36 replies to this topic

[Leonardo]

Imaginarynumber1, on 01 April 2012 - 06:40 AM, said:

Hominid isn't being used anymore. Hominin has replaced it.

I am aware that hominin is used today, as hominid was used 20 years or so ago. It does not follow from that, however, that hominid is no longer used. It is used today (as the link Swede posted shows) as an abbreviation to refer to the Family Hominidae, which includes the Hominins and all the Great Apes and their ancestors.

Just as Swede originally posted, and my 11 year-old link also demonstrated.

[Imaginarynumber1]

Like I said, I'm going by what is being taught in anthropology classes right now.

[Swede]

Imaginarynumber1, on 01 April 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

Like I said, I'm going by what is being taught in anthropology classes right now.

Perhaps you could supply a reference?

.

[Imaginarynumber1]

Swede, on 01 April 2012 - 11:24 PM, said:

Perhaps you could supply a reference?

.

Sure.


Jurmain, Robert, et. al. Essentials of Physical Anthropology, 8th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2011.

This was the text I used last.
I also have my notes from lectures which has the classifications, but I believe those are in storage. I will look for them.

As I also stated, the classifications are always changing as new discoveries are found and various samples of primate DNA are analyzed. What I posted was what I was taught last spring. I do not believe it has changed since then, but I could be wrong.

Edit; After reviewing several more sites and books that I have, it would appear that while hominin has seemed to replaced hominid in its original use (humans and ancestors), hominid has now become an inclusive term for all great apes and humans. I was unaware of this.
Leo, Swede, I apologize for any confusion.

Edited by Imaginarynumber1, 02 April 2012 - 12:05 AM.

[Swede]

Imaginarynumber1, on 01 April 2012 - 11:56 PM, said:

Sure.


Jurmain, Robert, et. al. Essentials of Physical Anthropology, 8th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2011.

This was the text I used last.
I also have my notes from lectures which has the classifications, but I believe those are in storage. I will look for them.

As I also stated, the classifications are always changing as new discoveries are found and various samples of primate DNA are analyzed. What I posted was what I was taught last spring. I do not believe it has changed since then, but I could be wrong.

Edit; After reviewing several more sites and books that I have, it would appear that while hominin has seemed to replaced hominid in its original use (humans and ancestors), hominid has now become an inclusive term for all great apes and humans. I was unaware of this.
Leo, Swede, I apologize for any confusion.

Imaginary - No problem. Pleased that you have personally resolved such.

.

[Leonardo]

Imaginarynumber1, on 01 April 2012 - 11:56 PM, said:

Sure.


Jurmain, Robert, et. al. Essentials of Physical Anthropology, 8th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2011.

This was the text I used last.
I also have my notes from lectures which has the classifications, but I believe those are in storage. I will look for them.

As I also stated, the classifications are always changing as new discoveries are found and various samples of primate DNA are analyzed. What I posted was what I was taught last spring. I do not believe it has changed since then, but I could be wrong.

Edit; After reviewing several more sites and books that I have, it would appear that while hominin has seemed to replaced hominid in its original use (humans and ancestors), hominid has now become an inclusive term for all great apes and humans. I was unaware of this.
Leo, Swede, I apologize for any confusion.

No problem, and thanks. I apologise if I seemed over-insistent in pressing the case. Glad to have the misunderstanding resolved.  

[thewild]

Learn something new everyday!