The nomenclatural difficulties associated with classifications that have mi
splaced rank-denoting terms are reviewed. Several examples (both real and h
ypothetical) of classifications with misplaced rank-denoting terms are disc
ussed. A distinction is made between misplaced rank-denoting terms and coll
oquially (mis)used rank-denoting terms, and a discussion is provided on whe
ther or not it may be useful to have such a distinction presented in the Co
de. In providing guidelines on how one should deal with the nomenclature of
classifications that include misplaced rank-denoting terms, a "minimal inv
alidity" concept is introduced. A review is made on how Art. 33.7 might be
reworded so as to provide clearer guidance when dealing with classification
s that involve misplaced rank-denoting terms.