Results 1 to 5 of 17
August 29th, 2013 02:05 PM #1Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Same name as a relative, but not naming after?
I have a few names that I really like, but I've ruled out because they are the names of relatives, and not relatives I want to name a child after.
The baby would not have the same surname as any of these relatives, and they are not immediate relatives (think more along the line of cousins and second cousins) but the extended family is fairly small - not like there's fifteen cousins on either side, each with kids of their own and whatever. Also, said relatives are not exceptionally close and are all adults (20-40) and the names are pretty well-known - not top 10 common but nothing obscure/unique either.
Could I do it? Could I do it, but only as a middle? Or should I just forget about these names completely?
Anna Katherine * Lydia Ellen * Zoe Madeleine * Phoebe ___ * Imogen ___ * Emilia ___Samuel * Thomas * Charlie * Reuben * Oliver * George
August 29th, 2013 02:10 PM #3i do not ignore the Rich Text toolbar provided me. i bold, italicize, enlarge, underline and CAPITALIZE for emphasis, individuality, and to capture attention among the endless Arial Standard Size Font that everyone else uses.
i am not screaming nor will i cosset you. i do this to highlight the most important aspect of my thoughts so they are not lost again in the never ending sea of tiny, black, tempered letters that make up forums everywhere.
~*~ i encourage you to do the same ~*~
August 29th, 2013 02:13 PM #5
I understand what you're saying. I have the same name as my great grandmother, but I'm not named after her (she was not a nice woman, apparently). I was named after my aunt who has a similar name to my great grandmother, whom she was named after. This never bothered me growing up. I think if its a name you really love, you should use it, especially if you aren't close to the relative. I never met my aunt or my great grandmother, so it didn't bother me that I had the same name as them. Unless you think of this person every time you hear the name, I would use it. I used to really the name Adam for a boy, then I realized I had a cousin with the name, whom I'm not close with. At first it put me off the name, but then I realized it didn't matter since I hadn't seen him in at least ten years.
Don't let not-close family members ruin/take your favorite names.Just another teenberry and writer, a lover of names
Current Favorites:| Zoe | Jane | Emma | Natalia | Thalia | Isabel | Helen | Alice | Calliope | Elizabeth |
| Dimitri | Linus | Augustus | Jude | Thomas | Basil | Samuel | Jasper | Gus | Jonas |
Pondering: | Cecily |
Have a fabulous day!
August 29th, 2013 02:15 PM #7Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
I think it depends on the name. If it is a name that is fairly common then I say it's totally fine as a first name, and especially in the middle name slot. For example, my middle name is Anastasia. My first cousin has a daughter, he and his wife named her Anastasia. I do not see it as weird at all, but I guess it would depend on your family.
August 29th, 2013 02:23 PM #9Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2013
This definitely can work. My extended family is quite large, but we manage to keep seven Jims, two Marks, multiple Mary-related names, two Lukes, two Andrews, two Peters, two Annes, two Meghans, two Michaels, and two Emmas straight, so depending on how common the name is, you might be able to get away with it. You could always run it by the person or one of your parents for some extra perspective if you're really worried about it.