372 ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 



into their respective languages. Secondly, the preservation 

 of the trivial names which animals bear in their native coun- 

 tries is often of great use to the traveller in aiding him to 

 discover and identify species. We do not therefore consider, 

 if such words have a Latin termination given to them, that 

 the occasional and judicious use of them as scientific terms can 

 be justly objected to. 



(c.) Technical names. — All words expressive of trades and 

 professions have been by some writers excluded from zoology, 

 but without sufficient reason. Words of this class, when care- 

 fully chosen, often express the peculiar characters and habits of 

 animals in a metaphorical manner, which is highly elegant. 

 We may cite the generic terms, Arvicola, Lanius, Pastor, Ty- 

 r annus, Regulus, Mimas, Ploceus, &c, as favourable examples of 

 this class of names. 



{d.) Mythological or historical names. — When these have no 

 perceptible reference or allusion to the characters of the object 

 on which they are conferred, they may be properly regarded as 

 unmeaning and in bad taste. Thus the generic names, Lesbia, 

 Leihts, Remus, Corydon, Pasiphae, have been applied to a 

 Humming bird, a Butterfly, a Beetle, a Parrot, aud a Crab 

 respectively, without any perceptible association of ideas. But 

 mythological names may sometimes be used as generic with 

 the same propriety as technical ones, in cases where a direct 

 allusion can be traced between the narrated actions of a person- 

 age aud the observed habits or structure of an animal. Thus 

 when the name Progne is given to a Swallow, Clotho to a Spi- 

 der, Hydra to a Polyp, Athene to an Owl, Nestor to a grey- 

 headed Parrot, &c, a pleasing and beneficial connection is esta- 

 blished between classical literature and physical science. 



(e.) Comparative names. — The objections which have been 

 raised to words of this class are not without foundation. The 

 names, no less than the definitions of objects, should, where 

 practicable, be drawn from positive and self-evident characters, 

 and not from a comparison with other objects, which may be 

 less known to the reader than the one before him. Specific 

 names expressive of comparative size are also to be avoided, as 

 they may be rendered inaccurate by the after discovery of ad- 

 ditional species. The names Picoides, Emberizoides, Pseudolus- 

 cinia, rubeculoides, maximm, minor, minimus, &o. } are examples 

 of this objectionable practice 



(f.) Generic names compounded from other genera. — These are 

 in some degree open to the same imputation as comparative 

 words ; but as they often serve to express the position of a 

 genus as intermediate to, or allied with, two other genera, they 

 may occasionally be used with advantage. Care must be taken 



