2000AAPG BulletinRequires access

Comments About the Relationships Between New Ideas and Geologic Terms in Stratigraphy and Sequence Stratigraphy with Suggested Modifications

Gerald M. Friedman, John E. Sanders

Open publisher page 12 citations

Abstract

Since the landmark volumes of the Exxon school (Vail et al., 1977; Posamentier and Vail, 1988), stratigraphy has been reshaped. Geologists now look at sedimentary successions differently and employ the term stratigraphy. The paradigm of sequence stratigraphy was based initially on observations made by the Exxon group from seismic data, but has since been applied to a wide variety of subsurface and field problems, including studies of surface outcrops, cores, and well-logs—even without marine deposits. Sequence stratigraphy encompasses quite different conceptual models (Miall, 1997) and provides a new set of terminology for what was already being done (Harper, 1999). Hence, stratigraphy is a discipline swamped in terminology in which students and even practicing geologists get bogged down. We must emphasize that the acceptance of terminology is not necessarily an exercise in logical thinking or rational debate, but commonly is part of a popularity contest. Terms evolve to meet a perceived descriptive need. Some catch on, others do not, depending in part on when and where the terms were published. History is replete with examples of how insightful work has gone unnoticed. Thus, the discipline of stratigraphy affords numerous examples of the interactions between the dilemmas posed by new ideas and the language used to express them. Because of the contrasting concepts involved in stratigraphy, the language of this subdiscipline is necessarily complex. To begin with, the strata themselves were deposited in particular environments (places) as a result of certain processes, during which they acquired particular characteristics. They also possessed certain attributes, displayed various relationships among themselves, and resulted from the elapsing of a certain amount of time. Ample opportunities exist for imprecise usage, as, for example, the widespread confusion between laminae (things, particular kinds of strata) and the attribute of lamination (attribute words, typified by -ion endings, …

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Since the landmark volumes of the Exxon school (Vail et al., 1977; Posamentier and Vail, 1988), stratigraphy has been reshaped. Geologists now look at sedimentary successions differently and employ the term stratigraphy. The paradigm of sequence stratigraphy was based initially on observations made by the Exxon group from seismic data, but has since been applied to a wide variety of subsurface and field problems, including studies of surface outcrops, cores, and well-logs—even without marine deposits. Sequence stratigraphy encompasses quite different conceptual models (Miall, 1997) and provides a new set of terminology for what was already being done (Harper, 1999). Hence, stratigraphy is a discipline swamped in terminology in which students and even practicing geologists get bogged down. We must emphasize that the acceptance of terminology is not necessarily an exercise in logical thinking or rational debate, but commonly is part of a popularity contest. Terms evolve to meet a perceived descriptive need. Some catch on, others do not, depending in part on when and where the terms were published. History is replete with examples of how insightful work has gone unnoticed. Thus, the discipline of stratigraphy affords numerous examples of the interactions between the dilemmas posed by new ideas and the language used to express them. Because of the contrasting concepts involved in stratigraphy, the language of this subdiscipline is necessarily complex. To begin with, the strata themselves were deposited in particular environments (places) as a result of certain processes, during which they acquired particular characteristics. They also possessed certain attributes, displayed various relationships among themselves, and resulted from the elapsing of a certain amount of time. Ample opportunities exist for imprecise usage, as, for example, the widespread confusion between laminae (things, particular kinds of strata) and the attribute of lamination (attribute words, typified by -ion endings, …

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Since the landmark volumes of the Exxon school (Vail et al., 1977; Posamentier and Vail, 1988), stratigraphy has been reshaped. Geologists now look at sedimentary successions differently and employ the term stratigraphy. The paradigm of sequence stratigraphy was based initially on observations made by the Exxon group from seismic data, but has since been applied to a wide variety of subsurface and field problems, including studies of surface outcrops, cores, and well-logs—even without marine deposits. Sequence stratigraphy encompasses quite different conceptual models (Miall, 1997) and provides a new set of terminology for what was already being done (Harper, 1999). Hence, stratigraphy is a discipline swamped in terminology in which students and even practicing geologists get bogged down. We must emphasize that the acceptance of terminology is not necessarily an exercise in logical thinking or rational debate, but commonly is part of a popularity contest. Terms evolve to meet a perceived descriptive need. Some catch on, others do not, depending in part on when and where the terms were published. History is replete with examples of how insightful work has gone unnoticed. Thus, the discipline of stratigraphy affords numerous examples of the interactions between the dilemmas posed by new ideas and the language used to express them. Because of the contrasting concepts involved in stratigraphy, the language of this subdiscipline is necessarily complex. To begin with, the strata themselves were deposited in particular environments (places) as a result of certain processes, during which they acquired particular characteristics. They also possessed certain attributes, displayed various relationships among themselves, and resulted from the elapsing of a certain amount of time. Ample opportunities exist for imprecise usage, as, for example, the widespread confusion between laminae (things, particular kinds of strata) and the attribute of lamination (attribute words, typified by -ion endings, …

Key concepts: Geology, Sequence stratigraphy, Stratigraphy, Sequence (biology), Paleontology, Facies, Structural basin, Tectonics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comments About the Relationships Between New Ideas and Geologic Terms in Stratigraphy and Sequence Stratigraphy with Suggested Modifications — Research Paper | ScholarLens