Vreleksá Forum Index Vreleksá
The Alurhsa Word for Constructed: Creativity in both scripts and languages
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Some Naming Systems

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksá Forum Index -> Conworlds
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Which of these three proposed naming-systems do you like best?
I like Pattern One (first son named after father's father, seventh daughter named after mother's third-oldest sister) best; and I'll tell you why.
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
I like Pattern Two (first son named after father's father's father, seventh daughter named after mother's father's oldest sister) best; and I'll tell you why.
66%
 66%  [ 2 ]
I like Pattern Three (first son named after father's father's father's father, seventh daughter named after mother's father's father's mother) best; and I'll tell you why.
33%
 33%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 3

Author Message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:43 pm    Post subject: Some Naming Systems Reply with quote

From the Middle Ages to the Industrial Revolution, in most of the world at most times, if a couple married when each was the average age to marry, and if each of them lived to an average life-span for his/her sex, and if they lived together as husband and wife for the entire time from their marriage until one of them died; then, on the average, they probably had about six or seven children.

In such a culture, it might make sense to have a system for naming up to the first six or seven sons and up to the first six or seven daughters. (Even though most couples wouldn't have six living sons or six living daughters.)

Some cultures just named the first-born son, and simply numbered the daughters and all the other sons.
Some cultures prohibited naming a child after a living relative.
Some cultures required a child to be named after a dead relative.
And there were other patterns.

I am about to describe three patterns.
I want people to tell me which pattern they like best and why. (Failing that, tell me which one you like least and why.) If you want, you can also tell me how you feel about one of the other patterns.

Pattern One
Sons
  1. The first son is named after his father's father.
  2. The second son is named after his mother's father.
  3. The third son is named after his father's oldest brother (if he has or had one).
  4. The fourth son is named after his mother's oldest brother (if she has or had one).
  5. The fifth son is named after his father's second-oldest brother (if he has or had one).
  6. The sixth son is named after his mother's second-oldest brother (if she has or had one).
  7. The seventh son is named after his father's third-oldest brother (if he has or had one).
  8. And so on.
Daughters
  1. The first daughter is named after her mother's mother.
  2. The second daughter is named after her father's mother.
  3. The third daughter is named after her mother's oldest sister (if she has or had one).
  4. The fourth daughter is named after her father's oldest sister (if he has or had one).
  5. The fifth daughter is named after her mother's second-oldest sister (if she has or had one).
  6. The sixth daughter is named after her father's second-oldest sister (if he has or had one).
  7. The seventh daughter is named after her mother's third-oldest sister (if she has or had one).
  8. And so on.


Pattern Two
Sons
  1. The first son is named after his father's father's father.
  2. The second son is named after his mother's father's father.
  3. The third son is named after his father's mother's father.
  4. The fourth son is named after his mother's mother's father.
  5. The fifth son is named after his father's father's oldest brother (if he has or had one).
  6. The sixth son is named after his mother's father's oldest brother (if he has or had one).
  7. The seventh son is named after his father's mother's oldest brother (if she has or had one).
  8. And so on.
Daughters
  1. The first daughter is named after her mother's mother's mother.
  2. The second daughter is named after her father's mother's mother.
  3. The third daughter is named after her mother's father's mother.
  4. The fourth daughter is named after her father's father's mother.
  5. The fifth daughter is named after her mother's mother's oldest sister (if she has or had one).
  6. The sixth daughter is named after her father's mother's oldest sister (if she has or had one).
  7. The seventh daughter is named after her mother's father's oldest sister (if he has or had one).
  8. And so on.


Pattern Three
Sons
  1. The first son is named after his father's father's father's father.
  2. The second son is named after his mother's father's father's father.
  3. The third son is named after his father's mother's father's father.
  4. The fourth son is named after his mother's mother's father's father.
  5. The fifth son is named after his father's father's mother's father.
  6. The sixth son is named after his mother's father's mother's father.
  7. The seventh son is named after his father's mother's mother's father.
  8. And so on.
Daughters
  1. The first daughter is named after her mother's mother's mother's mother.
  2. The second daughter is named after her father's mother's mother's mother.
  3. The third daughter is named after her mother's father's mother's mother.
  4. The fourth daughter is named after her father's father's mother's mother.
  5. The fifth daughter is named after her mother's mother's father's mother.
  6. The sixth daughter is named after her father's mother's father's mother.
  7. The seventh daughter is named after her mother's father's father's mother.
  8. And so on.

_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission


Last edited by eldin raigmore on Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I liked pattern Two best because (1) every child has or had grandparents; (2) it's very likely that the child's grandparents have or had oldest brothers and/or oldest sisters; (3) there's an increased chance that one or more of the grandparents' oldest brother and/or oldest sisters is deceased before the child's "christening", or will be by the time the child is of age.

Pattern One seems to me to depend too much on chance; the child's parents are only about 50% likely to have third-oldest brothers or third-oldest sisters, even if the child's grandparental couples did have seven children each. And there's a fairly good chance (though less than 50%, if the grandparents had six or seven children) that one parent doesn't have a second-oldest brother or doesn't have a second-oldest sister.
Also, the child's grandparents may still be alive; so may the child's parents' siblings.

I think maybe I should have picked Pattern Three instead of Pattern Two. I didn't, because (1) I thought some ancestor's siblings should have somebody named after them and (2) remembering who the child's great-great-grandparents were may be too much of a strain on the parents' memories (those would be the parents' great-grandparents; odds are they died when the parents were young children, if not before that). This is especially true in a pre-Industrial, pre-Enlightenment society, when the parents' grandparents probably also have died well before the child is born, and are not too unlikely to have died while the parents were still quite young.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission


Last edited by eldin raigmore on Thu Oct 17, 2013 7:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So basically, pattern 1 is grandparents, then aunts/uncles; pattern 2 is great-grandparents, then great-aunts/-uncles; and pattern 3 is great-great-grandparents.

Hmm.
With 1, your odds of being named after someone who's alive are high, with 2 and 3 they're basically nil.
I guess which one is best depends on your preferences. I'd say I dislike 1 just because its more likely you'll be named after a living person (which I'd like to avoid). Other than that, I really don't have a preference.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
So basically, pattern 1 is grandparents, then aunts/uncles; pattern 2 is great-grandparents, then great-aunts/-uncles; and pattern 3 is great-great-grandparents.

That's right.
Pattern Three could go on to great-granduncles and great-grandaunts from the ninth son or daughter on, but how often is that going to happen?
Also, Pattern Two would have to have some emergency default way to handle there not being and not having been an appropriate granduncle/grandaunt, and Pattern One would have to have one for handling there not being nor having been enough uncles/aunts.

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Hmm.
With 1, your odds of being named after someone who's alive are high, with 2 and 3 they're basically nil.
In the RL modern industrialized West, even with Pattern Two most children could be named after a person still living at the time of the child's birth; my last great-grandparent died when I was 15 y/o and I still have a granduncle living.
But in a pre-industrialized, and/or pre-enlightenment, and/or pre-scientific, and/or pre-renaissance milieu, Pattern Two could, as you say, make the odds of being named after someone who's still alive be basically nil.
And Pattern Three, as you say, does so even in the RL modern industrialized West.

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
I guess which one is best depends on your preferences. I'd say I dislike 1 just because its more likely you'll be named after a living person (which I'd like to avoid). Other than that, I really don't have a preference.

Thanks.
I hope to see variety in why other people prefer what they prefer.
(and BTW everyone's welcome to post their own favorite(s), even if they're not one of the above three.)
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
Pattern Three could go on to great-granduncles and great-grandaunts from the ninth son or daughter on, but how often is that going to happen?

Mormons? Razz

Quote:
Also, Pattern Two would have to have some emergency default way to handle there not being and not having been an appropriate granduncle/grandaunt, and Pattern One would have to have one for handling there not being nor having been enough uncles/aunts.

I'd actually expect each pattern to default to the next one (i.e. 1 > 2, 2 > 3, 3 doesn't really need it).

Quote:
In the RL modern industrialized West, even with Pattern Two most children could be named after a person still living at the time of the child's birth; my last great-grandparent died when I was 15 y/o and I still have a granduncle living.
But in a pre-industrialized, and/or pre-enlightenment, and/or pre-scientific, and/or pre-renaissance milieu, Pattern Two could, as you say, make the odds of being named after someone who's still alive be basically nil.

Yeah, I was thinking in terms of a pre-industrial society (like you mentioned).
(One of my great-grandmothers died when I was 14 and she already had a 5-year-old great-great-granddaughter. My last great-grandmother is still alive.)

Quote:
(and BTW everyone's welcome to post their own favorite(s), even if they're not one of the above three.)

If I may - Emitaru uses a system where the category of acceptable names is basically the category of words that are possible within Emitare's phonology but don't actually have a meaning assigned (though most male names end in -ru, and female in -ra).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
Pattern Three could go on to great-granduncles and great-grandaunts from the ninth son or daughter on, but how often is that going to happen?

Mormons? Razz
In the farmlands of America during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, farm families did tend to include many children, but usually not more than six or seven of them would be full-siblings of each other.
Sterotypically a teen-aged guy would marry a teen-aged wife and she'd have a baby every year until she wore out and died, then the man (now in his late twenties) would marry another teen-aged wife and she'd also have a baby every year until she too wore out and died, and then the man (now in his mid-thirties) would marry another teen-aged bride but the man would die from "old age" after she'd had just one or two babies. In real life it might take a lot longer than that, because there'd typically be more time between one baby and the next; the first two wives might be 34 to 41 when they died, and the man might live to his middle or late fifties, or even his late sixties.
But another thing that might happen; A man and a woman marry and have some kids; the man dies, and his widow marries another husband and they have some kids; then she dies, and her widower marries another wife and they have some kids. The youngest kids would have no blood in common with the oldest; they'd still be siblings (because half- and step- and adopted siblings still count as "siblings"). But possibly the closest blood-relation might be "this is my half-brother's half-brother's half-brother" or something.
Naturally Mormons got around some of that by marrying the wives all at once and not waiting until someone died (they started the custom, though, because so many of the husbands were in fact dying and the wives and their children were still young enough to need husbands and fathers).

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Quote:
Also, Pattern Two would have to have some emergency default way to handle there not being and not having been an appropriate granduncle/grandaunt, and Pattern One would have to have one for handling there not being nor having been enough uncles/aunts.

I'd actually expect each pattern to default to the next one (i.e. 1 > 2, 2 > 3, 3 doesn't really need it).
I thought of that; it does seem natural, so yeah, why not? But there's also "naming the baby after who that relative would have been named after if there'd been any such relative". Since eventually that'll work back to an ancestor, and every baby had(has) all the ancestors, that will result in a name. But it might be a name that's already been used by an older sibling, unless people have been careful enough about not marrying their close relatives.

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Yeah, I was thinking in terms of a pre-industrial society (like you mentioned).
(One of my great-grandmothers died when I was 14 and she already had a 5-year-old great-great-granddaughter. My last great-grandmother is still alive.)
Cool!

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Quote:
(and BTW everyone's welcome to post their own favorite(s), even if they're not one of the above three.)

If I may - Emitaru uses a system where the category of acceptable names is basically the category of words that are possible within Emitare's phonology but don't actually have a meaning assigned (though most male names end in -ru, and female in -ra).
That gets around the problem of running out of names, and gets around the problems of requiring too much duplication; but having all that freedom may make it hard to choose a name, and there could still be random fads like "Heather" or "Jason" or "Jennifer" that could (randomly) result in a lot of duplication. Nevertheless, it's probably just as good as any.

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

The lines of fathers-and-firstborn-sons and of mothers-and-firstborn-daughters go through short cycles of names, in all three patterns.
In Pattern One such a line alternates between two names; in Pattern Two it cycles through a cycle of three names; and in Pattern Three it cycles through a cycle of four names.

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

In Pattern One, a man's sons' firstborn sons will all be named after him, so there could be quite a raft of cousins-german or first-cousins all with the same name. And, if he has three or more sons, then those other than his firstborn son will name their third-born sons after his firstborn son; so there could be another lot (likely smaller) of cousins with the same name. And a man's daughters' second sons will all be named after him; and his daughters' fourth sons will all be named after his oldest son (that is, after his father).

Indeed, in all of the patterns, a couples sons' firstborn sons will all share a name, as will the couples daughters' firstborn daughters. So will their daughters' secondborn sons and their sons' secondborn daughters. So will their sons' third sons and their daughters' third daughters. And their daughters' fourth sons and their sons' fourth daughters, and so on.

So if you have two boys or two girls whose fathers are brothers or whose mothers are sisters, there's about an even 50%-50% chance that each one is named the same as the other or as a sibling of the other. Even if one boy's father and the other boy's mother are brother-and-sister (or one girl's father and the other girl's mother are brother-and-sister) there's still a good chance; maybe it's only 25%, and/or maybe it depends on which pattern we're talking about.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission


Last edited by eldin raigmore on Fri Jul 02, 2010 9:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kyonides



Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Which of these three proposed naming-systems do you like best?

I don't like them because it makes it look quite systematic, unnatural, boring. Even so I know it's a very common thing to name a child after his or her grandfather / grandmother, but there are also were some people dislike the usual naming practices and looked for alien names...

I think I'd prefer to create a scheme where a child should be named after one of the most prominent (deceased) family members and make some "corrections" / adjustments just in case it's a female name and they only have a boy... Or it could be more like in anciente Rome, IIRC, where a son or daughter were "last-"named after their father but could get a different "first-"name even if it has no real connection with some relative or emperor or politician or gladiator, etc.
_________________
Seos nivo adgene Kizne tikelke

The Internet might be either your best friend or your worst enemy. It just depends on whether or not she has a bad hair day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kyonides wrote:
Quote:
Which of these three proposed naming-systems do you like best?
I don't like them
OK, but, among them, which do you either like best or dislike least? Or the other way around -- which do you like least or dislike most?

kyonides wrote:
because it makes it look quite systematic, unnatural, boring.
(1) It's certainly systematic. I wanted systematic. "No system" is just like we have here, at least in my natculture; so I wanted a system.
(2) It's as natural as any piece of culture.
(3) Even more boring would be to simply number the children; that's been done. For instance AIUI Dakotas always named their firstborn daughter "Wynona".
(4) There are other systems in use in real life; for instance, all children born on a certain day are named after the saint whose day it is. Maybe they're less boring.
(5) And maybe the kid has two names besides his/her surname; the one inherited from the grandparent or uncle/aunt, and another name, maybe a "middle name". Something like that happens in Korean and various other East Asian cultures.
(6) AIUI on the Greek island that uses Pattern One there is the option of variation from the third son/daughter on; the third son is named after one of his father's brothers, but not necessarily the oldest brother, and/or the third daughter is named after one of her mother's sisters, but not necessarily after the oldest sister.

kyonides wrote:
I think I'd prefer to create a scheme where a child should be named after one of the most prominent (deceased) family members and make some "corrections" / adjustments just in case it's a female name and they only have a boy...
Sounds like it might not be a bad idea. I'd like to hear more detail.

kyonides wrote:
Or it could be more like in ancient Rome, IIRC, where a son or daughter were "last-"named after their father but could get a different "first-"name even if it has no real connection with some relative or emperor or politician or gladiator, etc.
As I understand it, in Republican Rome, daughters weren't named at all -- they were called by a feminized version of their father's family name. A girl whose dad was a Cornelius was just "Cornelia" until she married, and so were all of her sisters. But if she married a Gracchus then she'd be Cornelia Gracchae or something ("Cornelia of the Gracchi" or whatever -- I don't know Latin).
Second and later sons were named pretty much at random. From the third on they were more and more frequently just numbered; there were a few Tertius, even more Quartuses, and lots and lots of Quintuses, Sextuses, many famous Septimuses, and some famous Octaviuses. (And some famous Decimuses. I don't know what the name for the ninth son was nor whether there were any famous eleventh sons.)
First sons were always named a traditional family name; probably their father's father's name or their father's father's father's name. Each family had a cycle of a few names, usually two or three, and rotated through them as the generations passed.

In later Imperial Rome, though, brothers and sisters tended to have similar names; for instance Constans, Constantius, and Constantine.

Modern day Jews have a rule that a baby can't be named after a living relative and must be named after a dead relative. But that "named after a dead relative" is interpreted loosely; it's just the first letter that has to be the same. A system in which a baby had to have a name whose first syllable was the same as some dead relative's and whos last syllable was also the same as some dead relative's -- maybe but not necessarily the same one -- seems interesting to me. Of course, such a system would allow a lot of variety, since one would have one's pick of dead relatives to choose from.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission


Last edited by eldin raigmore on Sun Jul 04, 2010 12:04 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kyonides



Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's say I like least Pattern One, just because it's the simplest one and doesn't force the parents to look up for a name in a name pool where you should even include your very early ancestors in it. Why? Maybe because some war let some of their relatives die in the battlefield and their mothers didn't really know anything about their families or "families-in-law"... (Maybe they were too young when they got married and didn't have a chance to learn all about their past, IDK.)

eldin raigmore wrote:
kyonides wrote:
I think I'd prefer to create a scheme where a child should be named after one of the most prominent (deceased) family members and make some "corrections" / adjustments just in case it's a female name and they only have a boy...

Sounds like it might not be a bad idea. I'd like to hear more detail.

Too bad that's the only thing I could think of...

Mmm... This is the second time Rome disappoints me hehehe.

It sounds weird but quite original indeed. I don't know if I'd include it in some way in my conworlds.
_________________
Seos nivo adgene Kizne tikelke

The Internet might be either your best friend or your worst enemy. It just depends on whether or not she has a bad hair day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hemicomputer



Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 610
Location: Calgary, Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I most like system two. System one counts too much on brothers existing and gives too high a chance of being named after someone living. System three requires a knowledge of ancestors that I'm not sure most (non-noble) families would have. System two offers a good balance between these.

IRL, it has been a tradition in my mother's family to name the first son after his father's father and the second son after his mother's father, though I believe naming is left open after that. I am not sure if the same was done for daughters.

eldin raigmore wrote:

Pattern Three could go on to great-granduncles and great-grandaunts from the ninth son or daughter on, but how often is that going to happen?

My grandmother was one of 11 children (all of them full siblings), which was about average for that part of rural Netherlands. So, it has happened. Whether or not it would happen in you con-culture would be up to you.
_________________
Bakram uso, mi abila, / del us bakrat, dahud bakrita!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 12:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hemicomputer wrote:
I most like system two. System one counts too much on brothers existing and gives too high a chance of being named after someone living. System three requires a knowledge of ancestors that I'm not sure most (non-noble) families would have. System two offers a good balance between these.
Reasonable.

Hemicomputer wrote:
IRL, it has been a tradition in my mother's family to name the first son after his father's father and the second son after his mother's father, though I believe naming is left open after that. I am not sure if the same was done for daughters.
Interesting.

Hemicomputer wrote:
My grandmother was one of 11 children (all of them full siblings), which was about average for that part of rural Netherlands. So, it has happened. Whether or not it would happen in you con-culture would be up to you.
My mother's father was one of 17 children of his own father; but I think his mother was his father's second or third wife. Anyway, he was raised by his oldest sister; he was just a year younger than one nephew and just a year older than the other one. (So he was an uncle when he was born.)

I think I've heard of someone in my family who was already a granduncle when he was born, but maybe I don't remember right.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Only three votes so far!
Anyone else want to vote?
And/or post?
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksá Forum Index -> Conworlds
All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Theme ACID © 2003 par HEDONISM Web Hosting Directory


Start Your Own Video Sharing Site

Free Web Hosting | Free Forum Hosting | FlashWebHost.com | Image Hosting | Photo Gallery | FreeMarriage.com

Powered by PhpBBweb.com, setup your forum now!
For Support, visit Forums.BizHat.com