New Post
Search
HelpRe: I don't mind it. Heck, the ancient Romans already named their children numbers. (nt)
in reply to a message by mirfak
OTish. Lately I kind of think naming kids emptyish names like Seven and Braylynn are symptoms of having not very many problems. Societally, not personally. It becomes less important to cling to something and pass it down. Sounds and whims become equally as (un)important as tradition. Does that make sense?
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Yeah, I think it makes sense. But "having not very many problems" is not resonating for me. I think you could maybe say, symptoms of not having very many solutions. Or at least, of tradition not representing any solution, and projecting a potentially negative image, since kids like Braylynn and Seven seem to be named like products or companies or characters, for image.
Seven's a magic number and that's why I think they like it, more than because it sounds namey. Magic. Like Nevaeh.
Seven's a magic number and that's why I think they like it, more than because it sounds namey. Magic. Like Nevaeh.
This message was edited 5/24/2012, 11:31 PM
1
How is Nevaeh magic?
At least the number 7 has a long, long history. It's considered lucky not only in the Western world but also in China. Also it could have special meaning to the parents in other ways. The 7th day of a month that was important to them, an important date, someone who studied maths and loves numbers, whatever.
I just don't think it's fair to say someone didn't put thought into a name because he chose Seven instead of John or something. In fact I think many Marys or Johns back in the day were named because it was a name that fit in and didn't cause trouble, not because it was so special to the parents. I'm pretty sure many Emilys or Chloes were just name because their parents loved the sound. If I met someone named Seven or Reef or something or I would expect an interesting story or reason behind it that I wouldn't necessarily with Emma or Jacob. Also I associate a name like Seven more strongly with other names that are used in every day language such as Faith, Hunter or Sky than with Nevaeh or Braylynn, but maybe that's just me.
I don't even have anything against Nevaeh or Braylynn. I'm pretty sure if you had asked board members 10 years ago what they thought of Nevaeh they would have thought it was a nice biblical name or something. I thought that at first before realizing what it really was.
Yeah, I guess what I want to say is that I think it's unfair to assume someone was named for image just because he has a new name like Seven and not something that is centuries old like Hannah.
At least the number 7 has a long, long history. It's considered lucky not only in the Western world but also in China. Also it could have special meaning to the parents in other ways. The 7th day of a month that was important to them, an important date, someone who studied maths and loves numbers, whatever.
I just don't think it's fair to say someone didn't put thought into a name because he chose Seven instead of John or something. In fact I think many Marys or Johns back in the day were named because it was a name that fit in and didn't cause trouble, not because it was so special to the parents. I'm pretty sure many Emilys or Chloes were just name because their parents loved the sound. If I met someone named Seven or Reef or something or I would expect an interesting story or reason behind it that I wouldn't necessarily with Emma or Jacob. Also I associate a name like Seven more strongly with other names that are used in every day language such as Faith, Hunter or Sky than with Nevaeh or Braylynn, but maybe that's just me.
I don't even have anything against Nevaeh or Braylynn. I'm pretty sure if you had asked board members 10 years ago what they thought of Nevaeh they would have thought it was a nice biblical name or something. I thought that at first before realizing what it really was.
Yeah, I guess what I want to say is that I think it's unfair to assume someone was named for image just because he has a new name like Seven and not something that is centuries old like Hannah.
1
*groan*
This is a little frustrating. Are you trolling me? Lol, it's kinda fun.
Nevaeh is magic because it's spelled backwards.
I didn't SAY someone didn't put thought into a name because he chose Seven instead of John. Isn't it more like, a person would put a great deal more thought into Seven, than John?
Marys or Johns back in the day were named because it was a name that fit in and didn't cause trouble
Yeah ... this is I was trying to get at in my reply which was to Ludwig's comment. Why is "not causing trouble" not desirable any more? You sound as dismissive of traditional naming, as you seem to accuse me of being about nontraditional naming. I think Braylynn and Seven's parents choose those names, based on sound and image, for reasons that might seem superficially lame, but actually are NOT entirely numbskulled. I think there's a reason why such names come off as insubstantial ... but there's also a reason why parents would want a name that is not insubstantial per se, but substantially insubstantial. I don't think I can explain myself very well, I'm sorry - but please, stop implying that I am disrespecting people who name their kids Nevaeh, Braylynn, Seven or whatever. I'm not better than them. That's not what this conversation was about, for me.
Ludwig was grouping Nevaeh and Braylynn together because they are together in the category "not traditional" - like, they don't honor certain values? It's not that they are the same style. She was thinking about the arc of history I think ... thinking about how the traditional names that people (which people? well duh, the mainstream ...) have used proudly for centuries - like a piece of heritage so ingrained that it wasn't even thought about - lost their appeal for so many folks. It loses appeal because it isn't seen as beneficial - for whatever reason, we were wondering. If I understood her right.
This is a little frustrating. Are you trolling me? Lol, it's kinda fun.
Nevaeh is magic because it's spelled backwards.
I didn't SAY someone didn't put thought into a name because he chose Seven instead of John. Isn't it more like, a person would put a great deal more thought into Seven, than John?
Marys or Johns back in the day were named because it was a name that fit in and didn't cause trouble
Yeah ... this is I was trying to get at in my reply which was to Ludwig's comment. Why is "not causing trouble" not desirable any more? You sound as dismissive of traditional naming, as you seem to accuse me of being about nontraditional naming. I think Braylynn and Seven's parents choose those names, based on sound and image, for reasons that might seem superficially lame, but actually are NOT entirely numbskulled. I think there's a reason why such names come off as insubstantial ... but there's also a reason why parents would want a name that is not insubstantial per se, but substantially insubstantial. I don't think I can explain myself very well, I'm sorry - but please, stop implying that I am disrespecting people who name their kids Nevaeh, Braylynn, Seven or whatever. I'm not better than them. That's not what this conversation was about, for me.
Ludwig was grouping Nevaeh and Braylynn together because they are together in the category "not traditional" - like, they don't honor certain values? It's not that they are the same style. She was thinking about the arc of history I think ... thinking about how the traditional names that people (which people? well duh, the mainstream ...) have used proudly for centuries - like a piece of heritage so ingrained that it wasn't even thought about - lost their appeal for so many folks. It loses appeal because it isn't seen as beneficial - for whatever reason, we were wondering. If I understood her right.
This message was edited 5/25/2012, 9:14 AM
2
Haha no, I just realized that we had the Evan conversation. I remember I had it but not with whom :P
No, not at all. I like many classic names such as James, Aaron and Luke.
'Not causing trouble' is not desirable when it's the only reason to choose a name. Just my opinion, of course. But my friend who was named Anna was almost named Ivy and her parents simply decided on Anna because they thought it would cause her less trouble in life (I think they were especially worried about 'Poison Ivy' jokes, because a movie of that name came out before she was born) and I just think that's kind of sad because they liked Ivy more but wanted to be safe. I mean to each their own, I realize they had their child's best interest at heart so you can't argue with that.
Oh I get what you mean now, about the 'not very many problems' thing. I kind of agree. I think some time ago it was more desirable to fit in than stand out. I remember reading about naming in the 1600s in England and people would often be named after members of society they knew who were slightly better off in the hope that they would become the child's godmother/godfather and that the child could benefit from them. Also it wasn't unusual for family members to have the same name and just a different nickname. I guess that wouldn't be popular today.
Oh and sorry if I made you feel like I was trolling you :P I just like many unusual names (I love classic names too) and feel a bit sad about them not getting so much love here :P Nothing personal, really.
No, not at all. I like many classic names such as James, Aaron and Luke.
'Not causing trouble' is not desirable when it's the only reason to choose a name. Just my opinion, of course. But my friend who was named Anna was almost named Ivy and her parents simply decided on Anna because they thought it would cause her less trouble in life (I think they were especially worried about 'Poison Ivy' jokes, because a movie of that name came out before she was born) and I just think that's kind of sad because they liked Ivy more but wanted to be safe. I mean to each their own, I realize they had their child's best interest at heart so you can't argue with that.
Oh I get what you mean now, about the 'not very many problems' thing. I kind of agree. I think some time ago it was more desirable to fit in than stand out. I remember reading about naming in the 1600s in England and people would often be named after members of society they knew who were slightly better off in the hope that they would become the child's godmother/godfather and that the child could benefit from them. Also it wasn't unusual for family members to have the same name and just a different nickname. I guess that wouldn't be popular today.
Oh and sorry if I made you feel like I was trolling you :P I just like many unusual names (I love classic names too) and feel a bit sad about them not getting so much love here :P Nothing personal, really.
This message was edited 5/25/2012, 10:21 AM
1