Re: Correct latin&greek - was RE: New iguanodonts in PLoS ONE

[Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>]

On 27 November 2010 13:01, Mickey Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:
>> So, to turn the tables, if some linguist calls a new linguistic
>> phenomenon (say, a really aggressive figure of speech) "Therapodism"
>> (because he was thinking of Theropods but couldn't recall the name),
>> would you then also agree that it's not important enough to be made a
>> big deal of? Who would notice except for a few paleontologists? After
>> all, who learns about dinosaurs in school nowadays?
>
> I would indeed agree it's not a big deal.  It doesn't affect any area of 
> study, and language is so fluid that English is already full of numerous 
> words which break rules or have evolved from earlier forms which were more 
> directly derived.  As with the Latin and Greek examples, I agree it's ideal 
> to form words correctly, if only because it will help a few people remember 
> more easily and because the knowledge is valuable for its own sake.  Yet my 
> reaction would probably be limited to a derisive "ha!", as opposed to 
> lamenting that the paper didn't get rejected for a spelling error from an 
> unrelated field.

Ah, you say that now, but only because Martin has deftly argued you
into a corner :-)

If this had actually happened, before all this discussion, I bet your
attitude would have been VERY different.