Re: Evolution of Language

[Pieter.Depuydt@rug.ac.be]

Brian wrote: 
> Sorry, Ed, but you've missed the point. Raptor is already a common term
> (*not* a scientific term) in science for birds of prey. Your example above
> is not analogous. Allowing the use of "raptor" to mean dromaeosaur does
> nothing but lead to confusion. Language is also about economy of
> communication: raptors is more concise than birds of prey. How can I have a
> discussion with school age children and use the word raptor (in its correct
> sense) and not confuse the hell out them if they think I'm talking about
> dromaeosaurs? Why should I have to keep explaining this every time I give a
> talk? Why should I have to give up a perfectly acceptable, long-standing
> common term in favor of one invading from pop culture? And read my article
> RAPTOR WRONG again. What about _Eoraptor_, _Conchoraptor_, _Sinraptor_, and
> _Oviraptor_? Where do they fit into the "raptor family" of dinosaurs?
> Sorry, I can't give in on this one. The evolution of language is a given,
> but in this case, I think it's just an excuse for sloppiness.
 
There's also Parviraptor, not even a dinosaur, but a lepidosaur from 
the Jurassic of Britain, described and named some years ago.

Pieter Depuydt