in the preface of a well known book by an authoritative physicist i found the phrase "homo sapiens sapiens." the quote is talking about the cultural evolution of said beings. is this likely a misprint, or does the term mean something other than "homo sapien"?

it's a subspecies of homo sapiens == modern man
: )

really? wow. funny that i'd never known that. i don't claim to be a biologist in any fashon, and don't really understand the complexities of their naming schemes, but i'm surprised that i didn't know that. [hangs head sheepishly emoticon]

homo sapiens = "thinking man". As it was explained to me at school, homo sapiens sapiens = "man who thinks he can think". I think that our science teacher, who was, reputedly, a member of the species, had been teaching truculent schoolboys for far too long ...

homo sapiens = "thinking man"
I think that it would be better to translate it as
knowing man.
Thinking man would be homo cogitans - as in cogito ergo sum.

Could it be "wise man"? (My sole basis for this is a distant memory; I know no latin.)

Post-edit: And less greek.

While I'm no anthropologist and I do know that the direct Latin translation of sapiens is "wise man" or "philosopher", the way I've seen the translation of homo sapiens expressed is "thinking" as in "rational thought" or "philosophy".

This also ties in with the way in which sapiens can be translated as "judicious" or "discreet". I guess you could also translate homo sapiens sapiens as "man the judicious thinker".

Me, I'm closer to homo habilis. Ask my wife.

OED gives this ....Sapient = wisdom, understanding, esp of God.
Sapience = wise, now ironically or literary
Sapiential = pertaining to or characterized by wisdom, esp of God.

Whereas sapid pertains to food = having a pleasant flavor. (neatly tying two threads-e)

xara's initial question presents an opportunity demonstrate that I also attended biology classes - as well as chemistry whuch has been getting a mention in her other posts.

Every living thing (or that that lived once) may be categorised uniquely by their genus ( always capitalised - "Homo" in this case) and species (never capitalised - sapiens) and, if applicable, a sub species (also never capitalised - sapiens again in the example).

Genera and species are often fun and or interesting. A favourite biology quiz night question is: "What do the scientific names of gorillas and bison have in common? (A)The genus and species of each, respectively, are the same, ie Gorilla gorilla and Bison bison.

The giraffe is an interesting one for trivia buffs - its name reflects the confusion in the minds of its first Europen viewers. Believing it was a cross between a camel and a leopard, that's what's immortalised in its scientific name: Giraffa camelopardalis!

Can't leave without mentioning rhinoceros's: rhino = nose, keras/ceras = horn!!

stales

Can't leave without mentioning rhinoceros's: rhino = nose, keras/ceras = horn!!

If you look at the etymology of hippopotamus doesn't it mean "big water animal"? Hippo is "big or large", "pot" is "water" (potable), and amus relates to animal, or animate. Is my analysis flawed?

I was always taught that hippopotamus meant "river horse"

Well, in German hippo is Nilpferd, literally Nile horse. Though I don't really see how a hippo looks much like a horse. Maybe a horse with a weight disorder, I guess. . .

Max is right - "river horse"

Hippus = horse (as in hippodrome). Dunno about potamus but - must mean river.....

stales

hey, c'mon guys! some genius came up with Homo sapiens sapiens to differentiate us from Neandertal and dem other ancient sapiens.

hippos is Greek for horse. Potamos is Greek for river.

Kuda Nil is Indonesian for hippopotamus. Kuda is Indonesian for horse. I'll leave you to guess what Nil is Indonesian for.

Bingley

Homo sapiens sapiens seems like rubbing one's knowledge into some others species' face.

Probably just as well that no other species is currently able to understand it, then!

"like rubbing one's knowledge into some others species' face"

Not the context to slip a roonerspism in!

stales

homo sapiens = "thinking man".

but homo means self or same. so it's self aware or self thinking, not thinking man.

other examples of homo: homogenous doesn't have anything to do with being men, it has to do with being made of the same material throughout. homosexual one who likes people of the same sex, not one who likes men, because women can be homosexual too.

so doesn't homo sapiens sapiens indicate awareness of one's self awareness rather than a man who thinks he can think? you don't get "men" until you define the phrase, so you can't use "men" in the definition.

I don't really see how a hippo looks much like a horse. Maybe a horse with a weight disorder, I guess. . .

Is anyone able to cite me to a humorous poem I partly recall, the plaint of a young lad bemoaning the loss of his beloved pet hippopotamus?

The lines I recall are that the lad nursed had his pet through "his hippopotameasles and his hippopotamumps," and that, "No longer in the morning will the neighborhood rejoice / To his hippopotamusically modulated voice."

Thanks in advance.

I don't really see how a hippo looks much like a horse. Maybe a horse with a weight disorder, I guess.

I vaguely recall that in ancient egyptian times and as late as the the classical greek era, there was a smaller species of hippopotamus, now extinct, indigenous to Egypt and parts of the middle east. Can anyone confirm or deny? Does the Bible include any references to hippopotami? (I know, ICLIU)

A bit of Ogden Nash:
We mock the hippopotamus
Because of how he looks to us,
But often, in a moment grim
I wonder how we look to him.
Peace! Peace! thou hippopotamus!
We really look al right to us,
As you, no doubt, delight the eye
Of other hippopotami.

HOMO= (latin) MAN
SAPIENS= (latin) WISE
SAPIENS= (latin) WISE

Everyone knows that the latins were sexist pigs, but at least they were open about it. What, I ask, is the excuse of the men who designated peoplekind as homo sapiens sapiens? Well, let it be known that there are a lot of women who are wise and a select few that have a sence of humor.

Milo

homo- = man (Latin)
homo- = same (Greek)

what we have here is an old-fashioned logomachy! and may the better homo- win.

(perhaps that genius should have gone for Homo sapiens homo)

Stales--you're quick; I like that!

Keiva:
I Had a Hippopotamus

I had a hippopotamus; I kept him in a shed
And fed him upon vitamins and vegetable bread.
I made him my companion on many cheery walks,
And had his portrait done by a celebrity in chalks.

His charming eccentricities were known on every side.
The creature's popularity was wonderfully wide.
He frolicked with the Rector in a dozen friendly tussles,
Who could not but remark on his hippopotamuscles.

If he should be affected by depression or the dumps
By hippopotameasles or hippopotamumps
I never knew a particle of peace 'till it was plain
He was hippopotamasticating properly again.

I had a hippopotamus, I loved him as a friend
But beautiful relationships are bound to end.
Time takes, alas, our joys from us and robs us of our blisses.
My hippopotamus turned out to be a hippopotamissus.

My housekeeper regarded him with jaundice in her eye.
She did not want a colony of hippopotami.
She borrowed a machine gun from her soldier-nephew, Percy
And showed my hippopotamus no hippopotamercy.

My house now lacks the glamour that the charming creature gave.
The garage where I kept him is as silent as a grave.
No longer he displays among the motor-tires and spanners
His hippopotamastery of hippopotamanners.

I had a hippopotamus, but nothing upon the earth
Is constant in its happiness or lasting in its mirth.
No life that's joyful can be strong enough to smother
My sorrow for what might have been a hippopotamother.

--Patrick Barrington

The version I found had one additional verse:

My house now lacks the glamour that the charming creature gave,
The garage where I kept him is as silent as the grave;
No longer he displays among the motor-tires and spanners
His hippopotamastery of hippopotamanners.

No longer now he gambols in the orchard in the Spring;
No longer do I lead him through the village on a string;
No longer in the mornings does the neighborhood rejoice
To his hippopotamusically-modulated voice.

I had a hippopotamus; but nothing upon earth
Is constant in its happiness or lasting in its mirth.
No joy that life can give me can be strong enough to smother
My sorrow for that might-have-been-a-hippopotamother.

+++++++++++++++++++

I found it on this page: http://members.aol.com/HippoPage/hipppoem.htm

Thank you, m'ladies. You have made me .

In fact, the translation of Latin homo- as 'man' reveals more about the sexism of English speakers than Latin speakers. In Latin, homo (genitive hominis) meant 'human' rather than 'male', so the translation 'man' is the generic sense of the English word. More accurately, the etymology of Latin homo would mean 'earthling' -- from the Indo-European locative form of the word for 'earth': *dhghom-on- 'the one on the earth', in contrast with *deyw-os 'the one in the sky' = deus 'god'.

Other words from this same Indo-European root *dhghem- 'earth' include chthonic, chameleon ('lion of the ground') from Greek; Latin humus 'earth'; and Old English guma 'human' which survives today only in altered form in the word 'bride-groom' (originally 'bride-goom').

Cool, rbarr, and welcome. I'm looking forward to discussions between you and Nicholas, our resident linguistic expert. I hope to see him back here very soon indeed.

Affectus for feeling maybe.

Vir , by the way, is the Latin for man in the sense of adult male human. Does the fact that Latin carefully differentiates between the species and its adult males mean females were any better treated by a Latin-speaking community than they are today by English-speaking ones?

Bingley

Homo sapiens sapiens to differentiate us from Neandertal

To expand a little; some time ago modern man and Cro-Magnon man, considered the same species, were termed Homo sapiens and Neanderthal man was considered a separate species (but same genus) Homo neandertalensis. After some thought it was decided that we and the Neanderthals were the same species but different sub-species; thus Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neandertalensis. I've been out of touch for a while but I believe that we have gone back to believing we are different species again.

A general announcement: When most of us use "man" in the general sense of homo, we are surely using it as a shortened form of "mankind" or "hu-man-kind".

Can we please leave accusations of sexism in the agony aunt columns where they belong? We all know that English is an imperfect language. And long may it stay that way.

When most of us use "man" in the general sense of homo, we are surely using it as a shortened form of "mankind" or "hu-man-kind"

Amen, Cap K. And when we specifically mean male human being we can use that good old English word wapman.

accusations of sexism

for what it's worth, when i made the man\same remark i wasn't thinking in terms of gender or sexism at all. i was trying to ask about homo meaning man (or human, if you please) as opposed to homo meaning same.

I was also questioning the validity of using (hu)man to describe a phrase that in turn describes (hu)mans. i disapprove of that kind of circular logic.

it amazes me how difficult it can be for me to communicate my intent here. like the fact that my taste\flavour question was interpreted by most to be a question about water. sigh


EDIT Ok, in looking back at my post I see that the homosexaul example does make the human/male distinction. i didn't even realize i did that. thus the remark about my difficulty in communicating my intent...

I'm so sorry, xara. Isn't that just like us tho' to toss it over our shoulder and run with it?

doesn't homo sapiens sapiens indicate awareness of one's self awareness rather than a man who thinks he can think?. - Considering the results of his thinking activity, I wonder if homo sapiens sapiens is the first known example of an heritable pseudonym.

I wonder if homo sapiens sapiens is the first known example of an heritable pseudonym.
For certain members of our species, who shall remain nameless, I do believe you may be right. Uh, you did mean the homo part, right?

Thanks, Jackie, for the words of the 'hippo' song. We have a 1966 LP record called "Oats and beans and barley: songs for children" which includes this song ( and has the extra verse which Gymkhana posted). It added much to my day to listen to this record again after many years. I suspect it never made it to CD. [originally Argo ZDA 44]

I agree that Homo sapiens sapiens is a subspecies of Homo sapiens. I think that Neandertals were strictly speaking the same species as modern humans, meaning that they could have interbred to produce viable offspring. In fact at my college, I am convinced that some of the Neandertals on the football team were attempting this feat.

I had never thought of "Homo sapiens" meaning "self-aware" though. What an interesting thought.

I had never thought of "Homo sapiens" meaning "self-aware" though. What an interesting thought.

Interesting, but ... ? Does this imply that homo neandertalis (or neanderthalis) was not? Depends on that extra sapiens, I suppose!

I may be way out in left field here but could the expression 'homo sapiens sapiens' be the same type of descriptive as when we say a particular guy is a real 'man's man'? As in the person is archetypical of what a man is.

In response to Wordwind's question:

In reply to:

---

You wouldn't happen to know what Homo sapiens sapiens, in an attempt to relinquish a little brain power and substitute it with a good dose of heart power, would be called could he become "Homo sapiens 'feeling,'" would you?

---

Though affectus actually translates better, I think sentiens has more of the right connotations and connections with other fields. For example, there is a perennial disagreement in science fiction as to whether we are looking for other sentient life forms or sapient life forms, if we're looking for those that are human-like.

Sentire means 'to feel', but by extension also 'to be self-aware'. I've often wondered how sapiens 'tasting' came to mean 'wise' -- I can only think it's because the wise were those who had 'good taste.' Maybe the distinction is just that the homines sapientes cooked their food? Grits for the mill, anyway.

!!???!!! That was hippopositively a word-windmill!

The system of taxonomic classification:

Kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, variety.

Plants and animals are usually classified according to their body structure.

Humans are in the animal kingdom, chordate phylum, mammal class, primate order, homo genus, homo sapiens species.

Kingdoms are: plants, animals, monera (bacteria, algae), protista (amoebas, protozoa), and fungi.

Phyla (frequently called divisions in the plant kingdom) include the arthropods, the mollusks, and the chordates (animals which have a central nerve, such as the spinal column; humans are in the subphylum vertebrates).

Classes include mammals, insects, and reptiles.

Orders include carnivores (dogs and cats), and primates (humans, monkeys and apes).

Families include homonides (humans), and felidae (lions, tigers, house cats)

Genus further breaks down families, so that wolves and dogs are in the same genus (canis).

Species are the smallest standard unit of biological classification, consisting of closely related, interbreeding living things. Species can be divided into varieties, races, breeds, or subspecies.

Here is a site devoted to curiousities of biological nomenclature, including puns and wordplay.

http://www.best.com/~atta/taxonomy.html