THE-C9ra)9R 
0ecsG€tEg\- oigffGi^oiiOGy- 
Volume XlII 
May-Juine, 1911 
Number 3 
THE literary and OTHER PRINCIPLES IN ORNITHOLOGICAL 
WRITING 
By MILTON S. RAY 
F rom time to time, in our various ornithological journals, appears criticism of 
what is termed “popular” ornithology. To discuss this and similar matters 
the present article is written. I consider the use of the word “popular” in 
connection with ornithological writing to be rather indefinite and misleading. If 
the line be drawn between scientific and unscientific ornithology the difference I 
think would be more clearly defined, for in my opinion any article treating of bird 
life or bird anatomy, wherein exact facts are given without any deviation from the 
truth, is scientific no matter in what particular style it is written, popular or other- 
wise. 
To some, however, an article must fairly bristle with Latin before it becomes 
of value. To such, a check-list of exclusively Latin names is scientific; but add 
the vernacular as well, together with pertinent field notes, and although the article 
has gained instead of lost, it is now deemed semi-popular. I appreciate the ad- 
vantages of Latin as an international language in. nomenclature, but here, I think, 
its advantages end. The former custom of giving all the birds foreign names as 
well, has, too, a certain merit. I have an old English work which treats almost 
every bird in this fashion, the description of the raven beginning for instance: 
“Corvus corax, the Raven. This well known bird is the Korax of the Greeks; 
Corvus of the Latins; Corvo, Corbo, and Corvo Grosso of the niodeni Italians; 
El Cuervo of the Spaniards; Corbeaii of the French; Der Rabe and Der Kohlrabe of 
the Germans; Korp of the Swedes; Raim of the Danes; Corbie of the Scotch; Cig- 
fran of the Welsh; Kaw-kaw-gew of the Cree Indians and Toolloo-ak of the Esqui- 
maux.” I can read this with patience and some interest but when it comes to the 
