Rules of nomenclature versus principles of revision: An impudent debate

Résultat de recherche: Articleexamen par les pairs

6 Citations (Scopus)

Résumé

The rules of the anatomical nomenclature are sometimes in conflict with the principles of revision of the nomenclature. This is possibly most obvious is the debate about the use of the Latin words pudendus (“shameful”) and sacer (“holy”) in the anatomical nomenclature. The principles of revision stress preservation of traditional terms even if there are etymological concerns. On the other hand, the nomenclature rules state that anatomical names should, preferably, have informative or descriptive value and that the official Latin terms are the basis for translations of the international standard terminology into modern, vernacular languages. This issue of Clinical Anatomy contains responses to the removal of the noun pudendum and the replacement of the adjective pudendus with pudendalis in the second edition of Terminologia Anatomica.

Langue d'origineEnglish
Pages (de-à)312-314
Nombre de pages3
JournalClinical Anatomy
Volume34
Numéro de publication2
DOI
Statut de publicationPublished - mars 2021

Note bibliographique

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

  • Anatomy
  • Histology

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Journal Article

Empreinte numérique

Plonger dans les sujets de recherche 'Rules of nomenclature versus principles of revision: An impudent debate'. Ensemble, ils forment une empreinte numérique unique.

Citer