Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Usage is language.It’s not a discussion. There are clear rules on what defines a host. A clownfish isn’t a host. Unless it’s to a parasite, bacteria, etc.
I didn’t say it wasn’t understood what a person meant when they say that the clowns are hosting. I just don’t see what the English language has to do with anything. You can say that the clown is hosting a nem in any language and it’s incorrect.This is a naive rebuttal. we are discussing english statements, which is why the language is intimately intertwined. The technical side is well defined. in the scientific literature it is quite clear the clowns are being hosted. There is no dispute of technical definitions, to say that clowns are hosting is technically incorrect. However, in common parlance the statement that the clowns host the nem remains, as it is widely understood to mean the same thing, and the technical distinction in context is unimportant. I personally find the few extra words worth being technically correct but merely posit this explanation for the persistence of the technically incorrect usage, it is an effective shorthand which is widely understood.
I don't see any length difference between "The clowns host the anemone" and "The anemone hosts the clowns". There is no difference? I.e. no shortcut? Judging by the voting "the clowns are hosting the anemone" is not 'common parlance" is it?This is a naive rebuttal. we are discussing english statements, which is why the language is intimately intertwined. The technical side is well defined. in the scientific literature it is quite clear the clowns are being hosted. There is no dispute of technical definitions, to say that clowns are hosting is technically incorrect. However, in common parlance the statement that the clowns host the nem remains, as it is widely understood to mean the same thing, and the technical distinction in context is unimportant. I personally find the few extra words worth being technically correct but merely posit this explanation for the persistence of the technically incorrect usage, it is an effective shorthand which is widely understood.
When someone comes over to my house, I am hosting. To me, it's the same concept. The anemone does not go to the clowns, the clowns go to the anemone so the anemone is the "host."Its always been a question for me - why do people (to me incorrectly) - say that clowns host anemones - when in fact it seems (to me) that its the other way around. So I decided to do a poll - which should it be - and Please comment 'Why'? Might as well have some happy discussion during the pandemic
It’s just a bunch of phony ballots, that’s all.I don't see any length difference between "The clowns host the anemone" and "The anemone hosts the clowns". There is no difference? I.e. no shortcut? Judging by the voting "the clowns are hosting the anemone" is not 'common parlance" is it?
The fact you made this post is evidence that the misuse is common. Yes concise statements can be made either way. I suspect the reason is that typically the clowns are the subject of the sentence. The clowns (subject) are hosting my nem. (Predicate). The nem (subject) is hosting my clowns. (Predicate) The latter form also implies that the anemone is making the choice which is another factor which I think influences using incorrect language. I can’t think of a way concisely keep the subject of the sentence the clowns and imply that it is the clowns choice in doing so. I believe these factors combine to make the incorrect form remain in common parlance, though it is common knowledge in the hobby that the anemone is considered the host in this symbiont relation.I don't see any length difference between "The clowns host the anemone" and "The anemone hosts the clowns". There is no difference? I.e. no shortcut? Judging by the voting "the clowns are hosting the anemone" is not 'common parlance" is it?
Its always been a question for me - why do people (to me incorrectly) - say that clowns host anemones - when in fact it seems (to me) that its the other way around. So I decided to do a poll - which should it be - and Please comment 'Why'? Might as well have some happy discussion during the pandemic
Not sure this is entirely the reason - I mean - I had a friend from Germany - who always confused the words 'stomach' and 'mustache'. So - after dinner he would say 'my mustache is full' (for example). Of course - I understood what he 'meant'. In this case - everyone understands 'what the phrase means' - just like people understand what the word 'ain't' means. So - I'm not sure that just because a few people use this terminology that it means its 'correct' (linguistically or scientifically). But - Your first point was about length of sentences. Can you give an example of what you mean? Because I can think of a lot of ways to keep the clowns 'the subject' without using 'my clowns are hosting my anemone'. My opinion (and its just an opinion) - is that people have heard the term that way - and repeated it without thinking rather than the length, etc. But that what the 'discussion' is aboutThe fact you made this post is evidence that the misuse is common. Yes concise statements can be made either way. I suspect the reason is that typically the clowns are the subject of the sentence. The clowns (subject) are hosting my nem. (Predicate). The nem (subject) is hosting my clowns. (Predicate) The latter form also implies that the anemone is making the choice which is another factor which I think influences using incorrect language. I can’t think of a way concisely keep the subject of the sentence the clowns and imply that it is the clowns choice in doing so. I believe these factors combine to make the incorrect form remain in common parlance, though it is common knowledge in the hobby that the anemone is considered the host in this symbiont relation.
Unfortunately - you cant add another voting option in a poll - it has to be done. by a mod.Add a none of the above vote.
Its interesting I have never heard this phrase until I started coming here - and I've been doing this a while as well.Usage is language.
People have been saying clownfish host anemones for multiple decades now. People know what people mean when they say it.
You're correct that there's no discussion - it's over. The usage has entered the vernacular.
Do a search of ReefCentral. You'll find threads from the late 90s with people having the same argument.Its interesting I have never heard this phrase until I started coming here - and I've been doing this a while as well.
Would it be hosting if the frogspawn doesn't want them.Sorry for the blues.... In my tank the frogspawn hosts my clowns! Lol
You’re right. I don’t think the frogspawn wants them so we’ll call it intruding! LolWould it be hosting if the frogspawn doesn't want them.
Would you say that the glass is hosting the nems?
and my 2 clowns prefer the side glass.
right - I dont care.Do a search of ReefCentral. You'll find threads from the late 90s with people having the same argument.
Language is dynamic. Word usage changes - whether it's 'correct' really doesn't matter.