New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Patricia
I never liked the name Patricia because I thought it was boring and a bit harsh sounding. Now I've seen Patricia Rose as a combo and all of a sudden it looks pretty to me. Maybe it's only because I like Rose a lot, I'm not sure. WDYT? Is is dated? Too plane?
This message was edited 9/7/2009, 3:53 AM
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
This is my sister's mn. She's Hilary Patricia, meaning "happy noblewoman." And it fits her. :-)
I've always thought Patricia was an underrated gem. It has a very *clean* feeling for me. I like the traditional nn Patsy, but few of the other traditional nns. I'd like to see Pax used as a nn for either Patrick or Patricia.
I see you don't have a problem with Rose being a so called filler mn. That being said, the combination Patricia Rose is very nice. Could I interest you in Patricia Caroline or Patricia Maeve?
I've always thought Patricia was an underrated gem. It has a very *clean* feeling for me. I like the traditional nn Patsy, but few of the other traditional nns. I'd like to see Pax used as a nn for either Patrick or Patricia.
I see you don't have a problem with Rose being a so called filler mn. That being said, the combination Patricia Rose is very nice. Could I interest you in Patricia Caroline or Patricia Maeve?
1
This is my sister's name, so when I saw the subject I just had to respond.
I think that Patricia is actually a pretty name. Not boring and not all harsh, in fact, it's rather soft. Not plain. But definitely dated.
The problem I have with it is the nicknames. My sister is always called Patty, never Patricia, and I don't care for Patty at all. Tricia is better, but I'm still not nuts about it.
Patricia was once very, very, popular. There are a LOT of Patricias out there. But the vast majority of them are now at least over forty. A little Patricia would stand out now. However, it seems that most people want to avoid a name that is dated to the present day's middle-aged and old women, which Patricia sure is. We have to wait for all of the Patricias to pass out of this world for Patricia to have a chance at a comeback.
But what the heck, I'd say to anyone who likes it, go ahead and use it!
BUT...Rose is very unoriginal as a middle name.
I think that Patricia is actually a pretty name. Not boring and not all harsh, in fact, it's rather soft. Not plain. But definitely dated.
The problem I have with it is the nicknames. My sister is always called Patty, never Patricia, and I don't care for Patty at all. Tricia is better, but I'm still not nuts about it.
Patricia was once very, very, popular. There are a LOT of Patricias out there. But the vast majority of them are now at least over forty. A little Patricia would stand out now. However, it seems that most people want to avoid a name that is dated to the present day's middle-aged and old women, which Patricia sure is. We have to wait for all of the Patricias to pass out of this world for Patricia to have a chance at a comeback.
But what the heck, I'd say to anyone who likes it, go ahead and use it!
BUT...Rose is very unoriginal as a middle name.
1
Thank you for informing me about the average age of a Patricia today! I don't live in the US, so sometimes it's hard for me to tell how a name would be perceived there age-wise.
I don't like most NNs for Patricia either, Tricia or Thrisha are the only ones acceptable, in my opinion.
I agree, Rose is a bit unoriginal as a middle name but I like to hear/read it and as it is not usuable where I live anyway, I don't really mind it being a filler.
I don't like most NNs for Patricia either, Tricia or Thrisha are the only ones acceptable, in my opinion.
I agree, Rose is a bit unoriginal as a middle name but I like to hear/read it and as it is not usuable where I live anyway, I don't really mind it being a filler.
This message was edited 9/7/2009, 8:26 AM
1