The importance of Sanskrit names of plants was fully understood by Sir William Jones, the President Founder of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. More than a century ago he suggested that
孟加拉亞洲學會主席創始人威廉瓊斯爵士充分理解梵文植物名稱的重要性。一個多世紀前，他提出：
“the first step in compiling a treatise on the plants of India should be to write their true names in Roman letters, according to the most accurate orthography, and in Sanskrit preferably to any vulgar dialect; because a learned language is fixed in books, while popular idioms are in constant fluctuation, and will not perhaps be understood a century hence by the inhabitants of these Indian territories, 'whom future botanists may consult on the common appellations of trees and flowers.” (Sir Wm. Jones’ Works, Yol. II, London, 1799, p. 2.)
撰寫有關印度植物的論文的第一步應該是根據最準確的正字法，用羅馬字母寫出它們的真實名稱，最好用梵文寫出任何通俗的方言；因為學過的語言是固定在書本中的，而流行的習語卻在不斷變化，一個世紀後這些印度領土上的居民可能無法理解它們，未來的植物學家可以向他們諮詢樹木和花卉的常見名稱」。
（Wm. Jones 爵士的著作，Yol. II，倫敦，1799 年，第 2 頁。）
On another occasion Sir Wm. Jones said:—
“I am very solicitous to give Indian plants their true Indian appellation; because I am fully persuaded, that Linnæus himself would have adopted them, had he known the learned and ancient language of this country. * Far am I from doubting the great importance of perfect botanical descriptions; for languages expire as nations decay, and the true sense of many appellatives in every dead language must be lost in the course of ages; but as long as those appellatives remain understood, a travelling physician who should wish to procure an Arabian or Indian plant, and without asking for it by its learned or vulgar name, should hunt for it in the woods by its botanical character, would resemble a geographer, who, desiring to inquire by name for a street or a town, but waits with his tables and instruments for a proper occasion to determine its longitude and latitude.” (“Botanical Observations on select Indian Plants.” Sir Wm. Jones’ Works, Vol. II P. 47, London, 1799.)
還有一次，Wm 爵士。瓊斯說：——
「我非常熱衷於賦予印度植物真正的印度名稱；因為我完全相信，如果林奈(卡爾•林奈)懂得這個國家博學而古老的語言，他自己也會採用它們。* 我絲毫不懷疑完美植物學描述的重要性；因為隨著國家的衰落，語言也隨之消失，而每一種已消亡的語言中的許多稱謂的真正意義必定會隨著歲月的流逝而消失。但是，只要這些名稱仍然被理解，一位旅行醫生如果希望獲得一種阿拉伯或印度植物，而不是通過其學術或通俗的名稱來詢問它，應該根據其植物特性在樹林中尋找它，就像一個地理學家，想要查詢一條街道或一座城鎮的名稱，卻拿著桌子和儀器等待合適的時機來確定其經度和緯度。” （“對選定的印度植物的植物學觀察”。Wm. Jones 先生的著作，卷 II P. 47，倫敦，1799 年。）
In Sanskrit every plant bears several synonyms which may facilitate in tracing the history and identification of the plant.
在梵語中，每種植物都有幾個同義詞，這可能有助於追溯植物的歷史和識別。
“Every single word in Sanskrit,” writes Professor Sir Monier Williams, “is referred to dhatu or root which is also a name for any constituent elementary substance, whether of rocks or living organisms. In short, when we follow out their grammatical system in all the details of its curious subtleties and technicalities, we seem to be engaged, like a geologist, in splitting solid substances, or like a chemist, in some elaborate process of analysis.” (Preface to Sanskrit Dictionary p. vi.)
莫尼爾威廉斯教授寫道：「梵文中的每一個單字都指的是dhatu或根，它也是任何構成基本物質的名稱，無論是岩石還是生物體。簡而言之，當我們遵循他們的語法系統的所有細節以及其令人好奇的微妙之處和技術細節時，我們似乎像地質學家一樣致力於分解固體物質，或者像化學家一樣從事某種複雜的分析過程。（《梵語字典序言》第 vi 頁）
These Sanskrit synonyms to be of any use, should be accompanied with a literal translation into English.
這些梵文同義詞要有任何用途，都應附有英文的直譯。
Mr. O. B. Clarke does not think that the vernacular names of plants help much in identifying them. For he says:
“I have observed that the eagerness to get native or vulgar names for plants is directly proportioned to the ignorance of the enquirer, those who know nothing about the plants and who are unable to discriminate them under any names being always loud in their call for native or local names.”
OB 克拉克認為植物的俗名對於識別它們沒有多大幫助。因為他說：
「我觀察到，對植物的本土或俗名的渴望與詢問者的無知成正比，那些對植物一無所知並且無法用任何名稱來區分它們的人總是大聲呼喚本土植物或當地的名字。」
Again, “as to the grand Sanskrit names, they are of still less value than the vulgar ones, being founded on less actual observation, with the object of enriching the language.” (Preface by Mr. Clarke to his Edition of Roxburgh’s Flora Indica, p. ii, Calcutta, 1874.)
「再說一次，至於梵文的宏大名稱，它們的價值仍然低於通俗的名稱，因為它們建立在較少的實際觀察之上，目的是豐富語言。」 （克拉克先生為其 Roxburgh 版《Flora Indica》所寫的序言，第 ii 頁，加爾各答，1874 年。）
I think these remarks of Mr. Clarke are not quite justifiable, and they are not shared in by other eminent botanists. For instance, Sir David Brandis, who has been called the “Father of Indian Forestry,” says regarding the vernacular names of plants,:—
“The critical examination of the vernacular names of the different Indian languages, and their derivation from the Sanskrit or other roots, will be found a most interesting and important study. The forester should not despise vernacular names, for in many instances they have a fixity which systematic names do not yet possess. We all know the ever green Khirni, and there can be no mistake about it; but botanists are not yet agreed whether the tree shall be called Mimusops indica, hexandra or Kauki. Kamela or Kamila is a well-known small tree, its systematic name among Indian botanists, however, which for more than half a century was Rottleria tinctoria has now and properly been changed into Mallotus philippinensis. Again, there can be no doubt as to the tree designated by kao, kan. Although some botanists call it olea europea, others olea cuspidata, and others olea ferrnginea. * These changes of systematic names are not arbitrary—as a rule, they are dictated by the progress of scientific research ; but they are apt to discourage the student, and on that account, also, vernacular names merit attention.” (Forest Flora of N. W. India, Preface: pp. xi and xii, London, 1874.)
我認為先生的這些言論 克拉克的觀點並不完全合理，其他傑出的植物學家也沒有認同他們的觀點。例如，被稱為“印度林業之父”的大衛•布蘭迪斯爵士在談到植物的俗名時說道：
「對不同印度語言的方言名稱及其源自梵文或其他詞根的嚴格審查將是一項最有趣和最重要的研究。護林人不應輕視民間名稱，因為在許多情況下，它們具有系統名稱尚不具備的固定性。我們都知道常綠的鐵線子(Khirni)，這是毫無疑問的；但植物學家尚未就該樹是否應命名為Mimusops indica、 hexandra或Kauki達成協議。卡梅拉（Kamela）或卡米拉（Kamila）是一種著名的小樹，在印度植物學家中是它的系統名稱，然而，半個多世紀以來，它一直被稱為Rottleriatinctoria，現在已經正確地改為Mallotusphilippinensis(粗糠柴)。同樣， 「kao 」 、「kan」指定的樹是毫無疑問的。儘管一些植物學家稱其為歐洲油橄欖（olea europeana），其他植物學家稱其為尖角油橄欖（olea cuspidata），還有一些植物學家稱其為olea fernginea。* 系統名稱的這些變化並不是任意的－通常是由科學研究的進展決定的；但它們很容易使學生洩氣，因此，白話名字也值得關注。」 （《印度西北部森林植物區系》，前言：第 xi 和第 ii 頁，倫敦，1874 年。）
When the Pharmacopoeia of India was issued, it was considered a great defect in the work that it had not given the vernacular names of the plants. In reviewing the work, a writer said : —
“ Many of the non-officinal remedies, the introduction of which to regular practice is avowedly one of the objects of the publication of this Pharmacopoeia, are dismissed without a single vernacular name for them being given. The recommendation, for example, of the committee, that Hymenodictyon excelsum should be looked to as likely to prove a valuable specific for malarious fevers, is pretty certain to be quite thrown away on a medical officer, who is not an expert in botany, for not a single native name for this tree is given either in the book itself or in the index ; and though it might happen to grow in forests round his station, the committee put him in possession of no means of recognising it. * This very grave defect in the Pharmacopoeia, cannot be removed by the publication of a separate catalogue of native names, as proposed. In a second edition we hope to see not only a full vernacular index, but to find, following the botanical name of each substance, as complete a list as possible of the vernacular Synonyms for it which are current in the three presidencies.” (Calcutta Review for 1869, p. 201.)
印度藥典頒佈時，沒有給出植物的俗名，被認為是這部作品的一大缺陷。一位作家在評論這部作品時說：
「許多非藥方，將其引入常規實踐無疑是本藥典出版的目的之一，但在沒有給出它們的單一白話名稱的情況下就被駁回了。例如，委員會的建議，即Hymenodictyon excelsum應該被視為可能被證明是治療瘧疾發燒的有價值的特異性藥物，但很肯定會被不是植物學專家的醫療官員拋棄，因為本書本身或索引中都沒有給出這棵樹的原生名稱；儘管它可能恰好生長在他所在站周圍的森林中，但委員會卻讓他無法識別它。* 藥典中的這個非常嚴重的缺陷，不能透過按照建議出版單獨的本土名稱目錄來消除。在第二版中，我們不僅希望看到完整的白話索引，而且希望根據每種物質的植物學名稱，找到盡可能完整的三屆總統任期內該物質的白話同義詞列表。」
（《1869 年加爾各答評論》，第 201 頁。）
All the above extracts will show that the importance of vernacular names of plants is fully recognised by those whose opinion is entitled to respect on this subject.