Canada geese

[snopes]

Comment: Hi,
This is not particularly a rumor, but a mis-identification of a bird,
or maybe not.

After the recent plane downing into the Hudson river people were
calling for the mass killing, or removing of the suspected culprit, the
dreded "Canadian" goose. Now I know the name is "Canada" goose, but most
news anchors were calling them "Canadian" geese.

So, my question to you is would you PLEASE put this one to rest. Are
they "Canada" geese, named after a man named John Canada, or are they
named after the Country of Canada.

I think they are Canada Geese, named after John Canada.

[Steve]

Language Log dealt with the "John Canada" story:http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langu...es/004214.html

Pat points out that bird nomenclature also tends to follow the "nation-states as modifiers are adjectives" rule -- thus the Mexican Parrotlet, the American Crow, the Cuban Parakeet, and the Jamaican Lizard-Cuckoo -- so that we might really have expected the Canadian Goose instead of the (correct) Canada Goose. Perhaps this anomaly is the motivation for the urban legend that the Canada Goose is named not for the country, but for the (I believe mythical) ornithologist John Canada.

[lord_feldon]

I wonder if he also founded Canada Post, named the Canada Warbler, sailed through Canada Water, or drove through Canada Gate.

[Ieuan ab Arthur]

Hi All:

Originally Posted by lord_feldon

I wonder if he also founded Canada Post, named the Canada Warbler, sailed through Canada Water, or drove through Canada Gate.

And after all that hard work, he stopped and drank some Canada Dry.

Ta ra 'wan,

Ieuan "Ginger" ab Arthur

[snopes]

Comment: A story often told is the John Canada named the Canada Goose many
years ago and that is where the Goose got its name. My sisters were
recently on a tour in Vancouver and a tour guide related this untrue story
to them. Linnaeus in 1729 actually named the Goose.

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by snopes

Linnaeus in 1729 actually named the Goose.

Linnaeus is responsible for developing the Latin naming of species (specifically the 2 part name with the first part giving the genus and the second part giving the species).
Branta Canadensis (ie black-feathered goose from Canada) was listed by him in Systema Naturae 10th edition (1758), but the name Canada Goose was first used in 1770 according to the Oxford English Dictionary (note that the OED list dates when words first existed in print in English.

[Troberg]

Even though Linné named it, it's still a bit of an odd name. Most animal names in Swedish that includes a nation use the "-ian" form (or the Swedish equivalent), such as "norsk råtta" (Norwegian rat), but the Canada goose is name "kanadagås", not "kanadensisk gås".

Well, maybe it just goes to show that Linné wasn't as organized as previously thought...

Btw, what's with the American tendency to make latinized forms of Swedish names, such as Linnaeus (Linné), Gustavus Adolphus (Gustav Adolf) and so on. Why not stick with their names in their native tongue? (Btw, Anders Celsius was really named Celsius.)

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by Troberg

Btw, what's with the American tendency to make latinized forms of Swedish names.

It's not an American tendency; it's a pre-19th century (generally) intellectual's tendency. Most books on academic matters were written in Latin, as this was treated as an international language and latin literacy was a requirement for most universities. As such they used a latinized author's name, and is this name by which they are generally known internationally, although they may also be known by their 'normal' name in their home country.

[Nick Theodorakis]

Linnaeus called himself that, among other names, in a time when surnames were not standardized.

It's not just Swedes. For example, Flemish cartographer Gheert Cremer published using the Latinization we are more familiar with, Gerardus Mecator. Americans didn't have anything to do with that, either.

Nick

[RealityChuck]

According to the OED, there are several other instances of "Canada" being used as a modifier instead of "Canadian":

Originally Posted by OED

1. Used attrib. in the names of various commercial products, animals, and plants, as Canada agaric, goose, stag, etc.; esp. C. balsam, a pale balsam or resin derived from Abies balsamea, and A. canadensis, used in medicine, and as a transparent gum for mounting microscopic objects; C. rice, an aquatic grass (Hydropyrum esculentum), whose seeds feed great flocks of water-fowl, and are also used as food by the natives; C. tea, the leaves of Gaultheria procumbens, used to flavour tea, or as a substitute for it; Mountain Tea; C. turpentine = Canada balsam.

[Floater]

Originally Posted by Nick Theodorakis

Linnaeus called himself that, among other names, in a time when surnames were not standardized.

He so did, but he changed his name to von Linné when he was knighted, so the question should be "Why do non-Swedes stick to his old name (that his father had assumed) instead of using the one he picked for himself?"

So, I know this thread is terribly old at this point, but I found something that seemed relevant to the discussion, and I wanted to write it down before I forgot.

Anyways, it seems that some species were named as such:
Canada Goose (Branta Canadensis) and South China Tiger (Panthera Tigris Amoyensis)
While others were named in this manner:
Mexican Axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum) and African Elephant (Loxodonta africana)

The difference being in the original Latin word for the species. The former ending with "ensis" (native of, relating to, or characteristic of the place indicated by the stem or prefix), the latter "anum/ana" ("an"?- Relating to, or native of).
Of course, I don't know much of anything about Latin; I just looked those up in a Latin suffix dictionary. So correct me if you know anything more.

The only other theory I have for this is based on which person named which animal. So far I have Linnaeus naming Canada Goose, Hilzheimer the South China Tiger, Shaw the Mexican Axolotl, and Blumenbach the African Elephant (if Wikipedia is to be trusted on this).
Of course, Linnaeus also named the Oriental Cockroach (Blatta Orientalis) (al-[from Latin -alis] Of, belonging to, pertaining to, connected with), so I don't even know anymore.

Sorry for double posting on a dead thread, but I got an answer to the question. Finally asked a biologist (because who else do you ask, really?) who sent the question on to a Canada Goose expert, who gave this reply:

"Unfortunately, this seems to be an instance when you have to accept it just because that's the way it is. The form of the geographic part of the English name of a species is not directly related to the scientific name or its ending. The geographic part of the name of the Canada Goose or African Elephant have been that way forever, probably because that is the way they sounded better to the person who first used them. The first mention of the goose of which I am aware, in the 1600s, called it Canada Goose, because it was brought to England from Canada. This was long before the scientific name canadensis was applied to it. In the infrequent circumstance where we have to coin a new English name now for a species, we generally try to avoid the adjectival form, which implies a sort of possessiveness."

Richard C. Banks, Ph.D.
Emeritus Zoologist, USGS
Research Associate, USNM



Disappointing, right? But at least there's your answer.

[snopes]

Comment: I have heard that Canada Geese got their name from a person named
Canada & not actually from having originated from the country of Canada.
Any truth to that?

[Floater]

Whoever wrote the article in Wikipedia doesn't think so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_..._and_etymology