Talk:elaphus

elaphus
Translingual specific epithet. The epithet is actually the genus name in lower case. This occurs in taxonomic naming fairly often. Once a word has been used as a genus name in taxonomy, it seems that all subsequent use is in reference to that name, not to the Latin or other word from which the genus name may have been derived. DCDuring TALK 20:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It comes from the Ancient Greek name of the species, and was present as a specific epithet from the initial description of Cervus elaphus by Linnaeus in 1758. As for Lucanus elaphus, Fabricius was following the lead of Linnaeus, who used cervus as the specific epithet for another species. He named other species of stag beetles after deer: alces, capreolus, & dama.
 * As for general practice: I can't think of any specific epithets that are nouns in apposition that are derived solely from a generic name, though I'm sure some exist. The ones that are clearly derived from generic names are usually in the genitive (very common for host-specific parasites), or with some kind of affix such as -oides or -vorus. Even for those that were simply the generic name, they would be alternative capitalizations of it and thus not deletable if attested (though attestation for taxonomic names can be problematic due to difficulties with the matter of independence). Chuck Entz (talk) 21:30, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I haven't found as a Latin word in L&S or in my Late Latin glossary (which does have  as an adjective). Is it Medieval Latin or just New Latin coinage? Given its relative age it seems unreasonable for it to be called Translingual. Should it be moved to Latin? DCDuring TALK  00:55, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I would guess that it's a Scientific Latin borrowing from Ancient Greek. Try searching on inflected forms to filter out the taxonomic names: elaphorum turns up a specific epithet, but also Latin sentences. That's not to say it can't be translingual, too, but it definitely exists as Latin. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:55, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Just to confuse things further, here's a case where the taxonomic name Cervus elaphus is present as the inflected Latin form Cervo Elapho. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:11, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * And Elaphus was a genus name, but only from 1827. So my original hasty classification of the epithet as a genus name was just wrong. The use of forms of suggests it was in use in New Latin, but apparently not earlier. That suggests the L2 header should be be Latin, not Translingual. That  and  are also used as specific epithets (for pests of deer) is consistent with  being fully absorbed into New Latin. DCDuring TALK  02:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)


 * There's an entry for “ELAPHUS” in Johann Jacob Hofmann’s  (1698), whose text comprises “ELAPHUS, mons Aſiæ, & Arcadiæ. Pauſan.”, Anglicè "Elaphus, a mountain in Asia and in Arcadia. Pausanias"; nothing cervine, however. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:26, 7 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it was used in that way in Pliny. DCDuring TALK 16:49, 7 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Right you are. I've added it. Good old Pliny. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, possibly change to Latin: I'm not seeing how this fails CFI. As Chuck notes, the argument is more for RfV than for RfD. Pur ple back pack 89   05:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no reason to have it as a Translingual term as it is a Latin term. If it were a genus name used as a specific epithet, the genus name (capitalized) would be a Translingual entry. Genus names are sometimes used as specific epithets. When they are, they appear in lower case as a result of the 'grammatical/orthographic' rules applied to taxonomic names. To have the lower case term in addition to the upper case one introduces needless redundancy into the dictionary. If you would like to add the redundant entries, feel free to do so. It would be a way to increase your net contributions without a great deal of effort. DCDuring TALK 16:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * In the real world it seems to be used with a lowercase first letter. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * In the real world sentence-initial words are capitalized. What's your point? Any genus name (capitalized) used as a specific epithet will, in that use, appear without a capital. DCDuring TALK 19:59, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * As an example consider Datura stramonium, Stramonium being an obsolete genus name. A different, common type of species name is Lynx lynx. DCDuring TALK 00:40, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
 * There again, see Datura stramonium, which goes back to Linnaeus, a year before Miller published Stramonium. As I said above, I don't think I've ever seen a specific epithet consisting of a noun in apposition that came from a generic name. The usual pattern is someone taking a specific epithet and converting it to a generic name when they create a new genus. This one is a bit murky, though, because it predates Linnaean taxonomy but was treated as a genus in a couple of pre-Linnaean works. It was, however, also used as a non-generic plant name as early as 1605. As a plant producing a commodity it tends to be treated as uncountable, so there are fewer inflected forms to search for. It does show up in 19th-century pharmaceutical usage in the genitive (i.e. "folium stramonii"), but that's also true of some completely translingual taxonomic names. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:01, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. DCDuring TALK 02:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Kept as nominator withdrew the request with improvement.--Jusjih (talk) 02:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)