Something that's always puzzled me is the (mainly american) tradition of giving children a second surname instead of a normal given name. It seems to have spread across the atlantic somewhat in the past decade or so too.What's interesting about this is that I think of it as a class-specific thing in the U.S. It was originally a way to display your illustrious maternal blood line, which would not otherwise be clear from your last name. If you are a female Whitney and your name is obliterated by marriage, naming one of your children Whitney is a way to signal to the world that you're from a prominent family.
Ah. It's a racism thing. I shoulda known.I could be wrong, but I think they have to do with a cultural nationalist impulse, rather than racism in the contemporary sense. How was Hungary going to protect its distinctive Hungarianness if parents were allowed to give their kids German names? That kind of thing. But I could be wrong. Some countries seem to demand that you choose from an established list, while others just step in if you try to name your kid Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116.
Finland, for instance, maintains strict, nonoverlapping rolls of official boys’ and girls’ names and will not recognize births unless parents select a name from the appropriate list.Here's what the law says:
[...]Which (IANAL) means that, with certain exceptions,
Ilman 3 momentissa mainittua syytä ei etunimeksi voida hyväksyä:
1) nimeä, joka muodoltaan tai kirjoitustavaltaan on kotimaisen nimikäytännön vastainen;
2) pojalle naisennimeä eikä tytölle miehennimeä;
[...]
Which is why I named my daughter Molly. Everyone knows it, everyone can spell it...I'm reminded of SanDeE in "LA Story".
« Older Baby porcupine eats a banana and has hiccups.... | A 400 year old clam has been s... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by transona5 at 8:56 AM on October 28, 2007