Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

A forum for guides, lessons and sharing of useful information.
Post Reply
jimydog000
greek
greek
Posts: 502
Joined: 19 Mar 2016 04:14
Location: Australia

Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by jimydog000 »

..........
Last edited by jimydog000 on 01 Jun 2021 14:48, edited 4 times in total.
A signature.
User avatar
lsd
greek
greek
Posts: 504
Joined: 11 Mar 2011 21:11
Contact:

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by lsd »

thank you for this interesting sharing...
as an a priori language builder, where a name is a definition, I'm also interested in the signed name...
in addition to the initialized name, there are descriptive names :
  • characteristics of physical appearance
  • employment related
  • characteristics of body movements
  • personal tendencies or habits
  • similar sound or meaning of a person's name or surname
  • any unusual or unique characteristics of a person
that can make good candidates for a priori names...
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2500
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by Salmoneus »

I'm a bit uneasy about the ethics of just reprinting other people's work en masse, even when you link to the source. Particularly since some of that is not from wikipedia, and thus may not be legally open-source.



Perhaps it would in any case be more helpful, for you and for others, rather than copy-pasting (much of which is near-repetition), to actually analyse the information, summarise it, and phrase it in your own words? Often that helps you understand a topic.

It would be great to have a database of naming systems that could easily be called upon. However, a first step might instead to think more generally about what sort of naming systems there are.


First, I think we have to distinguish between what we might call(and sorry, I don't know the technical terms so this is just me off the top of my head here) nomen, onoma, and moniker. An individual has an 'onoma' (in my sense) that indicates who they are. It's their 'full name', as it were. The onoma consists of one or more 'nomen' - a discrete naming unit that acts as a grammatical word. The individual is, however, addressed by a 'moniker', a way that people refer to them.

So, there are three different naming systems in each culture: the system regulating the form and selection of nomina; the system regulating the form and selection of onomata; and the system regulating the form and selection of monikers.

NOMINA

First, we can recognise three ways of gaining a nomen: at birth, or in early childhood, when little or nothing is known about the individual, and they have no say in the process of being assigned a name; in later childhood or adulthood, when a name is awarded by others, but probably as the result of some negotiation (even if not explicit or overt); and in later childhood or adulthood when a name is chosen by the individual. Assigned names are usually given by the parents, or sometimes by some other individual close to the individual (grandparent, godparent, village hetman). Awarded names may be given by those people, but are often given by a wider society either through consensus acclamation (as nicknames are given and stick or don't stick) or by a religious or state authority figure (eg Roman victory agnomina or English titles of nobility). Chosen names are selected by the individual, though often with guidance or within an existing ruleset.

Any type of name can be chosen, awarded or assigned, but some types lend themselves more naturally to one method than to another.

So what types of nomen are there?

I think we can probably start by thinking of three large classes of nomen: systematic, symbolic, and arbitrary.

Systematic nomina
A systematic name is one that indexes the individual's 'location' within some sociological sphere. We can in turn divide these into: family, class, location and domain names. Finally, multi-indexing names depend on two or more of these categories at once. In all four cases, we can further distinguish relative and absolute indexes.

Family nomina: these are names that show who the person is related to, in a systematic way. With an absolute family name, the individual receives the same nomen as a systematically-specified individual within the family. In some cases, the specification is so narrow that few people in the family have the name - "the firstborn male grandchild takes the name of their paternal grandfather", for instance, is a common systematic naming rule that only specifies one name every generation. These rules can be added together - there may be a further rule about naming the secondborn grandchild - or the rules may leave many names unspecified. Some rules are much wider, like "the firstborn male child takes the name of the maternal grandfather", which gives the name to many people in each generation. Some are very wide, like "every child takes the same name as their father" (which is how traditional European "surnames" work).

Some nomina are polyelemental, allowing more complicated rules, like "first element from paternal grandfather, second element from maternal grandfather".

There can also, more rarely, be relative names. Here, the rules are along the lines of "if grandfather is named X, grandchild must be named Y". These names often appear in pairs or cycles - "if father is called West, firstborn son is called East", and so on. Iirc, sophisticated cyclic relative family names are a feature of some Australian moiety systems. Relative names are also common between siblings (if brother is called Sun, sister is called Moon), particularly twins.

Family names aren't limited to blood relatives, either. For instance, Roman freedmen took the nomina of their former masters to signify their entrance into a kind of extended family with them. Religious groups likewise often award nomina on the basis of a pseudofamilial relationship with a teacher or spiritual leader.


Class nomina: these indicate what social groups the individual belongs to. Class rules are often part of multi-indexing rules - often class (social status, ethnicity, gender, membership of secret societies, etc) specifies a limited pool of names, from which other rules select more specifically. However, there can also be classes in which everybody is given the same name. This is often at the bottom (slaves, freedmen, bastards) or top (royalty), but can also relate to things like guilds and societies and religious orders. For instance, in the third century, the name "Aurelius" became not only a family name (belonging to all members of the Aurelius family), but was also given to millions of inhabitants of Roman provinces who had previously not possessed citizenship but who were granted it by the edict of Caracalla, becoming therefore a marker of social class and ethnicity. A common example here are profession names - the idea of all smiths being called Smith, all thatchers being called Thatcher, and so forth.

Location nomina: these systematically indicate the physical or temporal place of birth (or other name-giving event) of the individual. The most famous example are day names: the name of the child is determined by (and sometimes the same as the name of) the day they were born. There are also hour names, month names and year names. The most complicated are some Mesoamerican systems, in which nomina are assigned by multiple, out-of-phase calender cycles. And there are geographical names - the name of a settlement, house, region or country. For instance, mediaeval English royalty took the name of the town or city where they were born: Richard of Bordeaux (born in Bordeaux) was overthrown by Henry Bolingbroke (born in Bolingbroke castle) (I believe the presence or absence of 'of' was originally optional and has been fixed in a fairly arbitrary way by later historians).

There can also be relative location names. I don't know of any for places, but they're common for times, in the form of birth order sequences - these can be as simple as naming your kids 'primus', 'secondus', 'tertius' and so on, or there can be specific names that don't literally mean 'first' and 'second' but that are always given to the first, second, third etc child (or separate lists for boys and girls in some cases).

Location names can also be based on notable events in the person's life, or another person's (eg a parent's) life. Battle titles are a common example of this.

Domain nomina tie the individual to an institution to which they have a particular right or responsibility. The most obvious example are European feudal titles, in which the individual had the name of land that they owned, or were entitled to inherit.

---------------

Symbolic nomina
Instead of indexing objective facts about the individual - where they're from, who they're related to, what their job is - a nomen can index the attitudes of the name-giver - how the name-giver sees the individual's significance.

We can probably distinguish: names of affiliation, names of commemoration, and names of intention.

Affiliation nomina are where the name-giver ties the individual to a person. They may be given the name of another individual (known to the name-giver often, or else a political figure) - in these cases the name is meant to inspire loyalty, and there's often an expectation of reciprocal affiliation (eg, if you name your kid after your rich neighbour, your neighbour might be expected to be their patron figure in return). Or it might be more subtle - you give your kid the name of your neighbour's father, for instance.

Commemorative nomina tie the individual to an event. Often this is the event of their birth. The famous example here is the old "first thing the mother sees" idea (I don't know if that's true or apocryphal, but it does fit an existing pattern, even if it's extreme). Other times it can be an important event in personal history of the name-giver, or the individual (as in battle titles) or sometimes social history. Generally, there are two types here: a nomen that links the individual to a bad event (where they symbolise redemption), or a nomen that links the individual to a good event (where they symbolise celebration). Rarer are explicitly condemnatory names, like the Puritan "Merry-begotten" (a.k.a. 'your mother was a dirty slut and don't you forget it'), although these names could be awarded by authorities as punishments.

Intention nomina tie the individual to an image of what the name-giver wants them to be in their life from then on. These names may be aspirational - specifying a desired (whether or not realistic) position or virtue the individual is hoped to have. They may be instructive, telling the individual what to do ("Praise God") or avoid ("Suffer Not Injustice"), or giving an important reminder ("If Christ Had Not Died For Thee Thou Had'st Been Damned!"). Or they may in a more subtle way symbolise the values and priorities the name-giver wishes the individual to have. Hence Puritans used bizarre names like "Humiliation" and "No Merit" (reminding the individual to be humble and pious), or 'Jedidiah' or "Daniel" (reminding the individual of the importance of reading the Bible, since names like that would have been unknown to all but the most pious Bible scholars). On the other hand, a name like "Willowbark" or "Rainbow" is telling the child to seek beauty and happiness through a connexion to the natural world. Unusual names can also try to commit the individual to a certain group membership - if you call your child "No Merit", you're trying to force them to only spend time around other Puritans, whereas if you call them "Moon Unit" you're basically saying "don't even dream of trying to get a proper job, I want you to be a celebrity". Intention names can also be reversed, claiming a humble or negative aspiration, either ironically or to avoid jinxing the individual.

--------

Arbitrary nomina

Some cultures have no systematic or symboling name-giving rules. Far more do have rules, but they either don't specify names for each individual (eg they specify the name of the firstborn, but not other children), or they underspecify names (eg they specify that you need to name your child after a grandparent, but they don't specify which). Symbolic rules in particular will almost always underspecify. So a lot of names are either wholly or partially arbitrary.

We can perhaps meaningfully distinguish between open name pools (almost anything is possible as a name) and closed name pools (you pick from a relatively short list of possible names). And we can also distinguish between word-like names (which have a meaning outside their use as a name) and non-word-like names (which don't). More word-like names are probably associated with open pools, and less word-like names with closed pools, but that's not absolute.

Instead of there being different classes of arbitrary nomina, it might be more helpful to talk about different processes. The two big classes of processes here are probably euphonic naming (pick a name you like the sound of) and semantic naming (pick a name you like the meaning of). Note that non-word-like names can still be picked semantically - the 'meaning' need not be the meaning of a word, but the broader symbolism of the name.

Arbitrary names often follow the same principles as systematic or symbolic names... just in an unstructured, voluntary way. For instance, you can systematically name your child after your father, as a cultural norm... or you can individually chose to name your child after your father, as a personal arbitrary decision not forced upon you by cultural expectations. Arbitrary use of these principles is likely to be freer, not just in which principles are chosen, but in how strictly they are followed (for instance, having a father named 'Jedidiah' and naming your son 'Jed', which would be prohibited in most true systematic naming systems*). Semantic principles tied to systematic and symbolic guidelines can be merged with euphonic principles.

*and I realise I should have been saying 'structural' instead of 'systematic', that would probably have been a lot clearer...



---------------------
-------------------------------
----------


ONOMATA


The nomen is a name, but it's often not the whole name. Your true full name often contains multiple nomina. It doesn't have to! In some cultures, the onoma is identical to a singular nomen. Other cultures have many, many nomina in each onoma. This is probably related to a) the 'size' of the society (how many people you'll meet) and b) how much freedom is allowed in nomen granting (what percentage of people you meet will have the same nomen as you). But because the nomen is a social symbol, not to mention an administrative tool, long onomata can also be associated with more complicated societies.

Different sorts of nomen have different benefits. So onomata often combine nomina of different sorts. For instance, the traditional English onoma combines an almost entirely arbitrary "Christian name" (from a closed pool) with an almost completely regulated structural family name, the "surname"

Increasing the number of nomina in the onoma has two clear virtues:
- where the nomen is non-arbitrary, having more nomina allows the onoma to become more meaningful (eg indexing multiple family affiliations, or imparting multiple symbolic life-lessons, or both)
- where the pool of nomina is small, having more nomina allows the onoma to more precisely specify an individual.

For instance, upper class Victorians often had three or four nomina: one arbitrary first name drawn from a small closed pool; one structural family last name; and one or two middle names that were arbitrary but leaned heavily on affiliative principles, typically being drawn from the first or last name of family members, patrons or those the name-giver wished to impress. For instance, Oscar Wilde, his father and his grandfather all bore the penultimate name 'Wills' - apparently because the Wills family were wealthier relatives of theirs who often helped them out. But Oscar's brother instead had the penultimate name 'Kingsbury', because that was the last name of his mother's father, who, again, was an important source of patronage for the family. In well-connected families, these names could stack up considerably - as in the case of Sir Hugh Caswall Tremenheere Dowding - Dowding was his father's father's father's last name, Tremenheere was his mother's father's last name, and Caswall was his father's mother's father's last name. Dowding's brothers had the middle names 'Ninian' and 'Townley' respectively - the latter is I think another distant family name, while the former looks like they named him after the school they (succesfully) wanted him to attend, perhaps to guilt the admissions board into giving him a place.

But as the importance of these extended clan and patonage links decreased, the need for that sort of semi-structural name dwindled. At the same time, when the pool of first names was very small (when not supplemented by last names that had filled up the available slots until they leaked out the front), it was useful to have several of them - so Dowding's father was Arthur John Caswall Dowding, and Wilde's father was William Robert Wills Wilde. There were so many 'Arthurs' and 'Williams' that the names needed supplementing! But as the pool of permitted names has grown, the need for more than one has in turn dwindled, until many people only have one first name, or else have two but never actually use the second.

[In europe, having more names generally meant higher status. This is because higher-class people needed to secure their position by establishing patronage links with as many families as possible. An upper class child in southern europe in the early modern period might have the names of at least four ancestors and up to six godparents...]

As thes examples illustrate, some onoma systems are relatively flexible in how many nomina there are and what they each do. Others are extremely strict, requiring a certain number of nomina and assigning each a specific purpose. So a traditional Spanish married woman's name was [firstname] [firstname] [father's surname] [mother's surname] [husband's father's surname], with some surname combinations being treated as single surnames to enable the upper class to inherit more patronage links. Or Russian names were traditionally [firstname][father's first name with patronymic suffix][father's surname].


Because the onoma may contain different types of nomina, it can often contain nomina given at different times. For instance, Catholic full onomata would often contain a 'confirmation name' - a nomina chosen by the individual on reaching adulthood (although this was not usually recorded administratively). This raises the possibility of people changing names, and indeed they often do. This can be by replacement of all the nomina, but more often it's by replacement of only some nomina, or addition of new nomina. An example of this is in English nobility, where domain names were added or subtracted with each change in station.

Other onoma systems demand fixity. The rise of modern administrative systems has made it hard for European names to change (though not impossible). As a result, this has given rise to the concept of the "title" - a naming element that is not considered part of the onoma proper because it is liable to change. Before modern systems, many titles were actually considered part of the name. For instance, consider the Duke of Gloucester: "Duke" was a title, not a name, but "Gloucester" was just the man's name. It was even the part most people knew him as, even though it was a name he acquired rather than being born with. [hence, "Bolingbroke" became "Derby", became "Hereford", became "Lancaster", became in theory "England" though nobody would have called him that.] Today, the "Gloucester" and so forth are considered part of the title. In other cultures even the 'duke' part would be considered a name, rather than a title.


Romans are a good example of name changing:
Gaius Octavius - Gaius is a firstname, arbitrarily chosen from an incredibly small pool. Octavius is a family name given to everyone in that family. Because there were so few firstnames, and not many surnames in aristocratic society, most aristocrats had a third name, a cognomen (an inherited nickname). So he became...
Gaius Octavius Thurinus - to make clear his high standing as a relative of Julius Caesar, it was important to have a cognomen, so he was given one as a child. But then he became:
Gaius Julius Caesar (Octavianus) - he adopted the family names of his new adoptive father. As they had the same firstname (small pool!), this meant they had the same name overall. People often called him 'Octavianus' to distinguish them. In later centuries this sort of name (the family you were adopted from) became part of the onoma, but for him it was only a nickname. But he then became
Gaius Julius Caesar Divi Filius - when his adoptive father died and was deified, Octavian changed his name to incorporate a reference to this. But then he became:
Imperator Caesar Divi Filius - 'Imperator' looks like a title. But it isn't. It was a title by which troops acclaimed a victorious general, but he just gave himself the name. and then:
Imperator Caesar Divi Filius Augustus - likewise, 'Augustus' would eventually become a title, but for him and his successors it was just a name he chose. All four elements of this name (Imperator, Caesar, Divi Filius, Augustus) would come to be used by following emperors, but they wouldn't all use all of them, or in the same order.


Likewise, Titus Aurelius Fulvus Boionius Arrius Antoninus became Titus Aelius Antoninus Caesar when he was adopted by Hadrian - 'Aelius' because Hadrian's previous chosen heir, who had died before inheriting, had been Aelius. And then when he became emperor he was renamed Imperator Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius. Meanwhile, Marcus Annius Catilius Severus became Marcus Annius Verus, who became Marcus Aelius Aurelius Verus Caesar (adopting not only Antoninus' own adopted name of Aelius, but his original name of Aurelius, which Antoninus himself had abandoned), and then Imperator Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus.


---------
--------------------


MONIKERS

Because even simple onomata are often a mouthful, they're often not what people are, in practice, called. Instead, people are known by a moniker.

Crucially, although everyone has one onoma, they often have multiple monikers - they are called different things by different people, or in different contexts.

Monikers can be divided, I should think, into three types: bynames, diminutives, and nicknames.

Bynames are nomina drawn from the onoma, but are not the whole of the onoma. Calling John Smith just 'John' is a byname. [He may be called 'John' by a friend, but 'Smith' by a superior - two different monikers for one person]. The derivation of bynames can be very regulated - the vast majority of English people have their first name as their normal moniker. Or it can be highly arbitrary - there's no way in hell, looking at the onomata of Roman nobles, that you'd be able to guess their normal bynames. Consider: Tiberius Claudius Nero (Tiberius) had a brother, Nero Claudius Drusus (Drusus) who had two sons, Tiberius Claudius Nero Germanicus (Germanicus) and Tiberius Claudius Nero Germanicus (Claudius), the latter of whom had an adopted son, Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus (Nero).

Diminutives are nomina that have been mutated in a fairly predictable way. Calling James Smith 'Jimmy' is using a diminutive. Sometimes diminutives are used sporadically and creatively; other times, they're fairly rigid. Traditionally, Russian first names have specific diminutives, and the use of the diminutive was demanded by certain contexts.

Nicknames are monikers that are not nomina. Or at least, not that person's nomina. For instance, another Roman Emperor, Gaius Julius Caesar, was instead universally known as Caligula, which isn't part of his onoma at all. Nicknames are often personal, but some may be inherited as though they were part of an onoma, while remaining apart from it.


------------



...I was going to say more, I think, but I'm bored now.
User avatar
lsd
greek
greek
Posts: 504
Joined: 11 Mar 2011 21:11
Contact:

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by lsd »

I do see languages as baptist languages because of their habits of use baptismal names for words (except a priori languages because of their self defined words), and so such name distinctions could have interestingly application for the whole words of languages...
User avatar
Sequor
sinic
sinic
Posts: 342
Joined: 30 Jun 2012 06:13

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by Sequor »

From the Chinese section:
Given names are chosen based on a range of factors, including possession of pleasing sound and tonal qualities, as well as bearing positive associations or a beautiful shape.
Also: the number of total strokes between the xìng (family name) and míng (given name). In Chinese, there is a standard method of counting 楷書 kǎishū (regular script) character strokes.


About the Spanish-speaking world (using the ad hoc symbol "%" to separate given names from family names):

Naming conventions vary a little bit throughout the Spanish-speaking world, but overall the same patterns are used.

In all countries there is the primer nombre or first name, the segundo nombre or middle name, and apellido or family name (typically the father's family name). The first and middle names are typically arbitrary, although there is a few patterns such as using "José" or "Ana" as a first name rather than as a middle name. There are a few middle names beginning with "de" + a definite article, such as "(Jesús/Simón) de la Cruz" and "(María/Reina) de los Ángeles". Also, "José María" is a masculine combination, but "María José" is a feminine combination. Typical names: Francisco Javier % Molina, Ana Ligia % Ramírez.

In Latin America, some (short) names from English such as Christian, Wilbur/Wilber, Jonathan, William, Freddy, Paty, Lucy, Betsy or Yvonne/Ivón have rather recently become popular, especially among the lower class. This leads to names such as Jonathan Mauricio Rivera or Jenny Leticia Delgado.

In many countries, many or most people also inherit their mother's (first) family name, which is placed after the father's. Then when these people have children, they typically pass on their first family name (the father's), unless there is a cultural or political interest in retaining the mother's (perhaps because it's associated with rich people and the family is in fact fairly rich, or because the mother's family name is rare or unique, or because the parent holds feminist ideas). This leads to people having names such as Javier Antonio % Tobar Medina, José María % Romero Escalante.

In some countries such as Spain and Mexico, many people don't have a middle name, which leads to people having only a first name but two apellidos (family names), one for their father and one for their mother. E.g. César % Cáceres Rojas, Lourdes % Ocampo Núñez.

In some countries in Latin America, married women often add their husband's (first) family name at the end with de, called the apellido de casada 'married woman family name', which may or may not be a formal legal addition of the civil marriage, potentially giving a woman five names in total: María Alejandra % López Espinoza de Beltrán. Women with an apellido de casada often then go by a title and that surname, when referred to directly in the 2nd person or talked about in the 3rd person: ¡Sra. de Beltrán! (señora de Beltrán, 2nd person), la Sra. de Beltrán (la señora de Beltrán, 3rd person).

There is a number of titles commonly used, especially in Latin America. Besides Dr./Dra. (doctor/doctora) and Padre (Father, for Catholic priests), used in a similar way to their counterparts in English, there is also: Hno./Hna. (hermano/hermana, for Protestant ministers, or people very involved in a carismatic Catholic or evangelical Protestant church), Ing. (ingeniero/ingeniera, for engineers, sometimes also software engineers), Arq. (arquitecto/arquitecta, for architects), Prof./Profa. (profesor/profesora, for teachers and higher-ed professors), Lic. (licenciado/licenciada, for people with at least a bachelor's degree in business/finance, also lawyers), Don/Doña (for the rich whether old or young, or also older people in the lower class especially if they're living in a town). Law enforcement and military officers have their own complicated title systems, as elsewhere.

Titles are commonplace when addressing strangers in white-collar work, official correspondence, and formal spoken contexts. It is common to talk to someone while addressing them by their title, even in relatively less formal spoken contexts ("ah, you see, engineer, this is the new budget that I managed to get...", "yeah! I think we should meet at my house for dinner, doctor, you'll like the chicken in cream sauce that I'll make...").
hīc sunt linguificēs. hēr bēoþ tungemakeras.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2500
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by Salmoneus »

Ser wrote: 10 Feb 2020 18:51
In all countries there is the primer nombre or first name, the segundo nombre or middle name
Apparently in Spain, legally they can only have one forename - it's just that their forename has two parts. I'm not sure what if any significance this philosophical distinction is supposed to bear. Although it may be related to the fact that Spaniards seem much more likely to go by their first two names (particularly if one if very common) than English people do (i.e. calling someone Jose Antonio seems much more common than calling someone Joseph Anthony in speech would be. Although to be fair, calling someone by two or more names in speech is also traditional in Ireland. I don't think it's common much there now, though, perhaps because people aren't all called John Mary or Mary John anymore...)
Women with an apellido de casada often then go by a title and that surname, when referred to directly in the 2nd person or talked about in the 3rd person: ¡Sra. de Beltrán! (señora de Beltrán, 2nd person), la Sra. de Beltrán (la señora de Beltrán, 3rd person).
I've always wondered but never bothered to find out: what happens when the husband's name already has a 'de' in it? I assume the 'de' is just dropped, or?

Also, do people still use y? And are composite family names still created?
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2831
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by sangi39 »

Ser wrote: 10 Feb 2020 18:51 In many countries, many or most people also inherit their mother's (first) family name, which is placed after the father's. Then when these people have children, they typically pass on their first family name (the father's), unless there is a cultural or political interest in retaining the mother's (perhaps because it's associated with rich people and the family is in fact fairly rich, or because the mother's family name is rare or unique, or because the parent holds feminist ideas). This leads to people having names such as Javier Antonio % Tobar Medina, José María % Romero Escalante.

In some countries such as Spain and Mexico, many people don't have a middle name, which leads to people having only a first name but two apellidos (family names), one for their father and one for their mother. E.g. César % Cáceres Rojas, Lourdes % Ocampo Núñez.

In some countries in Latin America, married women often add their husband's (first) family name at the end with de, called the apellido de casada 'married woman family name', which may or may not be a formal legal addition of the civil marriage, potentially giving a woman five names in total: María Alejandra % López Espinoza de Beltrán. Women with an apellido de casada often then go by a title and that surname, when referred to directly in the 2nd person or talked about in the 3rd person: ¡Sra. de Beltrán! (señora de Beltrán, 2nd person), la Sra. de Beltrán (la señora de Beltrán, 3rd person).
There are some really fun combinations that come from this, probably the most well known (at least the person is) being Sofía Margarita Vergara Vergara, daughter of Julio Enrique Vergara Robayo and his wife Margarita Vergara de Vergara.

I love the extent to which some people in the UK have taken middle names to, one of my favourites being Leone Sextus Denys Oswolf Fraudatifilius Tollemache-Tollemache de Orellana Plantagenet Tollemache-Tollemache (from what I can tell, the two "Tollemache"s are pronounced differently, and actually result from his father doubling his own surname in order to conform to Spanish naming customs, after marrying his second wife, Dora Cleopatra Maria Lorenza de Orellana, but looking at the children from this marriage, only Tollemache-Tollemache was the surname, with 3 of the 10 children not having de Orellana anywhere in their names).

And then you get utter gems like Ernst August Albert Paul Otto Rupprecht Oskar Berthold Friedrich-Ferdinand Christian-Ludwig Prinz von Hannover Herzog zu Braunschweig und Lüneburg Königlicher Prinz von Großbritannien und Irland, whose surname is, as far as I can tell (thanks to German titles being retained as surnames after 1919) is Prinz von Hannover Herzog zu Braunschweig und Lüneburg Königlicher Prinz von Großbritannien und Irland, while his given names (which he was christened with) are Ernst August Albert Paul Otto Rupprecht Oskar Berthold Friedrich-Ferdinand Christian-Ludwig [:D]
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2500
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by Salmoneus »

sangi39 wrote: 10 Feb 2020 19:53 There are some really fun combinations that come from this, probably the most well known (at least the person is) being Sofía Margarita Vergara Vergara, daughter of Julio Enrique Vergara Robayo and his wife Margarita Vergara de Vergara.
I have no idea who those people are, but there's a famous cyclist named Rigoberto Uran Uran.
And then you get utter gems like Ernst August Albert Paul Otto Rupprecht Oskar Berthold Friedrich-Ferdinand Christian-Ludwig Prinz von Hannover Herzog zu Braunschweig und Lüneburg Königlicher Prinz von Großbritannien und Irland, whose surname is, as far as I can tell (thanks to German titles being retained as surnames after 1919) is Prinz von Hannover Herzog zu Braunschweig und Lüneburg Königlicher Prinz von Großbritannien und Irland, while his given names (which he was christened with) are Ernst August Albert Paul Otto Rupprecht Oskar Berthold Friedrich-Ferdinand Christian-Ludwig [:D]
Regie Plunkett, younger brother of Lord Dunsany, eventually became Admiral the Honourable Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurley Plunkett-Ernle-Erle Drax. His mother Ernle ended up as Ernle Elizabeth Louisa Maria Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax née Burton; HER mother was Sarah Charlotte Elizabeth Sawbridge-Erle-Drax; and HER mother was Jane Frances Sawbridge-Erle-Drax; and HER mother was Frances Drax.

The first interesting thing here is that this is basically a matrilineal dynasty. Almost all the male surnames - Grosvenor, Sawbridge, Plunkett Burton and Plunkett - have fallen by the wayside

And indeed, the current scion, Tory MP Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax goes by plain Richard Drax for electoral purposes, going back to the maternal clan's surname again.

The second interesting thing is that Ernle Plunkett (nee Burton), on inheriting from her mother, decided to call herself Ernle Plunkett-Ernle-Erle Drax. That is, she used her own first name as an additional surname, because a triple-barrelled surname wasn't big enough! (and presumably 'Sawbridge' wasn't prestigious enough).

Weird!

[Lord Dunsany himself - Regie's big brother - was Edward John Moreton Drax Plunkett. I don't know where 'Moreton' comes from, but presumably another maternal clan. Looking it up, it turns out that the real clan here are the Erles, who emerged in the early 1500s. Their line passed by marriage to the Ernles, then to the Draxes, then to the Plunketts. Interestingly, they lead the conspiracy to overthrow James II and replace him with William III.]
User avatar
Sequor
sinic
sinic
Posts: 342
Joined: 30 Jun 2012 06:13

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by Sequor »

Salmoneus wrote: 10 Feb 2020 19:51I've always wondered but never bothered to find out: what happens when the husband's name already has a 'de' in it? I assume the 'de' is just dropped, or?
Yes, the de is just dropped. So if a man with de los Campos as his (first) surname marries a woman called Sonia Lucía % Zepeda, she then may become Sonia Lucía % Zepeda de los Campos, and be referred to as Dra. de los Campos (doctora de los Campos) or the like.
Also, do people still use y?
People don't use y except in extremely rare cases (presumably people who happen to love the idea of using such an archaic naming convention).
And are composite family names still created?
They are, especially among the rich. I think that hyphenated surnames being a thing in modern English is an important factor. "The English-speaking rich do it, so we should do it too", that kind of thing.
hīc sunt linguificēs. hēr bēoþ tungemakeras.
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 5989
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Personal Naming conventions (How people are named in the world)

Post by eldin raigmore »

Salmoneus wrote: 09 Feb 2020 21:35 ...I was going to say more, I think, but I'm bored now.
I didn’t get bored at all!
Thanks for that informative and detailed post!
Post Reply