Re: BCF (was New Article in Experimental Zoology)

["T. Michael Keesey" <mightyodinn@yahoo.com>]

--- Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 8/26/02 1:37:18 PM EST, qilongia@yahoo.com writes:
> What you're saying is that we've had a limited idea of what a bird is since

> time immemorial, so we should enshrine this grievous error rather than 
> correct it. Where's the progress?

How is this an "error"?

I would like to once more plea for people to divorce the term "bird" from
"avian" and other such terms based on formal taxa. They are not completely
synonymous.

"Bird", like any other English vernacular word, is defined by the general
agreement of English speakers. Extraordinarily few would say the
_Brachiosaurus_ or _Ankylosaurus_ are birds. (Maybe just one, in fact -- and I
never see you call them "birds" outside of discussing this issue, anyway.)

The only way a usage can be in error is if it contradicts the definition(s).
There is no official body governing the English language; there is only
(sometimes hazy) majority consensus.

Unfortunately, this is also currently the case for suprafamilial taxa at
present.

=====
=====> T. Michael Keesey <keesey@bigfoot.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com