[rec.birds] English & Latin Bird Names

rising@utzoo.uucp (Jim Rising) (01/11/90)

A few comments about N. A. Bird names.  I think that one reason
that North Americans tend to use English names for their birds
is that they are marginally more stable.  For a variety of reasons
(primarily shifting species from one genus to another, or splitting
or lunping genera) the Litin binominals are constantly changing.
For example, 17% (122 of 739) of the Latin names changed from the
1956 AOU Check-list to the 1983 one, and that's about par for the
course (up to 30% have changed between some lists).  As well, we
can anticipate that this will continue.  As someone else noted on
this newsgroup, the AOU committee has already decided to
resurect the genus Morus for the Northern Gannet, and Nyctanassa
for the Yellow-crowned Night-Heron.  Also note that these Latin
names are not necessarily universal.  E.g., to my knowledge the
Europeans will still use Sula and Nycticorax for the above.

Of course the NA English common names change, too, but these 
changes are usually not so confusing (I only counted confusing
changes above, not such as Bomybcilla garrula to Bombycilla garrulus).
Some of these changes are made in an attempt to obtain conformity
with English usage (e.g., Common Gallinule to Common Moorhen--although
the British simply call it the Moorhen!).  Some reflect a change in
taxonomic thinking (e.g., Northern Oriole is Baltimore + Bullock's
+ Abeillei's orioles; Green Heron becomes Green-backed Heron when
lumped with the circumtropical Striated, or Little, or Green-backed
Heron--I think).  Every new addition, the Americans pick up a few
more British common names (Dunlin, Peregrine, Whimbrel in 1956;
Moorhen and some others this time), but there are still a substantial
number of differences (e.g. Annika refers to the Common Loon; that's
Great Northern Diver in England; and the NA folks hang on to Oldsquaw,
and various jaegers and murres, to name some).

Concerning the Quebecois, there are "official" N. A. French names
for each N. A. species--determined I think unilaterally by Henri
Ouelette at the National Museum in Ottawa.
As well, there are French editions of many bird books--at least
Peterson's Field-Guide to Birds, and Godfrey's Birds of Canada,
and I'd bet others.  These French names are also given in the
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas.  One of my favorites is Geai bleu.
Try to guess what a Paruline a tete cendree (without accent
marks, yet), an Effraie de clocher, or a Goglu are.
Incidentally, we're beginning to get Dur-bec des pins just 
north of Toronto, now.
However, when the Quebec birders leave Quebec, they generally
have to come up with the English name, or point to a picture
in a book (which is what I do in Quebec).
-- 
Name:     Jim Rising
Mail:     Dept. Zoology, Univ. Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    M5S 1A1
UUCP:     uunet!attcan!utzoo!rising 
BITNET:   rising@zoo.utoronto.ca

mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser) (01/12/90)

In article <1990Jan10.212757.22128@utzoo.uucp>, rising@utzoo.uucp (Jim Rising) writes:
> 
> Of course the NA English common names change, too ... 
> Some of these changes are made in an attempt to obtain conformity
> with English usage (e.g., Common Gallinule to Common Moorhen--although
> the British simply call it the Moorhen!).  
                                 ^^^^^^^

	It seems that the British had this habit of giving the generic
family name as the common english name to those birds represented in
Britain by a single species of the family. Other examples are the Wren,
the Jay, and the Nuthatch. In North America we know the Wren as the
Winter Wren, in order to tell it from the eight other wren species that
we have. 

> Every new addition, the Americans pick up a few
> more British common names (Dunlin, Peregrine, Whimbrel in 1956;
> Moorhen and some others this time), but there are still a substantial
> number of differences (e.g. Annika refers to the Common Loon; that's
> Great Northern Diver in England; and the NA folks hang on to Oldsquaw,
> and various jaegers and murres, to name some).

	I think that the AOU has taken some decent strides recently in
trying to standardize the common english names used in North America
with those being used in other parts of the world. Some more examples
would be Black-Shouldered Kite, Northern Harrier, American Kestrel,
and Merlin; just to name a few raptors. However, it seems that the
BOU would have to reciprocate a little in order to alleviate the some-
what confusing situation mentioned above.

> One of my favorites is Geai bleu.
> Try to guess what a Paruline a tete cendree (without accent
> marks, yet), an Effraie de clocher, or a Goglu are.
> Incidentally, we're beginning to get Dur-bec des pins just 
> north of Toronto, now.

	Well, you've certainly piqued my interest. The only word
that looks familiar is Paruline, which I would associate with
Parula, leading me to guess that it is a Northern Parula.

Mike

misan@ra.abo.fi (Annika Forsten DC) (01/15/90)

In article <53546@oliveb.olivetti.com> mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser) writes:
>	   It seems that the British had this habit of giving the generic
>   family name as the common english name to those birds represented in
>   Britain by a single species of the family. Other examples are the Wren,
>   the Jay, and the Nuthatch. In North America we know the Wren as the
>   Winter Wren, in order to tell it from the eight other wren species that
>   we have. 

Yes and a list of more distinct names has been published by BTO(?)
which is currently under consideration. All names like those above have
been changed to include a 'qualifier', like Northern Wheatear, Azore Jay etc.
There has been a lot of negative reaction to this proposed change though
(as well as positive). We'll see how it turns out.

>	   I think that the AOU has taken some decent strides recently in
>   trying to standardize the common english names used in North America
>   with those being used in other parts of the world. Some more examples
>   would be Black-Shouldered Kite, Northern Harrier, American Kestrel,
>   and Merlin; just to name a few raptors. However, it seems that the
>   BOU would have to reciprocate a little in order to alleviate the some-
>   what confusing situation mentioned above.

That's a good idea. I suppose the English and the Americans should both
be allowed to keep some of their names, so a compromise would be best.
The names are different for a surprisingly large number of species.
Norther Harrier, by the way, is Hen Harrier in English, I don't see
why it wasn't called that when the name changed from Marsh Hawk. Marsh Hawk
was worse of course, since there is a species called Marsh Harrier in Europe
which is another species.

I also think it would be a good idea to keep the same name in all languages,
I mean just a simple translation if it's possible. It's very confusing
when different species have the 'same' name in two languages, like
Rodspov (translates Red Godwit is Black-tailed Godwit) in Swedish, 
Punakuiri (translates Red Godwit is  Bar-tailed Godwit) in Finnish. It
is a stupid name in both languages, of course, as both Godwits are more
or less red.

But you sure are lucky having to know the names in American only, I've
had to learn the European species in Finnish, Swedish, English, Latin and
now I'm struggling with German, Dutch and French. I subscribe to a French 
magazine which doesn't include Latin Names and it isn't always possible to 
guess which species they mean. Fortunately French names resemble Latin names 
somewhat. Using a dictionary all the time would be too timeconsuming.
European birding magazines for birders generally include Latin
names, but the more general birdwatching-conservation magazines do not.

Annika Forsten, Abo Akademi, Finland    misan@ra.abo.fi

jhiggott@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk (jeff higgott) (01/15/90)

From article <53546@oliveb.olivetti.com>, by mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser):
> In article <1990Jan10.212757.22128@utzoo.uucp>, rising@utzoo.uucp (Jim Rising) writes:
>> 
>> Of course the NA English common names change, too ... 
>> Some of these changes are made in an attempt to obtain conformity
>> with English usage (e.g., Common Gallinule to Common Moorhen--although
>> the British simply call it the Moorhen!).  
>                                  ^^^^^^^
> 
> 	It seems that the British had this habit of giving the generic
> family name as the common english name to those birds represented in
> Britain by a single species of the family. Other examples are the Wren,
> the Jay, and the Nuthatch. In North America we know the Wren as the
> Winter Wren, in order to tell it from the eight other wren species that
> we have. 
> 

Bear in mind that _T. troglodytes_ was named the Wren long before 
taxonomists had stumbled across another few related species in the States.
Similarly, Nuthatch and Jay are old names for familiar, common British
birds, named long before there was a full understanding (or even discovery?)
of other taxonomically related birds.  It is really not the "British"
who had/have the "habit of giving the generic  family name as the common 
english name to those birds represented in Britain by a single species of
the family", but the English speaking who want to use the English
vernacular name of a common British species as the `family' name for a 
group of related species.


> 	I think that the AOU has taken some decent strides recently in
> trying to standardize the common english names used in North America
> with those being used in other parts of the world. Some more examples
> would be Black-Shouldered Kite, Northern Harrier, American Kestrel,
> and Merlin; just to name a few raptors. However, it seems that the
> BOU would have to reciprocate a little in order to alleviate the some-
> what confusing situation mentioned above.

 "Northern" harrier is still known as Hen Harrier in Britain.

The BOU is currently making moves to standardise the English names of 
West Palearctic birds.  A subject that can be debated ad nauseum.
For example, is it sensible to change the name of _Melanitta nigra_ from
Common Scoter (because it is not the most common scoter over the whole of
its range) to Black Scoter (as the Americans call it) - True, M. nigra
is black, but so are the drakes of all the other scoters.  So is this
name any more useful?  [This problem may never arise as there are 
murmerings of the American subspecies being split from the European one.]

Jeff...

dmark@acsu.Buffalo.EDU (David Mark) (01/16/90)

In article <1990Jan15.135014.11727@axion.bt.co.uk> jhiggott@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk writes:
>From article <53546@oliveb.olivetti.com>, by mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser):
>> In article <1990Jan10.212757.22128@utzoo.uucp>, rising@utzoo.uucp (Jim Rising) writes:
                              [some lines deleted]
>> 
>> 	It seems that the British had this habit of giving the generic
>> family name as the common english name to those birds represented in
>> Britain by a single species of the family. Other examples are the Wren, ...

                              [some lines deleted]
>
>Bear in mind that _T. troglodytes_ was named the Wren long before 
>taxonomists had stumbled across another few related species in the States.
>Similarly, Nuthatch and Jay are old names for familiar, common British
>birds, named long before there was a full understanding (or even discovery?)
>of other taxonomically related birds.  It is really not the "British"
>who had/have the "habit of giving the generic  family name as the common 
>english name to those birds represented in Britain by a single species of
>the family", but the English speaking who want to use the English
>vernacular name of a common British species as the `family' name for a 
>group of related species.

  But, the English themselves do this sort of thing a lot, using Redstart
  for one species, and Black Redstart for another species THAT ALSO OCCURS
  IN ENGLAND!  So, if I am biring at Dungeness, and someone says "here's
  a redstart!", how do I know whether its the species that I've seen
  (Black Redstart; it's my first visit to the UK), or the one I haven't
  (Unmodified Redstart)?  What do you call out if you see a member of this
  genus but don't know what it is?  The rule that, if there are two known
  forms with the same basic or generic name, then each must have an
  adjective in its formal name, seems eminently sensible, and reduces
  ambiguity, especially if one does not spell bird-names with the leading
  upper-case letter.  (American practice on that could allow one to
  distinguish a "Redstart" from a "redstart" in writing, if not in speech.)

>
>> 	I think that the AOU has taken some decent strides recently in
>> trying to standardize the common english names used in North America
>> with those being used in other parts of the world. Some more examples
>> would be Black-Shouldered Kite, Northern Harrier, American Kestrel,
>> and Merlin; just to name a few raptors. However, it seems that the
>> BOU would have to reciprocate a little in order to alleviate the some-
>> what confusing situation mentioned above.

  I HEARTILY agree!!  Just as in genetics, two descendents of a common
  ancestor are equally close to it, so the two major versions of the
  'English' language, UK and American, are equally descended from 18th-century
  English and are equally 'valid' vesions of it.  Thus, I see NO reason that a
  highly commendable effort to standardize English-language names for birds
  should involve only changes by the AOU.  I would like to see a
  roughly-equal number of cases where the BOU changed to adopt US
  names, which certainly go back hundreds of years.  
>
> "Northern" harrier is still known as Hen Harrier in Britain.
>
  That is a very regressive name, since it at least implies predation
  on domestic fowl.  That would seem like an excellent case for the
  British to compromise, and adopt the name "Northern Harrier", that
  if it caught on might improve the image over raptors in the UK.

>The BOU is currently making moves to standardise the English names of 
>West Palearctic birds.  A subject that can be debated ad nauseum.
>For example, is it sensible to change the name of _Melanitta nigra_ from
>Common Scoter (because it is not the most common scoter over the whole of
>its range) to Black Scoter (as the Americans call it).

  Of course, the AOU does some really stupid things, too.  One of the worst,
  in my opinion, involved the recent split of loons, to Gavia arctica
  a G. pacifica.

  G. pacifica is the new name for the common form in North America.
  G. arctica is the ma,e for the form found from the UK east to western
     Alaska; there are few if any records of this in North America outside
     of Alaska.

  G. arctica was always called "Black-throated Diver" in the UK, and in European
  field guides.  Both it and G. a. pacifica were known as "Arctic Loon" in
  North America.

  So, the AOU, in its wisdom, decided that we should all learn the new name,
  "Pacific Loon", for all of our non-Alaskan birds; and that the ones we
  don't get here should be called "Arctic Loon" even though they don't
  call them that where they get them (Europe)!  They could have left ours
  as "Artic Loon", and called the Eurasian form "Black-throated Loon", or
  even "Black-throated Diver".

  And, oh BOU types, there's a good nominee for the first UK concession to
  American usage:  isn't "Loon" a far more picturesque and colorful term
  for Gavia than "Diver"?


  David Mark
  dmark@cs.buffalo.edu

misan@ra.abo.fi (Annika Forsten DC) (01/16/90)

In article <15807@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> dmark@acsu.Buffalo.EDU (David Mark) writes:

>   >> 	It seems that the British had this habit of giving the generic
>   >> family name as the common english name to those birds represented in
>   >> Britain by a single species of the family. Other examples are the Wren, 

>   >Bear in mind that _T. troglodytes_ was named the Wren long before 
>   >taxonomists had stumbled across another few related species in the States.
>   >Similarly, Nuthatch and Jay are old names for familiar, common British
>   >birds, named long before there was a full understanding (or even discovery?)
 >    But, the English themselves do this sort of thing a lot, using Redstart
 >    for one species, and Black Redstart for another species THAT ALSO OCCURS
 >    IN ENGLAND!  So, if I am biring at Dungeness, and someone says "here's

This is done in Finnish as well, as has always been a source of exasparation
to me, it is much better in Swedish. 

Tylli = Ringed Plover, Pikkutylli = Little Ringed Plover
Kuovi = Curlew, Pikkukouvi = Whimbrel
(Maa)Kotka = Golden Eagle, Merikotka = White-tailed Eagle
(Laulu) Joutsen = Whooper Swan, Kyhmyjoutsen = Mute Swan  etc.

The species that have the family name for the common one and a 'qualifier'
for rarer species of the same family (mostly rare in Finland though) are
numerous. In Finnish lots of species also have names that doesn't tell
anything about what sort of bird it is, often derived from the call.
Haapana = Wigeon, Alli = Oldsquaw, Tylli, Kuovi.
Mustalintu is Common Scoter, but translated it means Blackbird.
Pilkkasiipi again is Velvet Scoter, but translated it means Spotwing.

Well, some things are better in Finnish than in Swedish too. In Finnish
Warblers are not all called Warblers, there are different groups. Locustella
Warbler are called sirkkalintu, Acrocephalus kerttunen, Sylvia kerttu,
Phylloscopus uunilintu, etc. This is a good thing because it helps to know
what one is talking about.

>   > "Northern" harrier is still known as Hen Harrier in Britain.
>   >
>     That is a very regressive name, since it at least implies predation
>     on domestic fowl.  That would seem like an excellent case for the
>     British to compromise, and adopt the name "Northern Harrier", that
>     if it caught on might improve the image over raptors in the UK.

May be true. It is also true that Northern Harrier is the northernmost
Harrier. This is easily experienced in Finland, but I'm not sure the English
feel that this is clear. Northern Harrier is, however, a rather cumbersome
name. In the USA it is easy to say: 'I've got a Harrier' , and everyone knows
you're talking about Northern. In England you've got to be more precise and
say you mean Northern. Personally, I don't like names like Northern or Common
or Western. The name ought to tell something more about the bird. Preferably
something that's different from all the other species. So when you see the
species, you can just say, 'I've got a Golden'.

>   >The BOU is currently making moves to standardise the English names of 
>   >West Palearctic birds.  A subject that can be debated ad nauseum.
>   >For example, is it sensible to change the name of _Melanitta nigra_ from
>   >Common Scoter (because it is not the most common scoter over the whole of
>   >its range) to Black Scoter (as the Americans call it).

I think that's ok, Black is much better than Common as a qualifier and the 
species is the only totally black anyway.
 
>     So, the AOU, in its wisdom, decided that we should all learn the new name,
>     "Pacific Loon", for all of our non-Alaskan birds; and that the ones we
>     don't get here should be called "Arctic Loon" even though they don't
>     call them that where they get them (Europe)!  They could have left ours
>     as "Artic Loon", and called the Eurasian form "Black-throated Loon", or
>     even "Black-throated Diver".

I think Pacific Loon should be the name for G. pacifica, Artic Loon for
G. pacifica/arctica (we need a name for that, since they are difficult to tell
apart) and then something new or Black-throated Loon/Diver for G. arctica.
Black-throated isn't very good of course, since they both have black throats,
but the new name should be for the 'new' species and keep Arctic Loon for
what it has always meant.

>     And, oh BOU types, there's a good nominee for the first UK concession to
>     American usage:  isn't "Loon" a far more picturesque and colorful term
>     for Gavia than "Diver"?


I agree, much better. In German, both Grebes and Loons are called Taucher
(diver). Stupid.

>     dmark@cs.buffalo.edu

I lived in Buffalo, NY for 9 months when I was eight. Unfortunately I hadn't
started birding then, I got intrested just afterwards. We visited California
too and walked on a mountain where we were told the California Condor bred.  
We found a feather which they told us was from the Condor and we were going
to bring it back home with us. On the last plane (we went via Iceland), we 
forgot it behind. It's been bothering me for a long time, it would be nice
to find out if it really was a Condor feather. I just remember it was long.

Thanks everyone, for all the info about shorebird hot-spots. I hope I'll
be able to come over soon and check it out. It would be cheap now as the
dollar is very cheap at the moment.

Annika Forsten, Abo Akademi, Finland   misan@ra.abo.fi

jhiggott@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk (jeff higgott) (01/16/90)

From article <MISAN.90Jan15104823@ra.abo.fi>, by misan@ra.abo.fi (Annika Forsten DC):
> 
> I also think it would be a good idea to keep the same name in all languages,
> I mean just a simple translation if it's possible. It's very confusing
> when different species have the 'same' name in two languages, like
> Rodspov (translates Red Godwit is Black-tailed Godwit) in Swedish, 
> Punakuiri (translates Red Godwit is  Bar-tailed Godwit) in Finnish. It
> is a stupid name in both languages, of course, as both Godwits are more
> or less red.

It starts to get silly when you compare the English and latin names of some
of the Gulls _Larus_ eg:

The Latin name of Mediterranean Gull is _L. melanocephalus_ which means
"Black-headed Gull"; Black-headed Gull (which has a brown head!) has the 
Latin name _L. ridibundus_ which means "Laughing Gull"; Laughing Gull has
the Latin name _L. atricilla_ which means "Black-tailed Gull" - and 
Black-tailed Gull is something else again!


Jeff....

mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser) (01/20/90)

In article <1990Jan15.135014.11727@axion.bt.co.uk>, jhiggott@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk (jeff higgott) writes:
> 
> Bear in mind that _T. troglodytes_ was named the Wren long before 
> taxonomists had stumbled across another few related species in the States.
> Similarly, Nuthatch and Jay are old names for familiar, common British
> birds, named long before there was a full understanding (or even discovery?)
> of other taxonomically related birds.  It is really not the "British"
> who had/have the "habit of giving the generic  family name as the common 
> english name to those birds represented in Britain by a single species of
> the family", but the English speaking who want to use the English
> vernacular name of a common British species as the `family' name for a 
> group of related species.

	I apologise for having misspoken. What I should have said is:
the British have maintained as a common english name, a term that has
become a generic family name, for hundreds of years after the taxonomic
diversity and the acceptance of the generic family name have become
apparent. Also, bear in mind that when the above mentioned families of
related species were discovered in America, I believe that the english
speaking people who wanted to use the English vernacular name as the
family name were, at the time, the British. It was the British, themselves,
who set the tone for using a qualifier in conjunction with a family
name for groups of closely related birds. An excellent example is the
family of tits. Why they abandoned this format with some British birds,
whose taxonomic diversity occurred outside of Britain, is beyond me.

> The BOU is currently making moves to standardise the English names of 
> West Palearctic birds.  A subject that can be debated ad nauseum.

	I applaud and encourage any effort by both the AOU and the BOU
to standardize the english common names and to use qualifiers for those
common names that have become accepted as family names.

> For example, is it sensible to change the name of _Melanitta nigra_ from
> Common Scoter (because it is not the most common scoter over the whole of
> its range) to Black Scoter (as the Americans call it) - True, M. nigra
> is black, but so are the drakes of all the other scoters.  So is this
> name any more useful?  

	Its usefulness comes from its uniqueness, and its applicability
to the species worldwide. It doesn't matter what kind of scoter you
call it, as long as its name is unique and everybody calls it that.

	On a different note, I am currently in Italy on business and
have had a limited opportunity to do some birding. Here is my list,
with appropriate latin names.

Mike

Buzzard - buteo buteo
Rock Dove - columba livia
Collared Dove - streptopelia decaocto
Green Woodpecker - picus viridis
Blackcap - sylvia atricapilla
Firecrest - regulus ignicapillus
(European) Robin - erithacus rubecula
(Eurasian) Blackbird - turdus merula
Fieldfare - turdus pilaris
Long Tailed Tit - aegithalos caudatus
Coal Tit - parus ater
Great Tit - parus major
Blue Tit - parus caeruleus
Marsh Tit - parus parus palustris
Nuthatch - sitta europaea
(Winter) Wren - troglodytes troglodytes
Rock Bunting - emberiza cia
Chaffinch - fringilla coelebs
(European) Goldfinch - carduelis carduelis
Siskin - carduelis spinus
(Eurasian) Bullfinch - pyrrhula pyrrhula
(Eurasian) Tree Sparrow - passer montanus
Jay - garrulus glandarius
(Black Billed) Magpie - pica pica
Rook - corvus frugilegus
Hooded Crow - corvus corone cornix