This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Proavis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
We know it was not Gerhard Heilmann since Franz Nopcsa says in his article " Ideas on the Origin of Flight" (in 1907, page 235):
So, if on the cited text Nopcsa is not coining himself the term Pro-Avis, the Englishman William Plane Pycraft could have been the one who coined the term, certainly in the late 19th century... how can we suppose that? simply because Pycraft published a series of articles dealing with the origin of feathers in 1894, 1896 and 1910, and, quite likely, Nopcsa is referring to the two first of them:
I got these references here... but not the articles themselves... how could we get their content? it is in public domain, for sure.
So... Nopcsa, in his 1907 article, is certainly referring directly to a term coined by Pycraft in his 1894 and 1896 articles... or may be not, may be Nopcsa was simply coining himself the term in his 1907 article... Can anybody shed some light on the matter? In any case, at this point, we can argue that Heilmann was not the creator of the term proavis.
Another point I would like to submit to discussion is the following: was the German word Urvogel ('primitive bird', almost litterally Pro-Avis) coined before 1894 and, then, could Pycraft or Nopcsa simply translated it to create the word Pro-Avis? Kintaro ( talk) 21:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
By the way: I think that, in latin, Avis is just the singular form of the plural form Aves. Thus, the name of the taxon is Aves... and Pro-Avis or Pro-Aves are just the same term, but expressed following the singular or the plural. That's why Nopcsa talked about a running Pro-Avis (singular) and Pycraft mentioned one of the Pro-Aves (plural). Cheers. Kintaro ( talk) 22:29, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
revived the interest in direct bird ancestors? didn't you mean, MWAK, revived the interest in direct dinosaur ancestors? Just in case... Kintaro ( talk) 13:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
By the way, wouldn't the image of Heilmann's poaves [1] be nicer in the article than essentially a duplicate of the Nopcsa one? FunkMonk ( talk) 13:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Proavis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
We know it was not Gerhard Heilmann since Franz Nopcsa says in his article " Ideas on the Origin of Flight" (in 1907, page 235):
So, if on the cited text Nopcsa is not coining himself the term Pro-Avis, the Englishman William Plane Pycraft could have been the one who coined the term, certainly in the late 19th century... how can we suppose that? simply because Pycraft published a series of articles dealing with the origin of feathers in 1894, 1896 and 1910, and, quite likely, Nopcsa is referring to the two first of them:
I got these references here... but not the articles themselves... how could we get their content? it is in public domain, for sure.
So... Nopcsa, in his 1907 article, is certainly referring directly to a term coined by Pycraft in his 1894 and 1896 articles... or may be not, may be Nopcsa was simply coining himself the term in his 1907 article... Can anybody shed some light on the matter? In any case, at this point, we can argue that Heilmann was not the creator of the term proavis.
Another point I would like to submit to discussion is the following: was the German word Urvogel ('primitive bird', almost litterally Pro-Avis) coined before 1894 and, then, could Pycraft or Nopcsa simply translated it to create the word Pro-Avis? Kintaro ( talk) 21:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
By the way: I think that, in latin, Avis is just the singular form of the plural form Aves. Thus, the name of the taxon is Aves... and Pro-Avis or Pro-Aves are just the same term, but expressed following the singular or the plural. That's why Nopcsa talked about a running Pro-Avis (singular) and Pycraft mentioned one of the Pro-Aves (plural). Cheers. Kintaro ( talk) 22:29, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
revived the interest in direct bird ancestors? didn't you mean, MWAK, revived the interest in direct dinosaur ancestors? Just in case... Kintaro ( talk) 13:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
By the way, wouldn't the image of Heilmann's poaves [1] be nicer in the article than essentially a duplicate of the Nopcsa one? FunkMonk ( talk) 13:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)