NOMENCLATURE. 24t 



NOMENCLATURE. 



It is a reproach to natural science, and to no department thereof 

 more than to conchology, that most of its votaries consider the 

 determination of species and genera its legitimate end ; tlaat is, 

 that tliey are more actuated by the selfish ambition of acquiring 

 reputation than b}^ the love of knowledge. As the builder finds 

 it convenient to express the kinds of instruments used in his 

 labor, by technical names, so do naturalists find necessary a 

 succinct designation of the subjects of their studies; and the 

 naming and technical description of species, in the same manner 

 distinguishes for us the implements Avhich we should use in our 

 investigation of nature — implements by which the Great Builder 

 has worked, in which He has expressed His thought. The 

 proper acquisition of a language requires the preliminary 

 knowledge of its grammar, the knowledge of letters precedes 

 reading : even so, the simple name of a species, then of a genus, 

 and its recognition wdien met with or referred to, forms the mere 

 alphabet of science, from which w^e proceed gradually to the 

 consideration of individual properties, then to intimate and 

 to wnder relationships, until we are fortified with sufficient 

 knowledge to generalize. In these latter days generalizations 

 are numerous enough, but unfortunately they are usually the 

 product of minds not furnished with the requisite intimate 

 knowledge of the factors upon w^hich they build their generali- 

 zations. 



Prior to the works of Linnjieus binomial nomenclature was 

 emplo^^ed in natural histor^^ descriptions by several authors, 

 and notably by Tournefort in botany ; yet Linnseus was the 

 first to use it throughout the animal and vegetable kingdoms, 

 and he has accordingly been considered the founder of a system 

 which he only extended and perfected. His principal rules 

 still form the foundation of modern nomenclature. They are, 

 as at present generally accepted, these: Everj^ name applied 

 to a natural object should consist of a generic followed by a 

 specific name, each consisting of a single word. These names 

 should be of Latin or Greek derivation, or Latinized if otherwise 

 derived. The generic name is always with a capital initial letter, 

 the specific name with a small initial, with the exception of 

 personal, including mythological names, and of those which 

 denote localities. With regard to these exceptions the practice 

 is far from uniform ; some strict Latinists writing all specific 

 names with a small initial, w^hilst the most of authors give the 

 capital initial to personal, and a respectable minorit}^ of them 

 to geographical names. The former receive a genitive, the latter 

 an adjective form. 



Originally names were supposed to express qualities of the 



