{"id":11864,"date":"2021-08-18T16:21:44","date_gmt":"2021-08-18T20:21:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/?p=11864"},"modified":"2021-08-18T16:32:08","modified_gmt":"2021-08-18T20:32:08","slug":"the-samuels-song-sparrow","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/2021\/08\/18\/the-samuels-song-sparrow\/","title":{"rendered":"The Samuels Song Sparrow"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><a href=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.07.56-PM.png\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" width=\"670\" height=\"726\" src=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.07.56-PM.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-11865\" srcset=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.07.56-PM.png 670w, http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.07.56-PM-277x300.png 277w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 670px) 100vw, 670px\" \/><\/a><figcaption><em>Melospiza melodia samuelis<\/em>\u2014painting by Louis Agassiz Fuertes<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>The appearance of <a href=\"https:\/\/ebird.org\/science\/use-ebird-data\/2021-ebird-taxonomy-update#common-names\">the newly updated eBird taxonomy<\/a> reminds me today that the venerable song sparrow name <em>samuelis<\/em>, dating to 1858, has been appearing recently in an emended form, <em>samuelsis<\/em>. I believe that the first such &#8220;correction&#8221; was made by Dickinson and Christidis in their fourth edition of the Howard and Moore <em>Checklist, <\/em>where they write that their change is &#8220;based on &#8216;Mr. Samuels&#8217; mentioned in the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.biodiversitylibrary.org\/item\/37038#page\/387\/mode\/1up\">original&#8221; description<\/a>, by Spencer F. Baird. Denis Lepage&#8217;s &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/avibase.bsc-eoc.org\/species.jsp?avibaseid=85683495C1307C83\">Avibase<\/a>&#8221; followed suit a year later, and the emendation is adopted, too, in the <a href=\"http:\/\/datazone.birdlife.org\/species\/taxonomy\">HBW\/Birdlife <em>Checklist<\/em><\/a><em> <\/em>and in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.worldbirdnames.org\/bow\/sparrows\/\">the most recent IOC list<\/a>, which cites Howard and Moore explicitly in the matter of &#8220;internal information&#8221; in Baird&#8217;s account. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Dickinson and Christidis are, as usual, absolutely right on the facts. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.biodiversitylibrary.org\/item\/32609#page\/678\/mode\/1up\">The co-types<\/a>, both taken on May 9, 1856, in Petaluma, were shot by the visiting Massachusetts collector <a href=\"https:\/\/sora.unm.edu\/sites\/default\/files\/journals\/condor\/v030n05\/p0261-p0307.pdf\">Emanuel Samuels<\/a>, and it was his name that Baird assigned to them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><a href=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.35.40-PM.png\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" width=\"576\" height=\"870\" src=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.35.40-PM.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-11866\" srcset=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.35.40-PM.png 576w, http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Screen-Shot-2021-08-17-at-8.35.40-PM-199x300.png 199w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px\" \/><\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>To my imperfect knowledge, Herbert G. Deignan was the first to take umbrage at Baird&#8217;s barbarous <em>samuelis, <\/em>which <a href=\"https:\/\/www.biodiversitylibrary.org\/item\/32609#page\/678\/mode\/1up\">Deignan snorts<\/a> was &#8220;probably used by Baird as euphonically preferable to the more proper <em>samuelsi<\/em>; unfortunately, as it stands it is not obviously dedicated to Emanuel Samuels at all, but apparently to some imaginary Samuel.&#8221; Deignan&#8217;s objection is grammatical: <em>Samuelis <\/em>is the genitive of &#8220;Samuel,&#8221; while &#8220;Samuels&#8221; would yield <em>samuelsi<\/em>\u2014if it happened to be a Latin noun.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In a sense, Deignan was right, though it is easy to argue that the English family name &#8220;Samuels&#8221; has its historical origins in an English genitive meaning &#8220;of Samuel,&#8221; which would translate into Latin as precisely the Bairdian <em>samuelis<\/em>. And it is equally easy to argue that Baird considered &#8220;Samuels&#8221; a noun of the third declension, which would drop that final -s, like l<em>ux\/luc-, rex\/reg-,<\/em> and so on, and form its genitive in <em>-is<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If we accept either of those as possibilities, it is by no means certain that Baird&#8217;s <em>samuelis <\/em>was an error. Instead, the name can be squeezed into the provisions of ICZN 31.1.1 as a name formed from a modern personal name that has been latinized. Poorly latinized, to be sure, but ICZN 32.5.1 lets Baird off the hook even for that: &#8220;Incorrect transliteration or latinization, or use of an inappropriate connecting vowel, are not to be considered inadvertent errors&#8221; that must be corrected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Unfortunately for Baird and for the original spelling (whatever its origin, in error or innovation), we cannot simply dismiss <em>samuelsis<\/em> even if we class it (as I think we ought) as an incorrect subsequent spelling of <em>samuelis<\/em>. For the ICZN magically makes &#8220;an incorrect subsequent spelling &#8230; in prevailing usage and &#8230; attributed to the publication of the original spelling &#8230; a correct original spelling.&#8221; With prevalence defined by the Code as &#8220;that usage of the name which is adopted by at least a substantial majority of the most recent authors concerned with the relevant taxon,&#8221; it&#8217;s clear that we&#8217;re stuck with <em>samuelsis<\/em>, adopted as it now is by all the major world checklists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Why, though, did our pii correctores contrive <em>samuelsis <\/em>rather than simply adopt Deignan&#8217;s suggestion of <em>samuelsi<\/em>? I cannot see how the neologism satisfies the requirement of the ICZN that a species name formed from a personal name must be formed either in accordance with the rules of Latin grammar\u2014yielding <em>samuelsii<\/em>, if we fussily latinize the name to &#8220;Samuelsius&#8221;\u2014or by the simple addition of a terminal -i\u2014yielding Deignan&#8217;s preferred <em>samuelsi<\/em>. The currently prevailing form <em>samuelsis<\/em> seems to be pulled out of thin air; it is at least utterly unpredictable on the rules of zoological nomenclature. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Stay tuned. I&#8217;ll find out what happened. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The appearance of the newly updated eBird taxonomy reminds me today that the venerable song sparrow name samuelis, dating to 1858, has been appearing recently in an emended form, samuelsis. I believe that the first such &#8220;correction&#8221; was made by Dickinson and Christidis in their fourth edition of the Howard and Moore Checklist, where they &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/2021\/08\/18\/the-samuels-song-sparrow\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;The Samuels Song Sparrow&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11864"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11864"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11864\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11870,"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11864\/revisions\/11870"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11864"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11864"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/birdaz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11864"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}