What does the community think?
5 Likes
It may be easier to answer when the plant name isn’t true! I’d only notice when there were characteristics that weren’t supposed to be for plant name. For example, if the named variety is a floricane and it turns out it’s a primocane. There’s always a chance that when you buy a non-cloned plant that some random mutation will change a characteristic you care about, but I think exactly when such a change happens, a new name is deserving.
3 Likes
As a sociologist, my initial answer is something like: A “true” name is the name that has managed to capture the most legitimacy. Now, what makes a name “legitimate?” That’s a complicated answer, one that would likely draw upon theories related to things like “the concentration of power in institutions.” But I think I’ll leave it there, because I am honestly trying to not get too carried away by social science these days (I guess I could not entirely resist).
3 Likes
As a general rule, it would be the oldest known name. Anything else is just a re-naming.
7 Likes
There’s actually a code for this:
It’s basically lawless though, because the final item is this:
“34. A name that is contrary to the rules of this Code yet has become widely used may be designated an accepted name (Art. 10.3)”
I’d put money down that there are several thousand identical tissue cultured succulents out there called Kevin.
3 Likes
OK, agreed. Now we’d also agree that there are no native American figs (except the few produced in breeding programs). Almost all figs grown here originated in the Mediterranean thousands of years ago. The true names would therefore be Aramaic or Hittite or Greek or Latin or who knows what. I’m not saying we should use those names, even if we could discover them. I just think the construct of a “true name” is not useful to us. It’s academic.
Please note, I don’t think we should encourage promiscuous re-naming. But really, who cares if over the past century different names arose in different locations? Sure, it’s great to identify synonyms. But to devote any attention to identifying the “true name” is a waste.
2 Likes
When the original cultivar name uses a different alphabet to write, you simply transliterate it into your own alphabet to preserve the original name. Sometimes people translate the names instead of transliterating them, but that is actually not best practice. Of course, many plant cultivars have been around so long we can’t know with certainty what their original name was, so the best we can do is go with the oldest KNOWN name.
4 Likes
Around the beginning of the 20th century, The American Pomological Society struggled with nomenclature and in 1903 at its annual meeting, passed “The revised code of pomological nomenclature.” It was included in full in S.A. Beach, The Apples of New York, volume 1, pp. 27-28, and I will include it in full as Beach recorded it. The most controversial rule was the requirement that the official name of a variety be a single word. In January 1, 1820, the code was revised again, and the new wording stated that “Names of new varieties shall be one word, preferably but two words will be accepted. Names of existing varieties shall not be changed in such a way as to lead to confusion or loss of identity.”
Priority
Rule 1.—No two varieties of the same kind of fruit shall bear the same name. The name first published for a variety shall be the accepted and recognized name, except in cases where it has been applied in violation of this code. A.—The term “kind” as herein used shall be understood to apply to those general classes of fruits that are grouped together in common usage without regard to their exact botanical relationship; as, apple, cherry, grape, peach, plum, raspberry, etc. B.—The paramount right of the originator, discoverer, or introducer of a new variety to name it, within the limitations of this code, is recognized and emphasized. C.—Where a variety name through long usage has become thoroughly established in American pomological literature for two or more varieties, it should not be displaced or radically modified for either sort, except in cases where a well-known synonym can be advanced to the position of leading name. The several varieties bearing identical names should: be distinguished by adding the name of the author who first described each sort, or by adding some other suitable distinguishing term that will insure their identity in catalogues or discussions. D.—Existing American names of varieties which conflict with earlier published foreign names of the same, or other varieties, but which have become thoroughly established through long usage shall not be displaced.
Form of Names.
Rule 2.—The name of a variety of fruit shall consist of a single word. A.—No variety shall be named unless distinctly superior to existing varieties in some important characteristic nor until it has been determined to perpetuate it by bud propagation. B.—In selecting names for varieties the following points should be emphasized: distinctiveness, simplicity, ease of pronunciation and spelling, indication of origin or parentage. C.—The spelling and pronunciation of a varietal name derived from a personal or geographical name should be governed by the rules that control the spelling and the pronunciation of the name from which it was derived. D.—A variety imported from a foreign country should retain its foreign name subject only to such modification as is necessary to conform it to this code or to render it intelligible in English. E.—The name of a person should not be applied to a variety during his life without his expressed consent. The name of a deceased horticulturist should not be so applied except through formal action by some competent horticultural body, preferably that with which he was most closely connected. F.—The use of such general terms as seedling, hybrid, pippin, pearmain, beurre, rare- ripe, damson, etc., is not admissible. G.—The use of a possessive noun as a name is not admissible. H.—The use of a number either singly or attached to a word should be considered only as temporary expedient while the variety is undergoing preliminary test. I.—In applying the various provisions of this rule to an existing varietal name that has through long usage become firmly imbedded in American pomological literature no change shall be made which shall involve loss of identity. Rule 3.—In the full and formal citation of a variety name, the name of the author who first published it shall also be given.
PUBLICATION.
Rule 4.—Publication consists (1) in the distribution of a printed description of the variety named, giving the distinguishing characters of the fruit, tree, etc., or (2) in the publication of a new name for a variety that is properly described elsewhere; such publication to be made in any book, bulletin, report, trade catalogue, or periodical, providing the issue bears the date of its publication and is generally distributed among nurserymen, fruit growers and horticulturists; or (3) in certain cases the general recognition of a name for a propagated variety in a community for a number of years shall constitute publication of that name.
A.—In determining the name of a variety to which two or more names have been given in the same publication, that which stands first shall have precedence.
REVISION.
Rule 5.—No properly published variety name shall be changed for any reason except conflict with this code, nor shall another variety be substituted for that originally described thereunder.
4 Likes
I think we should.
We aren’t averse to using French names like ‘ col de dame’ and even learning the right pronunciation so why the problem in using Hebrew or Arabic or whatever names?
Many of my loquat cultivars come from Japan and China. I make it a point to learn the original names and the right pronunciation-to the extent possible.
7 Likes
I spend a lot of time trying to track down older names of plants. Recently, I went down the rabbit hole on a rose which has been known to “the west” for hundreds of years, but possibly closer to a thousand years in China. It has gone by multiple names in English with ‘Old Blush’ being the most commonly used as of recent. However, with some digging I was able to find a Chinese name for it which is ‘月月粉’ (which I would transliterate to “Yae-yae-fen”). While it is possible that it has had more than one name in China, I was only able to find that one name showing consistent use. Therefore, while I’d still be happy to use the term “Old Blush” as a sort of “common name” for this rose, I will record it in my collection as the ‘Yae Yae Fen’ rose with a note that “月月粉” is the spelling prior to transliteration.
Not everyone needs to take the time to do this deep dive of research into every plant, but I think when someone does, it should be honored. Knowing an older name for a plant allows you to be more aware of its history and provides a better connection to the past generations who grew it.
8 Likes
I carry a Sharpie and write “Williams” on all the heretical “Bartlett” pear displays. 
I don’t think the name really matters too much if people will know they’re talking about the same thing. I’ll go with the oldest known name is probably what should be used, and second the dislike for flashy marketing renames that obfuscate well-known existing names.
1 Like
As far as pronunciation goes, I found google translate or chatgpt to do a decent job in getting native speaker pronunciations.
Fig names are so badly mis-pronounced by the youtube fig growers - its somewhere between cringey and funny.
English Brown Turkey Figs arrived in 1733 via Oglethorpe in Georgia. Yet they are often thought of as second rate after thoughts of Texas figs…lol…I think “trueness” is very subjective.
It would be interesting to know what Figs the Spanish imported and where. As well as the French.
2 Likes
Well, for sure the “Mission” figs.
2 Likes
Just to nitpick, the correct transliteration should be Yue Yue Fen.
Just to nitpick, the correct translation should be Yuè yuè fěn （unless it was originally Cantonese or another dialect which opens another can of worms)
I’m sure the rose will be just as sweet by any name though
2 Likes
But it’s pronounced yae yae fen? Yes, no?
1 Like
I wish US and European nurseries would stop renaming old named cultivars that they import and then market them as new!
I see cultivars for sale referred to as “new releases” when the original Ukrainian (or whichever country) cultivar is from 1976 
I guess it is new on a cosmic scale…
5 Likes
They even rename American varieties!
Early Jewel got renamed to Prairie Star.
4 Likes
No, the u makes the same sound as the French u or German ü.
1 Like