In the spirit of Linnaeus, he suggested the use of trivial names for substances of
more complex composition such as Tartarum Seignetti for potassium sodium tartrate and Phosphorum microcosmicum for ammonium sodium hydrogen phosphate.
These salts had previously been known as Sal Seignetti and Sal microcosmicum,
respectively. While de Morveau had rejected any name derived from personal
names, Bergman accepted such names for substances with more complex composition, referring to the use of personal names in botany and anatomy. By using
trivial names, he obtained a larger agreement with botany and zoology, as he could
express a chemical name with no more than two words. According to Bergman, the
genus had to be described by one single word in Linnaean style.
By seeking to bring his nomenclature closer to that of de Morveau, Bergman
probably hoped that the two systems eventually could converge into a single system
of chemical nomenclature which would have a much greater chance of being
accepted than a system developed by a single chemist. At one point, Bergman
disagreed with de Morveau. In the conclusion, he wished that the chemical
nomenclature should be written in Latin, and not be translated to living languages.
In that way, the language of chemistry would be international and universally
understandable by every chemist. To conclude, Bergman wrote:
Thus, then, I have pointed out a method, as I apprehend, both easy and simple, by which all
the known salts, about fifty in number, may be each denominated in one or at most in two
words. According to the first division [i.e. acids, alkalis, metals and earths], we have the
genus only. Of the second, the double salts completely saturated are indicated by
the adjective of their base ending in atus. In the third, the imperfect salts are known by the
genitive of their base. The fourth contains the triple salts and those of several principles,
which are expressed by the trivial names; and as in them we neither find the adjective of the
base atus, nor the genitive, it is not possible that any ambiguity can arise. [41]
26.9 The Development of Nomenclature After the Death
of Bergman
As Bergman died in July 1784, he was unfortunately unable to continue his work in
the reformation of chemical nomenclature. Thus, the task of winning acceptance for
a systematic binomial chemical nomenclature was left to de Morveau, who by this
time had established himself as an authority of the subject. Lavoisier wrote in the
preface to his Elements of Chemistry: “In a letter which the learned Professor of
Upsal, M. Bergman, wrote, a short time before he died, to M. de Morveau, he bids
him spare no improper names; those who are learned, will always be learned, and
those who are ignorant will thus learn sooner” [42]. Unfortunately, Bergman’s
important contributions are not universally recognised today. For example, in the
official guidelines on nomenclature of inorganic compounds (“The Red Book”) by
IUPAC,
4 de Morveau receives the sole credit [43].
4
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry.
26.8 Bergman’s Revised Nomenclature
363
more complex composition such as Tartarum Seignetti for potassium sodium tartrate and Phosphorum microcosmicum for ammonium sodium hydrogen phosphate.
These salts had previously been known as Sal Seignetti and Sal microcosmicum,
respectively. While de Morveau had rejected any name derived from personal
names, Bergman accepted such names for substances with more complex composition, referring to the use of personal names in botany and anatomy. By using
trivial names, he obtained a larger agreement with botany and zoology, as he could
express a chemical name with no more than two words. According to Bergman, the
genus had to be described by one single word in Linnaean style.
By seeking to bring his nomenclature closer to that of de Morveau, Bergman
probably hoped that the two systems eventually could converge into a single system
of chemical nomenclature which would have a much greater chance of being
accepted than a system developed by a single chemist. At one point, Bergman
disagreed with de Morveau. In the conclusion, he wished that the chemical
nomenclature should be written in Latin, and not be translated to living languages.
In that way, the language of chemistry would be international and universally
understandable by every chemist. To conclude, Bergman wrote:
Thus, then, I have pointed out a method, as I apprehend, both easy and simple, by which all
the known salts, about fifty in number, may be each denominated in one or at most in two
words. According to the first division [i.e. acids, alkalis, metals and earths], we have the
genus only. Of the second, the double salts completely saturated are indicated by
the adjective of their base ending in atus. In the third, the imperfect salts are known by the
genitive of their base. The fourth contains the triple salts and those of several principles,
which are expressed by the trivial names; and as in them we neither find the adjective of the
base atus, nor the genitive, it is not possible that any ambiguity can arise. [41]
26.9 The Development of Nomenclature After the Death
of Bergman
As Bergman died in July 1784, he was unfortunately unable to continue his work in
the reformation of chemical nomenclature. Thus, the task of winning acceptance for
a systematic binomial chemical nomenclature was left to de Morveau, who by this
time had established himself as an authority of the subject. Lavoisier wrote in the
preface to his Elements of Chemistry: “In a letter which the learned Professor of
Upsal, M. Bergman, wrote, a short time before he died, to M. de Morveau, he bids
him spare no improper names; those who are learned, will always be learned, and
those who are ignorant will thus learn sooner” [42]. Unfortunately, Bergman’s
important contributions are not universally recognised today. For example, in the
official guidelines on nomenclature of inorganic compounds (“The Red Book”) by
IUPAC,
4 de Morveau receives the sole credit [43].
4
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry.
26.8 Bergman’s Revised Nomenclature
363