Defining the problem: terminology and progress in ecology

A genre of papers has arisen around the premise that ecological progress and communication with non‐specialists are impeded because (1) many ecological terms have multiple meanings and (2) many ecological terms have meanings similar to each other. There is a repeated call for ecological terminology to be standardized and for terms to be defined more concretely. These calls for the standardization of definitions are based on faulty premises about the way language conveys meaning. Most recommendations for definitional reform are unlikely to take hold due to properties of language and they are unlikely to stimulate increased ecological understanding. Precisely delimited definitions are necessary in very few instances, whereas extensive and prescriptive classification can hinder the development of a field by preventing some types of questions from being asked. Useful lexical reviews should focus on the development of ecological knowledge that is signaled by a wealth of terms and meanings, rather than critiquing the terms employed.