[Previous by date - Re: languages in PhyloCode]
[Next by date - Re: languages in PhyloCode]
[Previous by subject - interesting style of definition]
[Next by subject - lineages of true crabs]
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:22:37 +0000
From: Fredrik Pleijel <pleijel@mnhn.fr>
To: PhyloCode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: languages in PhyloCode
Just a note to say that I agree with Mieczyslaw: just English would be fine= . In science it is today the most used and/or recognised language. The phrasing of the definitions would in many cases be more or less standardise= d and thereby easy to formulate. And of course, in a paper in another languag= e the definition could also be given in that language as well as in English - in case of any discrepancies between the two the English version would be valid. If the English dominance would shift sometime from now, then maybe = a change in the PhyloCode would have to be considered at that time. Latin in any case is certainly not very used, and I see no argument for keeping it except for continuity with the Botanical Code. Fredrik (zoologist; not well trained in Latin) __________________________________________________________ Fredrik Pleijel Biologie des Invert=E9br=E9s marins, Mus=E9um National d'Histoire Naturelle 57, rue Cuvier 75231 Paris Cedex 05 tel: 33(0)1 40 79 31 12 fax: 33(0)1 40 79 31 09 http://www.mnhn.fr/mnhn/bimm/pleijel.htm __________________________________________________________