| |
| ▲ | nephihaha 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I was specifically interested in the Irish names, because they are related to some research I have been doing for a number of years. The Latin names are available in numerous other sources. | |
| ▲ | wizzwizz4 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Scientifically, communication matters. Therefore, other names do also matter. | | |
| ▲ | contingencies 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | All other names are generally considered either common or historic. Common names are regarded as too ambiguous for scientific use, they are generally only mentioned in relevance to collections such as "How do the local people in <area x> having <population y> of <latin name z> (who might help identify where it is growing) refer to the organism?". In a small number of cases local names confer ethnobotanical or cultural semantics. | | |
| ▲ | nephihaha 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | I am well aware that laypeople don't always distinguish between various similar species of plants and animals, and I probably can't in some cases myself, but I am specifically interested in some of those "common or historic names" along with their "ethnobotanical or cultural semantics", to see how they might compare with words elsewhere. |
|
|
|