Edit:
Also, this is what happens in practice anyway! Doctors don't remember a lot and constantly have to look things up ( as is understandable and expected ). You must be a master of the "grammar of medicine" though. Otherwise you won't be able to construct well formed sentences... aka medical thoughts.
You need some memorization to give some concrete instances of the grammar, of course; however, going overboard on the "vocabulary" is not constructive and shifts the focus onto knowing a lot of words, not knowing how to construct great sentences. It's like a writer that knows a lot of uncommon words, but ends up having nothing meaningful to say... because the power of writing is not in the vocabulary alone, but in the craft of composition.
They don't bootstrap this search every time. Enough of the basics have been instilled that they will know what they should look up.
For example if you named the bones in the fingers as left, thumb, two then it’s little effort to recall. Instead people need to recal the stuff like distal phalanges. Math is arguably worse with redundant notations for the same thing. So, I see the benifit of avoiding creating multiple systems.
PS: I would include tendons, joints, and muscles etc not just 206 bones in that example. Also, that was rather off the cuff as left/right could confuse things so maybe you want port vs starboard or something.
What's your point? It seems to be that medical terminology (or the expert body of knowledge that distinguishes someone with anatomical or medical knowledge from the layperson) is an artificial construct which imposes undue restrictions on the easy transfer of this knowledge - guild behaviour.
Every realm of knowledge has its own language which must be learned in order to be proficient. In briefly reading your other replies in this thread, it seems like you feel that computing and programming don't have these restrictions - that is absolutely not true, just ask anyone who has been trying to learn programming themselves but is stuck on the difference between a method and a function (only to find out they are the same thing).
It is not possible to be an expert without gathering the knowledge, the language, and the real understanding necessary to partake in the field. Anything else is simple arrogance, to assume that any specialised field that people spend decades learning, is actually just arcane crud and cruft that disguises the simplicity hidden within
Math however is trying to be as clear as possible and more elegant notation generally though not always wins over time. Mathematics don’t still use Roman Numerals even though they worked.
PS: Languages change over time, programmers dropped the term subroutine. This can look messy, but it’s benifical over time.
I understand your last comment about languages changing over time (technical languages) - medicine is no different. See for instance the Dukes grading of bowel cancer, now largely superceeded by TNM Grading which carries specific histological and pathological meanings (as dukes does) but is applicable to all cancers.
Ah, yes, the best way to learn all the intricacies of a human: osmosis.
Good luck attaining knowledge that takes 8+ years of focused study in medical training today through osmosis over 30 years of "on the job" training, being paid $0 because you are still "learning" and can't contribute to anyone's actual medical care during that time unlike a resident physician.
“Distal phalanges” are the far away phalanges, which are the bones that are in an array like a phalanx in the extremities.
The problem is that language changed after that, and the expectation for those words to make intuitive sense changed in the broader culture doctors were pulled from.
They’re then faced with having to rename everything, breaking with the established record and creating confusion or having to explicitly teach the names.
I’m also curious what you think is redundant in math notation.
Taking classes that use different notation for the same thing is annoying.
That said, I started with: ‘Math is arguably worse with redundant notations for the same thing.’
He asked “I’m also curious what you think is redundant in math notation.”
This is like telling someone "we need to figure out how to use technology to prevent people from spending years of rote memorization before they can speak <X_foreign_language>!"