[Rockhounds] Columbite

[Axel Emmermann]

I'm not all that unhappy about the way things are now.
Actually, I find naming minerals after their elements (cavansite = Calcium
Vanadium Silicon) so unimaginative. 
Take a mineral like arrojadite... Are we prepared to call that
kanacamanferralfluhyphite?
That would be the name for those who call the element K kalium. If you're in
the linguistic group that names K potassium (K ?????) you'd have to call it
Potnacamanferralfluhyphite ;-)))

Axel




> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com 
> [mailto:rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com] Namens Kreigh 
> Tomaszewski
> Verzonden: woensdag 12 maart 2008 1:49
> Aan: Rockhounds at drizzle.com: A mailing list for rock and gem 
> collectors
> Onderwerp: Re: [Rockhounds] Columbite
> 
> The mineral name should be just that, a name. 
> 
> If the splitters in the lab discover Leaverite is really two 
> minerals, one with Ca and one with Na, leave the name 
> Leaverite with one of them, and give the other a new name. 
> Leaverite and Righttherite.
> 
> Or be kind to the lumpers, and make a Leaverite group out of 
> them, and give both minerals new names. Whereite and Foundite.
> 
> But don't get confused and try to make a hybrid name with the 
> chemical formula. Leaverite-(Ca) and Leaverite-(Na) are just 
> an admission you don't know the difference between a name and 
> a formula, or that you are not smart enough to think up a 
> good name or two. Names and formulas are two different 
> attributes and should not be confused.
> 
> It may have started with the rare earths, but we've already 
> reached apatite-(CaF), and we're on our way to 
> Mica-(KMgOHFAlSiO). It is a slippery slope. Lets just not go 
> there. At least that is my opinion.
> 
> Kreigh
> 
> P.S., Mica-(KMgOHFAlSiO) = Phlogopite, a member of the 
> Biotite Group, and a good example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pmodreski at aol.com wrote:
> > 
> > It was standardized (the original paper was by Levinson 
> himself, back 
> > several decades ago--but only for the rare-earth minerals.
> > 
> > Using this system for other minerals was the subject of 
> quite a bit of 
> > discussion in Tucson; apparently, the authors of the Glossary of 
> > Minerals unilaterally decided to adopt this system for the mineral 
> > names therein, for  many mineral groups--apatite, apophyllite, 
> > columbite--I haven't checked through  the whole Glossary to see how 
> > many names they thus altered.  People seemed  to feel that it was 
> > premature for them to have done this, because there has not 
>  been any 
> > formal IMA--sanctioned journal article published, stating 
> that "this 
> > is the agreed-upon way this shall be done".  The sentiment 
> expressed was that "the way mineral names are thus written, 
> in the Glossary, has no "official"
> > status; it is just one pair of authors' personal opinion as to how 
> > they would like to see these names used.
> > 
> > Whereas as I said, this convention has the virtue of the minerals 
> > being grouped together alphabetically, it has the down sides of 
> > dropping some long-accepted mineral names, and also, of 
> some of these 
> > names becoming quite cumbersome--becoming not just a name, but a 
> > shorteneed version of the chemical formula, which in some 
> cases leads 
> > to the question--how the heck do you  pronounce this name verbally, 
> > without explaining where all the parentheses go  and so forth?  For 
> > example, the common mineral of the apatite group, which  of 
> course in 
> > the old days used to be just called "apatite" and we have 
> now  finally 
> > just about convinved and informed everyone, is properly known as  
> > fluorapatite, is now listed in the Glossary as, 
> "apatite-(CaF)".  I'm  really not sure how one is supposed to 
> say that when speaking.
> > 
> > I took a picture of one specimen label in a case at the 
> Tucson Show, 
> > which did display a specimen of apatite, labeled this way; 
> > Apatite-(CaF), from the Pea  Ridge mine, Missouri.  It was, 
> of course, 
> > in a case of specimens from the Royal Ontario Museum (home of both 
> > authors of the present edition of the Glossary).
> > 
> > My personal feeling is that this is NOT the most desirable 
> system for 
> > mineral names, and that there is a good chance that it may 
> not really 
> > be adopted widely, or that it may be simply ignored.  I 
> kind of hope 
> > that this is the first and last time I will have seen 
> "apatite-(CaF)" printed on a mineral  label!
> > As I say, just my personal opinion on this.  So I would advise  
> > collectors and museum NOT to rush out and re-do all their labels.
> > 
> > Pete Modreski
> >
> 
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Rockhounds at drizzle Mailing List
> Subscription Services:
> http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/rockhounds
> List Home Page, with a link to the List Usage Policy:
> http://www.eclecticlapidary.com/Rockhounds/index.html
>