New Post
Search
Help[Facts] Re: No. Name websites like that are inaccurate . . .
in reply to a message by Cleveland Kent Evans
Little and tiny, as I'm sure you can see, are not the same words. If they had put "little" then it would have been a reasonable extrapolation, but "tiny" is not.
♦ Chrisell ♦
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
1
Replies
Oh, come on. My unabridged dictionary gives "little" and "tiny" as synonyms of each other. I don't see any substantial difference in interpreting Annette as "little Anne" vs. "tiny Anne". I suppose that to most native English speakers, "tiny" sounds like "very little", but does that mean that in order to use "tiny" you have to be talking about a name that's a "double diminutive" like Annetty?
Yes, it's inaccurate, but it's clear how the "inaccuracy" evolved through a reasonable misinterpretation.
Very few of the people who put up baby name sites are creating their inaccurate name origins out of whole cloth. Most of the ones you see were in print in baby name books 50 years ago. Their problem is in uncritically accepting as the full truth the first written information they come across. And understanding that that isn't how one does proper research is a skill that's developed over time. No one becomes an expert in any field overnight.
Yes, it's inaccurate, but it's clear how the "inaccuracy" evolved through a reasonable misinterpretation.
Very few of the people who put up baby name sites are creating their inaccurate name origins out of whole cloth. Most of the ones you see were in print in baby name books 50 years ago. Their problem is in uncritically accepting as the full truth the first written information they come across. And understanding that that isn't how one does proper research is a skill that's developed over time. No one becomes an expert in any field overnight.
1
As someone whose job definition includes "research", I find it offensive that people would presume to make so-called information websites without bothering to go beyond the first available explanation for anything. If you are correct - and I don't believe you are - then the fact that they are guilty of plagiarisation is no better than being guilty of fabrication.
Besides, the name we were talking about originally was not in fact Charlotte but Searlait. The OP's original reference said nothing about Searlait being a variation of Charlotte, just that it was French meant "tiny and womanly". Last time I checked, 'lait' is not a suffix meaning "tiny", so the original description of it being thrown in for no good reason is entirely accurate.
♦ Chrisell ♦
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
Besides, the name we were talking about originally was not in fact Charlotte but Searlait. The OP's original reference said nothing about Searlait being a variation of Charlotte, just that it was French meant "tiny and womanly". Last time I checked, 'lait' is not a suffix meaning "tiny", so the original description of it being thrown in for no good reason is entirely accurate.
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
1
As someone who also does research and teaching for his living, I think you are too easily offended. And of course most websites are full of plagiarization. Anyone who spends much time looking at websites on any issue can easily figure that out! The Web is not the same thing as an academic journal and people who put up websites don't have to abide by academic standards of referencing. It would be nice if they did, but I'm not holding my breath. I hope I'm doing my part by trying to teach my students the difference between a peer-reviewed journal and Websites which can and are put up by anyone.
I also do not understand your comment about Searlait and Charlotte. This site clearly states that Searlait is just the Irish Gaelic form of Charlotte. It is the -otte of the original Charlotte that was a diminutive suffix. Whatever meaning if any -lait would have in Irish Gaelic is irrelevant.
By the way, your picking out the silly interpretation of Mackenzie in an attempt to refute my statement about false information going back to baby name books published before the Internet was invented doesn't wash. You are ignoring the fact that I did not say ALL misinformation went back to those books; I said "most". And as Rene has pointed out, the fact that so many sites give the same misinformation shows that for the majority of people who put up these sites the problem is plagiarization and poor research, not deliberate invention.
I also do not understand your comment about Searlait and Charlotte. This site clearly states that Searlait is just the Irish Gaelic form of Charlotte. It is the -otte of the original Charlotte that was a diminutive suffix. Whatever meaning if any -lait would have in Irish Gaelic is irrelevant.
By the way, your picking out the silly interpretation of Mackenzie in an attempt to refute my statement about false information going back to baby name books published before the Internet was invented doesn't wash. You are ignoring the fact that I did not say ALL misinformation went back to those books; I said "most". And as Rene has pointed out, the fact that so many sites give the same misinformation shows that for the majority of people who put up these sites the problem is plagiarization and poor research, not deliberate invention.
1
You're really taking this seriously, aren't you? Calm down!
The original poster of this thread said that Searlait meant "tiny and womanly" in French. So, saying that "tiny" was a reasonable addition to the meaning because -otte is a diminutive suffix in French is irrelevant. If they'd said that Charlotte meant "tiny and womanly" then it might have some dodgy authenticity, but they were talking about Searlait which has no such suffix.
Make sense now?
♦ Chrisell ♦
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
The original poster of this thread said that Searlait meant "tiny and womanly" in French. So, saying that "tiny" was a reasonable addition to the meaning because -otte is a diminutive suffix in French is irrelevant. If they'd said that Charlotte meant "tiny and womanly" then it might have some dodgy authenticity, but they were talking about Searlait which has no such suffix.
Make sense now?
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
1
I am all with you concerning the reliability problems of "baby name" websites. And for me there is also a difference between tiny and small, in fact a whole order of magnitude: something small can easily be 10 times as big as something tiny.
But my view concerning fabrication is different. I certainly saw much of it in the last 5 years of intensive Googling while building my name database from scratch, but often "plagiarisation" is an even bigger problem.
An example that I recently encountered: What does the name Ayanna mean? Baby name websites mostly tell "beautiful flower" in Swahili. Well, this is a likely candidate for a fabrication, because people knowing something about Swahili or even speaking it know nothing about such "beautiful flowers":
http://research.yale.edu/swahili/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=2&page=3
But look just how many websites tell this probable nonsense? There must be dozens of them! If fabrication is really widespread I probably should see a wide choice of different purported meanings for a name like Ayanna whose meaning is probably unknown and thus attracts "fabricators".
But instead widespread copying of information seems to take place. 1 fabrication once at an unknown place and time in the past, but dozens of copies that nearly drown interesting information about the name.
And why not? Let's suppose I want to make a quick dollar on the Internet and see that baby names are all the rage. I hope to make a small fortune with advertising and products for parents like many such sites seem to. I thus need a name database pronto. Now do I start with a name list and fabricate meanings where none are readily available? Hell no, I just copy the names somewhere, and shortly afterwards my site is running...
Maybe it even overestimates the capabilities of some of these people assuming them to be able to decently fabricate.
Rene www.AboutNames.ch
But my view concerning fabrication is different. I certainly saw much of it in the last 5 years of intensive Googling while building my name database from scratch, but often "plagiarisation" is an even bigger problem.
An example that I recently encountered: What does the name Ayanna mean? Baby name websites mostly tell "beautiful flower" in Swahili. Well, this is a likely candidate for a fabrication, because people knowing something about Swahili or even speaking it know nothing about such "beautiful flowers":
http://research.yale.edu/swahili/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=2&page=3
But look just how many websites tell this probable nonsense? There must be dozens of them! If fabrication is really widespread I probably should see a wide choice of different purported meanings for a name like Ayanna whose meaning is probably unknown and thus attracts "fabricators".
But instead widespread copying of information seems to take place. 1 fabrication once at an unknown place and time in the past, but dozens of copies that nearly drown interesting information about the name.
And why not? Let's suppose I want to make a quick dollar on the Internet and see that baby names are all the rage. I hope to make a small fortune with advertising and products for parents like many such sites seem to. I thus need a name database pronto. Now do I start with a name list and fabricate meanings where none are readily available? Hell no, I just copy the names somewhere, and shortly afterwards my site is running...
Maybe it even overestimates the capabilities of some of these people assuming them to be able to decently fabricate.
Rene www.AboutNames.ch
1
The first reference I have to Ayanna meaning "beautiful flower" is in _The Book of African Names_ by Chief Osuntoki, copyright 1977. In this book, Ayanna meaning "beautiful flower" is part of a list of "Girls Names From East Africa" and is NOT designated as being specifically Swahili. The Swahili part must have gotten in there when someone later ignorantly assumed that all East African names are Swahili.
It would be interesting to know where Osuntoki found the name. I doubt if he invented it or its explanation. Two pages after the list of Girls Names from East Africa is a list of "Ma-Shona" names. Several of the names on that list are also included in Jonathan Musere's _Traditional African Names_ (Scarecrow Press, 2000), with the same meanings. I think it is likely that Osuntoki did find the name Ayanna with that meaning from some African source. Though there isn't enough information in this little book to completely explain who Osuntoki was, from the introduction it seems fairly clear that he himself was a Yoruba from West Africa and so did not have direct knowledge of East Africa himself.
Personally I find tracing down where inaccurate information comes from as interesting and intellectually stimulating as figuring out which derivation is the most accurate. But of course YMMV.
It would be interesting to know where Osuntoki found the name. I doubt if he invented it or its explanation. Two pages after the list of Girls Names from East Africa is a list of "Ma-Shona" names. Several of the names on that list are also included in Jonathan Musere's _Traditional African Names_ (Scarecrow Press, 2000), with the same meanings. I think it is likely that Osuntoki did find the name Ayanna with that meaning from some African source. Though there isn't enough information in this little book to completely explain who Osuntoki was, from the introduction it seems fairly clear that he himself was a Yoruba from West Africa and so did not have direct knowledge of East Africa himself.
Personally I find tracing down where inaccurate information comes from as interesting and intellectually stimulating as figuring out which derivation is the most accurate. But of course YMMV.
1
Maybe it even overestimates the capabilities of some of these people assuming them to be able to decently fabricate.
ROFL! I heartily agree with you.
You're right, of course, in that the originally fabricated meanings have been plagiarised left and right by every cheap and nasty baby names website. They all copy off each other. In distinguishing between copying and inventing I was mainly talking about Cleveland's assertions that the baby name websites' inaccurate meanings came from books from the 50s, which is patently inaccurate - for example, I challenge anyone to find a 1950s baby names book which gives Mackenzie as a girls' name meaning "warrior princess"!
♦ Chrisell ♦
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
ROFL! I heartily agree with you.
You're right, of course, in that the originally fabricated meanings have been plagiarised left and right by every cheap and nasty baby names website. They all copy off each other. In distinguishing between copying and inventing I was mainly talking about Cleveland's assertions that the baby name websites' inaccurate meanings came from books from the 50s, which is patently inaccurate - for example, I challenge anyone to find a 1950s baby names book which gives Mackenzie as a girls' name meaning "warrior princess"!
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
1
Egad! Mackenzie = Warrior Princess = child of people too dim to wonder why there are all those Warrior Royals of both sexes walking around, mostly in Scotland ...
I suppose it's an education issue. One can hardly prevent crooks from taking money from the unthinking ... if only there was a way to encourage them to think; preferably through fear of public ridicule, since if they found intellectual pursuits exciting and fun, they'd give their mindoids some exercise, presumably.
I suppose it's an education issue. One can hardly prevent crooks from taking money from the unthinking ... if only there was a way to encourage them to think; preferably through fear of public ridicule, since if they found intellectual pursuits exciting and fun, they'd give their mindoids some exercise, presumably.
1