FMF - Friends of Minerals Forum, discussion and message board

[Konstantinos Ch.]

Hello!

Does "First-Owned" solve the problem (or I'd better say sorry to my English teacher for sleeping during her class?)


I hate mistakenly used phrases, too, honestly, but guys, I think that, even if we find a way to say it right, people will carry on using it as it is. And you know why? Because they love they way they first read it at the description or label of their favorite specimen they bought once!



I hope we make it, though.

-Kostas.

[Gail]

On my labels as well as my catalogue filing system I put "Collected by Gail Spann during her first mining experience, Bingham, New Mexico in March of 2007."
You got to be one dumb person if you can't understand what that means!

[Les Presmyk]

For the past 46 years that I have been a mineral collector, I have always referred to specimens I personally collected in the field, whether dug near the surface, out of an operating or abandoned mine, or from one of our mining projects, as self-collected. I never even considered that it might mean the specimen collected itself or any of the other possible definitions we have heard. When I hear someone say a piece was self-collected, that means to me, anyway, that the specimen was collected by that person.

Never mind the nuiances of whether that person was part of a collecting team who dug a group of specimens and the ensuing argument about who collected which specimen. Or, the collector who walks into a pocket opened by someone else and pulls a specimen out to be able to say it was "self-collected".

If we want to tighten up our nomenclature, why don't we start with using the term "malachite crystals" rather than "primary malachite" for non-pseudomorph malachite crystals. I believe this originated when malachite crystals came from the Onganja mine in Namibia. Since malachite is a secondary mineral not a primary mineral, why are people so comfortable using primary malachite rather than what the specimen actually represents, malachite crystals? Again, another entrenched name that is geologically not correct but carries a semblance of respectability because of its use.

[Konstantinos Ch.]

Hello!

Les and Gail,this topic is not about changing a term in order to be more understandable.We all understand what self-collected means (or, to be more accurate, came to mean!) . This topic is actually about using a language correctly. Self-collected according to English Grammar means collected by oneself. Respectively, when we say that the specimen is self-collected it is the same as saying the specimen was collected by itself, which makes no sense! Probably the term "self-collected" came as a short form of "myself collected" . It is just meaningless in English language at its current form!

Similarly, Les is right. It is wrong according to mineralogical terminology to describe a specimen as "Primary Malachite"! Yes, we all understand very well that Primary Malachite is nothing more than normal Malachite. But, since we have formed official or unofficial communities of COLLECTORS and NOT mineralogists, it is easier for us referring to Malachite pseudomorphs as Malachite and to Malachite crystals as Primary Malachite because the latter seem to be rarer and we prefer to use a long term less often.

What I'm trying to say is that, while a scientist is trying to be accurate with her/his terms (independently of being a Philologist, a Mineralogist or any other type) , a collector doesn't care so much about the terms but about the object of his hobby! The SPECIMEN is important to the collector, and every term serves this purpose. A collector doesn't need to know if Malachite is a primary or secondary mineral,but which is rarer- "Malachite" or Primary Malachite"? Doesn't care if self-collected means collected by itself, but cares to know that her/his specimen was handled for the first time by an important person in the hobby, because this increases its value!

You see, there is a kind of fashion in all hobbies, especially in collecting hobbies.

Best regards!
-Kostas.

[Tracy]

While I am certain that I am overreacting, I nevertheless bristle at the suggestion that there is a clear division between scientists and mineral collectors. Kostas, your personal collecting style might not lend itself to studying the science to any degree (hmm, isn't this touching on another topic in the Forum?), but there are many others who find minerals fascinating for their scientific attributes. It is possible to be BOTH collector and scientist in pursuing this hobby. (and I for one don't really care very much how many hands a specimen passes through before reaching mine)

The need for accuracy is equally important regardless of what pleases you about minerals. To that end it seems to me that as long as we are meticulous in recording details, it doesn't matter how we record them. I side with Gail and catalog my specimens as "puchased from/at _________ on xx/yy/zzzz" or "found in/at _________ on xx//yy/zzzz" as appropriate.

Last: Webster's New World Dictionary defines "self" as "one's own person as distinct from others." So "self-collected" is NOT inaccurate or meaningless in English - it means "collected by one's own person." :-)

- Tracy

[Les Presmyk]

I agree with Tracy. It is our responsibility to maintain with as much accuracy all of the information we have and we know about our specimens. While some collectors will claim to have no scientific curiousity about their specimens, I believe that is more facade than reality. How can you not look at two quartz specimens, one smoky and one amethyst, and not at least wonder for a moment why the crystals are different sizes or how the color came to be?

Getting back to malachite and just for the sake of argument, I would suggest there are three "types" of malachite and the word malachite, by itself, does not denote a pseudomorph. There is malachite (massive or crystalline), malachite after azurite or malachite pseudo (yes, I appreciate malachite replaces copper and cuprite and even wood), and finally malachite crystals. The term "primary malachite" is widely and incorrectly used but it describes something that everyone seems to be familiar with and I guess that is why it is used. However, I do not accept that primary malachite is easier to say than malachite crystals.

[Les Presmyk]

Tracy,

I plan to be in Newark in about a month and was wondering how close you are and if you would like a visitor?

Les

[Tracy]

Hi Les -

Newark's not around the corner from here, but not unreachable either (about 50 minutes by car). Send me details of your trip offline balagan29(at)yahoo(dot)com, I'd love to meet you here, there, or someplace in the middle.

Tracy

[alfredo]

English is the supremely illogical language, so why should mineral collecting be the only field in English with an entirely logical vocabulary? Those looking for logic in language should learn Esperanto, not English.

[Konstantinos Ch.]

Hello again.

Tracy,I wasn't talking about a division.I was just saying that a collector is not necessarily a scientist and a scientist is not necessarily a collector.This doesn't mean the same person cannot be interested in both!

Given the facts that a field collector has mined limited specimen in his/her lifetime and that a world-class collector picks only the best of the best,it is important to know this information.For example, a piece once picked by Ralph Clark is somehow guaranteed to be of best quality! One would more easily dare to pay 10,000 dollars for a piece, if it once belonged to a famous collector, because the chance of a mistaken purchase is lower.

I was talking about accuracy in terminology, not description of the specimen. The best the description the best is the valuing of the specimen.

Les,I didn't say that collectors are not interested in science. If not anything else, they need scientific information to be able to value the different specimens,I was only saying that they are interested in science because this serves their collectible needs.

Otherwise,why not study on some other science(s) as well? Why most of us haven't studied and worked as mineralogists?

On Malachite, they usually refer to 1rst and 2nd type just as Malachite and to Malachite crystals as Primary Malachite. "Primary Malachite" is not easier than "Malachite", but "Malachite" is easier than "Malachite pseudo after Azurite" and "Massive Malachite", which are the most common types and so, more often referred to. (And that's what I was trying to say...). I totally agree with you about the mistaken term!

Best regards!
-Kostas,

[jorge santos garcia]

Hello all

My english doesn't allow mw to understand some 'nuances' of the language, but I wonder....

.... if 'self-collected' means that a specimen was collected by itself (I believe without any help, our help, wich is rather strange), then...

... 'self-obsessed' means that the obssession is obsessed by itself??

... 'self-service' means the service (food) serves to itself ?? or by itself??

... 'selfish' means that a fish is .... ??

It's funny to play with words....

I like 'personally collected'. It's almost a direct translation from my luanguage, but 'self-collected' is easily understood as well. I've never learned the word im my english lessons, I just heard of it in the mineral world, but I understood is meaning without someone's explanation.

So.... 'self-collected' or 'personally colected', they are both very understandable.

Jorge

[Konstantinos Ch.]

Hi there!

Although my English is bad, I'll try to answer:

-self-service means one have to serve oneself.If the term was self-served,then one would understand that the food is served by itself.

-selfish-no fishes here (nice one btw... eheheeh) .Self + ish = selfish were -ish is a terminoelement that gives the noun the property the first component indicates.

-self-obsessed -refers to a person, so the person is obsessed by herself or himself. Similarly, self-collected (which refers to specimen), means that the specimen is collected by itself, all on its own, so the specimen has formed an one-piece collection which consists of itself.

Cheers!
-Kostas.

[John S. White]

I think I would like to self-close this thread, it is getting silly

[Gail]

Hear Hear!
Yawn....ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Konstantinos Ch.]

I'll agree with John....