August 23, 1901.] 



SCIENCE. 



283 



as prefix or suffix, like Vaseyanthus, Pringleo- 

 jjhytum, Neonelsonia, and Paleohillia. It was 

 Dr. Otto Kuntze who astonished the world 

 and carried off the palm in this class by the 

 establishment of such genera as ' Sir- 

 hookera ' and ' Peckifungus.' 



I am quite well aware that these com- 

 pound personal names have many defenders 

 even among prominent scientists ; it is ar- 

 gued that since personal genus-names are 

 properly formed by the addition of the 

 Latin suffixes -a, -ia, -ella, -ina, etc., there 

 can be no objection to making these suffixes 

 consist of an adjective or noun. But while 

 the practice may not be technically incor- 

 rect, it is certainly not harmonious with 

 the fundamental principles of etymology, 

 and the results, whether we consider them 

 from the standpoint of euphony or signifi- 

 cation, are frequently ludicrous. Moreover, 

 they often originate on account of an inor- 

 dinate and misdirected desire to honor a 

 collector with more than one generic dedi- 

 cation. This has become a common prac- 

 tice, although formerly it was held as a 

 general principle that one genus, and one 

 only, could be dedicated to a single indi- 

 vidual ; while in the case of species, it was 

 customary to single out one striking new 

 plant from the list and designate it in honor 

 of the collector, other new species receiving 

 descriptive names. But nowadays, if John 

 Smith, let us say, visits some remote coun- 

 try and returns with a series of specimens 

 containing several new genera and perhaps 

 thirty new species, the botanist who de- 

 termines his collection, finding a previously- 

 published Smithia, establishes a ' Neo- 

 smithia ' and a ' Smithiophytum,' perhaps 

 also a ' Smithiocarpus ' or a ' Pseudo- 

 smithia ' ; while among the new species we 

 shall probably find a ' Smithii ' for each 

 separate genus. The same traveler is 

 likely to be similarly honored if he reaps 

 an equally rich harvest in another locality 

 the following year. 



Another objectionable class of names be- 

 longing to the same general type are those 

 derived from localities with the addition of 

 the Latin suffix -ensis. Originally this was 

 applied to names of States or countries al- 

 ready in the Latin form ; and Virginiensis, 

 Carolinensis, etc., are irreproachable. But 

 then we began to have Bostoniensis, lennes- 

 seensis and Wy oming ensis ; one writer has 

 furnished us with 'Bajensis,' from Baja, 

 the Spanish name of a small Californian 

 town ; and within the last few months a 

 distinguished German systematist, having 

 occasion to describe a new Selaginella from 

 a certain locality in Africa, has applied to 

 it the graceful and flowing designation 

 ' njam-njamensis,' 



Whatever may be one's individual views 

 concerning combinations of English per- 

 sonal names with Latin suffixes, I am sure 

 that very few defenders will be found for 

 the other classes mentioned, of which 

 ' graminoides ' and ' pseudocaudatum ' are 

 types. To those whose classical vocabulary 

 is limited, the pages of the Latin lexicon 

 afford numerous suggestions for specific 

 names irreproachable in form and pregnant 

 with meaning ; it seems strange that so 

 large a proportion of our systematists regard 

 the rules of etymology and grammar as 

 of so little importance in plant naming. 

 Glancing over the pages of one or two of 

 our prominent serials, I noted the following 

 examples of Latin and Greek hybrids, many 

 of which are as clumsy in their lack of eu- 

 phony as they are faulty in their construc- 

 tion : ' paucicephala,' ' pauciphylla,' * curvi- 

 carpus,' ' cresenti carpus,' ' cuspidocarpus,' 

 ' arenicoloides,' and ' polyclavatum.' I 

 have not thought it worth while to discuss 

 such specific names as ' annulum ' for annu- 

 latum ; ' arenicolum ' for arenicola ; and 

 ' glabrissimum ' for glaberrimum, though 

 these were actually published in all serious- 

 ness by authors of whom better work might 

 have been expected. 



