Talk:Rafflesia patma

Notes on common name

A brief look at internet would confirm padma to be the vernacular name in Indonesian, patma is likely correct in Javanese (both spellings attested). The name does not look like Austronesian based on consonant cluster 'tm' or 'dm', but a loanword. The most likely etymology is पद्म (padma), Sanskrit for 'lotus'. Note padma raksasa (padma raseksa in Balinese) for R. arnoldii is likely similarly derived from Hindu scripture, translating as 'demon tiger lotus'. There used to be a great Indonesian website with common names in Sundanese, Madurese, Javanese, etc... tanaman something, can't find it any more... Leo Breman (talk) 00:34, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Leo Breman: not relevant to the origin of the name, but Plants of the World Online doesn't recognize this species, regarding it as a synonym of Rafflesia horsfieldii. The cladogram in doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2010.08.005 suggests that species in the four geographical clades are very closely related, particularly in the Sumatra-Java clade; in other genera they might perhaps be considered as falling within a single species. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:19, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Eh, I was working with an older botany book regarding taxonomy, the etymology is my own OR observation -couldn't help myself but share. But regarding taxonomy, I am not familiar enough with the material to say anything useful here, but the Flora of Java mentions that early collections from Java under the name R. horsfieldii were actually Rhizanthes zippelii. A shame though, if I read this Indonesian website correctly last night, a Javanese company has managed to propagate R. patma using grafting, with one flowering at the Bogor Botanic Gardens in 2017! Isn't that fantastic! Leo Breman (talk) 15:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, my Bahasa (Malaysia not Indonesia) is limited, but Google Translate agrees with you: they seem to have grafted a piece of parasitized vine onto one they'd grown.

I don't know what source Kew has been using for Rafflesia species; we have to report their view, but there are good sources using R. patma. (However, your OR will eventually have to be removed if no source can be found.) Peter coxhead (talk) 20:48, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

OR, yeah, sure, but the text in this article was already there. And talk page is fine, right? Pretty incredible though, the grafting stuff.

Regarding R. horsfieldii, as far as I can tell, British sources have promoted this synonymy since at least 1999, but why is completely obscure. I can find no publication about why this move was made. There are problems: there was no type, only a drawing made of the plant, and this drawing has been lost for many decades. Brown is probably describing a Rafflesia of some kind with this name, but it seems unlikely to be R. patma: Brown describes a flower of 7.5cm diam. in his first article (in his second article he changes the size to 15cm)... Note this would be among the smallest Rafflesia, if not the smallest, and that such species are only known from the Philippines. This situation has been pointed out in at least three publications over the last 30 years. I found a paper proposing to conserve the name R. patma, but if it can't be proved they are synonyms, there's no point. Without a type, Brown's name cannot be used; it should just be disregarded. It could also be an extinct species or simply misidentified, no way to tell. Maybe I should type up a separate article on R. horsfieldii sensu Brown, and treat it as a hypothetical taxon? Like this one: Butia stolonifera? Leo Breman (talk) 21:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I've had some success with asking people at Kew in the past, but they have been on furlough; I don't know what the situation is right now.

We don't have articles on names but taxa. There seems no suggestion in the sources that use the epithet horsfieldii that there are two species, just a dispute over the correct name. So I would make Rafflesia horsfieldii a redirect to Rafflesia patma and try to discuss the issue in this article, although sources are an issue.

Re the name, search for "pakma" in this document (slow to load for me). I'm not sure why an Indian origin word for "lotus" was applied to Rafflesia flowers. The resemblance between the sacred lotus and any Rafflesia flower seems remote to me. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Re padma paksasa at Rafflesia, a better translation is, I think, "giant rafflesia" ex "giant lotus"; padma isn't plain "flower". Peter coxhead (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

That seems a good source for the etymology in this article, I'll use it. Well, I was right about the etymology of raksasa, but not the meaning, which has shifted in Indonesian (but not in Malay!). A similar thing could be the case here. Sanskrit is an important source of words in the region due to historical Hindu empires. Interesting about Indonesian is that it has quite a lot of words which mean 'flower', puspa also appears to originate from Sanskrit. Names can get messed up in language over history... Take Buxus, a traditional Dutch name for this plant is palmboompje: 'little palm tree' -it was an evergreen and used in Catholic regions on Palm Sunday! But I could imagine how such a rare and massive flower might evoke some ambiance of sacredness. One can imagine that rural people in the kampong might also have syncretised some of the sacred concepts/terminology of the superstrate religion with whatever local folk beliefs already existed, nor had the opportunity to see much foreign art! Leo Breman (talk) 22:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflict: Well, this is something I've been trying to find out. In some Indonesian dictionaries padma just translates as plain "flower"... I was earlier under the impression that bunga is the common word for flower, but it turns out there are a host of words for 'flower', and I can't tell as yet if they are straight-up synonyms or have some subtle difference in connotations such as size or form, or might mean 'inflorescence'. What may explain it is registers: in Javanese one has different modes of speaking, like Korean, but not that complicated. Thus padma could just mean plain flower, but may be a word from a higher register ... a bit more formal. But I don't know! Leo Breman (talk) 22:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Peter coxhead:, at least for the Malay language, I think you are right. According to Hsuan Keng in Orders and Families of Malayan Seed Plants, in Malay the simple word pakma is the vernacular for the 'normal' R. hasseltii, whereas the word krubut, which he translates as 'great flower', is reserved for R. arnoldii. That doesn't mean the word wasn't originally derived from Sanskrit (it makes it more likely), but apparently the meaning shifted as it was adopted into different languages. Note also the change in spelling in Singapore/Malaysia vs. Java vs. modern Indonesian. Also note that the Malaysian Wikipedia page on Rafflesia is simply titled bunga patma, i.e. 'patma' flower. Note the Indonesian article on R. patma is titled padma. Also check out this great Indonesian blog: lot's of good info. I will change the translation now based on this. Leo Breman (talk) 09:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

(From a linguistic point of view, the "t"–"k"–"d" shifts in Bahasa dialects are easily explained, so common origin is strongly supported – my OR, of course.)

Actually, I now think I'm wrong about the plausibility of the "lotus" connection. Features of the shape of a flower which botanists might consider superficial matter in vernacular names in all languages (consider "rockrose" for Cistus and Helianthemum). Look at File:Rafflesia_kerrii_flower_closeup.jpg, for example; the central 'column' bears a distinct similarity to the centre of a sacred lotus flower. (More OR!) Peter coxhead (talk) 09:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Yup, I/we were on the right track all along, check out this Malay etymological dictionary. The Sanskrit word seems to have been adopted twice into Malay, first in a word which became padĕma or padam, still meaning 'lotus', second as patma or pakma, meaning Rafflesia. This does mean, from linguistic evidence, that the plant was known well enough by the local people to attract a common name, a name shared over many languages and areas, which means it was communicated about between areas. I wonder what they had to say about it...? I'm slightly rewriting the discovery part in light of this (and what Keng has to say).

I also think there is some similarity with the lotus in the way the flower is large, lies atop the surface, faces upwards and opens from a bud. And both flowers can be endothermic! Leo Breman (talk) 10:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)