New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Names vs. Time
In the past, popular names were John, Ruth, Mary, and Robert, but what about the future? Do you think the pattern of trendy names/creative spellings (i.e. Addison, Noah, Brooklyn, etc.) will continue? Or do you think that they will eventually revert back to past popular names, as mentioned above? Do you think naming a child something popular from the past such as Ruth in today's time would be considered weird?
This message was edited 7/27/2010, 8:29 AM
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Everything is cyclical. Names that have been consistently popular for a long time, like Mary, Elizabeth, Robert, and John, will be at least moderately popular for a long time. Names that become extremely popular in a short time, like Sophia, especially ones that seem to come out of nowhere, like Madison, will also become unpopular in a short time. Past trends as well as past names are revived in time. Right now we are reviving some 1880-1900 names and the trendy spellings trend of the time. (Just as Mabel was respelled Maybelle in 1900, so is Caitlin respelled Kaitlynne today) Our children will probably think 1 syllable names are the coolest, like was popular in the 1930-1940's. Roy and Ruth will be all the rage. Everything is cyclical.
1
Both (Jahn, Rooth, Merrie, Robyrt)
Okay, just kidding.
I think today's popular names will become dated very fast. They might be added to the "pot" (place names, biblical names, and surnames will become more 'standard', just like past popular names have) but I don't think they will continue to be the most popular and a kid named Addison in the next generation would be like a Ruth in today's time.
Okay, just kidding.
I think today's popular names will become dated very fast. They might be added to the "pot" (place names, biblical names, and surnames will become more 'standard', just like past popular names have) but I don't think they will continue to be the most popular and a kid named Addison in the next generation would be like a Ruth in today's time.
1
I think the future will be like the present, so old-fashioned names will coexist alongside trendy ones.
1
I think that names from the past can be used in the future.
I hope kre8v spellings die, but the idea of trendy names probably won't. Some day, John, Ruth, Mary, and Robert could be considered trendy. It depends on what is trendy at the time of naming. Some of the current names aren't too bad.
If there are enough kids named in the same style, Ruth wouldn't be too weird.
I hope kre8v spellings die, but the idea of trendy names probably won't. Some day, John, Ruth, Mary, and Robert could be considered trendy. It depends on what is trendy at the time of naming. Some of the current names aren't too bad.
If there are enough kids named in the same style, Ruth wouldn't be too weird.
1
I think that there will always be some form of creative spellings amongst the lists: for every Maddyson we have today, there was a Debra or a Maggye in the past. However, I think we won't ever see the control that some of the names you listed (mainly John, Mary and Robert; Ruth has never been as widely popular as these three) had for hundreds of years. John and Mary had dominated the English world from the Middle Ages until, the twenties when John lost his place to Robert (although Robert and James--his predecessors until Michael came in the sixties--were very popular during this period too). As the baby boomers began to have children themselves, they wanted to be special and so the old standby names became less and less popular, and new exciting names such as Jennifer, Christopher, etc. came into common usage.
I think the trend that you wanted to mention is what I like to call "make your own baby name": you take common elements and sounds and when combined they make a baby name such as Jayden, Cayson, Bailey, Kayla, etc. I'm not a fan of this names...I often say that they have no complexity: they lack history, they lack aesthetical interest, they're just phonetic names that sound "good". However, you can't lump all the trends together: Addison is a "surname name", Noah is a "Bibilical name", Brooklyn is a "place name" and all these names represent different trends and different trends will always exist, no matter if you're looking at babies from 1910 or 2010.
Another trend, which is rather muted amongst the mainstream but may rise in the next few years, is resurrecting so-called "old lady" and "old men" names.
I think the trend that you wanted to mention is what I like to call "make your own baby name": you take common elements and sounds and when combined they make a baby name such as Jayden, Cayson, Bailey, Kayla, etc. I'm not a fan of this names...I often say that they have no complexity: they lack history, they lack aesthetical interest, they're just phonetic names that sound "good". However, you can't lump all the trends together: Addison is a "surname name", Noah is a "Bibilical name", Brooklyn is a "place name" and all these names represent different trends and different trends will always exist, no matter if you're looking at babies from 1910 or 2010.
Another trend, which is rather muted amongst the mainstream but may rise in the next few years, is resurrecting so-called "old lady" and "old men" names.
1
It depends on how far in the future we are talking about. I think eventually most names will be one or two syllables or names that were always considered nicknames before. Word names will probably be popular too.
1
Some could make a comeback or get popular, but some may be considered too ghastly for the general population. (i.e. Mildred or Mortimer)
Personally, I do hope the trendy/creative spelling fad dies out before I do.
Personally, I do hope the trendy/creative spelling fad dies out before I do.
1
I would say a mixture of both since John, Mary, and Robert can be found towards the bottom of the top 100. I would bet on a bounce back. Some trendy names like Noah and Gabriella will be around the top 100 in the long term future and Gabriella may even rise upwards from 33rd. But Ruth, average rating 1 star, would be an unlikely comeback canidate. Since even the equally unpopular at this time, Clint, 1 and a half stars, has more appeal.
1