And why shouldn't they be? This is equivalent to observing that "names are not meaningless," which is hardly surprising. The alternative would be a world with people named "533487214" or "lrjxynpwfcn."
Show this thread
The vast majority of names (of people and places) are simple nouns that have been warped by vernacular and/or obscured by language barriers. (Luke -> Lucius = "Light;" Champine -> Champagne -> campania -> campus = "open plain, field; both Latin.)
-
-
-
This raises more questions, though. First: although meaning is ubiquitous in names, names are frequently chosen for aesthetic reasons ("I like the way it sounds"), rather than for their meaning. But if the meaning is irrelevant, why don't more people invent new names?
Show this thread -
Sure, there are some weirdos out there saddling their kids with names like "Kynlee" and "Shalondra," but this seems to be a modern fad: I've yet to find a major historical figure with such a name. If the meaning of a name is secondary, why are meaningless names so rare?
Show this thread -
Second: are there cultures who assign names at random, e.g. by tossing bones or reading tea leaves? If not, why not? Humans clearly aren't shy about deferring to the whims of the gods.
Show this thread -
Third: are there cultures where the meaning of a (given) name is primary? "Johnson" and "Henry VII" come to mind, but in those cases, the meaning concerns the surname. It seems like some Native American names are explicitly meaningful ("Sitting Bull", "First-born Daughter").
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.