GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-10 > 1224040323


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] What is a clade?
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:12:03 -0400
References: <006601c92e07$1a005d10$6400a8c0@Ken1><68B69D8CE0C54829B29602D44B50508F@HP><A08066CE-2925-41F6-AD99-F778C8955486@vizachero.com><58FD1C87FEBD4162B79AB753A1EDBC68@HP><0AEC7A1A-31CC-45C8-8E51-0166C82D8277@vizachero.com>
In-Reply-To: <0AEC7A1A-31CC-45C8-8E51-0166C82D8277@vizachero.com>


It's not a question of right or wrong. I use the word in it's original,
technical meaning. I see that a less stringent definition has come into use,
and I will have to accept that fact, even if it grates on me.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Vincent Vizachero
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 10:36 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] What is a clade?
>
> It's the difference between the right definition and the wrong one.
> Your comfort with the latter is not my worry, but the fact that
> people might believe your version over the right one merited comment.
>
> VV
>
>
> On Oct 14, 2008, at 10:20 PM, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote:
>
> > It's a lay definition vs. a technical definition. It's your
> > prerogative to use
> > the former; I'm only comfortable with the latter.
>

This thread: