Monday, October 20, 2003
well, I shouldn't get too excited about this b/c we are going to confirm tonight, and there is still the second name/incorporating my name issue, but I think we have names!
the boy name is fairly popular - just outside the top 20 for the state - and the girl name is not on the top 100 at all. but that's OK, as boys are apparently more sensitive to having "weird" names. the girl name, I hasten to add, is a proper, real name, not something we made up.
in the process we found this infinitely searchable database of Victorian names, which does cool things like show the frequency of any particular name over the decades since 1929. it's kind of amusing that names like "John", which you'd think incredibly common, are actually well down the list, especially compared to (yawn) Jack and Josh - Jack being a nickname for John, of course. and names once common, like Ian, appear nowhere, while Americanisms like Blake are all over the place.
the boy name is fairly popular - just outside the top 20 for the state - and the girl name is not on the top 100 at all. but that's OK, as boys are apparently more sensitive to having "weird" names. the girl name, I hasten to add, is a proper, real name, not something we made up.
in the process we found this infinitely searchable database of Victorian names, which does cool things like show the frequency of any particular name over the decades since 1929. it's kind of amusing that names like "John", which you'd think incredibly common, are actually well down the list, especially compared to (yawn) Jack and Josh - Jack being a nickname for John, of course. and names once common, like Ian, appear nowhere, while Americanisms like Blake are all over the place.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]