THE ADOPTION OF THE BNA 9 



Aside from the facts referred to above that the Anatomical Society had almost 

 as many non- German as German members and that the Commission on Ter- 

 minology contained English, Belgian and Italian anatomists as well as German, 

 Austrian and Swiss it would not, it seems to me, have mattered much, or hin- 

 dered its acceptance by us, if the BNA had been wholly German in origin. If 

 anatomists of worthily world-wide fame like His, Toldt, Waldeyer, Krause, 

 and their colleagues are willing and able to give a large part of their time and 

 energies for six years to such a task, to secure the money to defray the expense 

 thereof, and then to present it freely to the rest of us, if what they have done 

 is really excellent, are we to be sulky and reject it simply because it was " made 

 in Germany"? I cannot believe that any one who reflects for a moment can be 

 other than extremely grateful for the very valuable gift these men have made us; 

 such a Chauvinistic attitude as I have described can surely not be assumed by more 

 than a minute minority. On the contrary, it is characteristic of the people of 

 this country that they seek out and adopt as their own the "best" wherever it 

 is to be found, even if it chance to be " made in Thibet" or in Timbuctoo. 



(3) The fact that the list of terms is written entirely in the Latin language 

 has been the ground of objection on the part of a few. But this, I feel sure, is 

 due to a misunderstanding of the intention of the Commission. Its members had 

 no idea that, in actual use, the Latin form would always be employed ; it is matter 

 of indifference whether one says "biceps muscle" or "musculus biceps," "fem- 

 oral nerve" or "nervus femoralis," "temporal bone" or "os temporale," "yellow 

 spot" or " macula lutea." As a matter of fact, a student learning an anatomical 

 term for the first time will usually find that the Latin term goes as trippingly 

 on the tongue, often more so, than its English equivalent. There are marked 

 individual preferences, however, in this regard and I have known some teachers 

 and students who would fly from a Latinized form as though from Satan. Cer- 

 tainly in this country fewer teachers than in Germany use the Latin consistently, 

 though, as the feeling for precision and uniformity grows, it is possible that the 

 custom may increase, in which event all the Latin names would actually become 

 English words, as has already happened with conjunctiva, retina, plexus, fornix, 

 thalamus, ganglion, ependyma, cranium, abdomen, pelvis, perineum, and of the 

 like many more. The Commission at first had the idea of placing translations 

 for the various languages in parallel columns with the Latin names, but wisely, 

 I think, refrained therefrom, thus leaving everyone free to supply the equiv- 

 alent in his own tongue as he will. In the German dissecting-rooms, even, the 

 Latin forms are not strictly adhered to; one hears "Riickenmark" rather than 

 "Medulla spinalis," "Kopfnicker" (not " Brustschliisselzitzenfortsatzmuskel ") 

 rather than "M. sternocleidomastoideus." It is in books, and more particu- 

 larly in atlases, that it is especially desirable that the BNA be used in its Latin 

 form. Where there is, too, any likelihood of international use of book or altas, 

 or of translation from one tongue into another, it would be helpful if this rule 

 were followed. 



(4) It has been objected, further, that since English and American text- 

 books have been written without regard to the BNA, students and teachers 

 will only add the burden of a lot of additional names to their already overcrowded 

 memories, that we shall have a "confusion worse confounded" than before. 

 It has been asserted, tooo, that students passing from anatomical laboratories in 

 which the BNA is employed into the clinics which are manned by professors 

 who learned their anatomy years ago will taken with them a tongue unintelligible 

 to their instructors and will find in use there a form of anatomical language un- 

 known to themselves. 



