JL, I take it you are asking in an implicatory sort of way why I didn't refer to the dog as canis lupus familiaris. In this case the term depends on whether the dingo is a canis lupus familiaris or its own subspecies. According to Spencer Wells on page 126 of DEEP ANCESTRY, "It appears that men and women made this long coastal voyage [to Australia] together, on foot, around 50,000 years ago." In his book THE JOURNEY OF MAN Wells describes artifacts "from sedimentary layers below Mungo 3" which "hint at dates as ancient as 60,000 years before present." Evidence is strong that the Dingo accompanied man as Canis Familiaris to Australia (but probably not with the Mungo 3 humans), e.g., "Analyses of amino sequences of the hemoglobin of a "pure" dingo in the 70s supported the theory that dingoes are more closely related to other domestic dogs than to grey wolves or coyotes." And, ". . . it was also considered that dingoes might have arrived within 4,600 to 10,800 years ago, in case that the mtDNA-mutation rate was slower than assumed. Furthermore it was reasoned that these findings strongly indicate a descent of dingoes from East-Asian domestic dogs and not from Indian domestic dogs or wolves. In addition these findings indicated two possibilities of descent: * All Australian dingoes are descended from a few domestic dogs, theoretically one pregnant female * All Australian dingoes are descended from a group of domestic dogs, who radically lost their genetic diversity through one or several severe genetic bottlenecks on their way from the Asian continent over Southeast-Asia" from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingo If this is true then at the very least the dingo should be called "Canis Familiaris Dingo" and not "Canis Lupus Dingo." But, we ask, is the difference between the Dingo and Canis Familiaris so different as to warrant its designation as a separate subspecies? There is a modern theory that if canis familiaris is allowed to breed completely at random then in a few thousand years he will look like other Pariah dogs. Two such examples are the Carolina dog and the Canaan dog. As it happens I have a nephew who developed a fondness for the dingo. He wanted to own one. I directed him toward the Carolina Dog as an accessible equivalent. In the Carolinas feral dogs ran wild for many generations, perhaps for thousands of years (its advocates would have us believe) and ended up looking quite a lot like the Dingo. See http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/caralinadog.htm If it is true that dogs left to their own devices will end up looking like Carolina or Canaan dogs; which look and behave quite a lot like Dingoes then what will the Smithsonian and American Society of Mammologists say when their studies catch up with those of the avid fans of the Carolina and Canaan breeds? Interestingly, Dog Breed Info treats the Dingo as any other dog a prospective buyer might want to own. Maybe it is a little more quirky than some breeds, but it is apparently still possible to get one and have it behave like a domestic dog, if one gets it before 6 weeks of age. See http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/dingo.htm Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 7:44 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] "Canis lupus familaris" (Am. Soc. Mamm., 1993) "The domestic dog was originally classified as Canis familiaris and Canis familiarus domesticus by Carolus Linnaeus in 1758,[19][20] and was reclassified in 1993 as Canis lupus familiaris, a subspecies of the gray wolf Canis lupus, by the Smithsonian Institution and the American Society of Mammalogists" -- Fail to know exactly WHO. Perhaps we can explain, alla Grice -- as Horn does -- the 'narrow' implicature at play here: from online source: "hound (n.) O.E. hund "dog," from P.Gmc. *hundas (cf. O.S., O.Fris. hund, O.H.G. hunt, Ger. Hund, O.N. hundr, Goth. hunds), from PIE *kuntos, dental enlargement of base *kwon- "dog" (see canine). Meaning narrowed 12c. to "dog used for hunting."" "meaning narrowed 12c. to "dog used for hunting". Same time, I would suspect when "deer" was narrowed down to 'cervus cervus' rather than a general meaning of 'animal'. ---- Next I would need to get a good quote about dog but I keep failing. Hence the rather boring header to this... ---cut-- ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html