New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Locklyn / Locklynn
There was a Celebrity BA at the end of last year, where it was posted that Vince Vaughn and his wife named their daughter Locklyn Kyla.
At first, there was a general "WTF?" reaction from everybody, especially concerning trying to turn Lachlan into a feminine name. Just about every response was negative--including mine.
However, two to three months later... I must say Locklyn doesn't repulse me. True, it pretty much has the same pronunciation as Lachlan, an awesome male name, but I must say that I like the element "lock" in a name. I'm pretty sure someone posted (a long time ago) about Locket / Lockett being a female name, but I forget the response to it.
So, Locklyn (or Locklynn)... is it actually a bad name?
At first, there was a general "WTF?" reaction from everybody, especially concerning trying to turn Lachlan into a feminine name. Just about every response was negative--including mine.
However, two to three months later... I must say Locklyn doesn't repulse me. True, it pretty much has the same pronunciation as Lachlan, an awesome male name, but I must say that I like the element "lock" in a name. I'm pretty sure someone posted (a long time ago) about Locket / Lockett being a female name, but I forget the response to it.
So, Locklyn (or Locklynn)... is it actually a bad name?
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Until you pointed it out just now, I didn't even realize that Locklyn was supposed to be a feminine form of Lachlan! I do not pronounce them the same.
I still don't like Locklyn or Locklynn. There are just too many letters or letter combinations in it that I don't like in a name, like 'ock' and 'lyn'.
I still don't like Locklyn or Locklynn. There are just too many letters or letter combinations in it that I don't like in a name, like 'ock' and 'lyn'.
This message was edited 2/3/2011, 6:51 AM
1
Yes, I still dislike it for a girl. Lachlan, Locksley, Locket would all be boys names to me. I just wouldn't use Locket because the meaning is not one a boy would appreciate I don't think.
1
Yes it is bad. It's just "lock" with a "feminine" suffix rammed onto it.
1
If Lachlan didn't exist, I think I might like Locklyn. I don't like -lynn names at all, so I wouldn't like Locklynn, but I think that I'd give Locklyn more credit if I didn't already like Lachlan.
1
No offense but I think it's . . . bad. Very bad. A random word with -lyn attached, a la Treelyn.
1
It reminds me of Lakelyn, a little girl I know of. I'm not a fan.
1
Lakelyn seems like a further corruption of Lachlan, like they changed "lan" into "lyn", and then changed "lach" into "loch" so they could 'translate' it and get "lake"...
1
now they have an idea for the next one :(
1
Locklyn seems totally masculine to me. The spelling actually doesn't totally turn me off, but hearing that sound for a girl's name does!
1
I don't hate it. I'm just sad to see yet another nice solid boys name cross the barrier. It's very hard to get them back you know! Anyway, I love Lachlan and would totally use it on a boy. That said, I'm a bit of a hypocrite and love Morgan on a girl. Go figure. :o)
1
To be completely honest, I think it's horrid! It's not just that it's a rip-off of Lachlan, as they sound quite different to me, I just don't see the appeal of it. The celebrity association would quickly date the name, too.
1
How on earth do they sound quite different to you? I'm confused.
1
Lachlan is LAHK-luhn and Locklyn is LOCK-lin.
1
Those sound exactly the same to me. lol
1
Wow, I've never heard Lachlan said that way. I mean I can see it from the spelling, but it looks like vicious exaggeration to me! I've only ever heard Lachlan pronounced LOCK-lin.
1
In American accents, anything that ends with an N preceded by a vowel tends to be pronounced as -in. In English accents, it tends to be -un. It's probably not true for all names / words and all accents, though.
This message was edited 2/2/2011, 1:42 PM
1
Yeah, I can see the -un part. It's the LAHK that's out-there for me. Is that the same as the word "lack"?
1
No, I wouldn't say it's like "lack". It's actually quite hard to describe. If I was explaining it to someone from England, I'd say it was like "lark" said quickly, but we don't say the R's where Americans do, so I'm stuck. Sorry...
1
The short 'O' sound doesn't exist in (some) American phonology
It's replaced by the backed A sound (like in 'hall'). Consequently, words like "stalk" and "stock", "dawn" and "don" are pronounced identically in most American accents.
It's replaced by the backed A sound (like in 'hall'). Consequently, words like "stalk" and "stock", "dawn" and "don" are pronounced identically in most American accents.
This message was edited 2/2/2011, 2:50 PM
1
I'm from California, and everyone I know pronounces "stalk" and "stock", "dawn" and "don" the same.
1
Not the same in my accent
In fact, that's a very western sounding thing to me, that "aw" sound. Like California accent. In my accent, stalk and dawn have the same sound (aw), and stock and don have the same sound (ah).
In fact, that's a very western sounding thing to me, that "aw" sound. Like California accent. In my accent, stalk and dawn have the same sound (aw), and stock and don have the same sound (ah).
1
It's referred to as the "cot-caught merger"
I might have been a little generous when I said "most" because it is on a scale, but more than 50% of Americans merge them. From Wikipedia:
"The cot-caught merger (also known as the low back merger) is a phonemic merger, a sound change, that occurs in some varieties of English. The merger occurs in some accents of Scottish English and to some extent in Mid Ulster English but is best known as a phenomenon of many varieties of North American English.
The sound change causes the vowel in caught, talk, and small to be pronounced like the vowel in cot, rock, and doll, so that cot and caught, for example, become homophones, and the two vowels merge into a single phoneme. The change does not affect a vowel followed by /r/, so barn and born remain distinct, and starring and warring do not rhyme.
The presence of the merger and its absence are both found in many different regions of the continent, and in both urban and rural environments.
According to Labov, Ash, and Boberg, the merger does not generally occur in the southern United States (with exceptions), along most of the American side of the Great Lakes region, or in the "Northeast Corridor" extended metropolitan region from Providence, Rhode Island to Baltimore. Areas that it occurs include:
* Canada
* Boston (see Boston accent)
* Northeastern New England
* the Pittsburgh area (see Pittsburghese)
* The Western United States
* Due to an apparent spread of the merger towards the center of the United States (from both the western and eastern states), portions of the Midwest also feature the merger:
o Illinois
o Indiana
o Iowa
o Minnesota
o Missouri
o Ohio"
I might have been a little generous when I said "most" because it is on a scale, but more than 50% of Americans merge them. From Wikipedia:
"The cot-caught merger (also known as the low back merger) is a phonemic merger, a sound change, that occurs in some varieties of English. The merger occurs in some accents of Scottish English and to some extent in Mid Ulster English but is best known as a phenomenon of many varieties of North American English.
The sound change causes the vowel in caught, talk, and small to be pronounced like the vowel in cot, rock, and doll, so that cot and caught, for example, become homophones, and the two vowels merge into a single phoneme. The change does not affect a vowel followed by /r/, so barn and born remain distinct, and starring and warring do not rhyme.
The presence of the merger and its absence are both found in many different regions of the continent, and in both urban and rural environments.
According to Labov, Ash, and Boberg, the merger does not generally occur in the southern United States (with exceptions), along most of the American side of the Great Lakes region, or in the "Northeast Corridor" extended metropolitan region from Providence, Rhode Island to Baltimore. Areas that it occurs include:
* Canada
* Boston (see Boston accent)
* Northeastern New England
* the Pittsburgh area (see Pittsburghese)
* The Western United States
* Due to an apparent spread of the merger towards the center of the United States (from both the western and eastern states), portions of the Midwest also feature the merger:
o Illinois
o Indiana
o Iowa
o Minnesota
o Missouri
o Ohio"
1
I feel way cool and indie now cuz I definitely have the merger but I'm from the south.
1
I don't pronounce "stalk" and "stock" the same, nor do I pronounce "dawn" and "don" the same. I'm from New Jersey. I had a friend in middle school who was from Michigan and had moved to New Jersey, and from what I remember of her accent, I can imagine her pronouncing "stalk" and "stock" the same. Now I will get more specific and state that I'm from northern New Jersey. My sister-in-law is from southern New Jersey, and from what I know of her accent, I think she would pronounce "dawn" and "don" the same. That's a Philly accent that she has, from what I understand. My sisters and I have always made fun of it! Anyway, so I think that this can really vary, but I do realize that you said "most". I find accents fascinating.
1
I live in the NW US, and I pronounce dawn and don, stalk and stock differently. Some Americans pronounce them the same???
1
Yeah, they're the same where I live. I read them differently, but when I say them out loud they're pretty much the same.
1
Yes, it does vary
But a significant majority pronounce them identically or very similarly.
But a significant majority pronounce them identically or very similarly.
1
It depends on the accent
I know that lots of Americans merge those sounds, but some don't. I can hear a very slight distinction between "ah" and a short "O" when I say them, for instance, although it's much more obvious when I put on a fake British accent.
I know that lots of Americans merge those sounds, but some don't. I can hear a very slight distinction between "ah" and a short "O" when I say them, for instance, although it's much more obvious when I put on a fake British accent.
1
That's true
I shouldn't have been so general. But for most Americans, there is little or no difference.
I shouldn't have been so general. But for most Americans, there is little or no difference.
1
I have a bit of a California accent (I lived in L.A. until I was five), and I noticed that California wasn't on your list of places with the cot-caught merger, so I think that explains it in my case. I live in Illinois now, though, so I'll have to pay attention to the people around me and see if they use that merger.
1
In a lot of american accents, Lark said quickly in an english accent sounds exactly like Lock. We don't make it as o-ish as y'all do.
1
The British accent in my head is saying "lark" with a mix of an r and a w. :o) Oh well. We tried. :o) It would be nice if they had sound bites with each name so you could hear how it's said in its language of origin.
1
You can hear the two pronunciations here:
http://www.howjsay.com/index.php?word=lachlan
I use the second one, the Americans seem to use the first one.
http://www.howjsay.com/index.php?word=lachlan
I use the second one, the Americans seem to use the first one.
This message was edited 2/2/2011, 1:55 PM
1
I use the second one too which is why Locklyn and Lachlan sound quite different to me.
1
That sounds odd to me. I'm English and I would say LOCK-lun but that pronunciation says LACK-lun. I don't come across many people named Lachlan but I've only ever heard it pronounced LOCK-lun. It's fairly common as a surname and as the surname McLachlan / McLoughlin etc and that's the same.
1
Funny, here in Australia its definately Loch-lin. There is no A sound in the middle.
1
Thanks. Next time my speakers are working I'll be all over that! :o)
1
LOL:-)
1
Yeah, we tried :P There's a good chance LAHK and LOCK sound the same in your accent, anyway. If only I'd have realised that sooner!
1
I think it's bad. And "bad" is really the most mild adjective I'm going to give it. I recall having a very negative reaction to seeing this for the first time. :-P
1