New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: Homophonic Neonyms...
in reply to a message by Frollein Gladys
In the example above, it wouldn't be pseudolinguistics. It would be the stated basis for one's given name, trumping its default/traditional meaning. Euphonic naming practices have no obligation to conform to rules about spelling, historical meaning or prior existence. We just consult those sources when there is no more specific information to the contrary. Such is a priori vs. a posteriori reasoning.
JOSHANA is a good example of that. We constructed a name from two Hebrew morphemes and Anglicized it.* Some Indian parents arrived at the same name through, most likely, a different linguistic process, thence a different meaning. Neither one is the precedent for the other. That would only be the case if we read about the Indian athlete and thought, "What a cool name. Let's name our baby girl that." Definition lies with the originator.
Some might name their baby BLAZE because of his/her fiery orange hair. If so, BLAISE would have no bearing on their specific use. If ESAU had been born to Anglophones, he would have (using their rationale) been named HARRY (without regard for its Germanic roots).
Also, I understand that known etymology trumps wild guesses, but in the absence of the former, a wild guess may be the best clue that one has. It, at least, puts forth a testable hypothesis when original research is necessary. (SWAG is just a visible disclaimer.)
*Granted, it is not syntactically correct, but that is not a mandate in euphonic naming.
"Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are sons born in one's youth." Ps. 127:4
JoHannah Jubilee, BenJudah Gabriel, Aaron Josiah, Jordan Uriah,
Maranatha Nissiah, (Anastasia Nike, 1992-1992), Jeshua David,
Shiloh Joshana, Elijah Daniel, Hezekiah Nathaniel, Zephaniah Joseph
JOSHANA is a good example of that. We constructed a name from two Hebrew morphemes and Anglicized it.* Some Indian parents arrived at the same name through, most likely, a different linguistic process, thence a different meaning. Neither one is the precedent for the other. That would only be the case if we read about the Indian athlete and thought, "What a cool name. Let's name our baby girl that." Definition lies with the originator.
Some might name their baby BLAZE because of his/her fiery orange hair. If so, BLAISE would have no bearing on their specific use. If ESAU had been born to Anglophones, he would have (using their rationale) been named HARRY (without regard for its Germanic roots).
Also, I understand that known etymology trumps wild guesses, but in the absence of the former, a wild guess may be the best clue that one has. It, at least, puts forth a testable hypothesis when original research is necessary. (SWAG is just a visible disclaimer.)
*Granted, it is not syntactically correct, but that is not a mandate in euphonic naming.
JoHannah Jubilee, BenJudah Gabriel, Aaron Josiah, Jordan Uriah,
Maranatha Nissiah, (Anastasia Nike, 1992-1992), Jeshua David,
Shiloh Joshana, Elijah Daniel, Hezekiah Nathaniel, Zephaniah Joseph
This message was edited 10/23/2014, 11:31 PM
1