New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesTechnically, yes (m)
in reply to a message by KidAged
The thing is, most/many women change their surnames after they marry, so a daughter named after her mother wouldn't technically be a Junior, or even a II.
Miranda
Miranda
1
Replies
Or, to be more clear
If Jane Doe has a daughter, and gives her both the surname Doe and the fn Jane, then the daughter could be called Jane Doe II.
But if Jane Doe has a daughter, and gives her her own name, but the father's surname, then Jane Smith (the daughter) couldn't be called Jane Smith II, because there isn't a Jane Smith I (married names don't count).
Junior doesn't apply to women in any case other than possibly a nn. The next-door neighbour on the cartoon King of the Hill calls his daughter Connie Con Junior, obviously because he wanted a son.
Hope that's a little more clear!
Miranda
If Jane Doe has a daughter, and gives her both the surname Doe and the fn Jane, then the daughter could be called Jane Doe II.
But if Jane Doe has a daughter, and gives her her own name, but the father's surname, then Jane Smith (the daughter) couldn't be called Jane Smith II, because there isn't a Jane Smith I (married names don't count).
Junior doesn't apply to women in any case other than possibly a nn. The next-door neighbour on the cartoon King of the Hill calls his daughter Connie Con Junior, obviously because he wanted a son.
Hope that's a little more clear!
Miranda
1