Etymology and entomology: The semiotics and ethics of multispecies gene nomenclatures

Abstract This article examines controversies surrounding gene names that are perceived as humorous in the context of fruit flies but are considered rude in the clinical context of human medicine. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in insect laboratories, interviews with entomologists and geneticists, and an analysis of scientific and clinical commentaries, I show how gene names coined as jocular mnemonics by drosophilists become the source of moralizing metapragmatic discourse when conserved genes circulate in the patient‐facing context of genetic testing. I identify three semiotic functions of these multispecies gene names: a referential function that stabilizes genetic homology across clades; a descriptive function that encodes the phenotypic consequences of prototypical mutations; and a performative function through which naming enacts in‐group membership. This third function renders gene names sensitive to audience and context, causing them to become taboos when they enter the trading zone of translational medicine. I show how clinicians, professional organizations, and journal editors respond by creating “avoidance nomenclatures” and imposing a sort of diglossic distribution of naming practices to be used at both bench‐ and bedside. I argue that extrascientific norms of politeness can motivate linguistic standardization of scientific dialects just as compellingly as do epistemic demands for clarity and universality.