126 



THE OSPEEY. 



THE OSPREY. 



An Illustrate'! Magazine of Popular Ornithology. 

 Published Monthly, 

 By 

 THE OSPIiKY COMPANY. 



Edited by Theodore Gill and Paul Bansch. in collabo- 

 ration with Robeik Kidgway, Leonhai'dSiejneger. Frederic 

 A Lucas, Charles W Richmond. William Palmer and 

 Harry C Oberh'o)£er of Washington, and Witmer Stone ol 

 Philadelphia 



Contributions of a relevant nature arc respectfully soli- 

 cited, and should be addressed toTHK Ospkey i ompany- 

 3J1-3-23 454 Street N. W.. Washington, U. C. 



Subscript ion : In the United States. Canada and Mexico 



One Dollar a year, in advance. Single Copies. Ten Cents, 



Foreign Subscription: I iue Dollar and Twenty-five Cents, 



Postage paid to all countries m the Postal Union 

 Advertising rates sent on request. 



Entered as second-class matter by The Osprey Com- 

 pany at the Washington. 11. i' , Post Office. 



AUGUST. 1001. 



No. 8. 



Comments. 



NOMENCLATURE AT BERLIN. 



As probably most of the readers of the Ospkey 

 know, there has been recently a Zoological Con- 

 gress at Berlin. As many may not know, the 

 most prominent feature of the congress, and 

 that which will influence more than any other 

 the proceeding's of working systematic zoolo- 

 gists, was a discussion of the subject of 

 nomenclature and the action taken on it. All 

 we know at present is that which is con- 

 tained in the newspapers in the form of tele- 

 grams from Berlin. From them, we learn that 

 the committee on nomenclature, appointed at 

 the last congress, submitted a report on the 

 subject on the 14th of August. Two distinct 

 propositions were offered. One, chiefly from 

 the French delegates, insisted on the impor- 

 tance of classical correctness of names and 

 demanded that all should be made to conform 

 with the principles of Latin grammar and should 

 be etymologically correct: the other, supported 

 by "the American delegates." contended that 

 no changes should be made except in theca.'e 

 of obvious typographical errors, and that the 



original names should be adopted without 

 change and without regard to etymological pro- 

 priety. There was a long and heated discussion 

 of the question at issue and finally it was de- 

 cided by a majority that Latin grammar should 

 be applied and names corrected accordingly. It 

 seems that when the question was put to vote, 

 the Dutch and some of the German delegates 

 sided with the Americans, while others of the 

 Germans and the British went with the French. 

 The Germans, it may be added, offered a compro- 

 mise resolution but of what nature, we are not 

 informed: the report is that it was not received 

 with fa voi'. 



We must await the official or at least an 

 authoritative report before we can appreciate 

 the exact action or the merits of the decision 

 reached. That the report is true in its main 

 features we have reason to believe from our, 

 knowledge of the practice on the question in- 

 volved, of the individuals who were in atten- 

 dance at the congress. It is not at all likely' 

 that the defeated minority certainly not all 

 — will submit to the decision of the tribunal 

 thus pronounced. Probably the breach will be 

 widened. When any one is at liberty to trans- 

 form a name into one he deems better, or more 

 conformable to linguistic elegance, a latitude is 

 allowed whose bounds are very indefinite and 

 concerning which a wide diversity of opinion 

 may exist. 



French naturalists, in times past at least, have 

 been among the greatest sinners in infraction 

 of laws of grammar and verbal composition. 

 Conspicuous especially of the ornithologists 

 were Lesson and Lafresnaye, and those were 

 followed to a slight extent by Bonaparte, Swain- 

 son, Andrew Smith and others. The first two 

 especially were addicted to a peculiarly vicious 

 method, compounding' the first part or syllables 

 of one word and the final elements of another: 

 examples are Embernagra (= £mher[iza.] and 

 [Ta] nag ml. Pyrrhulagra <— Pyrrhul\yi\ and 

 [Tan]«£7-a), Cypsnagra (= ( V/>.v|elus| and [Ta]- 

 nagra), Certhiaxis {= Certhi\s.\ and [Synall|- 

 axis), Cinnycerthia (= Cinny\ris~\ and Ccrlhia), 

 Certhilauda (= Cert/ii[a.] and [X]lauda), Pyrrhti- 

 lauda i= Pyrr/iu[la.] and [A]/auda), Merulaxis 

 [= Meru[la.] and | Synal \laxis), and Corvultur 

 (= Corp [us] and [V \////in). We only give suffi- 

 cient to afford an idea of the variety and method 

 pursued. 



But the monstrosity thus manifest is not the 

 only objectional feature in some of the names. 

 The additional gravamen of hybridity is in- 

 volved in several of them. Thus Emberiza is 



