Paph wilhelminiae 3 flowers

[Ernie]

"Wendy-licious!" I love that! Thanks for my new favourite word! Hee, hee, hee!:evil:


"I still say it's wilhelminae though." I don't think the identity was ever in question. 'Don't understand what you're getting at, Ernie. Did I miss something on another thread? I've seen this plant in person and there's absolutely no question in my mind that it is wilhelminiae.

I think "-licious" goes well with about anything. Here, as Wen-delicious, works nicely.

Yeah, you must've missed the other thread. Just ruffling feathers over the third "i". wilhelminiae vs wilhelminae. Yeah, there's no doubt THIS plant is in THAT taxon.

-Ernie

 

[John M]

Just ruffling feathers over the third "i". wilhelminiae vs wilhelminae. Yeah, there's no doubt THIS plant is in THAT taxon.

-Ernie

Okay. I understand now. I hadn't noticed the different spelling (no third "i"), in your post.

That is something that I've wondered about at times. Although, I'm used to pronouncing the third "i", I don't know if it should be there. So, just now, I went to the RHS site and searched for Paphiopedilum rothschildianum x Paphiopedilum wilhelminiae. It found 1 hit; Paph. William Ambler. So, FWIW, the RHS thinks it's spelled with a third "i".

Thanks for the reply.

 

[Ernie]

John,

Yeah, and the species pops up at the RHS site with three i's too, BUT the Kew Monocot list web site returns the species with only two i's. I guess we're all right?

-Ernie

 

[Paul]

that's just a perfect one!! good job !

 

[John M]

John,

Yeah, and the species pops up at the RHS site with three i's too, BUT the Kew Monocot list web site returns the species with only two i's. I guess we're all right?

-Ernie

I don't think that's possible...is it? Shouldn't there be one way and only one way to spell it? Doesn't the taxonomist who described the species decide what is the correct spelling? I wonder where this information could be found, once and for all? Hmmmm....?