Sticks & Stones
"Sticks and Stones" is an English-language children's rhyme. The rhyme is used as a defense against name-calling and verbal bullying, intended to increase resiliency, avoid physical retaliation and to remain calm and good-living."
"Sticks and Stones" - Wikipedia
"A common childhood chant meaning hurtful words cannot cause any physical pain and thus will be ignored or disregarded."
My suggestion for solving the problem of problematic names is that we simply relearn the rhyme mentioned above, rather than relearn all names. And, it is far easier than eliminating all eponyms. I stated my position on the matter of names in this post - Names on the Land - and it has not changed, nor am I now embarrassed about what I wrote, or how it is written. Even if I was someone defined by an acronym such as, BIPOC, I don't think I would be traumatized by seeing the signs for Dundas Street or Plantation Lane.
Birds & Bees
Those of you who have somehow been able to avoid the debates over toponyms will surely be surprised that the arguments now extend to the naming of birds and even insects (there are other "nyms" by the way. For example, it is proposed by some that the name of "British Columbia" should be changed and I think that BC is an example of a choronym. Other choronyms will need to be examined for excision, as will astionyms such as "Vancouver." Those of you who want to be among the first to display your self-righteousness over an old name newly discovered, as well as those of you who are beginning to worry about the amount renaming to be done, can start here.") I have already done more work than I planned, so here are the basics about the Birds and the Bees.
Awful Anna
You will find all you need to know at the link above (Bird Names for Birds.) It contains a spreadsheet of: 1) bird names, 2) who the bird was named for and 3) who it was named by. Biographical profiles are provided and here is why Anna's Hummingbird is up for elimination:
"Anna’s Hummingbird was named by René Primevère Lesson, a French naturalist in the early 19th century. This bird was named to honor Anne d’Essling, wife of François Victor Masséna, Second Duke of Rivoli, who also has a hummingbird named for him by Lesson.
I am personally very fond of this bird species. This is a bird that used to visit my feeders almost every day all year long in Phoenix, AZ. I feel very attached to these chunky little hummingbirds, their beauty, their feisty behavior, and their spectacular courtship dives.
My problem with naming this wonderful bird for Anne d’Essling is that she really has nothing to do with this bird other than her husband’s ornithological interests. Anne probably never saw a live hummingbird and it is unknown if she was even interested in them. Surely she appreciated their beauty, but that is not known for certain."
Audubon, by the way, was an awful fellow.
For bugs, see the link above . I will just say here that the entomologists have moved into the field of etymology. Among the derogatory names the Task Force is currently examining is Gypsy Moth which is offensive to some Romani people. The Crazy Ant is also under the etymological microscope.
Rather than worrying about the elimination of the names of some insects, we should be more worried about the extinction of them. For that see: Insect Elegy.
Post Script:
To complicate matters I will introduce you to Stigler's Law of Eponymy which "holds that scientific laws and discoveries are never given the names of their actual discoverers.” It is a good reminder of just how collaborative and complex the processes of scientific discovery really are - the point here isn't so much that the wrong person gets credit as it is that the very idea that a single individual can get credit for a discovery is, well...a bit ridiculous."
The same could be said about naming generally which was usually "collaborative and complex." Names were applied to the land by people who were often scoundrels, to honour people who were even worse and sometimes to satirize them. Some were attached in seriousness, others as a joke and not a few were chosen by those who may have been inebriated. If the names are eliminated so is the history. Read Names on the Land before you discard Dundas.
Sources:
"This Moth’s Name Is a Slur. Scientists Won’t Use It Anymore:The Entomological Society of America Will No Longer Refer to Common Species of Insects as “Gypsy Moths” and “Gypsy Ants,” Because Their Names are Derogatory to the Romani People." Sabrina Imbler, The New York Times, July 9, 2021.
"Scientists are Renaming the ‘Gypsy Moth’ as Part of Broader Push to Root Out Offensive Monikers," Caroline Anders, Washington Post, July 11, 2021.
For Stigler's Law see the very good: "Stigler's Law: Why Nothing in Science is Ever Named After Its Actual Discover," Alasdair Wilkins, Gizmodo. 7/13/11
[It's hard not to think of Sayre's Law in this context: "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake."]
The Bonus:
Country renaming has been continual over the centuries and some of the name changes are both reasonable and understandable. I was reminded of that fact by this recent headline and it is unlikely that you will recognize the name of the country: "Africa's Last Absolute Monarchy Convulsed by Mass Protests," John Eligon, NYT, July 2, 2021. The country is Eswatini, which was formerly known as "Swaziland." Other changes are noted in the article:
Nyasaland became Malawi on achieving independence in 1964. Months later, Northern Rhodesia achieved nationhood as the new republic of Zambia. In 1966, Bechuanaland was reborn as Botswana, and Basutoland changed its name to Lesotho. Rhodesia, following a 14-year period of white-minority rule that was not internationally recognized, became the new nation of Zimbabwe in 1980.
But several former British colonies in Africa — like Uganda, Kenya and Gambia — did not change their names upon gaining independence.
The Bonus Question:
Of all the country names on the planet, which one is in most need of reconsideration?
The United States.
The United States.
Think about it.
As soon, however, as the emergency of the war [ the American Revolutionary War] had grown less, the inadequacy of the name became apparent. United States of America was greatly lacking in that it applied no good adjective or term for the inhabitants of the country. It was unwieldy, inexact, and unoriginal. Although it rolled well from the tongue of an orator, not even the sincerest patriot could manage it in a poem or song."
Names on the Land, p.171.
No comments:
Post a Comment