Message 2005-05-0026: PhyloCode

Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:59:11 -0500

[Previous by date - PhyloCode]
[Next by date - Re: PhyloCode]
[Previous by subject - PhyloCode]
[Next by subject - PhyloCode]

Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:59:11 -0500
From: [unknown]
Subject: PhyloCode

I have a new proposal that perhaps everyone can agree with. To have i=
t be
that the official PhyloCode organization insist that the wording in
Dictionaries wherever the Thanksgiving Day clause applies should stat=
e that
the definition includes all of the descendents. If this is done the
Thanksgiving day clause's objective will be fulfilled. What do you sa=

----- Original Message -----

=46rom: "Yisrael Asper" <>

> ...I will retract my insistence for my original proposal wherever a
> Thanksgiving Day
> qualification is added to words PhyloCode redefines namely a qualif=
> saying that you are giving a more general definition of a word but =
that is
> not how people would understand it if they were told the word ordin=
> For other words whenever a would be PhyloCode definition for a word=
> otherwise differ from a definition already accepted even from Phylo=
> new term is to be made instead with the otherwise old name being de=
> from the point of view of PhyloCode as describing a nonexistent cat=
> course deciding on when a word is redefined would be defined by the
> Phylocode organization. So if we would not be able to tell someone =
he is
> eating a Brontosaurus or whatever they call it nowadays,  if they a=
> a T Rex (I can't say Trex I see as it wouldn't be understood. So mu=
ch for
> heresy with this), due to the Thanksgiving Day qualification we cou=
ld keep
> the same word and say that a T Rex is a Brontosaurus.
> Yisrael
> P.S. Humans are Homo Sapiens Sapiens. What is PhyloCode going to do=
> that?


Feedback to <> is welcome!