ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 119 



ing in vain through the vast storehouses of human language for the parentage 

 of such words, discovers at last that he has been pursuing an ignis fatuus. 



q. Names previously cancelled by the operation of § 6. — Some authors con- 

 sider that when a name has been reduced to a synonym by the operations of 

 the laws of priority, they are then at liberty to apply it at pleasure to any new 

 group which may be in want of a name. We consider, however, that when a 

 word has once been proposed in a given sense, and has afterwards sunk into 

 a synonym, it is far better to lay it aside for ever than to run the risk of ma- 

 king confusion by re-issuing it with a new meaning attached. 



r. Specific names raised into generic. — It has sometimes been the practice 

 in subdividing an old genus to give to the lesser genera so formed, the names 

 of their respective typical species. Our Rule 13 authorizes the forming a 

 new specific name in such cases ; but we further wish to state our objections 

 to the practice altogether. Considering as we do that the original specific 

 names should as far as possible be held sacred, both on the grounds of justice 

 to their authors and of practical convenience to naturalists, Ave would strongly 

 dissuade from the further continuance of a practice which is gratuitous in itself, 

 and which involves the necessity of altering long-established specific names. 



We have now pointed out the principal rocks and shoals which lie in the 

 path of the nomenclator; and it will be seen that the navigation through 

 them is by no means easy. The task of constructing a language which shall 

 supply the demands of scientific accuracy on the one hand, and of literary 

 elegance on the other, is not to be inconsiderately undertaken by unqualified 

 persons. Our nomenclature presents but too many flaws and inelegancies 

 already, and as the stern law of priority forbids their removal, it follows that 

 they must remain as monuments of the bad taste or bad scholarship of their 

 authors to the latest ages in which zoology shall be studied. 



^Families to end in idse, and Subfamilies in inae.] 



The practice suggested in the following proposition has been adopted by 

 many recent authors, and its simplicity and convenience is so great that we 

 strongly recommend its universal use. 



§ B. It is recommended that the assemblages of genera termed fa- 

 milies should be uniformly named by adding the termination idee to 

 the name of the earliest known, or most typically characterized genus 

 in them ; and that their subdivisions, termed subfamilies, should be 

 similarly constructed, with the termination ince. 



These words are formed by changing the last syllable of the genitive case 

 into idee or inec, as Strix, Strigis, Strigidee, Buceros, Bucerotis, Bucerotidee, 

 not Strixidce, Buceridai. 



\_Specific names to be written with a small initial.'] 



A convenient memoria technica may be effected by adopting our next pro- 

 position. It has been usual, when the titles of species are derived from pro- 

 per names, to write them with a capital letter, and hence when the specific 

 name is used alone it is liable to be occasionally mistaken for the title of a 

 genus. But if the titles of species were invariably written with a small ini- 

 tial, and those of genera with a capital, the eye would at once distinguish the 

 rank of the group referred to, and a possible source of error would be avoided. 

 It should be further remembered that all species are equal, and should there- 

 fore be written all alike. We suggest, then, that 



§ C. Specific names should always be written with a small initial 

 letter, even when derived from persons or places, and generic names 

 should be always written with a capital. 



