Lancashire Lad wrote:
> [quote=Flaxton post_id=12536 time=1580244800 user_id=50] . . . I think
> these are accepted English names rather than "common"
> Hi Mal,
> You will note, if you have a look at my screengrab some six posts above,
> that I do use "Accepted English Name" on the column header, as
> that is what BMS use at the head of their version of the list.
> When people refer to fungi by these names (especially beginners, people who
> are not familiar with fungi, and when used in informal foraying
> situations), most will ask "does it have a common name?" rather
> than "does it have an English name?".
> So for me, "accepted common name", "accepted English
> name" or "accepted English language name" all mean the same
> Regardless of which phrase is used, it is the use of the word
> "accepted" which signifies that the name in question is
> officially recognised.
> If we want to split hairs, the BMS page itself, is worded thus: -
> QUOTE "A working party formed in 2005 after the publication of the
> Checklist of the British and Irish Basidiomycota has been increasing the
> number of [b]common English language names[/b] for our fungi". ;)
> To split even more hairs - my use (in posts on this thread) of "Latin
> names" isn't strictly correct, because some fungi names aren't derived
> from Latin. :oops:
> More correctly, I should have used "Scientific names" - But
> again, when most people, and I include myself, (other than when in strictly
> mycological circles) discuss such things, they will usually say "this
> is a such and such, its Latin name is . . . ", rather than "its
> scientific name is . . . .".
> (Although again, you will note that I do use "Scientific Name" as
> header on my searchable list).
Just ignore me I was obviously having a bad day.