Scientific names & pronunciation

Scientific names are a major stumbling block for most enthusiasts.  Despite the concept of universal understanding that they are intended to provide, most of us avoid their use if at all possible.  The reason?  They are difficult to pronounce and remember, and popular species (like all the macro-moths) have English vernacular names that are easier to use.

So what's the answer?  To give all species vernacular names?  To standardise and publish pronunciations?  To encourage everyone to use scientific names?  All these views come up from time to time and arguments for and against each can be heated.

Birders gradually moved over from using all scientific names to vernacular names during the 50's and 60's.  More recently, the move to harmonise vernacular names globally has resulted in renewed contention (Robin vs. Eurasian Robin for example) and this still hasn't quite settled down.  Could we envisage a similar situation for moths in the future?

Virtually all micro-moths are without a vernacular name and we have to use scientific names for these.  However, at the first opportunity we revert to the vernacular (if one exists) - or worse still, avoid talking about them altogether.  So we generally refer to the 'Diamond-back' rather than Plutella xylostella, whereas we must talk of Agriphila tristella.  This curious mix of scientific and vernacular is confusing at best.

As you may know, scientific names have two parts: the generic name followed by the specific name, and should be shown (by convention) in italics when printed and underlined when hand written.  Also, convention states that the generic name is always capitalised.  They are 'Latinised' names and their assignment follows complex but well defined rules.  Scientific names are pronounced in 'English' rather than using classical Latin.

I grew up with the (now old fashioned) system of referring to all species by their 'last' name - or specific name, as it is more properly known.  In some ways I do miss this.  For example, the Death's Head Hawk-moth (Acherontia atropos) was known simply as atropos.  (This is pronounced in various ways but the correct way is, I believe, a-troh-poss, said quickly with a slight stress on the a, which is like the a in hat and the o in tro short like hot).

Pronunciation of scientific names is difficult for most.  Me included, despite 40 odd years of interest.  Someone once told me that his big tip on pronunciation was to "say everything quickly and confidently" with a sub note "you will always sound like you know what you are talking about even if you don't".  However, this was a little unfair coming from a tipster who was fluent in both Latin and Greek!

As a youngster, I learnt all the butterfly last names like this from an old hand so I'm still confident in saying euphrosyne (yew-froz-in-ee, said quickly with a slight stress on the froz) - or cardamines (car-der-my-knees, again, said quickly with slight stress on my).  Even now, these names pop up in my head when I see any butterfly and I have to do a translation before speaking.  Having said that, when I see Gonepteryx rhamni my instinct is still to shout "brimmo".

Together with many of the interesting, striking and desirable moths, these names have usually stuck with me.  Some are now lost or confused though: I'm pretty sure we used to say urticae as err-TY-see but I have since heard so many various way of saying this that I am no longer quite certain.  Which illustrates one particular issue of the 'last names only' method: urticae alone can mean the butterfly Small Tortoiseshell Aglais urticae or the moth Water Ermine Spilosoma urticae!  Rules state that a generic name must be unique within a Kingdom (the 'top level' of classification) but specific names have no such restriction and are often re-used within an Order (like Order: Lepidoptera).

It is near impossible to provide a rule set for pronunciation.  Many names are taken from classical history or mythology and are transliterated from the original, often breaking natural language rules.  A good example being semele and selene, which are pronounced seh-MEE-lee and SEL-eh-nee.  Perhaps the best single tip I could give is to remember that terminal vowels are always sounded.  Examples: Noctuidae = nok-TU-ih-dee (U said as yew, ae is invariably said as long e), culmella = kull-MELL-a (a as in hat).  Similarly, endings �ea = ee-ah and -es = eez.

So we really need to hear and use these names for this system to work comfortably.  Where names are frequently used verbally it is easy to see how they can be learnt and remembered.  With more and more non-verbal communication now (via email and the web) this can only exacerbate the problem.

Further Reading:

Entomological Societies of Oxford & Cambridge (eds.), 1858, An Accentuated List of the British Lepidoptera, with hints on the derivation of names, Van Voorst, London.

This book, published almost 150 years ago, is the first and only guide to pronunciation within the British Lepidoptrera.  It was produced in response to calls for standardisation and familiarisation in Victorian times.

Macleod, R.D., 1959, Key to the Names of British Butterflies and Moths, Pitman & Sons Ltd.

Emmet, A.M., 1991, The Scientific Names of the British Lepidoptera. Their History and Meaning, (ISBN: 0946589283), Harley Books.

Try searching Google  for "pronunciation scientific names" or "pronunciation biological latin" etc.  Many pages now present rules, for example http://www.saltspring.com/capewest/pron.htm .

Later (20:46) - slight revision for style and clarity.