Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

frogmarch

(12,144 posts)
Wed Jul 6, 2016, 10:50 PM Jul 2016

Pronunciation of Nesticidae?

I wish I knew how to pronounce the family name of the spiders commonly called nesticids (which I’d also like to know how to say).

Anyone know how to pronounce Nesticidae and nesticid? I can't find the info online anywhere.

Here’s a nesticid spider in Baltic amber:



Thanks!

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Pronunciation of Nesticidae? (Original Post) frogmarch Jul 2016 OP
ooh Let's get some dino DNA!!! lapfog_1 Jul 2016 #1
haha, well, frogmarch Jul 2016 #3
I think it's... 2naSalit Jul 2016 #2
Thank you! frogmarch Jul 2016 #4
Sort of depends on where the root comes from... HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #5
I agree 2naSalit Jul 2016 #6
I think 'biologese' is a wonder as a constructed language HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #7
I enjoy the construction of biological nomenclature HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #8
Interestingly 2naSalit Jul 2016 #9
Around here, kids are now taught to read via "whole language" HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #10
I think you 2naSalit Jul 2016 #11
I was trained that it was vain to name a species after oneself... HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #12

frogmarch

(12,144 posts)
3. haha, well,
Wed Jul 6, 2016, 11:39 PM
Jul 2016

Last edited Thu Jul 7, 2016, 03:59 AM - Edit history (1)

even if DNA could be found in Baltic amber inclusions, these fossils date to only around 44 million years ago - Paleogene Period (mid-late Eocene Epoch) - and dinos went extinct around 65.5 million years ago at the end of the Cretaceous Period (the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary), so, too bad for us, it'll never happen.

The Jurassic Park mosquito containing dinosaur DNA was cool, though. The mosquito supposedly was found in Jurassic amber.

EDIT: First I said the mosquito supposedly was found in Cretaceous amber. I don't know why I said that.

2naSalit

(86,031 posts)
2. I think it's...
Wed Jul 6, 2016, 11:29 PM
Jul 2016
nesticid (nes-ti'-sid)

nesticidae (nes-ti'-si-day)

Without the actual IPA in my font selection.

frogmarch

(12,144 posts)
4. Thank you!
Wed Jul 6, 2016, 11:43 PM
Jul 2016


I am ecstatic! This has been bugging (sorry, accidental pun) me for days!

Thanks again, 2naSalit!

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
5. Sort of depends on where the root comes from...
Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:27 AM
Jul 2016

But in America if you say it smoothly and with confidence you can get away with almost any pronunciation.

Generally if the root is from a proper name it retains pronunciation in its native language.

Otherwise the Latin vowel sounds are a= "ah", e = "a" as in hay, i = "ee", o = "oh" and u = 'ew'

The ae is a dipthong which most American taxonomists slur as something akin to ee

C is a problem consonant as it can be sounded in a variety of ways including 's', a 'k', or as a leading consonant, just be silent.

Generally, the syllables of the original roots or stems don't get divided and recombined into new syllables but in America it's not uncommon to do so, usually splitting at a consonant. So in the US, a name like Amblystoma (literally walking belly) is often prounounced Am-bliss-tom-a even though the roots suggest a Am-bly-stom-a.

-idae is a common ending used for family level taxa, and the leading syllable is usually not the stressed syllable in the name even though in Latin stress on the next-to-last syllable is common.

If I were taking a stab at it from my point of view as an American trained zoologist, and a handful of new species descriptions with my name behind them, I'd start in a similar place as you did... I'd be at nes-tis'-id and nes-tis'-id-ee realizing I'd probably run into people who pronounce it nest-iss'-id and nest-iss'-id-ee

2naSalit

(86,031 posts)
6. I agree
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 07:40 PM
Jul 2016

I was going for the least common denominator on this one, though. I like your more complex answer, thanks!



HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
7. I think 'biologese' is a wonder as a constructed language
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 08:29 PM
Jul 2016

although I'll admit to being not so keen on abbreviations and numbers as names of molecules.

As a kid I learned to read by breaking words into syllables (apparently not always taught anymore) and somewhere around the 3rd or 4th grade I got a set of science encyclopedia for Christmans and realizedthe syllables of biological words were based on other words! That led me to break a generations old pattern of studying German and instead learn a bit of Latin and a thimble of Greek which really held my later interest in Zoology.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
8. I enjoy the construction of biological nomenclature
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 08:35 PM
Jul 2016

I don't so much enjoy the molecular identifiers with abbreviations and numbers



2naSalit

(86,031 posts)
9. Interestingly
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 09:16 PM
Jul 2016

I was taught to read by looking up the history of each word as they entered the vocabulary in school lessons and I really enjoyed that. I was also exposed to multiple languages outside of school so I had access to more background on words and their origins than most, I suppose. I usually do better with pronunciation than application of conversational use.

I don't do well with numeric formula since I'm dyslexic but I see patterns well. With scientific language, I rely heavily on my scant knowledge of Latin gained through secular texts I encountered through music of all things. And that's sad since I love to make structured observations in the natural world. Go figure.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
10. Around here, kids are now taught to read via "whole language"
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 09:23 PM
Jul 2016

rather than word mechanics.

Having taught college kids who learned under either system, I think the kids that learn based on word mechanics rather than word context in sentences have less trouble learning biologese which is mostly intentionally built using word mechanics.

2naSalit

(86,031 posts)
11. I think you
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 09:33 PM
Jul 2016

have a good grasp of the differences. In my travels I have learned that those who learned via word mechanics have a greater understanding of more than just the words, they have more of a grasp if culture, history and overall life concepts. I feel the same about multilingual knowledge.

I do have some knowledge of some terminology in medicine, flora and fauna from making my own inquiry when I encounter something of interest but I don't know how well I'd do in biology and botany classes! I do know that many species are named after the person who identified them but I forget that part sometimes and really blow it with the names! It's a hobby that I am starting to have serious thoughts about studying though... like wildlife biology. Which reminds me, I have to go look something up.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
12. I was trained that it was vain to name a species after oneself...
Sun Jul 10, 2016, 09:50 PM
Jul 2016

In formal taxonomic work the name of the person who describes a species and the date the species name was published is listed behind it, so a person does get their name on a page in a journal that never gets looked at for years and year... until someone reviews the taxonomic group it belongs to and decides you've done it right or wrong. Not long ago shelves of such slowly moldering journals filled university libraries.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Pronunciation of Nesticid...