This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

Re: Homophonic Neonyms...
Harry for Esau doesn't work in terms of using a name based on a characteristic as Harry doesn't mean hairy it just sounds like it. That would be a stretch of the etymology of both names. If you really were naming your child after a characteristic a la Esau, which means "hairy" or "rough" then he would be named Hairy or Rough, not Harry.
vote up1vote down

Replies

Euphonic naming practice is not beholden to spelling rules or historical meanings, as we onomatologists are wont to be. Otherwise, variants (and respellings) would hold no meaning at all, due to their "incorrect" spelling.If JOHN can share the meaning of YEHOWCHANAN,
HARRY can be treated as a modern variant of "hairy,"
as much as it is a traditional variant to HEIMRICH. (Heimrich and "hairy" both have linguistic pedigrees. Harry, ultimately, is a colloquialism or corruption and can go anywhere it fits. It has no base morpheme.)A mom could declare, "Because he was so hairy, we named him Harry!"Linguistic rationale clearly stated. It is (in that specific case) a homophonic, hence variant, name for "hairy."Your etymological objections do not stand in a euphonic naming society. Its traditional etymology remains intact for those who don't impose such a meaning.Modern languages are just as valid of resources for names as classical ones are.

This message was edited 10/25/2014, 4:20 AM

vote up1vote down
This is ages ago but Harry and hairy are pronounced differently in other English speaking countries
vote up1vote down