Re: New issue of JVP 2001(2) (semi-JOKE)

["Tim Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

Christian Kammerer wrote:

> (reads paper)
> (look of rage contorts face)
> (stares up towards the ceiling, screaming)
> KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Gee, can you tell that I dislike this new genus name?

Your wrath over _Khaan_, no less.

I quite like names that incorporate the flavor of the local languages or
traditions.  IMHO, _Khaan_ (or _Citipati_, or _Kakuru_, or _Ilokelesia_) is
a nice contrast to the dusty old Greek or Latin names we're used to.

I particularly dislike names such as _Pararhabdodon_ or _Protarchaeopteryx_,
where a prefix or suffix is simply stuck onto an existing name.  The trouble
with names like this is that are "loaded" with the namers' views on the
taxon's relationships.  As such, they have a habit of coming back and biting
the namers on the ass.  _Protarchaeopteryx_ (for example) probably did not
live prior to _Archaeopteryx_ and may not be more primitive than
_Arhaeopteryx_.  _Pararhabdodon_ may not be very closely related to
_Rhabdodon_.

They're also boring.

The world's worst fossil genus name is probably _Neoaetosauroides_.
Blecchhhh!!  Give me a _Khaan_ or a _Baru_ or a _Vorona_ any day.


Tim

------------------------------------------------------------

Timothy J. Williams

USDA/ARS Researcher
Agronomy Hall
Iowa State University
Ames IA 50014

Phone: 515 294 9233
Fax:   515 294 3163

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com