Language desk
< October 18	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 19

Elk or moose?

The article elk says:

This article is about the species called "elk" in North America. For the species called "elk" in Eurasia (Alces alces), see Moose.

In turn, the article moose says:

The moose (in North America) or elk (in Eurasia) (Alces alces)

These contradict each other. Both of them say their name is used in North America and the other name is used in Eurasia. Or, to put it another way, elk says the animal is called the elk in North America and the moose in Eurasia, while moose says it is called the moose in North America and the elk in Eurasia.

So which is it? Is it the elk in North America and the moose in Eurasia, or the other way around? It can't be both. JIP | Talk 22:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For the moose, it's the other way around. For the elk, it's neither; it's called the elk in North America and the wapiti in Eurasia; nowhere is it called the moose. Georgia guy (talk) 23:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also moose. --Trovatore (talk) 23:54, 19 October 2021 (UTC) [reply]

That must be the Scottish Wikipedia; that article is about a mouse. Georgia guy (talk) 23:57, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alces alces is called elk (the same as the Swedish älg) in Europe, and called moose in North America. Our article Elk is about Cervus canadensis, the wapiti, which owing to the zoological ignorance of some white Americans was misnamed. Some flaming idiots decided to use "common names" for Wikipedia articles about mammals thus inevitably confusing everybody. Neither of the hatnotes say Cervus canadensis is called moose in Europe. DuncanHill (talk) 00:09, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following entries can be found in Britannica.com:

elk: "elk Alternate titles: American elk, Cervus elaphus canadensis, wapiti (Cervus elaphus canadensis), also called wapiti, the largest and most advanced subspecies of red deer (Cervus elaphus), found in North America and in high mountains of Central Asia."
moose: "moose: Alternate titles: Alces alces, Alces americana, Eurasian elk moose, (Alces alces), largest member of the deer family Cervidae (order Artiodactyla). ... The name moose is common in North America; it is derived from the word moosh (“stripper and eater of bark”) in the Algonquian language of the Innu people of Quebec, Canada. In Europe moose are called elk."

There are both elk and moose in North America; they are not the same animal. Mathglot (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The situation can be summed up in a table:

Species	Common name in North America	Common name in Eurasia
Cervus canadensis	elk	wapiti
Alces alces	moose	elk

The texts in both the articles Elk and Moose are in agreement with this table, so they do not contradict each other. --Lambiam 02:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lies! Lies! All lies! We adore the majestik møøse in Sweden.[1] (1:40) Clarityfiend (talk) 04:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC) [reply]

“What’s in a name? That which we call a moose by any other name would smell as sweet” --T*U (talk) 05:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, where our native elk/moose have been extinct for a thousand years, we are probably more familiar with the North American beast than the one found in remote parts of Eastern Europe. In my experience, we would probably treat them as two different species and call an American moose "moose" and a European elk "elk"; context is the deciding factor. Not many British people would be familiar with the elk/wapiti animal (we don't have those either), and a mention in conversation would probably require further explanation as a type of red deer, which we do have (my first thought is always the Westland Wapiti rather than any sort of wildlife). Alansplodge (talk) 10:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Alansplodge: And with remote parts of Eastern Europe, you mean of course places like Norway, Sweden and Finland (and even Denmark, to where they sometimes swim across)? --T*U (talk) 11:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Our article lists; Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Czech Republic, Belarus Ukraine and Russia. I once saw one in Finland, which most people would call Eastern Europe. I admit that Sweden and Norway don't fit, but are certainly east of us. Alansplodge (talk) 11:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And from the North Pole, everything is south... Anyway, the elk-densest country is Sweden, where some 10,000 elk are killed in traffic every year and some 100,000 are shot each autumn, followed by Norway and Finland. The total number of elks in Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Czech Rep., Belarus and Ukraine is half the number of elks felled every year in Sweden. Furthermore, most of the elks in Russia live east of Ural, which is not Europe at all. They do, by the way, mostly belong to other subspecies than the Scaninavian elks and have been suggested to be placed in a separate species together with the American moose. Also, I would really like to see some evidence of your claim that most people call Finland Eastern Europe. In every case, "remote parts of Eastern Europe" is profoundly inaccurate. --T*U (talk) 12:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken T*U, a quick Google brought up this reference but most seem to go with "Northern Europe". Alansplodge (talk) 17:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elks in Scandinavia? Here adding 's' doesn't make a plural, but changes the meaning to a bunch of drunks. fiveby(zero) 13:04, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford, Collins and Cambridge all give the plural of 'elk' as 'elk' or 'elks', while Webster says 'usually elk'. So I guess a European elk together with another European elk could very well be two elks, even if they are not drunk. --T*U (talk) 13:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take Webster. Unlike your UK dictionaries and such as The Guardian and BBC that are confused about drunken elks. fiveby(zero) 14:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c)I remember reading about the wapiti in an "Animals of the Empire" book at primary school in the '70s. The book was, I think, from the '50s. It was in the cupboard of books that had been left behind by changes in both educational theory and the structure of education in that part of north Cornwall. I and a friend were allowed free run of it to stop us dying of boredom from the interminably dull antics of Peter and Jane and the bloody awful (but at the time almost de rigueur) Key Words Reading Scheme. DuncanHill (talk) 11:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You were lucky, we only had the fatuous Janet and John. Alansplodge (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not to confuse things, but there is a third large deer native to polar regions of both continents that also goes by two names. The animal known as a reindeer in Europe is known as a caribou in North America. --Jayron 32 12:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are several different subspecies of reindeer, some in America and others in Northern Europe (including Svalbard). The name 'caribou' or 'karibu' is commonly used also in Europe as a name for reindeer of the American subspecies. --T*U (talk) 13:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are also several different subspecies of elk, some in America and others in Northern Europe and Central Asia. The ones in N. America are all known as "Elk" and the ones in Northern Europe are all known as "Wapiti". The Central Asian ones, FWIW, seem to be called red deer, which also refers to a closely related species in the same genus. --Jayron 32 16:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And now you have fully and truly confused me. There are no subspecies in Europe called 'wapiti'. 'Wapiti' is the name in British English (and most other European langages) for Cervus canadensis (called 'elk' in American English), which has subspecies in North America and in Eastern and Central Asia, but not in Europe. Until recently it was considered to be the same species as Cervus elaphus, the European and Western Asian "red deer", but now they are seen as different species. The 'Central Asian red deer' is treated by some authors as a subspecies of the European red deer, by others as third (and very local) species, Cervus hanglu. The taxonomy is under discussion. --T*U (talk) 16:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should have learned by now that I am an idiot, and have already ignored everything I say. Pay me no mind. I meant Eurasia, several subspecies of Wapiti are known by that name, such as the Manchurian Wapiti, but of course that isn't Europe. I apologize for my stupidity, which is only exceeded by my hubris. Carry on. --Jayron 32 17:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]