Phonetic spelling: Name of the day

[Pal Meir]

The problem with the Latin names is not only if it is pronounced in the Italian, Spanish, German, etc. way (the American-English pronounciation has nothing to do with any Latin one), but also the spelling. One example: We have Satakentia liukiuensis vs Arenga ryukyuensis. A correct Latin spelling of the Ryûykyû Islands would be “riukiu” or “liukiu”, but never “ryukyu”, because the “y” was a vowel similar to a Latin “u” (and not a ligature of ij). The same case we can observe in Livistona chinensis; the correct Latin would be “sinensis”. A “ch” in Latin had a pronounciation like a “kh” and never like a “tsh”. — And what should we do when we have e.g. latinized English names as in Howea, Wallaceodoxa, etc. in a correct Latin pronounciation?

[Bigfish]

3 hours ago, Yunder Wækraus said:

Honestly, near enough is good enough. This, however, is why I prefer to write and say the common name whenever possible. Not only does it avoid the contentious issue of stress and vowel quality inherent in scientific names, but it also avoids confusion. Contrary to what we might want to think, scientific names are hardly fixed, and the common name is often more stable! (e.g. the floss silk tree and its ever-changing scientific name)

I completely disagree with this.  There are far too many plants that have the same or similar common names.  One reason for scientific names is to avoid the confusion.  Common names create way more confusion in some circumstances, in my experience.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Bigfish

[Yunder Wækraus]

3 hours ago, Bigfish said:

I completely disagree with this.  There are far too many plants that have the same or similar common names.  One reason for scientific names is to avoid the confusion.  Common names create way more confusion in some circumstances, in my experience.

Scientific names are great. I'm not knockin' them. But they are not, as is often believed, unchanging and unambiguous. In fact, if you try to learn enough of them and use them over a 30-year period, you'll soon find that a significant number of them change once or more during that time. Sometimes it is because new technologies and insights necessitate the creation of new genus or moving one species from one genus to another, etc. Sometimes it is because the species name is discovered to be the incorrect one due to chronology (i.e. an earlier name was legitimately proposed in the literature but forgotten till now).

Two classic examples of this (for me, anyway) are the American cougar and the (already mentioned) floss silk tree. Yes, both of these species have multiple common names: cougar, puma, mountain lion, and panther are the most common "common" names for the tawny big cat of the Americas; silk floss and floss silk are both names for the tree. But their scientific names are no less confusing, and they do not have the added benefit of being understandable by most people. The cat has been known as both Felis concolor and Puma concolor in my lifetime, and the floss silk tree has been known as both Ceiba speciosa and Chorisia speciosa. And these examples are not isolated. So, for me, Acoelorrhaphe wrightii is the Everglades palm :-) Whenever there's room for confusion, I think the scientific name is a great tool to add to the first reference of the common name. 

http://southeastgarden.com/why-scientific-names-change.html
 

[Yunder Wækraus]

5 hours ago, Pal Meir said:

The problem with the Latin names is not only if it is pronounced in the Italian, Spanish, German, etc. way (the American-English pronounciation has nothing to do with any Latin one), but also the spelling. One example: We have Satakentia liukiuensis vs Arenga ryukyuensis. A correct Latin spelling of the Ryûykyû Islands would be “riukiu” or “liukiu”, but never “ryukyu”, because the “y” was a vowel similar to a Latin “u” (and not a ligature of ij). The same case we can observe in Livistona chinensis; the correct Latin would be “sinensis”. A “ch” in Latin had a pronounciation like a “kh” and never like a “tsh”. — And what should we do when we have e.g. latinized English names as in Howea, Wallaceodoxa, etc. in a correct Latin pronounciation?

American English pronunciation has just as much to do with scientific Latin as any other modern language, which is to say, it has EVERYTHING to do with it for speakers of American English. There is no one correct way to pronounce Latin. The Roman Catholic church uses a standard that is influenced by modern Italian orthography and pronunciation (e.g. <c> is a /k/ before <a>, <o>, <u>, but it is /tʃ/ before <i> and <e>). The Catholic church in England once had its pronunciation standards, and these developed in situ alongside the sound changes that affected all English pronunciation. Thus, for a time, <a> in open, stressed syllables within Latin words was given the value of English <a> in such words generally, namely /ei/ (as in <bay> or <they> or <fate>). Later, as higher education focused more on Latin and Greek studies (think the heydey of Thomas Jefferson's college education), attempts were made to pronounce Latin in ways that were closer to classic pronunciation of the Roman period. Even then, however, no one could agree on how far to take such attempts.

Thus Julius Caesar's famous quote, "Veni, vidi, vici" would have sounded like WAY-NEE, WEE-DEE, WEE-KEE to an English speaker! I doubt that anyone in the English-speaking scientific community is using a /w/ sound for any Latinate scientific name with <v> in it :-) Oh, and don't forget that scientific names are not exclusively Latin: they can be of Greek origin, and the roots can come from any language and preserve any Roman grapheme combinations in that language (e.g. wrightii, which has the non-Latin letter <w> and the non-Latin digraph <gh> in it.) I say all this to let anyone reading this know that any reasonable pronunciation of a scientific name is fine. When in doubt, copy the local nurseryman's pronunciation. If you want to be pedantic, prepare to teach yourself the stress rules of Latin (a task which will require you to understand the concept of syllable weight) and to say things that NO ONE in the English-speaking world would say. 

[Sanips]

13 hours ago, Pal Meir said:

The problem with the Latin names is not only if it is pronounced in the Italian, Spanish, German, etc. way (the American-English pronounciation has nothing to do with any Latin one), but also the spelling. One example: We have Satakentia liukiuensis vs Arenga ryukyuensis. A correct Latin spelling of the Ryûykyû Islands would be “riukiu” or “liukiu”, but never “ryukyu”, because the “y” was a vowel similar to a Latin “u” (and not a ligature of ij). The same case we can observe in Livistona chinensis; the correct Latin would be “sinensis”. A “ch” in Latin had a pronounciation like a “kh” and never like a “tsh”. — And what should we do when we have e.g. latinized English names as in Howea, Wallaceodoxa, etc. in a correct Latin pronounciation?

'sinensis' vs. 'kinensis' could be the answer for your next question. I think it's pronunce deliberaty wrong as 'sinensis' to mantain the reference of the country/area. So I think that for fist names It could be accepted to pronunce them like they are. Talking about languages is talking about exceptions.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Sanips

[Pal Meir]

22 minutes ago, Sanips said:

'sinensis' vs. 'kinensis' could be the answer for your next question. I think it's pronunce deliberaty wrong as 'sinensis' to mantain the reference of the country/area. So I think that for fist names It could be accepted to pronunce them like they are. Talking about languages is talking about exceptions.

The sin- in Latin SINA for "China" ist the phonetic transcription with Latin letters for Chinese 秦 *dzin (modern qín) and not for anything like "kin". There is no correct Latin adjective like "chinensis", no matter how to pronounce it.

[Sanips]

2 hours ago, Pal Meir said:

The sin- in Latin SINA for "China" ist the phonetic transcription with Latin letters for Chinese 秦 *dzin (modern qín) and not for anything like "kin". There is no correct Latin adjective like "chinensis", no matter how to pronounce it.

I didn't realise about that, other species are well-named (Camellia sinensis or Wisteria sinensis) ...well, errors are part of scientific names culture . Any possibility to see Livistona chinensis corrected?

Edited January 11, 2016 by Sanips

[John Case]

Let's try this one...Ptychosperma microcarpum

[Pal Meir]

20 minutes ago, Sanips said:

I didn't realise about that, other species are well-named (Camellia sinensis or Wisteria sinensis) ...well, errors are part of scientific names culture . Any possibility to see Livistona chinensis corrected?

No, no possibility, that’s the way of science.  A famous example is the Gingko biloba; biloba is correct, but Gingko is a misspelling (by Kaempfer) for Sino-Japanese 銀杏 giñkyô, which had to be spelled in Latin as “Ginkio”.

[Pal Meir]

Oh, sorry, I meant "Ginkgo biloba" and not "Gingko".

[Phoenikakias]

2 hours ago, John Case said:

Let's try this one...Ptychosperma microcarpum

What is difficult in this name? I wish only to highlight a very often misunderstanding in the use of greek words for the botanical names. Macro means in greek long and not big, just like the latin longus. So if someone uses as specific name the attribute macrocarpa to describe a simply big seed, this is simply wrong and wrong as well is the use of the word carpos to decribe the SEED, because latter is the sperma (like in Ptychosperma), while carpos is the whole reproductive organ - the fruit which includes the seed. Big is actulaly the mega (in latin grandis) like it is used in the term Megabyte, Megametaphyte (in Cycads), Megalith, Megalodon.

[John Case]

19 hours ago, Phoenikakias said:

What is difficult in this name? I wish only to highlight a very often misunderstanding in the use of greek words for the botanical names. Macro means in greek long and not big, just like the latin longus. So if someone uses as specific name the attribute macrocarpa to describe a simply big seed, this is simply wrong and wrong as well is the use of the word carpos to decribe the SEED, because latter is the sperma (like in Ptychosperma), while carpos is the whole reproductive organ - the fruit which includes the seed. Big is actulaly the mega (in latin grandis) like it is used in the term Megabyte, Megametaphyte (in Cycads), Megalith, Megalodon.

I understand the meanings of the words, I just can't pronounce the genus of this one without spitting on someone! :)

[Pal Meir]

48 minutes ago, John Case said:

I understand the meanings of the words, I just can't pronounce the genus of this one without spitting on someone! :)

The Greek language had/has many consonant combinations like ks/ps/ts, sk/sp/st, pt/kt, very useful when you want to spit out the stones of olives and grapes.

[PalmsandLiszt]

On 12/19/2012 at 5:53 PM, tjwalters said:

When it comes to species that are named after persons, I think the "person" part of the name is pronounced as the proper name would be pronounced.

It occurred to me the other day that Magnolia is named after the French botanist Pierre Magnol, but I've never heard anyone pronounce it 'man-Yolly-uh'. Indeed, if I adopted this pronunciation, I bet many people wouldn't know what I was talking about.

Phoenix roebelinii, incidentally, is named after the Swiss plant collector Carl Roebelin, who I presume was either French or German Swiss given that the name doesn't look at all Italian. Either way, the 'oe' in Roebelin(ii) is not going to be pronounced like the classical 'oe' EE sound in Phoenix if we follow this rule.

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but I stumbled upon it and found the discussion interesting.

[Yunder Wækraus]

On 12/18/2012 at 4:21 AM, edric said:

There must be someone out there, that's good at Latin pronunciation, and phonetic spelling, first an example, then one of the names I have no phonetic spelling for, no guessing, you need to be fairly certain, for other examples see the A, B, and beginning of the C section in Palmpedia, Ed

 

Acoelorrhaphe (ah-see-loe-RAY-fee) wrightii (RITE-ee-eye) = (in the International Phonetic Alphabet) /ə.ˌsi.loʊ.ˈɹeɪ.fi ˈɹaɪ.ti.aɪ/

 

Carludovica drudei

 

 

http://www.palmpedia.net/wiki/Category:PALM_GENERA

 

[Kim]

You say Ra-va-NEE-ah, I say Ra-VEE-ne-ah. Whatever! Just don't call it Majesty. 

[Palmarum]

9 hours ago, PalmsandLiszt said:

... Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but I stumbled upon it and found the discussion interesting.

It is a popular topic of conversation at palm & plant related events and I find it evolving all the time.

After years of listening to binomial names being spouted off left and right and doing the same myself, I notice how people react to the pronunciations. Many learn the name from listening to others speaking it or they 'take their best shot' hoping they get close enough for you to know what they mean. Phoenix roebelenii is a great example of people hearing a name a certain way so many times they just say it that way, even though it is mispronounced.

I have figured out the main reason people pronounce binomial names phonetically is simply to remember how to spell them. Years of writing names on pot or hang tags over and over you got to get the spelling correct, or as close as possible. In the end, communication is what matters. As long as all parties know what is being talked about.

Having said that, there are some really bad errors out there that I have to correct on the spot. If not, they spread like fire and I have to listen to them all meeting, garden tour-long...

Ryan

[Silas_Sancona]

9 minutes ago, Palmarum said:

It is a popular topic of conversation at palm & plant related events and I find it evolving all the time.

After years of listening to binomial names being spouted off left and right and doing the same myself, I notice how people react to the pronunciations. Many learn the name from listening to others speaking it or they 'take their best shot' hoping they get close enough for you to know what they mean. Phoenix roebelenii is a great example of people hearing a name a certain way so many times they just say it that way, even though it is mispronounced.

I have figured out the main reason people pronounce binomial names phonetically is simply to remember how to spell them. Years of writing names on pot or hang tags over and over you got to get the spelling correct, or as close as possible. In the end, communication is what matters. As long as all parties know what is being talked about.

Having said that, there are some really bad errors out there that I have to correct on the spot. If not, they spread like fire and I have to listen to them all meeting, garden tour-long...

Ryan

Always found it interesting that many people can say  Eucalyptus,  Agapanthus,  Salvia, Petunia  ..and / or Oleander   w/ out even thinking about it,  but do a " puppy head tilt " when you share the scientific name of other common things.  Tougher stuff, can understand that being a little more of a challenge to understand / pronounce, until familiar enough anyway..

Johannesteijsmannia  is always a fun name  ( still don't think i can say it correctly, lol ),  ..but is a great one to challenge one's self to pronounce, < even half correctly > while learning how to pronounce other, less tongue twisty stuff.

Certainly helps everyone when nurseries use the scientific more often than the common name on tags or descriptive signage, etc.

[Palmarum]

28 minutes ago, Silas_Sancona said:

Always found it interesting that many people can say  Eucalyptus,  Agapanthus,  Salvia, Petunia  ..and / or Oleander   w/ out even thinking about it,  but do a " puppy head tilt " when you share the scientific name of other common things.  Tougher stuff, can understand that being a little more of a challenge to understand / pronounce, until familiar enough anyway..

Johannesteijsmannia  is always a fun name  ( still don't think i can say it correctly, lol ),  ..but is a great one to challenge one's self to pronounce, < even half correctly > while learning how to pronounce other, less tongue twisty stuff.

Certainly helps everyone when nurseries use the scientific more often than the common name on tags or descriptive signage, etc.

Genera that have become part of common usage become a 'gateway' for those interested in learning more complex names. Using them helps with some pronunciation. I think it's funny when people ask what the genus is for Salvia or Eucalyptus. I have fired off a few names that will make people react; laugh, cough, say 'bless you' etc. and I know when it's coming, followed by the spelling so they can copy it down. To help with pronunciations, I get them to start with the root of the word or work backwards right to left, each syllable or two at a time.

Johannesteijsmannia is always a fun one and an attention get'er. Whether it is on/in a website, sign, tag, palm book or sale booklet. Sale goers will often just point at the name and ask where it is. It isn't all that hard after you know it is actually two separate words stuck together: Johannes - teijsmannia. The first part, Johannes is a proper name said in the German/Dutch/Hebrew way, with the "J" like a "Y", 'Yoh-Haan ess'. The second part is derived from the original name of the genus from a long time ago in the mid-19th Century: Teysmannia, It is pronounced the same way it appears in the old form, 'tie'sz-Mahnn ee uh'. Now just group it all together. Variations exist, but due to the length of the genus, most any palm nut is going to know what you mean.

The scientific or binomial names are the great equalizer. Any one from any country, region or language will know what you are talking about. When we had the French Palm Society visiting here, I would follow them around writing names on a white erase board, as they knew the names, but pronounced them very differently. I call them binomial names after the system, as a kind-of inside joke to catch plant people off guard. As certain names are not that scientific, some are out right goofs. Calling them Latin names don't always work as some are derived from Greek, or neither. Botanical works, but the system is also used outside botany. I've heard them referred to as the 'Fancy' names sometimes, as they can be quite fancy.

Ryan

[Silas_Sancona]

7 minutes ago, Palmarum said:

Genera that have become part of common usage become a 'gateway' for those interested in learning more complex names. Using them helps with some pronunciation. I think it's funny when people ask what the genus is for Salvia or Eucalyptus. I have fired off a few names that will make people react; laugh, cough, say 'bless you' etc. and I know when it's coming, followed by the spelling so they can copy it down. To help with pronunciations, I get them to start with the root of the word or work backwards right to left, each syllable or two at a time.

Johannesteijsmannia is always a fun one and an attention get'er. Whether it is on/in a website, sign, tag, palm book or sale booklet. Sale goers will often just point at the name and ask where it is. It isn't all that hard after you know it is actually two separate words stuck together: Johannes - teijsmannia. The first part, Johannes is a proper name said in the German/Dutch/Hebrew way, with the "J" like a "Y", 'Yoh-Haan ess'. The second part is derived from the original name of the genus from a long time ago in the mid-19th Century: Teysmannia, It is pronounced the same way it appears in the old form, 'tie'sz-Mahnn ee uh'. Now just group it all together. Variations exist, but due to the length of the genus, most any palm nut is going to know what you mean.

The scientific or binomial names are the great equalizer. Any one from any country, region or language will know what you are talking about. When we had the French Palm Society visiting here, I would follow them around writing names on a white erase board, as they knew the names, but pronounced them very differently. I call them binomial names after the system, as a kind-of inside joke to catch plant people off guard. As certain names are not that scientific, some are out right goofs. Calling them Latin names don't always work as some are derived from Greek, or neither. Botanical works, but the system is also used outside botany. I've heard them referred to as the 'Fancy' names sometimes, as they can be quite fancy.

Ryan

" Easy " names, and breaking down how to pronounce them .. and tougher ones are definitely a gateway to better enlightenment ..except when you get " Too hard to learn.. Just give me the common name "  That phrase is more ..ahem,  lol   annoying?  when the person using it is a co- worker ( ..or two ) who should be able to impress me w/ their binomial vocabulary.   Anyway,

For those who want to learn, i see mastering the common stuff like learning how to ride a bike.. Harder names would like heading out on a 40 mile ride out in the mountains, on a hot day..  Might not be ready for mastering that right from the start, but, no one ever forgets how to ride a bike..

Funny you mentioned " Fancy " as a way some refer to use of " Botanical / Scientific " names..  The .." So what's the " fancy " name for X ".. request has definitely occurred on occasion.  Felt as though the plant should have been presented on a Platinum platter w/ frilly Doilys below it's pot  in such instances.  " Sir, might i interest you in this fahh bew- luus  Rhapis ?
 

[PalmsandLiszt]

14 hours ago, Palmarum said:

Many learn the name from listening to others speaking it or they 'take their best shot' hoping they get close enough for you to know what they mean.

I think I fall into the second category. I've always been interested in biological entities of all sorts; when I was a small child I was very interested in dinosaurs, as many small children are, so countless bits of Latin and Greek got ingrained in me by knowing what this or that dinosaur was. Then I was taught Latin and Greek at school, neither of which I was any good at, but it certainly helped with recognising vocabulary in scientific names. Many years later, after many cycles of being particularly interested in this or that group of animals or plants, I find I remember binomial names pretty much as easily as new English words, unless they're particularly peculiar or atypical.
This was before the internet age, and I do modify my pronunciations of names if I discover I'm in some extreme minority for the sake of facilitating communication and understanding.

14 hours ago, Palmarum said:

Having said that, there are some really bad errors out there that I have to correct on the spot. If not, they spread like fire and I have to listen to them all meeting, garden tour-long...

I was amused by a youtube video I watched not too long ago in which a women talking about Platycerium superbum pronounced it as 'super bum'.

12 hours ago, Palmarum said:

The first part, Johannes is a proper name said in the German/Dutch/Hebrew way, with the "J" like a "Y", 'Yoh-Haan ess'. The second part is derived from the original name of the genus from a long time ago in the mid-19th Century: Teysmannia, It is pronounced the same way it appears in the old form, 'tie'sz-Mahnn ee uh'.

I knew this was named after someone called Johannes Teijsmann, who was some manner of horticulturist in the Dutch East Indies in the 19th century. I didn't know the genus was originally just Teijsmannia and someone stuck his Christian name in front when it needed to be split from something else. What else was in Teijsmannia, I wonder?

12 hours ago, Palmarum said:

Calling them Latin names don't always work as some are derived from Greek, or neither.

Some of the worst are those that incorporate pinyin, as many English speakers don't know how to pronounce pinyin. E.g. Cycas panzhihuaensis, which looks a complete mess, and ought to be pronounced something like pan-juh-hwah-ensis, or C. debaoensis, which is duh-bow-ensis, not deb-ow-ensis or dee-bow-ensis. Then we have C. taitungensis, which incorporates Wade-Giles rather than pinyin; in pinyin it would be C. taidongensis. These are supposed to represent the same sounds! They should have made it a rule to stick to Greek and Latin, IMO.

[Darold Petty]

SAY-bel or sa-BALL ?