Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I got it: the term “ pulp” is an internal lingo of the carvers and traders of walrus tusks , i.e. people having no knowledge of, and no interest in correct terminology. Among themselves they could have used “Shadra” or ”thingamajig” to the same effect. But no professional anatomist or dentist would even dream about confusing pulp with dentin, wouldn’t you agree?
In other words, you relied on the information obtained from popular sources and did not verify it by consulting proper professional ones. It’s a pity: your book was supposed to reflect the official view of a respectable museum of natural history and as such adhere to the universally accepted scientific terminology.
If you ever republish it, even in Russian, my advice would be to correct the goof. And go through the entire book with a fine-tooth comb: where there is one error, there must be more.
With best wishes.
BTW, you do not have to post my earlier fees: since the original exchange my honoraria went up:-)