FURTHER TO “WHAT’S IN A NAME?”

Evening Star, Issue 23685, 19 September 1940, Page 10

FURTHER TO “WHAT’S IN A NAME?”

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In my former letter to you I insinuated that the writer of the article ‘ Unique Visitors 1 did not know what he was writing about. I now find that it is I that am the ignoramus. For yesterday 1 met the author casually, when in the Museum, and he introduced himself to me, and he had a pleasant chat whilst looking at plaster casts of whales and suchlike, and discussed the visitor. Ho pointed to a oast of the cowfish and said: ‘ ‘ That is what the fishermen in the trawlers call ‘ grampus ’; that is the animal I saw and described as being in the harbour. I knew that it was not the true gram-, pus, or Risso’s dolphin. When out fishing with the trawlers I have often seen that cowfish-grampus gambolling.” So I must eat humble pie (whatever that may be) and confess that I was wrong in the assumption that the creature was either porpoise or dolphin, which are a mere sft or 6ft in length. It is the cowfish, attaining a length of Bft to 10ft. I was not aware of the fact that this cowfish-grampus tries to emulate his godmother of the land; at any rate, that he or she has the habit of throwing himself or herself out of the water in its gambols. We naturalists are often at sea with these popular names. For instance, the “ kingfish ” of the south is quite a different animal from the “ kingfish ” of the North Island. And _so we arc in the habit of using distinctive names couched in the Latin language, and the animal under discussion is.to ns known as tursiops truncatus. Truly. “ they that go down to the sea in ships and do business in the great waters see the wonders of the deep,” about which we landsmen, even though we may'be naturalists, are very ignorant.—l am, etc., W. B. IBenham. September 19.