New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: Names with a meaning anotnimous with "chaste"?
in reply to a message by Getb2
Never met something even remotely similar. In fact, it's generally quite hard to find names with meanings that are negative in *any* way. Strongly negative and furthermore from the realm of sexuality? No chance, if you ask me.
1
Replies
Now, now, now, that is *very* parochial. There is/was a large part of the world where words with culturally "negative meanings" *are* used as names and "opposite" of chaste wouldn't necessarily be negative. That said, it is true that today we are homogenizing fast, and such "odd" names are becoming rare.
Thus even today, in India, dukhI is a common name. The word derives from Sanskrit duHkhI which is the nominative singular of a word meaning one having sorrow. It may actually be a reinterpreted Prakrit word from original Sanskrit duHstha, from dus- implying a negative and stha, to stay; be that as it may, the meaning is someone with "sorrow upon sorrow" as a dictionary says. Pretty negative, but it is often used as a name to guard against ill-luck.
In ancient Indian (Vedic) literature, a very famous character is called shunaHshepa, which literally means dog's genital.
Of course, you probably meant words that show a moral weakness rather than merely having a negative meaning. There, I guess, you are right, but we should check.
As to the second point about sexual connotation, prostitutes do not seem to be morally shunned in the earliest books of plays that we find in India: thus, for example, vasantasenA, the heroine of cArudatta from bhAsasya nATyacakraM from around the beginning of the common era, the play that forms the basis of the later and more well known play mRcchakaTakam, is a courtesan. [Though, there had to be a certain shame associated with it, at least outside the urban context where the play is set, as we see in the story of satyakAma jAbAla from about four to six centuries before that.]
Of course, prostitutes no longer are socially accepted in India. Even hierodules, or devadAsIs as they are called in some parts of India (literally "(female) servants of god") are looked down upon. These probably do not make it as names usually. But sexual meaning, itself, is not forbidden, especially in names from the past where the denotation is overriden by a holy connotation. That is why, even today you will find names like ratipriYA, meaning, fond of or pleasant in coition.
Thus even today, in India, dukhI is a common name. The word derives from Sanskrit duHkhI which is the nominative singular of a word meaning one having sorrow. It may actually be a reinterpreted Prakrit word from original Sanskrit duHstha, from dus- implying a negative and stha, to stay; be that as it may, the meaning is someone with "sorrow upon sorrow" as a dictionary says. Pretty negative, but it is often used as a name to guard against ill-luck.
In ancient Indian (Vedic) literature, a very famous character is called shunaHshepa, which literally means dog's genital.
Of course, you probably meant words that show a moral weakness rather than merely having a negative meaning. There, I guess, you are right, but we should check.
As to the second point about sexual connotation, prostitutes do not seem to be morally shunned in the earliest books of plays that we find in India: thus, for example, vasantasenA, the heroine of cArudatta from bhAsasya nATyacakraM from around the beginning of the common era, the play that forms the basis of the later and more well known play mRcchakaTakam, is a courtesan. [Though, there had to be a certain shame associated with it, at least outside the urban context where the play is set, as we see in the story of satyakAma jAbAla from about four to six centuries before that.]
Of course, prostitutes no longer are socially accepted in India. Even hierodules, or devadAsIs as they are called in some parts of India (literally "(female) servants of god") are looked down upon. These probably do not make it as names usually. But sexual meaning, itself, is not forbidden, especially in names from the past where the denotation is overriden by a holy connotation. That is why, even today you will find names like ratipriYA, meaning, fond of or pleasant in coition.
1
Maybe a goddess of sexuality... or a demon... We must realize that these meanings are only negative on the context of abrahamic religons... the name Cecilia and variants means "blind"... Isn't that even more negative?
1
Well, "sexually experienced" is not a synonym with "prostitute," but I think in the great majority of human cultures it would have been considered worse to be a prostitute than to be blind.
Also, in terms of Cecilia you are confusing the etymology of the name with the meaning that was intended when it was first given. Cecilia goes back to the time when ancient Romans were so sexist that women were simply given the feminine form of their family name as their given name. The family name "Cecilius" goes back to a word that meant "blind," but no one ever named a daughter "Cecilia" with the idea of blindness as a motive. It simply meant "daughter of the Cecilius family" when it was first given. And of course after ancient Roman times people were thinking of the figure of St. Cecilia, not "blindness," when they gave daughters the name.
Also, in terms of Cecilia you are confusing the etymology of the name with the meaning that was intended when it was first given. Cecilia goes back to the time when ancient Romans were so sexist that women were simply given the feminine form of their family name as their given name. The family name "Cecilius" goes back to a word that meant "blind," but no one ever named a daughter "Cecilia" with the idea of blindness as a motive. It simply meant "daughter of the Cecilius family" when it was first given. And of course after ancient Roman times people were thinking of the figure of St. Cecilia, not "blindness," when they gave daughters the name.
1
Well, I emphatically disagree that what people are thinking about when they choose a name is "meaningless." It actually has a lot more meaning to their lives and the lives of their children than any ancient etymology does.
And I don't think a large percentage of people in most cultures over the last few centuries have "survivalists."
And I don't think a large percentage of people in most cultures over the last few centuries have "survivalists."
1
most people pick a name from a babyname website that is mostly blatant lies, or from babyname books that are on the same level... the second greatest quantity pick names based on how they sound... third come the namesakes....
and names weren't invented in the last few centuries... survivalists existed at the time that names where being invented on a quicker rate
and names weren't invented in the last few centuries... survivalists existed at the time that names where being invented on a quicker rate
1
What do you mean by "survivalists"?
1
people who survived through harsh circumstances and who appreciated survival.
1
Right, ok. That's not actually what "survivalist" means or what it would convey to a native English speaker. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivalism
"Being a prostitute would have been worse than being blind? not to survivalists."
I will answer this using your intended meaning (people living a subsistence lifestyle whose daily life was a struggle).
For people living a hand-to-mouth existence in Roman times (or most other times before today), literacy would have been minimal to non-existent. The meaning of any name given might never have been known to the family, much less have been of any importance.
Further up the social scale, it's important to remember that there's a difference between a natural affliction and a lifestyle choice. People went blind quite frequently, and "blind" could also have a positive metaphorical meaning in some circumstances; but generally it was not the fault of the person going blind. Sexual promiscuity, on the other hand, was a deliberate negative moral choice which could lead to serious social consequences for the whole family.
"Being a prostitute would have been worse than being blind? not to survivalists."
I will answer this using your intended meaning (people living a subsistence lifestyle whose daily life was a struggle).
For people living a hand-to-mouth existence in Roman times (or most other times before today), literacy would have been minimal to non-existent. The meaning of any name given might never have been known to the family, much less have been of any importance.
Further up the social scale, it's important to remember that there's a difference between a natural affliction and a lifestyle choice. People went blind quite frequently, and "blind" could also have a positive metaphorical meaning in some circumstances; but generally it was not the fault of the person going blind. Sexual promiscuity, on the other hand, was a deliberate negative moral choice which could lead to serious social consequences for the whole family.
1
Actually, in many cultures, many name meanings are obvious even to "non-literate" people ...
1
The name Étaín is possibly derived from Old Irish ét "jealousy"... Isn't that term negative?
I know what survivalist means, nonetheless from the strict deffinition the meaning I gave it wasn't too far fetched considering that the modern meaning of survivalist wasn't applicable in the far past.
Literacy wasn't required to know the meaning of names...
তন্ময় ভট্টাচার্য্য has already provided name that have a name that can be considered antonimous with chaste.
I know what survivalist means, nonetheless from the strict deffinition the meaning I gave it wasn't too far fetched considering that the modern meaning of survivalist wasn't applicable in the far past.
Literacy wasn't required to know the meaning of names...
তন্ময় ভট্টাচার্য্য has already provided name that have a name that can be considered antonimous with chaste.
1
*sigh*
Do you actually want answers or just to argue with people? Because frankly the nature of your responses has put you firmly on my "not worth talking to" list.
Do you actually want answers or just to argue with people? Because frankly the nature of your responses has put you firmly on my "not worth talking to" list.
1
Do you have statistical data on this? I would be really curious to know what percentage of parents today pick names from baby name books or websites. I have a feeling it is actually quite small.
And certainly, in the past, say up to the last quarter of the 20th century, name websites did not exist and the usage of name books was pretty negligible.
And certainly, in the past, say up to the last quarter of the 20th century, name websites did not exist and the usage of name books was pretty negligible.
1
nope statistical data so, take my words with a grain of salt, but if I am wrong the fact remains that people almost never use etymology (or correct etymology) to decide their children's names.
1
By the way, in English the official spelling is "antonymous."
1
I made a typo... and you correct my ortography? To err is human... But thanks anyway.
1
Well, you know we all did end up with the misspelled word appearing over 30 times on the board home page. My eyes were starting to ache, so I was glad that the correction was finally made.
You certainly did not hesitate to correct people immediately when you thought they were mistaken.
And it's "orthography." 8-)
You certainly did not hesitate to correct people immediately when you thought they were mistaken.
And it's "orthography." 8-)
1
correcting a title is easier than correcting the body of the message, thanks for the correction 'though.
1
Etymology: ram is a root that means to stop, to rest, to be glad, to have intercourse and is cognate with words related to Greek ἐρᾰτός (eratos if you don't see the Greek) + suffix = rati pleasure, passion, sexual union. It is still used as a word in languages of North India as a formal word for sexual intercourse in many North Indian languages. It is also, mythologically, the name of a wife of the God of love, kAma (another word of Indoeuropean origin, meaning love or desire), the other wife being prIti, pleasure, from the root prI described next.
prI is a root meaning to please, and is etymologically related to English friend + suffix = priYa fond of, beloved, lover. The feminine of this word is priYA.
ratipriYA follows one of the four standard word-compounding principles and means fond of sexual union. It has also been used to mean pleasant during coition. (The masculine ratipriYa would mean lover of rati, i.e. kAma). It has been used as a name in the mythological context at least since the time of the purANas, most of which reached their present form shortly after 1000AD. It is also the name of a particular Karnatic rAga, a south Indian melodic mode.
It is still used as a name, typically in South India, where the languages spoken are not of the Indoeuropean family (so names are unlikely to be analyzed into constituents), but where the mythological and religious dominance of Sanskrit has led to a large influence on onomastics. Not sure, but the Google+ profile https://plus.google.com/112197455878860864766/about does seem to belong to someone with this name.
prI is a root meaning to please, and is etymologically related to English friend + suffix = priYa fond of, beloved, lover. The feminine of this word is priYA.
ratipriYA follows one of the four standard word-compounding principles and means fond of sexual union. It has also been used to mean pleasant during coition. (The masculine ratipriYa would mean lover of rati, i.e. kAma). It has been used as a name in the mythological context at least since the time of the purANas, most of which reached their present form shortly after 1000AD. It is also the name of a particular Karnatic rAga, a south Indian melodic mode.
It is still used as a name, typically in South India, where the languages spoken are not of the Indoeuropean family (so names are unlikely to be analyzed into constituents), but where the mythological and religious dominance of Sanskrit has led to a large influence on onomastics. Not sure, but the Google+ profile https://plus.google.com/112197455878860864766/about does seem to belong to someone with this name.
1
In latin script... how can ratipriYA be a different name than ratipriYa?
1
Sorry, they are not different in the Latin script, obviously. Indian scripts, however, are phonetic and the Harvard-Kyoto scheme uses capitals to distinguish various sounds. In the case, the difference is that the feminine (which is what you want) ends in the long a sound as in English car. The male one ends in a short -a sound, which depending on the language can vary between the initial sound of English about, the sound in English cot, or a short version of the sound in English joke.
1
The Latin script is phonetic when used in Spanish... I mean, each letter usually matches a corresponding sound and just one sound.
1
Yes, sorry, should have been more precise. The same script is indeed different when used to express different languages. It would have been pretty phonetic for English too except for the Norman conquest and the great vowel shift :-) And, because of the colonial past and cultural dominance of the English language, most Indian names (in India) written in the Latin script is aiming at the English (nowadays, American) speaker. Indian names from other places (e.g., West Indies, South Africa, Fiji, etc.) sometimes target speakers with different accents.
In any case, the phonemic inventory is much larger in a typical Indian language than it is in either the Romance or the Germanic languages. As a result, when writing the names in the Latin script, important differences get lost. Moreover, since the north and south of India speak languages with very different phonemic inventories, when approximations are inevitable, they tend to go for different transliterations to emphasize the phonetic features important to their ears. And, so, you will see the same name spelt in a variety of different ways: Gita vs Geetha, Vrinda versus Brintha, etc. In each case, the difference between the native pronunciations is much smaller than would be suggested by the transliterations. In some cases, however, the differences are because the pronunciations have indeed diverged in the different languages: Robindro vs Ravindra vs Rabinder, Smruti vs Smriti, etc. And, in some cases, there are purely conventional transliterations in some parts giving us forms like Rabindra.
I tend to use a mixed upper/lower case transliteration that recalls the spelling in one of the North Indian scripts (which are more uniform and most Indian names one would familiar in the west do have a North Indian transcription), which in most cases would let people deduce its likely pronunciation in most Indian languages (with a little study, of course). I know the situation is complicated: but India is easily as diverse as Europe, and you find the same tradition in Europe. What is orthographically Angel is differently pronounced in English and Spanish, and Charles is not the same in English and France. The difference is that here everyone uses the same script (with small variations), whereas in India the scripts (and the languages) diverged rapidly since about 7th to 9th century, and none of those scripts is, I believe, familiar to most on this board.
In any case, the phonemic inventory is much larger in a typical Indian language than it is in either the Romance or the Germanic languages. As a result, when writing the names in the Latin script, important differences get lost. Moreover, since the north and south of India speak languages with very different phonemic inventories, when approximations are inevitable, they tend to go for different transliterations to emphasize the phonetic features important to their ears. And, so, you will see the same name spelt in a variety of different ways: Gita vs Geetha, Vrinda versus Brintha, etc. In each case, the difference between the native pronunciations is much smaller than would be suggested by the transliterations. In some cases, however, the differences are because the pronunciations have indeed diverged in the different languages: Robindro vs Ravindra vs Rabinder, Smruti vs Smriti, etc. And, in some cases, there are purely conventional transliterations in some parts giving us forms like Rabindra.
I tend to use a mixed upper/lower case transliteration that recalls the spelling in one of the North Indian scripts (which are more uniform and most Indian names one would familiar in the west do have a North Indian transcription), which in most cases would let people deduce its likely pronunciation in most Indian languages (with a little study, of course). I know the situation is complicated: but India is easily as diverse as Europe, and you find the same tradition in Europe. What is orthographically Angel is differently pronounced in English and Spanish, and Charles is not the same in English and France. The difference is that here everyone uses the same script (with small variations), whereas in India the scripts (and the languages) diverged rapidly since about 7th to 9th century, and none of those scripts is, I believe, familiar to most on this board.
1
Yes... For instance I dont know how to refer to you because when I read "author" I dont see any script whatsoever, just a bunch of rectangles (18 rectangles) that appear when non-latin characters aren't recognized by a computer... I appreciat sanskrit and India a lot... Would you be able to make a translation based on a Castilian-Spanish-speaker's perspective?
1