90 



to examine all entomological papers published in America between this 

 and the next meeting, and famish a black-list of those who had ignored 

 the collectors or the field data. 



How much the collector can do, if he knows his work will be appre- 

 ciated and he will get proper credit! A good way, I have found, is to 

 divide a paper into two parts: (1) Systematic, by the specialist, and (2) 

 biological, by the collector. When the systeinatist has written his part, 

 he returns it to the collector, who immediately exerts himself to make 

 Ms part as complete and instructive as may be. The outcome is an 

 article which is both valuable and interesting, and the collector's part 

 of it is frequently the best. 



In the above remarks I have, of course, only covered a very small 

 portion of the ground, but I hope there will be found sufficient material 

 for discussion and perhaps action. 



VERNACULAR NAMES OF INSECTS. 

 By Edwin W. Doran, Clinton, Mo. 



At theiiinth annual meeting of the Association of Economic Ento- 

 mologists, held in Detroit last year, Prof. 0. P. Gillette read a paper 

 on this subject, giving a list of the vernacular names of many of our 

 common insects. A committee was appointed by the association to 

 report on the matter at the next meeting. I wish to offer a few sugges- 

 tions through this committee to the association. 



It is very evident to me that in the paper referred to there are several 

 mistakes in the compounding of words. In fact, I believe most of the 

 forms preferred by Professor Gillette are not in accordance with the 

 best usage. There are certain laws for the compounding of words, 

 which are just as definite and fixed as any other laws relating to the 

 use of good English, and I see no reason why entomologists should not 

 observe these laws. It will be a serious blunder to perpetuate upon 

 the present and future generations of entomologists a mass of incorrect 

 forms. 



It may be argued that the forms given are in use by many people, 

 and that is true; but many entomologists are woefully ignorant of good 

 English, and should not be allowed to determine matters outside of their 

 sphere. This is a question for English scholars to settle for the most 

 part. I have consulted the best authorities in the English language, 

 and in the list, as I give it, only upon one name is there any disagree- 

 ment. • 



In the list of names as published the arrangement is entirely illogical. 

 It is not in accordance with the development of the language in regard 

 to such words. For example, Professor Gillette writes the name in 

 three parallel columns, as illustrated by his first word, thus: 

 Aphis-lion, Aphis Lion, Aphislion. 



