Re: Goofy dinosaur names: (combined answer)

[Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

Nick Pharris wrote:

> Well, more or less.  What bothers me is the failure to recognize that the 
> genus name is the "thing", and the species name is the modifier.  _Mangas 
> tsaagan_ would be 'white monster'; _Tsaagan mangas_ is something like 
> 'white thing: to wit, a monster'.  I have the same problem with _Mei long_. 
>  The name doesn't make any sense if you split it up.

Yes, this bother me a little too.  I like the idea of non-classical taxon 
names, but for names like _Mei long_ and _Tsaagan mangas_ the species name 
is etymologically tied to the genus name.  As you say, the binomial doesn't 
make any sense if you split it up.

> OK, so it looks like Khalkha Mongolian uses adjective-noun order.  But what 
> happens if we want to put another species into the genus _Tsaagan_?

Or, if the species is referred to a pre-existing genus.  I don't have 
_Tsaagan mangas_ in mind, but I do worry about _Mei long_.  What happens if 
_Mei long_ is referred to _Sinovenator_, for example; we would get 
_Sinovenator long_.

David Marjanovic wrote:

> > Naming a dinosaur after Stan Winston is also a bad idea, just ask
> > anyone who has survived working with him.
>
> Are you sure it's named after him? The -orum ending implies that Stan and 
> Winston are two different people.

Pickering also named a species "Altispinax lydekkeri-huenensis", which is 
kind of funny if you think about it.  ("Altispinax of, relating to, or 
originating in Lydekker and Huene")

Cheers

Tim

_________________________________________________________________
Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio powered 
by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001