(no subject)

[lostrocket.livejournal.com]

I was catching up on old entries and was highly amused by the link to Utah Baby Names (that link goes to the post, not the site, sorry).

From there I found this little article which should probably be the manifesto of this community, or something:

The Nayme Gaimme.

Comments

[lostrocket.livejournal.com]

I think unique spellings are different than misspellings. It is possible to be creative with a name without butchering it. I just think it's a problem when people change a name in a way that SHOULD change the pronounciation, but then insist on the "normal" pronounciation.

And yeah, I do disagree a little with some of it, I have some made-up names I like a lot...but I think the article is still very funny. "Civilization is more than 6,000 years old; the brainstorming session is over."

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

I see your point (with the pronunciation issue) but I don't think any name can be misspelled, since we don't live in a country with a name list.


I believe the earth is around 6-7 thousand years old, lol.

But yeah, good article.

[turabiannights.livejournal.com]

Just out of curiosity, so you believe that human civilization and the earth are about the same age?

To the OP, thank you for posting this! He is old and crochety like meeeee!!

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

Yes, I do. Roughly. I base this on theology, so it might not be useful arguing it, because my opinion won't change, lol.


LOL to your comment to the OP.

[turabiannights.livejournal.com]

Thanks, just curious.

I think I am just an old dog who can't learn new names. :(

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

LOL! Funny way to put it! ;-)

Do you mind Sarah? ;-)

[turabiannights.livejournal.com]

How could I? It is about 6,000 years old! :D

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

LMAO.

;)

[lostrocket.livejournal.com]

The misspellings aren't about name lists, it's about linguistics and the rules of language, English or otherwise. But I'm only a dabbler in linguistics, so I really can't complain too vociferously.

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

Well, it just comes down to opinion, I guess.

[turabiannights.livejournal.com]

Well, to a point. I know one woman on the internet who INSISTED to me that her daughter Maydson's name was pronounced "madison." But it's not - there's no way in English phonetics that that can be. It's "maidson." I think it's one thing to be okay with alternative spellings, but it's definitely something else to let misspellings like that go. What does it teach our kids? That phonics are flexible?

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

To me, if someone says their name is pronounced a certain way, it is. It's *their* name. While I may not agree with it visually, that's how it is.

I don't think there is such a thing as misspelling names, either.


I'm the biggest Grammar Nazi of all, but what it comes down to is PEOPLE. You have to call them what they say their name is, agreeing or not.

[turabiannights.livejournal.com]

But you have to draw the line somewhere, don't you? What about the Swedish boy who was almost named Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116? His parents claimed it was pronounced "Albin"... but how could it be? Why can people spell names any way they want, but not words? What's the difference? I feel like the effectiveness of semiotic communication would simply break down at a certain point.

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

I understand your point there, but Madyson is close enough for it to be "acceptable."

Names are different than words. They're proper nouns.


And how else would you pronounce Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116? ;-)

[lostrocket.livejournal.com]

I do agree that you have to call people how they want to be called, but I disagree with the practice of disregarding the rules of language.

I think some sort of enforcement would not be a bad thing. Some people change spellings to be creative, but some people also do it out of ignorance because they don't know how a name is "supposed" to be spelled. If there was some sort of public official who went through birth certificates and followed up on potentially misspelled names, just to make sure the family really wanted it that way, that would be great in my opinion. However I don't think I'd agree with forcing someone to adopt a conventional spelling, even if their own - i.e. Maydson for Madison/Madyson - was logically incorrect, because it's the kind of foothold that could lead to abuse - forcing the Madysons to become Madisons, which in my opinion isn't necessary.

[sarahrose.livejournal.com]

*shrug* I don't feel differently about it since this talk started.

For me, it's part of the freedom we Americans are granted as Americans. I'm glad I have the right to name my children names I like - "made up," "misspelled," "mispronounced" or not.

[poespretty.livejournal.com]

I agree. if they had this kind of person, Oprah would be called "Orpha" as her mother intended (there was an error on her birth cert. or something, though I can't remember off the top of my head if it was her moms fault or the person who typed the birth cert.) either way, IMO certain spellings DO change the prn of a name, according to the widely accepted rules of phonics.

[krosp.livejournal.com]

Actually I think the example given was Maydson, not Madyson... there really is a difference there. Madyson is just another way of spelling Madison that, although trendy, is pronounced the same. Maydson is just wrong, unless you want it to be pronounced maidson. But like you said, if I met this person I would still have to call them "Madison" despite their spelling, since it is how they pronounce their name. I just think altering the spelling of names to the point where they should logically be pronounced some different way is stupid and pointless. You can still completely alter the spelling of a name in a way that keeps the original pronunciation if you do want to be creative.