Proposal (500) to South American Classification Committee
Change
the English name of Nandayus nenday
Effect
on the SA Check-list: This proposal, if adopted, would change the
English name of a species on our checklist to a previously established
name. This is one of several short
proposals dealing with recent changes in English names of various species of
parrots and parakeets.
Background:
Cory (1918) used the English name “Black-headed Parrot” for Nandayus nenday, a name that has for
some time been widely used for Pionites
melanocephala (which Cory called “Black-headed Caique”). Meyer de
Schauensee (1966, 1970, 1982), in his foundational classification of South
American birds, used the English name of Black-hooded Parakeet for Amazona aestiva. That name remained the standard during the
modern era of Neotropical ornithology at least until 1990; it was still used by
Juniper and Parr (1997), although those authors substituted the avicultural
name of “Conure” for “Parakeet”. However,
virtually every other recent authority (e.g. Collar 1997, Clements 2000, Gill
and Wright 2006, Forshaw 2010) has switched to Nanday Parakeet/Conure, which is
derived from the native Guäraní (Paraguay) name for the bird. I’m not clear where this change originated
(possibly with Sibley and Monroe 1990), or to what extent it was influenced by
current avicultural naming conventions, but it seems to have taken over, and
“Nanday Parakeet” is the name used in the Howard-Moore checklist (Dickinson
2003) that provided our base list for the SACC.
Analysis:
Unlike many of the name changes that have occurred among South American
birds through the popular literature, the replacement of “Black-hooded” with
“Nanday” actually has some historical thrust, given that the “new” name is
derived from an old, regionally indigenous name.
“Black-hooded” is,
without question, a more descriptive name, and targets the single most
important field mark that unambiguously identifies the species. On the other hand, “Nanday” is a more unique
name that tells us nothing about the bird’s appearance, but which is unlikely
to be confused with the name of any other parakeet. In terms of name confusion stemming from the
use of “Black-hooded Parakeet”, I would note that there is a Black-headed
Parrot and a Brown-hooded Parrot, but there is nothing remotely similar among
the parakeets.
Recommendation:
Unlike the other proposals dealing with the restoration of older
psittacid names, I don’t have a strong recommendation either way on this
one. I would slightly favor Black-hooded
Parakeet, simply because it is the name I first learned the species by, and
because the name is not only descriptive, but points out a field mark that is
unique among North American psittacids.
The species went by an English name that referenced the black color of
the head from at least 1918 until 1990, which suggests a pretty stable and
recognizable name. Nanday Parakeet has
more recent momentum, is memorable, dovetails nicely with the Latin name, and
pays homage to an indigenous name for the bird.
I don’t think there is a truly bad choice here, but I do think it would
be good to actually vote on it one way or the other, given that this was yet
another case where we “inherited” a new name that hijacked an established name
without any real discussion or debate.
I would also point
out that English names of parrots in general have been in turmoil, with each
new reference (e.g. Collar 1997, Juniper and Parr 1997, Forshaw 2010) introducing
new names for well-known birds, many of which have not been widely
adapted. And this doesn’t even include
the schizoid split between the various field guides and checklists on the issue
of using “Amazon” versus “Parrot” for Amazona,
and “Conure” versus “Parakeet” for Pyrrhura
and Aratinga. The result has been a body-punch to
stability, to the extent that very few of the “new” names (some of which are
actually throwbacks to Cory 1918) can really claim to be established, even if
they have been used in several recent references.
Literature
Cited:
CLEMENTS, J. F. 2000. Birds of the World: a
checklist. Ibis Publ. Co., Temecula, California.
COLLAR, N. 1997. Family Psittacidae (parrots). Pp.
280-477 in "Handbook of the Birds of the World, Vol. 4. Sandgrouse
to cuckoos" (J. del Hoyo et al., eds.). Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
CORY, C. B. 1918. Catalogue of birds of the
Americas. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Publ., Zool. Ser., vol. 13, pt. 2, no. 1.
DICKINSON, E. C. (ed.). 2003. The Howard and Moore
complete checklist of the birds of the World, Revised and enlarged 3rd Edition.
Christopher Helm, London, 1040 pp.
FORSHAW, J. M.
2010. Parrots of the world. Princeton University Press, Princeton and
Oxford.
GILL, F. B., AND M. WRIGHT. 2006. Birds of the
World. Recommended English names. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.
JUNIPER, T. AND M. PARR. 1997.
Yale University Press, New Haven and London.
MEYER DE SCHAUENSEE, R. 1966. The species of birds
of South America and their distribution. Livingston Publishing Co., Narberth,
Pennsylvania.
MEYER DE SCHAUENSEE, R. 1970. A guide to the birds
of South America. Livingston Publishing Co., Wynnewood, Pennsylvania.
MEYER DE SCHAUENSEE, R. 1982. A guide to the birds
of South America, 2nd edition. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
SIBLEY, C. G., AND B. L. MONROE, JR. 1990.
Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the World. Yale University Press, New
Haven, Connecticut.
GILL, F. B., AND M. WRIGHT. 2006. Birds of the
World. Recommended English names. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.
Kevin
J. Zimmer, September 2011
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________