394 SCIENCE TEACHING : EXAMINATIONS 



that hypothetically it was so, then you had better say * an 

 unfolded leaf.' I have suggested ' fiat or concave ' with 

 * unfolded ' in brackets. 



I do not at all agree with the terms Milkworts, Tutsans, 

 etc., as English equivalents for natural orders, seeing that 

 the same name more often apphes to the genus only and 

 most properly. Mallows are Mallows, and their family or 

 order, the Mallow family or Mallow order. Mallow-worts 

 means nothing — wort not being a recognised equivalent of 

 any value, generic or ordinal. I think that by introducing 

 such terms you lose all the little point English names have 

 and gain nothing whatever. What is a wort ? in English 

 surely not a tree, to justify Mast- worts, more especially as 

 mast is an equivalent to wort, in one sense. Wort I believe 

 means weed or herh. I am still all for Crowfoot family (or 

 order), Mallow family, etc., etc. 



You will have a little difficulty to adapt a good name 

 for all, but any genus contained in this family will be right, 

 whereas the introduction of wort is wrong in grammar and 

 more wrong in science. Let one of your pupils ask you to 

 explain why you say an Oak belongs to the Beech family, 

 or Nut family, or Hornbeam family, or any other contained 

 genus you may adopt, and you can explain at once, rationally, 

 and shew that the name conveys definite information — but 

 what conceivable excuse have you for calling a nut a viast- 

 wort ! wrong in sense, in English, in sound, and in science. 

 I think such terms are a retrograde step in the progress 

 of sound elementary education. * There then,' as Willy ^ 

 says. It would be further exceedingly important to desig- 

 nate the Nat. Ord. in EngHsh, by the same genus or term 

 as the Latin ordinal name is derived from — thus * Cruci- 

 ferae,' and ' Cupuliferae ' = * family of cupped fruits,' and 

 ' Primulaceae ' = * family of Primrose.' You could thus 

 explain both the Latin mode of giving ordinal nameS; 

 together, and save much complexity and loss of time and of 

 no little confusion too to young ideas, the only explanation 

 needed being that there is no Enghsh inflexion that answers 

 to the Latin ' Primulaceae ' — in English it must be expressed 

 by the word order or family affixed or postfixed. Better 

 than all this would it be to tell them that they can no more 



^ His small son, now aged two. 



