[Rockhounds] Levinson modifies

[Rock Currier]

I vote for extending the use of the Levinson modifiers to minerals like
apatite & apophyllite, axinite etc (presuming of course that I am entitled
to a vote). The reason is that if you use the suitable prefix like
hydroxyapophyllite and fluorapophyllite, in an alphabetical list of the
minerals those mineral will appear in different places. With Levinson
modifiers, the related minerals can be see at a glance. Someone looking up a
mineral in an alphabetical list of minerals may well be looking for
apophyllite, or apatite, and much to their amazement and irritation, that
mineral will not be in the list. With the use of Levinson modifiers this
would not be a problem. I know I have muttered bad words to myself in such
situations and find the prospect of finding all the apatites etc. together
something to look forward to. Could we hope the same for a mineral like
tourmaline? Just think how happy it would make the lumbers if we would throw
them a bone like that. That would probably be going too far, but at least in
the future, when more hydoxyls, fluors, and mangans are created they will
all be kept conveniently together with others of their kind where everyone
can find them in a list. It would asset in education. "OH my goodness, look
at how many apatites there are.!" What about minerals like eudialyte. Just
that mineral alone has the splitters drooling. More than 150 possible new
species? Imagine trying to remember the name of a particular variation so
you can locate it in a list or a database.

In terms of usage when speaking I think most people still use axinite,
apatite etc. and will continue to do so in spite of the nomenclature boys.
If we can bring our technical usage a bit back in line with the spoken
language without sacrificing its accuracy we should jump at the chance. It
will much easier for us to adjust to Levinson modifiers than for us to
change the rest of the world.


Rock