169 



plains, no attempt to "edit" the original has been made and no 

 responsibility is assumed for the treatment of subjects. While 

 this attitude of the translator shows deference to the author it is 

 to be regretted that a work of this character, which will un- 

 doubtedly be standard for some time to come, could not have 

 been edited enough at least to avoid the continuance of confusing 

 terminology, some of which was noted by reviewers when the 

 German edition appeared. 



In some cases the translator has unfortunately selected words 

 which are not physiologically precise and for which a good 

 equivalent could be used without departing from close transla- 

 tion. For instance, " Stoffaufnahme" is interpreted as "absorp- 

 tion " all through the work. Plants do not absorb substances, 

 they admit them. Admission is certainly as nearly equiva- 

 lent as "absorption." " Wasserabgabe " is translated "excre- 

 tion of water," which is physiologically incorrect and inaccurate 

 as translation. In the absence of an exact equivalent, why not 

 use the term, exit of water, when the general passage of water 

 from the plant is intended ? Likewise, " Wasseraufnahme " could 

 be translated, admission of water, instead of the absorption of 

 water. The term suction is frequently used instead of the proper 

 usage, negative pressure. 



That the translator has exercised commendable discrimination 

 in some cases is apparent in his interpretation of the word " Ver- 

 wendung." Utilization or appropriation are more nearly equiva- 

 lent than the word "fate," which the translator has used. Cells 

 do not use nor do they appropriate admitted substances, though 

 material which enters the cell does have a "fate." The same 

 discrimination applied to the phrase, " Verwendung der aufge- 

 nommenen Stoffe " would yield "the fate of admitted substances." 



Perhaps the most unfortunate confusion of terms and ideas is 

 apparent in the persistent use of assimilation to express the syn- 

 thesis of complex compounds and the word dissimilation to ex- 

 press the reverse process. When the German edition appeared, 

 Professor Barnes, in his review of the work, called attention to 

 the impropriety of the usage. In an explanatory paragraph on 

 page 103 of this English edition the original author himself con- 



