The beauty of the English language is its flexibility. If a word or name is commonly understood it can be used.
Ornithology has it’s own Scientific Names which are only changeable
through Scientific process and publication. These are generally accepted world-wide so readers know precisely which bird is referred to. (Pardon the grammar).
Birdwatchers, in Australia at least, have standardised Common Names as well, dictated originally by top twitchers, most of them British. In the process we lost some wonderful common names, understood by all Australian birdos. Eg “Jabiru”, (because this Portuguese name also refers to a South American Stork, never likely to be seen wild in Australia or confused with our Jabiru by anyone literate), replaced by “Black-necked Stork” , to my mind, ugly, ungainly and totally unromantic.
Similarly, “Torres Strait Pigeon” became “Torresian Imperial Pigeon” ; we lose an Oz name so that some intellectually straight jacketed pseudo -scientist can inflict their unnecessary pseudo-science on our historic Australian colloquial bird names.
Earlier bird-books quoted the common names as well as the Scientific ones. In themselves they made interesting reading.
As the Turkey discussion demonstrates, our original names reflect history and geography. “Lumping” of Scientific names is being modified as sub specific differences are revealed.
Perhaps Brush Turkeys dust bathe and Bush Turkeys don’t. Just by looking into the name differences we learn more about birds.
Birding names should not be sterilised, even at the alter of International Twitching tours. If in doubt use the Scientific names.
Sincerely
Michael Hunter
Sent from my iPhone
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
