TA2Viewer: A web-based browser for Terminologia Anatomica and online anatomical knowledge.

TA2Viewer is an open-access, web-based application and database for browsing anatomical terms and associated medical information on a computer or mobile device (https://ta2viewer.openanatomy.org/). It incorporates the official digital version of the second edition of Terminologia Anatomica (TA2) as published by the Federative International Programme for Anatomical Terminology (FIPAT), and adopted by the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAA) and other associations. It provides a dynamic and interactive view of the Latin and English nomenclatures. The organizational hierarchy of the terminology can be navigated by using a scrollable, expandable, and collapsible structured listing. Interactive search includes the official TA2 terms, synonyms, and related terms. TA2Viewer also uses TA2 term information to provide convenient access to other online resources, including Google web and image searches, PubMed, and Radiopaedia. Using cross-references from Wikidata, which were provided by the Wikipedia community, TA2Viewer offers links to Wikipedia, UBERON, UMLS, FMA, MeSH, NeuroNames, the public domain 20th edition of Gray's Anatomy, and other data sources. In addition, it can optionally use unofficial synonyms from Wikidata to provide multilingual term searches in hundreds of languages. By leveraging TA2, TA2Viewer provides free access to a curated anatomical nomenclature and serves as an index of online anatomical knowledge.

Revisiting the Latin vocabulary of Terminologia Histologica: I. Nouns.

Almost 20% of the Latin nouns (193/993) in Terminologia Histologica (TH), the international standard nomenclature for human histology and cytology, display linguistic problems, particularly in the areas of orthography, gender, and declension. Some anatomists have opposed efforts to restore the quality of the Latin nomenclature as pedantry, preferring to create or modify Latin words so that they resemble words in English and other modern languages. A Latin microanatomical nomenclature is vulnerable to the criticism of anachronism, so the requirement for the use of authentic Latin, including derivation of new words from Greek and Latin words rather than from modern languages, if possible, may be even greater than it is for the anatomical nomenclature. The most common problem identified here appears to have been caused by derivation of Latin nouns by addition of -us and -um second declension endings to English words. Many Latin nouns (128) in TH contain one of six morphemes that have been treated this way even though the original Greek words are either first declension masculine or third declension neuter nouns. Ironically, deriving Latin nouns directly from Greek morphemes often results in words that look more familiar to speakers of Romance and Germanic languages than those derived indirectly through modern languages (e.g., astrocyte, collagene, dendrita, lipochroma, osteoclasta and telomere instead of astrocytus, collagenum, dendritum, lipochromum, osteoclastus, and telomerus).

What's in a name? Is an anatomical term only a name?

The purpose of a standard terminology is to facilitate communication. Thus, changing the name of an anatomical structure or the meaning of an anatomical term undermines that aspiration and cuts connections with anatomy's long history. Two types of anatomical terms are the most vulnerable to logical arguments for revision-ones that are descriptive, but viewed, at least by some, as inaccurate, and ones that contain words that are polysemic or vague. A half dozen examples of each type are discussed, including ductus deferens, glandula seminalis, articulationes costochondrales, vulva and fascia. In general, traditional terms should be preserved, but judgments about which terms are traditional should be based on five centuries of modern anatomy, not just the past several decades.

General histological woes: Encore. Tissues, please.

In a previous essay, we wrote about the shortcomings of the four basic tissue dogma of histology - miscellaneous tissues lumped under the ill-fitting name "connective tissues" and the existence of human tissues that are not recognized as subtypes of any of the four "basic types". A provisional reclassification of human tissues was constructed to improve the precision and completeness of the tissue taxonomy. Here, we address criticisms from a recent paper that claims that the four basic tissue dogma is more useful than that revised classification in medical education and in clinical practice. Some of the criticism appears to arise from the common misconception of a tissue as simply an array of similar cells.

West meets east: Taking a stab at acupuncture point names.

Acupuncture point names written in Chinese Han characters often provide clinically useful information in both their literal and figurative meanings about location and therapeutic use. The World Health Organization (WHO) standard acupuncture nomenclature includes these names in Han characters in an unusual array that includes both "original" forms and, in parentheses, simplified forms. Construction of a multilingual table of acupuncture point names during development of a database revealed that the assumption that the "original" form in the WHO nomenclature was the traditional Chinese character was frequently false. The Han character forms in the pdf of the 2009 reprint of WHO Standard Acupuncture Point Locations were carefully compared with Han characters used in traditional and simplified Chinese, Japanese and Korean writing systems. This work utilized three online tools: UnicodePlus, Unihan Database Lookup, and Wiktionary. Only 48% of the "original" character forms were traditional Chinese characters. The Unicode number was correct in 99%, but in most cases the East Asian font used was not a traditional Chinese one. The issue about Han character forms was also found in all earlier versions of the WHO standard acupuncture nomenclature. Other detected problems included the use of wrong characters for an "original" character form in one name and for a simplified character form in another name. The WHO standard acupuncture nomenclature should be revised with a focus on accuracy in the usage of Han characters.

Substantive changes in the Latin anatomical nomenclature: Sometimes less is more.

Substantivation, the use of an adjective or participle as a noun, is commonly used informally to shorten Latin anatomical terms. Dozens of substantives also appear in the international standard anatomical terminology. Most of these are venerable and familiar as nouns in Latin anatomical terms. Examples of Latin nouns derived directly or indirectly from Greek and Latin adjectives and participles are presented here. Although neologisms are said to enrich languages, careful consideration is required before adding to a technical vocabulary. Terms consisting of a substantive or displaying a substantive as the head noun may be vague to learners and nonspecialists.

Torcular Herophili: A Review of the History of the Term and Synonyms.

The eponymous term torcular Herophili has been used for the confluence of sinuses. Although no original writings of Herophilus are extant, his accomplishments and descriptions live on in the writings of such authors as Galen. However, in regard to the torcular Herophili, there are some inconsistencies in the secondary sources and their translations regarding what was actually originally described by Herophilus. Herein, we review the history of the term torcular Herophili, which is so often used in clinical medicine.

Reimagining systematic anatomy: The conclusion of the quartet.

The central dogma of systematic anatomy is the well-known hierarchy of anatomical structures: body-systems-organs-tissues-cells. This schema omits extracellular matrix and extracellular fluids, which account for a significant proportion of body mass, and distorts the meanings of the terms system, organ and tissue in anatomy. These faults are partially due to oversimplification, presumably intended for educational purposes, and confusion of anatomy's organ systems with physiological systems. A revised schema of the hierarchy of systematic anatomy is presented that is more complete and more consistent with the long history of anatomy.

General histological woes: Definition and classification of tissues.

The modern view that the human body is composed of tissues and body fluids, and that there are four basic tissue types, may be a more significant departure from Artistotle's homoeomeres, and from Bichat's membranes and tissues, than commonly appreciated. The older concepts described these body parts as structural and functional parts of organs, whereas it is now commonplace to consider a tissue to be a grouping of similar cells with a variable amount of extracellular matrix. The development of the microscope as a useful tool in human anatomy shifted focus from tissues to cells and led to changes in the definition of tissue and the classification of tissues. Not all of these changes have been consistent with observable facts: many tissues contain diverse cell types, not all "connective tissues" are proper connective tissues, and some specialized tissues are not easily classified as subtypes of one of the four basic types. Here we propose corrective measures, including re-recognition of compound tissues, cataloging all adult human tissue types, and increasing the emphasis on function during the construction of a complete taxonomy of human adult tissues. Specific problems in the current scheme and a preliminary reclassification of human adult tissues are discussed.

What's in a synonym? A nose by any other name would smell.

INTRODUCTION: Communication in the biomedical sciences and clinical practice would be clearer if everyone used the same set of technical terms. Technical vocabularies, such as international standard terminologies, are attempts to avoid common linguistic problems, such as synonymy (many names for a single entity) and polysemy (many meanings for a single term). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Efforts made in human anatomical nomenclature since the late 19th century to deal with these issues were reviewed. RESULTS: The new designations official term, equivalent term, synonym and related term are defined, and current challenges (e.g., eponyms) are identified. DISCUSSION: The addition of synonyms and related terms to the international standard anatomical terminology allows indexing of these terms to the official terms and evaluation of the relationships between terms.

A tale of two systems: The tracts of my tears.

Most of the terms in Terminologia Anatomica are arranged by organ systems (systemata); however, the names for these systems are often used by physiologists and other biomedical scientists for related functional systems. These functional systems may differ in their composition from the anatomist's organ systems. In addition, many functional systems have been described that do not correspond to organ systems. Similarly, the non-standard anatomical terms alimentary tract, respiratory tract, urinary tract and reproductive tract lack a consistent meaning in the biomedical sciences. For clear communication, one should be cautious when using terms that may have other meanings in other disciplines. This appears to be particularly true for high level terms in the nomenclature of systematic anatomy.

Rules of nomenclature versus principles of revision: An impudent debate.

The rules of the anatomical nomenclature are sometimes in conflict with the principles of revision of the nomenclature. This is possibly most obvious is the debate about the use of the Latin words pudendus ("shameful") and sacer ("holy") in the anatomical nomenclature. The principles of revision stress preservation of traditional terms even if there are etymological concerns. On the other hand, the nomenclature rules state that anatomical names should, preferably, have informative or descriptive value and that the official Latin terms are the basis for translations of the international standard terminology into modern, vernacular languages. This issue of Clinical Anatomy contains responses to the removal of the noun pudendum and the replacement of the adjective pudendus with pudendalis in the second edition of Terminologia Anatomica.

Regular anatomical terms revisited: The simplest is often the right one.

Regular anatomical (RA) terminology rules were developed to simplify and clarify Latin anatomical terms in a systematic manner. These rules, which prohibit conjunctions, prepositions, and appositions, and define a consistent word order pattern, are extensions of the original 1895 rule of anatomical nomenclature that anatomical terms should be as short and simple as possible. It is not coincidental that most terms in Terminologia Anatomica (TA), and many traditional terms that were not used in TA, are consistent with RA term rules, and that the RA term rules are also consistent with the guidelines for expanding short form terms to full, unique terms. The consistent form of RA terms facilitates learning and translation, and is easier for humans and machines to manipulate than terms that are not compliant with RA term rules. Despite assertions to the contrary, RA terms are proper Latin terms that simplify the anatomical terminology and, in many cases, restore traditional terms.

One lump or two? One butt but two buttocks.

Future revisions of anatomical terminologies will have to give more consideration to the relationships between terms and referents, and the relationships between referents, because computer applications require greater precision. Median anatomical entities and paired entities that closely flank the median plane present common problems in nomenclature, semantics, and ontology. Some of these problems represent vestiges of usage in classical Latin. For example, the use of plural words for polite names of some body parts, and singular words for euphemisms for naughty words. Clin. Anat. 32:22-24, 2019. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

How many bones? Every bone in my body.

Textbooks frequently report that there are 206 human bones, or 200 bones and 6 auditory ossicles. The human bone counts in history and within adulthood were reviewed. Tallies of 197 to 307 bones have been reported over the past several centuries. The relatively low modern reckoning of 206 was due to exclusion of teeth and sesamoid ossicles, and to reassessments of the hyoid, sacrum, coccyx, and sternum as unitary bones. An audit of bone counts during adulthood failed to confirm a rational justification for the total of 206. The number is higher in young adults and lower in the elderly. Difficulties in establishing a definitive bone count include individual differences and the inconsistency of viewing the adult cranium as a collection of 21 bones. Clin. Anat. 33:187-191, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The principles of anatomical nomenclature revision: They're more like guidelines anyway.

Revision of the international standard anatomical terminology is required periodically to add names for new entities, delete archaic terms, and correct errors in existing terms. In addition to a small set of nomenclature rules, three principles have guided revisions: names should not be changed unless they are wrong; corrections of perceived errors should not be pedantic; and inclusion of every minor structure should not be attempted. These principles have served well, and are expected to continue to do so, but they have also proven to be subjective because their application through the history of the international terminology has varied. Specific efforts to deal with existing problems and new organizational initiatives to prevent future issues are presented. Clin. Anat. 33:327-331, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

What the 'ell? Testicle is a diminutive!

The frequency of diminutives in anatomical Latin has often been noted to be high, but that is not unusual in postclassical Latin. Although the connotation of "little" is well known, many of the diminutives in anatomical Latin do not have that meaning. The morphology of regular, irregular, and secondary diminutives is presented, along with that of adjectival forms of diminutives. Several transgendered and malformed diminutives are discussed. Clin. Anat. 31:1100-1103, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Another new organ! is this a golden age of discovery in anatomy?

Twice in fifteen months the popular press has published reports of the discovery of a new human organ. The claims that the mesentery and interstitium are organs come from medical practitioners, not from anatomical scientists. Although both of these anatomical entities are important in the functioning of the body, neither satisfies the requirements that an organ be composed of two or more tissues and perform a special function. Also missing in the recent claim that the interstitium, that is, connective tissues with fluid-filled spaces, is an organ, is a statement to that effect in the original research report. Alas, it appears to be much ado about nothing. Clin. Anat. 31:648-649, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Loss of philological purity: Hybrid vigor or mongrelism?

Although disparaged by philologists, hybrid words enrich technical and scientific vocabularies. They are common, so, like it or not, they are here to stay. On the other hand, where there are pre-existing purebred compound or affixed words, they should generally be given preference over hybrids. Some adjectives (e.g., laryngeus and sphenoideus) are discussed to illustrate these recommendations. Clin. Anat. 31:771-773, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Transgendered and re-flected borrowed Greek nouns in anatomical Latin.

In this survey, almost 30 borrowed words in anatomical Latin were found to differ from the original Greek noun in gender and/or inflection. A third of these cases were judged to be errors. The rest are long-standing or widely-accepted exceptions to the usual adoption rules for borrowed Greek words. Possible linguistic explanations for these exceptions are presented. Clin. Anat. 31:306-309, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.