from Stephen Russell, an author of The Anatomy of Medical Terminology textbooks - curiosities regarding the use and misuse of medical language. Picture of Lucy.
At a conference last week, a speaker mentioned the “substantia nigra pars compacta”, which is grammatical nonsense. It should be “pars compacta substantiae nigrae” – “the compact part of the substantia nigra (black substance).” There can’t be two subjects without an implied “and”
and this is why Latin has a distinction between adjectives and possessive nouns. One of these terms needs to go because, contrary to what the TA says, they are not synonymous. (5/end)
"pars cervicalis ductus thoracici" (A) &
"pars colli ductus thoracici" (B) are presented as synonyms in the TA (the Latin anatomical naming system). This, my friends, is a problem. (1)
although it's theoretically possible that the"neck-related part of the thoracic duct" (A) and the "neck of the thoracic duct" (B) could refer to the same thing, they are grammatically confusing, (4)
“Achilles jerk”: according to the Trojans, the only phrase in the medical dictionary that should be a sentence, but is missing a verb [“is”] and an indefinite article [“a”]
the tendo calcaneus is known both as the “Achilles tendon” and the “tendon of Hector”. I guess which term you use depends on whether you support the Greeks or the Trojans?
idea for a movie script: set in the 60s, some students consider dropping out of med school when their band – the arterioles – becomes popular. That's it. That's the tweet/idea. It's all I got so far...
ramus septi nasi arteriae labialis superioris: this is actually a real term in the medical dictionary, but it’s nonsense. Another “nose of the artery”. Ugh. Some people wanted to combine 2 terms but paid no heed to how Latin works, so we end up with complete & utter gibberish 🤷♂️