![]() Lionfish or devil firefish? Photo Geo Cloete |
What's in a (common) name? Common names - those names we generally use to identify a species (for example: dog, cat), are a bit of a nuisance. Their usage is understood, simply because they are generally easier to remember and usually easier to pronounce. For example, "bluespotted klipfish" is much easier than "Pavoclinus caeruleopunctatus", its scientific name, even though "caeruleopunctatus" actually means "bluespotted", and "Pavoclinus" indicates it is a member of the klipfish family. The nuisance bit comes into play because common names are occasionally used for two very distinct species, or multiple names exist for the same species! The first instance is often the case when travellers see something in a foreign place which reminds them of a species found at home. This happened in frequently enough in South Africa, with Dutch and other sailors using home country names. A good example is the snoek. The South African species (Thysites atun) is an ocean-dwelling fish, while the fish it was named after (commonly known in English as the "pike" (Esox lucius)) is a freshwater species! They however look similar enough, and the name stuck. In the other instance geographical distances often results in the same species receiving different names. For example, Chirodactylus brachydactylus is known as twotone fingerfin by some, butterfish by others. In South Africa this is compounded by the same species occasionally having an English and Afrikaans name. For example, Diplodus sargus is known both as the "Dassie" and "Blacktail". Why this duplication is a nuisance is that it becomes hard to be certain that the species a person is talking about actually is the species you think it is! I am sure we all experienced this in restaurants where names either mean nothing to us, or are even used to mislead us. An example is the butterfish mentioned: way more fish are sold under the name of butterfish than are actually "Chirodactylus brachydactylus". It is a relatively small species, which is not easily captured, and hence should actually be quite rare in restaurants. However, the real thing is meant to taste really, well, buttery and nice, so that anything resembling it in taste is sold as if it were the real thing! (And because the real thing is rare, at a premium price too!) This entry started because SURG received a question by Geo about what he calls a "lionfish", which he discovered was called "devil firefish" in the Two Oceans book. Well, looking at Sea Fishes of South Africa, by JLB Smith, he calls it the devil firefish, which the authors of Two Oceans accepted as the generally accepted common name and hence carried over. Except that this whole group of scorpionfishes is generally known as "lionfishes"... For that matter, I would have called the fish in Geo's photo a "turkey lionfish", only to find out that this is actually the common name "reserved" for Pterois volitans, a species which does not occur in South Africa - ours is Pterois miles. At even more than a glance they seem pretty much the same to me... So, how does one resolve this? Well, simply accept the fact that common names are simply that: common names, to be used, abused, and discarded at will. Personally I find it quite hilarious that ornithologists (people who like birds) have declared that the Cape robin shall henceforth be called the robin-chat. Who cares. Yes, it received its common name because it resembles the European robin (I think, I am by no means a bird expert - far from it!) while it is not the same species. But seriously, who cares! If you want to be unambiguous, use its scientific name (which, incidentally, is Cossypha caffra)! Trying to enforce a common name is, in my humble opinion, a fairly pointless exercise, and I, for one, will keep calling these lovely birds Cape robins, if only simply because it rolls easier of the tongue than robin-chat. And thus, to conclude, whether you call it the sock anemone, walking anemone, or hedgehog anemone, as long as we all know that it refers to Preactis millardae, then all is well! |
|
| References: The Sea Fishes of Southern Africa, JLB Smith, 1949 Coastal Fishes of Southern Africa, P Heemstra and E Heemstra, 2004. Fishes in colour, G Vevers, 1963 Two Oceans, A guide to the marine life of Southern Africa, GM Branch, CL Griffiths, ML Branch and LE Beckley, 1994, Revised Edition 2010 A Guide to the CommonnSea Fishes of Southern Africa, R vd Elst, 1981 History of the Local Names of Cape Fish, JDF Gilchrist, 1900 |
||
| Previous | Q and A Index | Next |