New Post
Search
HelpRe: Rachel vs Rachael
in reply to a message by number1212
Today just now, I looked up the origin of Rachael and saw that it was a variant "probably based on the spelling of Michael." Somehow I missed that before.
For this reason alone I prefer it. It's got an extra letter thrown in just for looks, the pronunciation doesn't even really make sense because if it were like Michael it'd be Ray-kul not Ray-chul -- and it became frequent and normal enough like that, and is appealing enough still, that people are still asking which one is better! That makes it more interesting.
I actually think Rachael looks more interesting and cooler, so I like it more. But Rachel is nice, and I often spell Rachel automatically and forget that there is a name Rachael so it's not a strong preference.
- mirfak
For this reason alone I prefer it. It's got an extra letter thrown in just for looks, the pronunciation doesn't even really make sense because if it were like Michael it'd be Ray-kul not Ray-chul -- and it became frequent and normal enough like that, and is appealing enough still, that people are still asking which one is better! That makes it more interesting.
I actually think Rachael looks more interesting and cooler, so I like it more. But Rachel is nice, and I often spell Rachel automatically and forget that there is a name Rachael so it's not a strong preference.
- mirfak
This message was edited 4/2/2016, 4:50 PM
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Yes - I too would be tempted to pronounce Rachael differently than Rachel, so I would think the names to differ in sound by the ch(k) sound prior to the diphthong within the vowels; if the names pronounce similarly, then I am perfectly indifferent to spelling variations, leaving this to the personalized preference of the name assigner--or ultimately, the name bearer.
This message was edited 4/3/2016, 3:18 AM
1