Talk:house sparrow

Ornithological names and "real names"
There is an unfortunate tendency for ornithological names to diverge from popular names. This is due to a tendency in the ornithological community to believe that ornithologists have the right to determine the "correct naming" of birds. It leads to usages and innovations among ornithologists that are completely unrelated to how ordinary people use these names.

It's rather tiresome to include notes at the Translation section that xxx is the ornithological name and yyy is ordinary language usage, but failure to do so results in inaccurate entries. The heading Passer domesticus is strictly an ornithological usage. Simply giving a popular name meaning "sparrow" is ornithologically incorrect. For instance, the Japanese term given here was スズメ, which ornithologically refers to Passer montanus. スズメ is perfectly acceptable as a Japanese term for "sparrows" in general (non-ornithological usage); it is not acceptable as the name for Passer domesticus, which has its own narrowly ornithological name (イエスズメ). (Incidentally, Passer montanus appears to be the most common type of sparrow in countries like Japan.)

Regrettably, the translation section at the Wiktionary page on "Sparrow" gives a redirect to "House sparrow", which only muddies the waters. Arguably, the page "Sparrow" should just give the generic word for "sparrow", with the understanding that the default referent will be the dominant type of sparrow in the country concerned. It is overspecificity in referring to the ornithological species that gives rise to this problem. Some contributors understandably feel that スズメ is a perfectly acceptable equivalent to the English word "sparrow" (which it is), but the ornithologist would beg to differ. For Passer domesticus, it should be イエスズメ, full stop.

Not sure if there is any way out of this mess.

Bathrobe (talk) 06:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)