Ontology and values anchor indigenous and grey nomenclatures: a case study in lichen naming practices among the Sámi, Sherpa, Scots, and Okanagan
Main Article Content
Abstract
Ethnobotanical research provides ample justification for comparing diverse biological nomenclatures and exploring ways that retain alternative naming practices. However, how (and whether) comparison of nomenclatures is possible remains a subject of discussion. The comparison of diverse nomenclatural practices introduces a suite of epistemic and ontological difficulties and considerations. Different nomenclatures may depend on whether the communities using them rely on formalized naming conventions; cultural or spiritual valuations; or worldviews. Because of this, some argue that the different naming practices may not be comparable if the ontological commitments employed differ. Comparisons between different nomenclatures cannot assume that either the naming practices or the object to which these names are intended to apply identifies some universally agreed upon object of interest. Investigating this suite of philosophical problems, I explore the role grey nomenclatures play in classification. ‘Grey nomenclatures’ are defined as those that employ names that are either intentionally or accidently non-Linnaean. The classification of the lichen thallus (a symbiont) has been classified outside the Linnaean system by botanists relying on the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN). But, I argue, the use of grey names is not isolated and does not occur exclusively within institutionalized naming practices. I suggest, ‘grey names’ also aptly describe nomenclatures employed by indigenous communities such as the Sámi of Northern Finmark, the Sherpa of Nepal, and the Okanagan First Nations. I pay particular attention to how naming practices are employed in these communities; what ontological commitments they hold; for what purposes are these names used; and what anchors the community's nomenclatural practices. Exploring the history of lichen naming and early ethnolichenological research, I then investigate the stakes that must be considered for any attempt to preserve, retain, integrate, or compare the knowledge contained in both academically formalized grey names and indigenous nomenclatures in a way that preserves their source-specific informational content.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
Acharius E (1803). Mehodus qua Omnes Detectos Lichenes Secundum Organa Carpomorpha ad Genera, Species et Varietates Redigere atque Observationibus Illustrare Tentavit Erik Acharius. Stockholm: Ulrich.
Ahlner, S. (1950). Some aspects of nomenclature and taxonomy of lichens. In H. Osvald H, E. Åberg (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International Botanical Congress. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell.
Ahrén, M. (2004). Indigenous peoples’ culture, customs, and traditions and customary law-the Saami people’s perspective. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law 21 (1): 63-112.
Arnold, A., Miadlikowska, J., Higgins, K., Sarvate, S., Gugger, P., Way, A., Hofstetter, V., Kauff, F., Lutzoni, F. (2009). A phylogenetic estimation of trophic transition networks for ascomycetous fungi: are lichens cradles of symbiotrophic fungal diversification? Systematic Biology 58: 283-297.
Aschenbrenner I., Cernava T., Berg G., Grube M. (2016). Understanding microbial multi-species symbioses. Frontiers in Microbiology 7:180.
Atran, S. (1990). Cognitive Foundations of Natural History: Towards an Anthropology of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barron, E., Sthultz, C., Hurley, D., Pringle, A. (2015). Names matter: Interdisciplinary research on taxonomy and nomenclature for ecosystem management. Progress in Physical Geography 1-21.
Berlin, B. (1992). Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bowker, G. (2000). The game of the name: Nomenclatural instability in the history of botanical informatics. In: M. Bowden, T. Hahn and R. Williams (eds) Proceedings of the 1998 Conference on the History and Heritage of Science Information Systems. Pittsburgh: 74–83.
Bowker, G. and Star, S. (1999). Sorting Things Out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Brodo, I., Sharnoff, S. D., and Sharnoff, S. (2001). Lichens of North America. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Chirimuuta, M. (2016). Vision, Perspectivism, and Haptic Realism. Philosophy of Science 83: 746-756.
Ciferri, R., Tomaselli, R. (1955). The symbiotic fungi of lichens and their nomenclature. Taxon 4:190-192.
Davidson-Hunt, I., Berkes, F. (2003). Learning as you journey: Anishinaabe perception of social-ecological environments and adaptive learning. Conservation Ecology 8(1): 5.
Davidson-Hunt, I., Jack, P., Mandamin, E., Wapioke, B. (2005). Iskatewizaagegan (Shoal Lake) Plant knowledge: an Anishinaabe (Ojibway) Ethnobotany of Northwestern Ontario. Journal of Ethnobiology 25(2):189-227.
Devkota, S, Chaudhary, R., Werth, S., Scheidegger, C. (2017). Indigenous knowledge and use of lichens by the lichenophilic communities of the Nepal Himalaya. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 13 (15): 1-10.
Dove, M. (1933). How Coyote happened to make the black moss food. In Coyote Stories. Caldwell: Caxton Printers Ltd. pp., 119-126.
Ellen, R. (1998). Palms and the Prototypicality of Trees: Some Questions Concerning Assumptions in the Comparative Study of Categories and Labels. In L. Rival (ed.) The social life of trees. Oxford: Berg. pp. 57–79.
Ellen, R. (2016). Is there a role for ontologies in understanding plant knowledge systems? Journal of Ethnobiology 36 (1): 10-28.
Ereshefsky, M. (2001). The poverty of the Linnaean hierarchy: A philosophical study of biological taxonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Feest, U. (2011). Remembering (Short-Term) Memory: Oscillations of an Epistemic Thing. Erkenntnis 75: 391-411.
Fink, B. (1911). The nature and classifications of lichens-I. Views and arguments of botanists concerning classification. Mycologia 3(6): 271-282.
Gies, E. (2017). The Meaning of Lichen. Scientific American (June): 52-59.
Goward, T. (2008a). Twelve readings on the lichen thallus. II. Nameless little things. Evansia: 25(3): 54-56.
Goward, T. (2008b). Twelve readings on the lichen thallus. VII. Species. Evansia 26 (4): 153-162.
Honegger R. (2000). Simon Schwendener (1829–1919) and the dual hypothesis in lichens. Bryologist. 103 (2): 307–313.
Kendig, C. (2016). Activities of kinding in scientific practice. In C. Kendig (ed.) Natural Kinds and Classification in Scientific Practice. Abingdon & New York: Routledge, 1-13.
Kendig, C., Bartley, B. A. (2019). Synthetic kinds: kind-making in synthetic biology. In J. R. S. Bursten (ed.) Perspectives on Classification in Synthetic Sciences: Unnatural Kinds. London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 78-96.
Kendig, C., Grey, J. (2019/2021). Can the epistemic value of natural kinds be explained independently of their metaphysics? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (2): 359-376. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1093/bjps/axz004
Linnaeus, C. (1753). Species plantarum, exhibentes plantas rite cognitas, ad genera relatas, cum differentiis specificis, nominibus trivialibus, synonymis selectis, locis natalibus, secundum systema sexuale digestas. Holmiae, Impensis Laurentii Salvii. L. Salvius, Stockholm.
Lindsay, W. (1854). Experimental researches on the tinctorial properties of lichens. Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal. p. 40.
Llano, G. (1948). Economic Uses of Lichens. Economic Botany 2(1): 15-45.
Ludwig, D. (2016). Overlapping Ontologies and Indigenous Knowledge. From Integration to Ontological Self-Determination. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 59: 36-45.
Lutzoni, F. (1997). Phylogeny of Lichen- and Non-Lichen-Forming Omphalinoid Mushrooms and the Utility of Testing for Combinability among Multiple Data Sets. Systematic Biology 46 (3): 373-406
Lutzoni F., Miadlikowska J. (2009). Lichens. Quick guide. Current Biology 19: R502–R503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.04.034 (Accessed 4 July 2019).
Lynge, B (1921). Studies on the lichen flora of Norway. Kristiania: I kommission hos J. Dybwad. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061871961 (Accessed 2 Feb 2019).
Magnus, P. D. (2012). Scientific Enquiry and Natural Kinds: From Planets to Mallards. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Martinez, E. J. (2017). Stable Property Clusters and Their Grounds. Philosophy of Science 84: 944–55.
Massimi, M. (forthcoming). Perspectival Realism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Massimi, M. (2014). Natural Kinds and Naturalised Kantianism. Noûs 48 (3): 416-449.
McNeill J, Barrie F, Buck W, Demoulin, V. Greuter W, Hawksworth D, Herendeen, P, Knapp S, Marhold, K. Prado, J. (2012). International code of nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code), Koenigstein: Koeltz Scientific Books.
Minelli, A. (2017). Grey nomenclature needs rules. Ecologica Montenegrina 7: 654-666.
Minelli, A. (2019). The galaxy of the non-Linnaean nomenclature. History and Philosophy of Taxonomy as an Information Science. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40656-019-0271-0 Accessed 1-10-2019.
Nash, T. (ed.) (2008). Lichen biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nissen, K. (1921). Appendix: Lapposian lichen. In B. Lynge’s Studies on the lichen flora of Norway. Kristiania: I kommission hos J. Dybwad. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061871961 (Accessed 2 Feb 2019).
Plitt, C. (1919). A Short History of Lichenology. The Bryologist 22 (6): 77-85+xii.
Rasmussen D., Akulukjuk, T. (2009). ‘My Father was Told to Talk to the Environment First before Anything Else’: Arctic Environmental Education in the Language of the Land. In M. McKenzie, P. Hart, H. Bai, and B. Jickling (eds.). Fields of Green: Restorying Culture, Environment, and Education. New York: Hampton Press. pp. 279-292.
Rosselló-Mora, R., Amann, R. (2001). The species concept for prokaryotes. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 25: 39–67.
Schwendener, S. (1869). Die Algentypen der Flechtengonidien. Schultze. Basel.
Slater, M. (2015). Natural Kindness. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 15 (66): 375–411.
Spribille, T, Tuovinen, V., Resl, P., Vanderpool, D., Wolinski, H., Aime, C., Schneider, K., Stabentheiner, E., Toome-Heller, M., Thor, G., Mayrhofer, H., Johannesson, H., McCutcheon, J. (2016). Basidiomycete yeasts in the cortex of ascomycete macrolichens. Science 353(6298):488-492.
Thomas E. (1939). Über die Biologie von Flechtenbildnern. Bern: Buchdruckerei Büchler & Co. p. 200.
Turner, N. (1977). Economic Importance of Black Tree Lichen (Bryoria fremontii) to the Indians of Western North America. Economic Botany 31 (4): 461-470.
Valijärvi, R-L, and Kahn, L. (2017). North Sámi: An Essential Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.