Poll - Do you agree or disagree with the AOS's recent decision to abandon the use of eponymous bird names? (2 Viewers)

[Trinovid]

…the results of this poll here are statistically irrelevant for multiple reasons…

You’re not incorrect there, but there is no harm done with this poll and at the very least it’s worth more than asking random people who seldom think of birds unless they happen to see an eagle what they think on the subject. Not to mention, this is a bird forum and of interest to not only birders, but also people tired of having everything in our world politicized, which is the only thing that the starters of this process are focused on.

Once again, the poll speaks for itself, no differently from any other, and no one is deceiving themselves into believing that it will matter a whit to the AOS what the final results turn out to be.

 

[jurek]

It is bizarre that the Merlin bird packs do not use the scientific names in addition to the vernacular ones.

Also bizarre, Merlin is itself an eponym from an Anglo-Saxon male name.

Maybe they could start getting rid of eponyms from themselves?

 

[lockbreeze926]

Well, such polls obviously can't (and don't pretend to) cover the possible range of opinion.

For myself, I voted "no strong feelings", but that's not quite accurate. What I would really voted in favour of would have been "thinks it's broadly a good idea, but probably isn't worth a lot of hassle, which it would clearly require". Instead, I went for the vaguely neutral option, which seemed to get closest.

 

[Mysticete]

I would, in a perfect world, prefer a case by case approach where problematic patronyms (Jameson, Bachman) were removed, while those seemingly with less issues remained (Blackburn, Wilson). Alongside a general ban on the recognition of any further patronyms.

But I am not the one serving on the committee. I don't have to be the person sitting as judge over the actions of people who have been dead for a century or more. And any option you choose is going to anger one side. Keep a patronym and take flack from the Anti-patronym people. Get rid of a patronym and take flack from the people who want no name changes. At least with this approach, you are getting the frustration and anger of one side all at once, rather than dragging it out over a decade.

 

[Mysticete]

It's also kind of why I feel there should have been a middle option in the poll: getting rid of some names and while keeping the patronyms of people who overall seem harmless. I think that would have changed the votes considerably, since even from comments here we have seen people with that view interpret the options differently , and vote for different things

 

[dantheman]

It's also kind of why I feel there should have been a middle option in the poll: getting rid of some names and while keeping the patronyms of people who overall seem harmless. I think that would have changed the votes considerably, since even from comments here we have seen people with that view interpret the options differently , and vote for different things

I tried saying that earlier, but my comments were disagreed with and unfortunately lost/deleted.

As it is, that 'middle option' is actually implicit in the 'disagree' option (disagree with all patronyms being removed) I think, however I do imagine that is not how it has been perceived.

Oh well, it's only a poll on BF ... ;-)

 

[Lerxst]

I would, in a perfect world, prefer a case by case approach where problematic patronyms (Jameson, Bachman) were removed, while those seemingly with less issues remained (Blackburn, Wilson). Alongside a general ban on the recognition of any further patronyms.

But I am not the one serving on the committee.

The NACC voted unanimously in favor of your perfect world approach. I've been having an interesting email correspondence with James Remsen about this. So the experts on naming/biology on the most relevant committee within the AOS were being quite rational and accommodating. It was someone/something else within AOS that determined to ignore their overwhelming consensus.

 

[Mysticete]

Yeah...not a big deal

 

[etudiant]

It's also kind of why I feel there should have been a middle option in the poll: getting rid of some names and while keeping the patronyms of people who overall seem harmless. I think that would have changed the votes considerably, since even from comments here we have seen people with that view interpret the options differently , and vote for different things

The skeptic in me takes the view that this 'middle ground' would simply perpetuate and probably envenom the strife over the issue.
I'm certain that there are stains in everyone's ledger, deciding which are acceptable would task a modern day Solomon.
Better to have one decision, remove personal names and just use descriptive ones. These are presumably less likely to provoke strong arguments.

 

[Andy Adcock]

The skeptic in me takes the view that this 'middle ground' would simply perpetuate and probably envenom the strife over the issue.
I'm certain that there are stains in everyone's ledger, deciding which are acceptable would task a modern day Solomon.
Better to have one decision, remove personal names and just use descriptive ones. These are presumably less likely to provoke strong arguments.

I don't think it would, what it would do is anger the people whose proposal it was, so putting the roles in reverse.

The stealthy, undemocratic, process and politically motivated reasoning is what's pissed most off.

 

[etudiant]

I don't think it would, what it would do is anger the people whose proposal it was, so putting the roles in reverse.

The stealthy, undemocratic, process and politically motivated reasoning is what's pissed most off.

No argument about the process, it is the 'elected' leadership that decides and then informs the troops.
Still, I don't think the leaders are worse than the members, so on a 'much cry, little wool' issue such as nomenclature, I'd let them be.

 

[Andy Adcock]

No argument about the process, it is the 'elected' leadership that decides and then informs the troops.
Still, I don't think the leaders are worse than the members, so on a 'much cry, little wool' issue such as nomenclature, I'd let them be.

I asked a few days ago about the process through which these people get the position, don't recall getting an answer but nobody suggested that they were 'elected' positions?

 

[Helsinki Birder]

Also bizarre, Merlin is itself an eponym from an Anglo-Saxon male name.

Maybe they could start getting rid of eponyms from themselves?

I believe you have that reversed. 🙂

Owen

 

[Telephoto Paul]

How many of the species that have eponymous names in English already have other names in different languages?

 

[01101001]

Polish bird names generally have no eponyms unless they're named after Polish people, of course (think every (sub)species ever described by a Polish person, give or take).

 

[Mysticete]

How many of the species that have eponymous names in English already have other names in different languages?

When I was looking up old names, I noticed that name for Bendire's Thrasher in Spanish translates as Short-billed Thrasher, which does fit the bird and would be a good replacement name

 

[jurek]

How many of the species that have eponymous names in English already have other names in different languages?

Polish bird names generally have no eponyms unless they're named after Polish people, of course (think every (sub)species ever described by a Polish person, give or take).

That is another good idea! I genuinely look forward to Americans trying to adopt Polish names. Bewick's Wren, for example, is strzyżyk myszaty.

 

[01101001]

You can, then, use the alkane-alkene-alkyne tactic employed by Polish taxonomists, and have 'Wrens', 'Wrans' and 'Wryns' depending on genus (or 'Thresh' and 'Thrash' for the some Asian thrushes). Plus scores of unrelated blahblah-birds: Sicklebird, Weedbird, Herbagebird, Smokebird, Blazebird, Streambird, Pinebird, Willowbird, Copsebird (no two of which belong to the same genus).

 

[Telephoto Paul]

I suspect it's a quirk of avibase+google translate but, the Japanese name for Bendire's Thrasher comes out as 'Sand-colored thrush imitation'. Now don't tell me that's not a name that everyone would understand.... (perhaps switching the order of thrush and imitation)

 

[Lerxst]

Your mission, should you choose to accept it: Replace the eponyms on all Phylloscopus warblers with accurate descriptive names that capture their differences. Go.

Western Bonelli's warbler,
Eastern Bonelli's warbler,
Hume's leaf warbler
Brooks's leaf warbler,
Pallas's leaf warbler,
Tytler's leaf warbler,
Radde's warbler,
Tickell's leaf warbler,
Ijima's leaf warbler,
Laura's woodland warbler,
Whistler's warbler,
Bianchi's warbler,
Alström's warbler,
Martens's warbler,
Blyth's leaf warbler,
Claudia's leaf warbler,
Hartert's leaf warbler,
Kloss's leaf warbler,
Davison's leaf warbler


There are many, many other Phylloscopus besides these, which look similar, so be sure your new names don't create confusion relative to those.