Ok, just call me quirky. Whenever someone talks about “other solar systems”, it grates on me.
My logic: even though we call our star “the sun”, sun is just a generic name for any star. The “real” individual name of our star is “Sol”. So we live in the solar system.
Planetary systems circling other stars cannot be a “solar system”, because there is only one “Sol”, and we’ve got it. Other stars with planets should be called something else, like planetary systems.
Ok, so am I hopelessly quirky, compulsive, and pedantic (or maybe just wrong), or do you think there might be hope for me someday.
Well, if you want to be pedantic, “planetary system” doesn’t necessarily require the presence of a star, just planets. If you say “solar system,” even pedants will have to admit that the common usage would imply a star and a bunch of planets.
Personally, I like the term ‘star system’ because it encompasses the concept of multiple stars as well as planetary objects.
The use of the word ‘Sol’ to designate our local star is from the Norse Eddas, I think.
That would be sometime about the 13th century CE. The word ‘Sunna’ or ‘Sun’ dates from Old High German of the 10th century CE. So, if you want to be old-school about it, yes, the name of our star is ‘Sun’ not ‘Sol’. But, then what would we call our star system? The Sunar system? The Sun system? Solar just works better. Mayhaps that is because I grew up with it.
The “solar system” name is borrowed directly from the same languages where the Sun is called sol, and in which the noun can also refer to other stars (that is, it is both a proper noun and a generic one). You don’t like it, complain to the part of English which enjoys going through other languages’ pockets, but being too picky could do a number on your vocabulary.
I hadn’t thought about that. Damn you! Now I’ve got something else that bugs me.
Seriously, that’s not one of my quirks. I guess you could make a case that “geo” refers only to earth, but in my mind, that’s a further stretch than the Sol / Solar use.
To everyone: also remember that this is MPSIMS, and my OP was written a little bit seriously, but mostly lightly and casually, with a small dose humor (at which I’m sure I failed).
[QUOTE=letter to Harper’s]
Harper’s Magazine is one of the most progressive periodicals being published, yet it lingers in the dark ages when it comes to referring to the planet on which we live. In “Emptying the World’s Aquarium” [Letter from the Sea of Cortez, August], Erik Vance writes that “there is no better place on earth to look at the future of global fishing” than the Gulf of California. This is a story about what’s in the water, not in the soil, so the word “earth” is obviously incorrect. Referring to Earth as “earth” is a vestige of the Judeo-Christian legacy. You can’t have dominion over our planet or pillage it quite so easily if linguistically you put it on the same level as all the sacred words we capitalize. Please change your style. This is an egregious philosophical error in an otherwise excellent story on the decline of our Earth.
[/QUOTE]
So we could simply use “Solar” (adjective derived from the proper noun Sol) for this particular planetary system, and “solar” (small-s generic adjective) for any planetary system in general.
Star Trek always referred to planets by the name of the star followed by the number of the planet, e.g.“Rigel 7” or “Rigel VII”
I always assumed this was a standard way to name planets that astronomers use. Is that true?
Now I’ve got something else that bugs me.