can anyone tell me the latin name for ...

[Peter]

Tony, you have far too much spare time at work!

[Dean Lofthouse]

To change something is quite easy Tony, it's the resistence to change that is hard to change.

 

Mr Mctree has just been round to give me a lesson in Latin, to no avail I might add.

 

I will never forget the time a client asked me what this certain tree was, I reeled it straight off, Acer pseudoplatimus brilliantissimum I replyed.

 

He looked at me with disgust on his face as though I had just called him a "right thick plank" .

 

I felt the same way, I had justed insulted a clients intelligence. Like you say Tony, you can adjust the way you talk dependant on whom your talking to, but why should that be.

 

To me, Acer pseudoplatimus brilliantissimum is such a gobfull and a total uneccessary use of letters of the alphabet, what a long winded way of going about things??

 

I'm not saying we should just use binary code to ID things but we should be able to talk in a language that everybody universally understands, including your typical householder.

 

Change will happen Tony, we will in 200 years or so all be talking the same language universally anyway, it is too inefficient for us not to within a global community.

 

But for now, at least you understand what I am getting at

[David Humphries]

I will never forget the time a client asked me what this certain tree was, I reeled it straight off, Acer pseudoplatimus brilliantissimum I replyed.

 

:

 

You did mean Acer pseudoplatanus 'Brilliantissimum'

did you not Deano :wink:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Amelanchier]

I will never forget the time a client asked me what this certain tree was, I reeled it straight off, Acer pseudoplatimus brilliantissimum I replyed.

 

He looked at me with disgust on his face as though I had just called him a "right thick plank" .

 

I felt the same way, I had justed insulted a clients intelligence. Like you say Tony, you can adjust the way you talk dependant on whom your talking to, but why should that be.

 

To me, Acer pseudoplatimus brilliantissimum is such a gobfull and a total uneccessary use of letters of the alphabet, what a long winded way of going about things??

 

I'm not saying we should just use binary code to ID things but we should be able to talk in a language that everybody universally understands, including your typical householder.

 

Change will happen Tony, we will in 200 years or so all be talking the same language universally anyway, it is too inefficient for us not to within a global community.

 

But for now, at least you understand what I am getting at

 

Interesting points Dean. And although it's not your central point, I think you've just shown why language is not binary.

 

Your innocent typo would be quite catastrophic in binary, as to delete or replace the information in a digital information system can produce completely different outcomes. E.g., just get one number wrong in your PIN or the ISBN of a book your looking for and you're done.

 

However, as language is analogue, we all know exactly what tree you're referring to, even though the typo was there!

 

Th bauty of an analog systm is that vn if you rmov an ntir st of lttrs its still possibl to b undrstood.

 

Not the same with a digital system especially binary!

 

Anyway I get your point Dean, but don't forget the lesson of Esperanto! Unu bieron, mi petas!!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto

[Pete Mctree]

You did mean Acer pseudoplatanus 'Brilliantissimum'

did you not Deano :wink:

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

SWOT

[David Humphries]

SWOT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Dean Lofthouse]

You did mean Acer pseudoplatanus 'Brilliantissimum'

did you not Deano

 

 

First two words copy and pasted from post #17 of this thread.

 

The reason I copied and pasted ???

 

Because it would have taken me half an hour to type such a long winded name out

 

So Nuggsy, get your damb spelling right man

[danbrown87]

If it wasn't necessary to have the current nomenclature system we have, I'm sure it would have long ago been done away with. It may not always be necessary to use it, for example when speaking to clients who may well already have identified a tree as "an oak" or "an ash". But, the fact remains that there are subtle differences in species, even those of the same genus.

 

If anything, in this world of increasing demand for efficiency etc. the need to be able to identify species (and not just trees) accuratley will become more essential. Take for example the the influenza virus (not strictly speaking an organism so classified slightly differently, but the point I'm making is the same). There are a number of different strains of that virus, H5N1 (Bird Flu) and H1N1 (Spanish Flu) to name just a couple, which are deadly. Now, the need to identify things precisley and acuratley becomes more apparent.

 

In a totaly anecdotal situation, we may discover a new tree in the uncharted Amazon which has fantastic medicinal properties. There may be many trees in the same genus, all looking very similar, but only this one species which has the medicinal properties.

 

Finally, I'm not saying that I would always be spouting off the botanical names for trees to clients, I'm just saying that I think the system is absolutley essential.

[bob]

First two words copy and pasted from post #17 of this thread.

 

The reason I copied and pasted ???

 

Because it would have taken me half an hour to type such a long winded name out

 

So Nuggsy, get your damb spelling right man

 

i knew there would be a reason for your stupidity

blame the kid

[Dean Lofthouse]

So you are basically saying Botanical names are infallable and accurate to the degree they cannot be mistaken and that there is no other more simplistic and understandable referencing system that will work.

 

I hope I'm wrong, but thats the sort of attitude there was to the computer filing system. It's accuracy and speed became apparent when comparing the system to the Ripper investigation filing system.