<p>I think, the more generic a term is, the better you can use a known term in your native language. The more specific a term is, the greater is the need for some circumlocution or some conlang term.</p>

<p><strong>Examples:</strong> Specific kinds of flowers and trees in Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" have constructed names like <em>mallorn</em>, <em>niphedril</em>, or <em>simbelmyne</em>. He consistently used <em>pipe-weed</em> (the word <em>tobacco</em> is used by the narrator, but not in dialogues). Already on the level of genera, Tolkien uses terms like <em>pine tree</em>, <em>oak</em>, ... and of course there is <em>grass</em>, there are <em>trees</em>, there are <em>horses</em> and so on.</p>

<p>Whether you want to call some space creatures "cows" depends on the picture the word "cow" evokes and the uses of cows (Do they give milk and flesh? Can you use oxen for ploughing or driving a cart?) in your fictional culture.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-20T19:06:04.567Z
Tolkien mentions horses and grass and so on because his Middle-earth is in the distant past of *our* world, in which those plants &c that have unfamiliar names are now extinct.
Anton Sherwood
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-05T17:41:15.040Z
2018-07-05T18:02:05.550Z
2018-07-05T18:02:05.550Z
Sir Cornflakes
<p>As title states; how to name extraterrestrial fauna/flora to human languages, would reffering to animals similar to cows as to cows and to plant that bears round red fruits as to apple be linguisticly acceptable? Or maybe new words would have to be put in place to describe those creatures?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-05T17:10:27.583Z
This is primarily opinion-based, and probably should be closed on that basis. This is not a new problem, either; there's plenty of SF where this has had to be done. Each author has done what has seemed best to him/her, ranging from making up nonsense words, to using terrestrial names based on appearance or behavior, to using _modified_ terrestrial names based on appearance or behavior, to ....
Jeff Zeitlin
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-05T17:22:01.987Z
Oh, I did not know it had such obvious resolution. So all are correct? Each one will be accepted?
KarolOfGutovo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-06T00:11:19.833Z
Karol, you're the creator, you can do whatever you want! :)
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-06T12:46:29.010Z
@KarolOfGutovo If you're looking for what other constructed languages do (along the lines of jknappen's answer), you could edit your question to ask how other conlangs deal with this
b a
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-20T19:06:53.653Z
There is natlang precedent: consider the Tasmanian wolf and tiger.
Anton Sherwood
<translation>
How to link extraterrestrial animal names from other language with terrestrial languages?
# How to link extraterrestrial animal names from other language with terrestrial languages?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-07-05)

As title states; how to name extraterrestrial fauna/flora to human languages, would reffering to animals similar to cows as to cows and to plant that bears round red fruits as to apple be linguisticly acceptable? Or maybe new words would have to be put in place to describe those creatures?

**Tags:** translation

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: This is primarily opinion-based, and probably should be closed on that basis. This is not a new problem, either; there's plenty of SF where this has had to be done. Each author has done what has seemed best to him/her, ranging from making up nonsense words, to using terrestrial names based on appearance or behavior, to using _modified_ terrestrial names based on appearance or behavior, to ....  
> **username_0**: Oh, I did not know it had such obvious resolution. So all are correct? Each one will be accepted?  
> **username_2**: Karol, you're the creator, you can do whatever you want! :)  
> **username_3**: @username_0 If you're looking for what other constructed languages do (along the lines of jknappen's answer), you could edit your question to ask how other conlangs deal with this  
> **username_4**: There is natlang precedent: consider the Tasmanian wolf and tiger.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2018-07-05. Score: 3

I think, the more generic a term is, the better you can use a known term in your native language. The more specific a term is, the greater is the need for some circumlocution or some conlang term.

**Examples:** Specific kinds of flowers and trees in Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" have constructed names like *mallorn*, *niphedril*, or *simbelmyne*. He consistently used *pipe-weed* (the word *tobacco* is used by the narrator, but not in dialogues). Already on the level of genera, Tolkien uses terms like *pine tree*, *oak*, ... and of course there is *grass*, there are *trees*, there are *horses* and so on.

Whether you want to call some space creatures "cows" depends on the picture the word "cow" evokes and the uses of cows (Do they give milk and flesh? Can you use oxen for ploughing or driving a cart?) in your fictional culture.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: Tolkien mentions horses and grass and so on because his Middle-earth is in the distant past of *our* world, in which those plants &c that have unfamiliar names are now extinct.  

---

