Curious about Bensky et al.'s Latin idents

[Guest guest]

I'm curious how people feel about the inverted Latin word order used

in Bensky et al.'s 3rd edition Materia Medica. I mean things like

" Gardeniae Fructus. " Normally, this should be Fructus Gardeniae, the

fruit of gardenia. If inverted, it should be Gardeniae, Fructus. I

guess what I'm getting at is will this cause students to say Gardeniae

as an abbreviation as opposed to Gardenia or Lycii for Lycii Fructus

as opposed to Lycium? I know this was done to make it easier to index

the medicinals under their species name, but doesn't it introduce yet

other problems (besides the fact that it simply is not correct)? I'd

like other peoples' opinions about this.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Bob,

I agree with you on this point.

Cara

Cara O. Frank, R.Ac, Dipl Ac & Ch.H.

President China Herb Company of the Chinese Herb Program

Tai Sophia Institute of the Healing Arts

215-438-2977

Fax 215-849-3338

 

 

 

 

Bob Flaws <pemachophel2001

 

Wed, 18 Oct 2006 20:01:25 +0000

 

Curious about Bensky et al.'s Latin idents

 

 

 

 

 

I'm curious how people feel about the inverted Latin word order used

in Bensky et al.'s 3rd edition Materia Medica. I mean things like

" Gardeniae Fructus. " Normally, this should be Fructus Gardeniae, the

fruit of gardenia. If inverted, it should be Gardeniae, Fructus. I

guess what I'm getting at is will this cause students to say Gardeniae

as an abbreviation as opposed to Gardenia or Lycii for Lycii Fructus

as opposed to Lycium? I know this was done to make it easier to index

the medicinals under their species name, but doesn't it introduce yet

other problems (besides the fact that it simply is not correct)? I'd

like other peoples' opinions about this.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

While I'm not a Latin scholar, I've had several students who've

studied Latin. You are correct, in that the Bensky-style word order

is simply wrong. Latin has a more sophisticated grammatical schema

than English; in Latin, adjectives are almost always placed after the

nouns they modify, as in all the Romance languages (Italian, Spanish,

French), and the endings (declensions) are important.

 

In our materia medica, I'm updating the names to the latest Bensky

terminology, but maintaining the correct Latin grammatical form.

For example, Radix Ledebouriellae is now Radix Saposhnikoviae, but

not " Saposhnikoviae Radix " . (Botanists like to rework the taxonomy

every few decades, which is somewhat annoying, but a lot of it makes

sense given the recent information coming out in genetic and

biochemical taxonomy.)

If one is referring to the genus of this herb only, the correct form

is " Saposhnikovia " . The extra " e " on the end is an adjectival

modifier. The declensions must be consistent with the gender of the

noun they are modifying.

 

In an index, the use of commas should not interfere with most

automated alphabetization schemes:

Saposhnikoviae, Radix

 

---Roger Wicke PhD

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute

website: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/

email: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

 

 

 

On 2006.Oct.19, at 04:36, wrote:

 

> 2. Curious about Bensky et al.'s Latin idents

> Posted by: " Bob Flaws " pemachophel2001 pemachophel2001

> Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:10 pm (PDT)

>

> I'm curious how people feel about the inverted Latin word order used

> in Bensky et al.'s 3rd edition Materia Medica. I mean things like

> " Gardeniae Fructus. " Normally, this should be Fructus Gardeniae, the

> fruit of gardenia. If inverted, it should be Gardeniae, Fructus. I

> guess what I'm getting at is will this cause students to say Gardeniae

> as an abbreviation as opposed to Gardenia or Lycii for Lycii Fructus

> as opposed to Lycium? I know this was done to make it easier to index

> the medicinals under their species name, but doesn't it introduce yet

> other problems (besides the fact that it simply is not correct)? I'd

> like other peoples' opinions about this.

>

> Bob

>

[Guest guest]

Most people I know just use the pin yin, and the few who use latin use

the species name only anyways.. but aren't writing books or sending to

Chinese pharmacies to get the orders filled.

 

Geoff

 

(Gee... I've been off the list for over a year and it's still

the 'students should learn Chinese' thing... ;-) )

 

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001 wrote:

>

> I'm curious how people feel about the inverted Latin word order used

> in Bensky et al.'s 3rd edition Materia Medica. I mean things like

> " Gardeniae Fructus. " Normally, this should be Fructus Gardeniae, the

> fruit of gardenia. If inverted, it should be Gardeniae, Fructus. I

> guess what I'm getting at is will this cause students to say

Gardeniae

> as an abbreviation as opposed to Gardenia or Lycii for Lycii Fructus

> as opposed to Lycium? I know this was done to make it easier to index

> the medicinals under their species name, but doesn't it introduce yet

> other problems (besides the fact that it simply is not correct)? I'd

> like other peoples' opinions about this.

>

> Bob

>

[Guest guest]

, Roger Wicke <rw2

wrote:

(Botanists like to rework the taxonomy

> every few decades, which is somewhat annoying, but a lot of it makes

> sense given the recent information coming out in genetic and

> biochemical taxonomy.)

 

 

Whilst I can understand, most of the time, with the reason for changing the

taxonomy of plants, to a certain extent the changes sometimes smack of

a certain amount of intellectual snobbery. This is fine in botanical fields

( " are YOU up on the taxonomical changes?!....Imagine not knowing...... " )

In terms of a medicinal substance, this can lead to all sorts of problems.

Recently the government registration board here in Victoria, Australia, sent

out a new guideline to practitioners that all patients receiving herbs should

be given a prescription detailing the herbs prescribed. So far it is

permissable to issue the prescription in chinese characters, pinyin, latinate

medicinal name or latin binomial- with part specified. (Wade-giles is

acceptable, but not prefferred, and species name alone or common name

is out.) The idea being that the herbs should be identifiable in an

emergency situation. Unfortunately, not many people are wholely versed in

more than one system of nomenclature, but as there does not seem to be

s standardized system yet, I guess something is better than nothing.

 

Lea.

[Guest guest]

I'm no Latin scholar either, but I did have a couple of years in

school. If I'm remembering correctly, word order isn't essential in

Latin, because the ending of words will convey the part of speech. For

example, Fructus Gardiniae, " us " is a nominative ending, denoting a

noun that is the subject of the sentence; " ae " denotes the genitive

case, showing possession. So Fructus Gardiniae is fruit of the

gardinia, whatever order it's in.

 

Standardization of word order in sentences may have been a later

development? If memory serves, in ancient texts it didn't matter. I

suspect there are conventions in botanical or scientific Latin, but my

education didn't go much beyond Cicero's odes.

 

My husband studied more--and remembers more--Latin than I do, so I can

double-check this with him tomorrow. For those who are intersted,

here's a good page on basic grammar

http://www.answers.com/topic/latin-grammar

 

Regards,

 

Sarah

 

Sarah E. Rivkin, MS, LAc, Dipl. OM

www.slopeacupuncture.com

 

 

 

, Roger Wicke <rw2 wrote:

>

>

> While I'm not a Latin scholar, I've had several students who've

> studied Latin. You are correct, in that the Bensky-style word order

> is simply wrong. Latin has a more sophisticated grammatical schema

> than English; in Latin, adjectives are almost always placed after the

> nouns they modify, as in all the Romance languages (Italian, Spanish,

> French), and the endings (declensions) are important.

>

> In our materia medica, I'm updating the names to the latest Bensky

> terminology, but maintaining the correct Latin grammatical form.

> For example, Radix Ledebouriellae is now Radix Saposhnikoviae, but

> not " Saposhnikoviae Radix " . (Botanists like to rework the taxonomy

> every few decades, which is somewhat annoying, but a lot of it makes

> sense given the recent information coming out in genetic and

> biochemical taxonomy.)

> If one is referring to the genus of this herb only, the correct form

> is " Saposhnikovia " . The extra " e " on the end is an adjectival

> modifier. The declensions must be consistent with the gender of the

> noun they are modifying.

>

> In an index, the use of commas should not interfere with most

> automated alphabetization schemes:

> Saposhnikoviae, Radix

>

> ---Roger Wicke PhD

> Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute

> website: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/

> email: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

>

>

>

> On 2006.Oct.19, at 04:36, wrote:

>

> > 2. Curious about Bensky et al.'s Latin idents

> > Posted by: " Bob Flaws " pemachophel2001 pemachophel2001

> > Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:10 pm (PDT)

> >

> > I'm curious how people feel about the inverted Latin word order used

> > in Bensky et al.'s 3rd edition Materia Medica. I mean things like

> > " Gardeniae Fructus. " Normally, this should be Fructus Gardeniae, the

> > fruit of gardenia. If inverted, it should be Gardeniae, Fructus. I

> > guess what I'm getting at is will this cause students to say Gardeniae

> > as an abbreviation as opposed to Gardenia or Lycii for Lycii Fructus

> > as opposed to Lycium? I know this was done to make it easier to index

> > the medicinals under their species name, but doesn't it introduce yet

> > other problems (besides the fact that it simply is not correct)? I'd

> > like other peoples' opinions about this.

> >

> > Bob

> >

>

[Guest guest]

See following reference:

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

Latin grammar

 

" Latin allows for a very flexible word order because of its

inflectional syntax. Ordinary prose tended to follow the pattern of

Subject, Indirect Object, Direct Object, Adverbial Words or Phrases,

Verb. Any extra, though subordinate verbs, are placed before the main

verb, for example infinitives. Adjectives and participles usually

directly followed nouns, unless they were nouns of beauty, size,

goodness, or truth, in which case they preceded the noun being modified.

"

 

While Latin allows generally for a flexible word order, adjectives

follow a more constrained pattern as stated above. Italian, Spanish,

and French inherited the same pattern of adjectives following the

noun, with the exceptions listed above (beauty, size, goodness, or

truth).

 

In a pharmaceutical name like " Radix Saposhnikoviae " , Radix is the

noun, Saposhnikoviae is the adjective (a root of type or genus

Saposhnikovia).

 

 

---Roger Wicke PhD

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute

website: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/

email: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

 

 

 

On 2006.Oct.21, at 03:53, " Sarah Rivkin " saydit wrote:

 

>

> 1b. Re: Curious about Bensky et al.'s Latin idents

> Posted by: " Sarah Rivkin " saydit saydit

> Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:45 pm (PDT)

>

> I'm no Latin scholar either, but I did have a couple of years in

> school. If I'm remembering correctly, word order isn't essential in

> Latin, because the ending of words will convey the part of speech. For

> example, Fructus Gardiniae, " us " is a nominative ending, denoting a

> noun that is the subject of the sentence; " ae " denotes the genitive

> case, showing possession. So Fructus Gardiniae is fruit of the

> gardinia, whatever order it's in.

>

> Standardization of word order in sentences may have been a later

> development? If memory serves, in ancient texts it didn't matter. I

> suspect there are conventions in botanical or scientific Latin, but my

> education didn't go much beyond Cicero's odes.

>

> My husband studied more--and remembers more--Latin than I do, so I can

> double-check this with him tomorrow. For those who are intersted,

> here's a good page on basic grammar

> http://www.answers.com/topic/latin-grammar

>

> Regards,

>

> Sarah

>

> Sarah E. Rivkin, MS, LAc, Dipl. OM

> www.slopeacupuncture.com

>

>

>

> , Roger Wicke <rw2

> wrote:

>>

>>

>> While I'm not a Latin scholar, I've had several students who've

>> studied Latin. You are correct, in that the Bensky-style word order

>> is simply wrong. Latin has a more sophisticated grammatical schema

>> than English; in Latin, adjectives are almost always placed after the

>> nouns they modify, as in all the Romance languages (Italian, Spanish,

>> French), and the endings (declensions) are important.

>>

>> In our materia medica, I'm updating the names to the latest Bensky

>> terminology, but maintaining the correct Latin grammatical form.

>> For example, Radix Ledebouriellae is now Radix Saposhnikoviae, but

>> not " Saposhnikoviae Radix " . (Botanists like to rework the taxonomy

>> every few decades, which is somewhat annoying, but a lot of it makes

>> sense given the recent information coming out in genetic and

>> biochemical taxonomy.)

>> If one is referring to the genus of this herb only, the correct form

>> is " Saposhnikovia " . The extra " e " on the end is an adjectival

>> modifier. The declensions must be consistent with the gender of the

>> noun they are modifying.

>>

>> In an index, the use of commas should not interfere with most

>> automated alphabetization schemes:

>> Saposhnikoviae, Radix

>>

>> ---Roger Wicke PhD

>> Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute

>> website: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/

>> email: http://www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

>>

>>

>>

>> On 2006.Oct.19, at 04:36, wrote:

>>

>>> 2. Curious about Bensky et al.'s Latin idents

>>> Posted by: " Bob Flaws " pemachophel2001 pemachophel2001

>>> Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:10 pm (PDT)

>>>

>>> I'm curious how people feel about the inverted Latin word order used

>>> in Bensky et al.'s 3rd edition Materia Medica. I mean things like

>>> " Gardeniae Fructus. " Normally, this should be Fructus Gardeniae, the

>>> fruit of gardenia. If inverted, it should be Gardeniae, Fructus. I

>>> guess what I'm getting at is will this cause students to say

>>> Gardeniae

>>> as an abbreviation as opposed to Gardenia or Lycii for Lycii Fructus

>>> as opposed to Lycium? I know this was done to make it easier to

>>> index

>>> the medicinals under their species name, but doesn't it introduce

>>> yet

>>> other problems (besides the fact that it simply is not correct)? I'd

>>> like other peoples' opinions about this.

>>>

>>> Bob

>>>

[Guest guest]

Thanks all for the thoughtful replies.

 

Bob