Talk:coccothraustes

RFV discussion: October 2016–February 2019
RFV for the Latin, which is currently defined as a New Latin adjective meaning "kernel-crushing". It wouldn't surprise me if this existed as a noun, but I don't think it's an adjective. Its Ancient Greek etymon,, is a noun, and its derived binominal species name, Coccothraustes coccothraustes, could easily have its epithet explained as a reduplication of the generic name used in apposition (cf. , , etc.). — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Apparently, coccothraustes began its taxonomic life as a specific epithet in . Following are other taxa that use it: (L.),  (L.),,  Skoracki 2011,  Bochkov, Flannery & Spicer 2009. All are from the online database Index to Organism Names (ION)], which includes unaccepted names.
 * My excuse for not providing explicit citations is that the existence of a name is evidence that the taxon was used at least once. If necessary I could probably find actual citations. DCDuring TALK 17:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)


 * It goes all the way back to Linnæus? Goodness! Citations for the species' names will not be necessary. I'll try to look for uses of (preferably as an adjective) outside binominal nomenclature. BTW, I love ; I've never seen that kind of re…&nsbp;triplication in taxonomy before. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I found two uses of — does that mean anything to you? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a genus in Cardinalidae called Caryothraustes, 2 species of New World grosbeaks. I don't see anything in Cardinalidae that has capensis as epithet. DCDuring TALK 23:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Any animal name prior to 1758 isn't part of the current system of taxonomic nomenclature, but it looks like it's the cardinal. I notice that the first work treats Coccothraustes as distinct from Coccothraustus, cross-referencing the first to Kirschbeisser- whatever that is. Linnaeus does give synonyms from older works, but in the case of Loxia coccothraustes, they they all seem to be for just plain coccothraustes. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:10, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the German name ("cherry-biter") indicates a diet, fruit, for Coccothraustus, that differs from that of the hawfinch (Coccothraustes), nuts and seeds, though the New Latin name indicates nuts and seeds are the diet. I suppose the German vernacular name is based on ignorance of the North American bird's actual diet and may be influenced by the bird's color.
 * I see no principled lexicographic reason to exclude pre-Linnean "Scientific Latin" names, but, as a practical matter, I see no great return on the extra effort required to document them. DCDuring TALK 10:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Other projects extensively document modern taxonomic names. I don't know any that do the same for pre-Linnean names. For that reason it seems worthwhile to me. DTLHS (talk) 03:17, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Pre-Linnaean names are legitimate, but there's less of a system to them, and their continuity with Linnaean names can't be assumed. In a way, they tend to be SOP: quite often they're just a short, descriptive Latin phrase. In this case, it seems to be a calque of an apparently obsolete German term (Kirschbeisser) for the hawfinch, which is now known as the Kernbeisser. All of these names refer to its habit of biting through cherries to get to the pits, which it cracks with its massive beak so it can eat the kernel inside. Another generic name, Carpodacus, has a similar meaning: from + . Chuck Entz (talk) 09:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

By the entry and its version history, it's quite obvious that coccothraustes is about a Translingual taxonomic word as in "Coccothraustes coccothraustes" and "Loxia coccothraustes". "Loxia Coccothraustes" (genitive "Loxiae Coccothraustis", abbreviation "Lox. Coccothraustes") and *"Loxia coccothraustes" (accusative "Loxiam coccothraustem", ablative "Loxia coccothrauste") do also appear in Latin, but it's likely better just Translingual and  and Translingual  and. As for the POS, Translingual and   could indeed be a noun instead of adjective. If one argues for having Latin entries based on the attestion in Latin texts and the inflection, then likely Loxia and Vulpes deserve to have Latin entries too and then an informative label and/or gloss has to be added as (ATM) it's not just "New Latin" but "New Latin, taxonomy [or taxonomics], in taxonomic names [or as part of taxonomic names]". -84.161.18.209 12:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @ I.S.M.E.T.A., 22:29, 20 October 2016: That are two mentionings and not usages of "Coccothraustus Capensis ruber" which is said to be a bird.


 * BTW: books.google.com/books?id=NUEAAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA2&dq=coccothraustes & books.google.com/books?id=cHsZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA66&dq=coccothraustes + books.google.com/books?id=GGVVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA300&dq=coccothraustes (by Carolus Linnaeus (Carolus a Linné)) & books.google.com/books?id=ZzVXAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA381dq=coccothraustes (with acc. Coccothraustem) 're Latin & 've capped "Coccothraustes", acc. "Coccothraustem". Anyhow, entry seems to be a malformated Trans entry (wrong lang)...


 * Pinging participants: - the entry has been converted by an anon from Latin into a Translingual entry, which seems fine (this has been here for more than 2.5 years, trying to resolve it finally this time) to me and which should be attested by its very clearly attested use in the derived species names Coccothraustes coccothraustes and Loxia coccothraustes. If none of you has any objections to this, I'm going to just consider this RFV passed; the word clearly exists. (Debates on whether the entry ought to be Latin or Translingual isn't so much a matter of RFV anyway, methinks.) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:41, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm find with calling it Translingual. All that we lose is the ready availability of Latin declension tables, which are of potential use to a very small number of our potential users. DCDuring (talk) 16:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)