View Message

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

Guess which one I prefer? ;)
in reply to a message by Pearl
Obviously Isla. The only downsides to the name, for me, are spelling and pronunciation issues. But with the popularity of Isla Fisher and with the name hitting the Top 1000 so high last year (came in for the first time ever and in the 600s), I'd say it might not be quite so obscure in the next couple of years. However, I don't think we need to worry about it hitting the top 20, either. This is all assuming you're in the U.S., btw.Georgia is gorgeous as well. Not really many downsides to it, except her being called Georgia Peach or something, lol. I just greatly prefer Isla. Good luck.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

Question!I thought it 'charted' before? There's definitely Islas born at the turn of the 20th century and looking at the statistics on this site, it seems to appear. I know use goes back almost another hundred years in Britain but I'm still more curious about its use in the United States.
vote up1
You're rightI never realized that. I just looked it up, and it did hit the U.S. charts in the late 1800s and very early 1900s coming in at #600+. I wonder if that was mostly Scottish immigrants' daughters born here in the U.S. :b
vote up1
That's probably quite true. It's nice to know it charted beforeNot just a "one off wonder" that some like to claim it is.The earliest female Isla I have found so far was 1800 but that was Scotland. Obviously a few male Islays go earlier than that.
vote up1