Blog: Is it just "semantics"?

Why when writing a scientific article must be precise in terminology

Important note: The original article for this article was intended for Hebrew speakers, to remind them of the mistakes in the language. It can be skipped in English and Arabic translations.

"Cloudy cat"?

The "phonetic" similarity between semantics and name may not be accidental, and perhaps this is the reason why sometimes I am "accused" of semantics? I am not a great linguist nor a philosopher, but my training in zoology/ecology obliges me to use precise and correct names and concepts, since the purpose of language is communication, that is, the transmission of messages between the speakers of the language, so that the messages are clear, flowing, understandable and without errors, language rules have been determined/developed . One of the rules is the correct use of names, names and concepts from whatever branch are determined to define and "mark" the subject of the text, so that those who exchange information have a common basis for understanding the information.

So in exact sciences (more or less) and so also in zoology, botany, etc. When writing / speaking, using concepts or names that are not accurate, a text is obtained that has a different meaning than the "creator" intended or alternately that is not correctly understood by the readers / listeners, in other words: wrong information...

Elsewhere I have already written about the great confusion caused by translations and interpretations that are not faithful to the correct scientific names and about errors that have been established due to free (misleading) translations of animal and bird names and concepts from the natural world. In communication (written and spoken) the errors continue and increase. Among the "responders" (a new type of communication) things are confused, therefore I need a number of clarifications and comments.

When a website (Ynet) publishes an interesting list about agave, a plant that originates in Central America, accompanied by a picture of aloe, a plant that originates in Africa, this is a gross error. After all, it is possible otherwise, here (Hidan) it was published (she wrote (days before, AB) accompanied by a correct picture. Daburim (D is open), this is Borot (since in Arabic Dabur = wasp in Hebrew).

When, over and over again, everywhere, a moose is replaced by a deer, a tiger by a tiger, a rabbit by a rabbit, an eagle by an eagle, and so on, these are gross errors, when in a "scientific" list the writer confuses: species, genus, species and race, while trying to classify animals or plants, information is obtained erroneous!

Imagine an observer who tells a zoologist that he saw a tiger in a forest in India devouring a buffalo, the zoologist will respond that "this is an interesting, special and rare sighting since the buffalo weighs twenty times more than the tiger", but then it turns out that the "tiger" had stripes.... I mean, it was a tiger that ate it... is it just semantics? Or just an error? On trips in Africa, after the (Israeli) guide promised the travelers to look for a tiger, the travelers implore the (local) driver to find the "tiger"... When the driver tells the travelers that there are no tigers in Africa, they complain to the guide... When in a popular science book the translator refers to a "rabbit- Rocks-variety" that lives in the Alps... this is a gross error, since there are no rabbits in the Alps... there are none! And it doesn't matter that in the original it is written from the beginning, the translator translated and the innocent reader reads and "learns",

When in different places the Red Sea, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Eilat are treated as if they are one, it is simply ignorance.

When the official website of the "Ministry of Environmental Protection" publishes a photo of a Negev tulip... and the caption... T and L Y P...? Is it just semantics? When a famous broadcaster tells excitedly how he saw "Bambi" in the steppe, (Bambi is a first name given to an elk) and without getting confused shows a picture of a deer... this is simply ignorance. When many of our poets and translators make mistakes, mislead, mislead, and replace a rose... with a rose (what to do... for a rose without a yin hochuim), then despite the "poet's freedom" this is a gross error.

I purposely brought the picture of the "clouded tiger", to show that even the publications in Lez are not free of errors... The photos of the cat above caused great excitement in the popular science media, the beautiful cat in the picture is associated with the cat family, a type of cat whose scientific name (in free translation into Hebrew) is "cloudy new cat" Neofelis nebulosa is a solid and "compact" cat, one third larger than a domestic cat (about 8 kg) And its uniqueness... in its rarity and in the cloud-like spots with which it is decorated.

To understand the extent of the confusion, a brief explanation: the cat family is divided into two types (and some are exceptions to this rule), most of the large ones that roar belong to the panther type, most of the small ones that howl belong to the feline type.

The new "discovery" belongs to the genus Felis, since it is special and rare it received the addition new to its name. Now we only have to wonder how the writers and publishers of all kinds (including "interested people") came to call him a tiger? Out of ignorance, error, inattention? Or maybe just a desire to attract attention? One way or another, an error was created/received that the audience of readers/listeners accepts as "Torah from Sinai", and it's a shame!

In another place and in a different context I wrote: "When I hear (sometimes read) the language of the "street", the mockery causes my ears to ring, when young people castrate the language - simply out of ignorance, and in their wake, out of a desire to "be in the news", announcers, journalists, public figures and others adopt the neutered concepts, make them official, and give them a "legal aura" - the result... an ugly, vulgar language Understandable. The accepted justification for distortions and nonsense is "slang" so those who justify it will understand: "slang" is the result of ignorance.

Such a situation is defined in any language as... ignorance, ignorance serves as a primary and main factor in creating a vulgar language, a vulgarity that most days is defined as "slang", before the Hebrew language is flooded with vulgar and mocking ignorance, it would be right to stop the drift."

Back to nature, in order for the readers, listeners and viewers to understand the text correctly, it is important, essential, that the names and concepts be correct and accurate, even if it is only... "semantics", when the names and concepts are not accurate and correct, the result will be incorrect, misleading and misleading content, and It has already been said that "life and death are in the hand of the tongue."

And once again the connection to the "Sea Canal" is not direct, but it exists, since through "tongue-rolling" megalomaniac entrepreneurs try to convince and push for the "development" of an environmental monster whose social, economic, and environmental damages can be predicted.