Wikipedia:Biological etymology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In articles about organisms, it is often desired to provide an etymology—particularly for binomial names whose meanings may not be obvious to readers lacking familiarity with Latin or Greek.
 | This is a WikiProject advice page on article content. It contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more WikiProjects on how the content policies may be interpreted within their area of interest. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community. |
Biological etymologies are subject to Wikipedia's usual policies on verifiability, original research and synthesis. When writing about etymology, we must only include information from reliable sources; we must not draw our own conclusions about the actual or intended meaning of names; and we must avoid combining information from different sources to state or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources.
Due weight
Wikipedia articles aim to provide a balanced summary of their topic. In articles about organisms, the meanings or derivations of names are typically quite unimportant compared with other major aspects such as the description, ecology, and distribution, and should not be given undue weight. Etymological information should usually be kept quite brief and incorporated toward the end of the article. It should not usually be included in the lead, and in many cases there will be no need for a separate section heading in accordance with MOS:OVERSECTION.
Greater prominence may be appropriate in rare cases where the name or its derivation is an especially notable characteristic of the organism—for example, Anophthalmus hitleri.
Etymology pitfalls
Etymology is a tricky area, and it's not always easy to provide an explanation for a name without straying outside Wikipedia policies and guidelines, even when the basis for a name appears obvious.
Historically—particularly pre-1950, when natural history texts were often wholly or partially written in Neo-Latin and many biologists/naturalists had formal education in classical languages—it was relatively uncommon for the describing author to explictly state an etymology for a taxon name. Unless the rationale was stated directly (with the description, or in another published source), we can't ascribe it to the author without violating WP:NOR.
Although binomial names often use Neo-Latin or Botanical Latin (which also borrow heavily from Greek), the fact that a name resembles certain Latin or Greek words, or a combination thereof, does not necessarily mean that the describing author intended that meaning.
Untranslateable names
Not all names have a translatable meaning. For example, Tegenaria and Aterigena are both anagrams of Eratigena, and Muilla is Allium spelled backwards. The International Code for Zoological Nomenclature permits names that are 'an arbitrary combination of letters' provided these are formed to be used as a word, and the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants also permits arbitrary formations subject to a few restrictions.
Taxonomic jokes
The entomologist Neal Evenhuis gave punning names to several species in the genus Pieza and named a fossil fly Carmenelectra shechisme (which can be pronounced "Carmen Electra she kiss me")—itself an homage to earlier 'kiss me' names by George Willis Kirkaldy. When publishing these names, Evenhuis provided etymologies that purported to be legitimate, but that are obviously spurious in the context of the joke.
Lepidopterist John W. Brown named a new moth genus Eubetia apparently for the opportunity to create species named Eubetia bigaulae ("youbetcha bygolly") and the sadly rejected Eubetia raz ("you bet your ass").
Translation vs. derivation
Etymology as a sub-field of linguistics is a broad discipline with many facets. In the context of biological taxonomy, the focus is usually on two aspects: what the elements of a name mean (referred to here as 'translation') and why those elements were chosen ('derivation'). In the absence of information from the author or a reliable secondary source, statements about the derivation are particularly likely to stray into original research.
Explicitly stated etymologies
It is always acceptable to include an etymology that was explicitly stated by the original author of a taxon name, provided this sourcing is cited. This is the preferred approach wherever feasible.
Drosera magnifica: Gonella, Rivadavia & Fleischmann stated that the species epithet magnifica refers to "the magnificent appearance of this new species".[1]
If the original author provided an etymology, we should accept it as authoritative. This applies even if the author made a linguistic or other error when constructing the name. Commentary on such errors should only be included where supported by reliable published sources, such as criticism by other scientists in a peer-reviewed paper or a justified emendation of a zoological name that has been made elsewhere.
If there is any doubt about whether the etymology used by the author is linguistically correct, providing an attributed direct quote from the description avoids repeating any potential errors in Wikivoice.
Articles about taxa should focus on information directly relevant to the taxon in question. Do not add linguistic commentary, 'corrections' or criticism of the derivation provided by the author unless this specific case has been the subject of commentary in published sources.
Stylidium oviflorum: According to Bean the specific epithet is derived from "the Latin ovi- egg and florus- flower, in reference to the corolla colour which combines rich yellow and pure white, just as in a fried hen’s egg".[4] The proper word for 'flower' in classical and botanical Latin is however flos,[5][6] while ovum is the word for 'egg' in classical Latin.[5]
Where a citation is provided that supports the given etymology (for example, the author's original description), disagreeing with the linguistic validity of that etymology is not an acceptable reason to add {{Citation needed}} tags or to remove the etymology from the article.
Etymologies from secondary sources
Where the original author did not state an etymology, it is acceptable to refer to an etymology provided in a reliable secondary source, as long as this is clearly attributed.
It's important to make clear who is providing the etymology. Be careful not to elide the distinction between sources.
Disputed / alternative etymologies
Where the original author did not state an etymology and there are multiple published sources proposing different derivations, it is acceptable to refer to these while maintaining a neutral point of view.
Griffiths suggests an alternative meaning behind Oldfield Thomas's choice of name. Instead of a reference to mythology, the name Ia io might be a joyful exclamation, translating to 'Shout hurrah!'. This interpretation posits that Thomas, who had recently become a Fellow of the Royal Society after three times previously being nominated but failing to receive the required endorsements, was expressing his elation through the naming of this species.[12]
Translating name elements
Prior to the 20th century, the majority of taxon descriptions did not provide any explicit etymology. However, many taxon names are based on common terms or word-forming elements that are listed in dictionaries of biological names. As with other faithful translations, it is not considered original research to provide the translation(s) of these terms.
For names that combine multiple word-forming elements, the precise derivation or intended meaning of the resulting compound may be ambiguous. For example, it may not be clear whether an element of a compound was intended as an adjective or a noun in apposition. In such cases it is preferable not to provide a speculative translation of the full compound but instead to focus on explaining, in general terms, what the elements of the compound refer to.
Etymology resources
The following resources may be helpful when dealing with biological etymology.
General resources
Taxon-specific resources
- The ETYFish Project - extensive database of etymological information for fish
- Jobling, J. A. (2010) The Helm Dictionary of Scientific Bird Names. London. Christopher Helm.
- Quattrocchi, U. (2000) The CRC World Dictionary of Plant Names. New York. Routledge.
- Stearn, W. T. (1992) Botanical Latin. London. David & Charles.