142 ON SPECIFIC NAMES OF PLANTS. [^^^j 



for example^ Kitel, in his ' Deutschlands Flora/ writes (invari- 

 ably?) (S instead of i, as Salix salviafolia, Veronica hedercefolia, 

 Cineraria spatulaefolia. He appears consistently to have used this 

 form, Hyjjericum Unariafolium and ErythrcBa linariatfolia do 

 not occur in his ' Flora.^ It can only be inferred how he would 

 have dealt with them if he had had occasion to write their 

 names. 



8. In Sprengel's ' Historia Hei Herbarise ' there are numerous 

 examples, for example : — Sagittaria sagittcefolia (i. 349), Cyclamen 

 heder(2folium (p. 405), Antirrhinum genistcefolium (p. 418), Cen- 

 taurea eruc(2folia (p. 420), Veronica urticafolia (p. 433), V. he- 

 dertefolia (p. 436), Inula spirceeefolia, Scirpus taberncemont., Car- 

 damine resedtefolia, etc. 



9. In Suter's 'Flora of Switzerland' there are the following, 

 viz. : — Veronica hederafolia, V. urticcefolia, Cyclamen hederee- 

 folium. 



It may be assumed from the above examples that the discre- 

 pancy appears only when the first portion of the compound word 

 is of the first declension and of the feminine gender; and here 

 grammar, if not an analogy, requires that the genitive case should 

 be employed. When a change is made of the a into i, neither 

 grammar nor sense is satisfied. Our English botanical authors 

 are unsteady; they waver or vacillate. Sometimes they write 

 the one way, sometimes the other. Perhaps they never heard of 

 the rule. Perhaps some of them may think that the author of the 

 rule, though a great authority in botany, was not equally great 

 in etymology. Whatever be the cause, their practice is not uni- 

 form. They not only dififer from each other, but also fr'om them- 

 selves. This is not the case with English authors alone. Nyman, 

 in his ' Sylloge Florse Europse,' is not always strictly consistent, 

 though there are but few examples in which he has violated the 

 grammatical principle. The Continental authors quoted in Nos. 

 7-9, have invariably followed the etymology, and not the assumed 

 analogical principle. 



It is only in compounds where the first declension forms a 

 part that there can be any question about the proper scription. 

 Sir J. E. Smith says that some botanists write salicisfolia. This 

 is probably as rare as a white crow. Who has ever seen tenuis- 

 folius, grandisflora, noctisflora, and the like? When nouns of 

 the second declension form a part of the compound, the gramma- 



