124 GENERAL SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY 



for opposing it. There have been objections, however, raised by those 

 who contend for the use of classic Latin names for all plants and animals. 

 Clements (1902, p. 82) says: "A single generic name may be founded 

 upon the name of a botanist. Such names are only to be formed by 

 adding -ia to cognomina ending in a consonant and -a to cognomina in 

 a vowel or in -r except in the case of names already latinized in which 

 case the termination is first dropped." Apparently Clements possessed 

 a high estimate of the ability of classic Latin and Greek to furnish the 

 tens of thousands of generic names that will still be demanded before 

 all plants and animals have been named and classified. The formation 

 of names by anagram is also objectionable to such purists, as witness 

 the following statement from Clements (1902, p. 78): 



Anagrams if they be considered words at all are vernacular since they are 

 neither Greek or Latin. They are the ultimate product of puerility or illiteracy 

 in nomenclature. Such a series as Filago, Gifola, Ifloga, Logfia and Oglifa throws 

 a clear light upon the good sense and linguistic tests of the authors concerned. 

 One might better make names after the fashion of Carroll or take names from 

 the "dog latin" of childhood. 



Views in contradiction to this are generally held, however, by most 

 practical workers in the fields of zoology and botany. These workers 

 have a firm conviction that botanical Latin does not need to be classic 

 Latin. This is well stated in the following quotation from Stiles (1905, 

 p. 12): 



Nothing is stated in the rule as to what particular Latin should be used, but 

 latitude is granted to use Latin or Latinized names, or to use names as if they 

 were Latin. This latitude has its practical basis. The Latin poets and authors 

 did not foresee the practical scientific use to which their language would be 

 applied, and they failed to leave enough Latin words as names for the millions of 

 animals and plants which come into consideration. Hence as a carpenter, a 

 sailor or a manufacturer coins words which are accepted in English as English 

 words of good standing, when applied to carpentry, nautical affairs, and trade, the 

 zoologists and botanists coin words upon Latin precedents, which we adopt as 

 botanical and zoological Latin. Not in all cases do our efforts attain the highest 

 standards of classical Latin (Taenia solium., and Gadus tomcod, for instance), 

 but because of practical considerations such names are retained, although not 

 recommended, as examples to be followed in coining new words. 



V. Botanists who are publishing generic names show judgment and taste by 

 attending to the following recommendations: 



a. Not to make names very long or difficult to pronounce. 



Comments. Clements believes that a generic name should be invalid 

 if it contains more than six syllables. Apparently few generic names 



