View Message

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

[Opinions] I agree with Chrisell (m)
that it's absurd. Use a name that *means* new, by all means, if that's what you want. But don't just use a different language version of new, simply because a French accent makes it sound better.Plus, there's the added bonus of the "Nouveau Riche" association. Or the mismatched gender, if you use it on a girl.Think about this - will Nouveau ever be elected president? Will they successfully head an office? Will they be able to print business cards that aren't confusing? When you limit a child with a name that restricts them to certain avenues when they are grown, I think it's not practical. This doesn't mean we have to be overrun by Elizabeths and Georges, but there's *so* many names to choose from that I think it's fanciful and impractical to randomly pick words that don't have a history of use as a name to use instead. There isn't *anything* else out there that has the same meaning or similar sound? That baffles me.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

Hmm interesting usually people like word names in other languages.For example when I asked about Butterfly everyone told me to use Mariposa.May I ask what the difference is?
vote up1
For me, my opinion doesn't change unless the word name is used as an actual name. So, while I wouldn't like Butterfly, Mariposa would be okay, provided it has actual usage as a name. Otherwise, it's just a fancy way of dressing up the same thing - a word, not a name. It's the word part that bothers me, as there's plenty of names out there with meanings that are the same or similar, without having to resort to words.
vote up1
ah got you :) I was just wondering thanks :).
vote up1
Fair point. It's probably going to end up on a guilty pleasures list...
vote up1