New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: meaning of Damon
in reply to a message by flower_of_dawn
That is probably a false meaning that people want you to believe. Like Emily means "hard working", Caroline weans "women", and Lorelei means "siren". None of those are true but nmost soures will tell you those are the meanins, but rest assured Mike who runs this site has every meaning as close to correct as possible or he put "meaning unknown".
-Seda*
-Seda*
1
Replies
I'm afraid, „flower_of_dawn“ is not all that wrong. The meaning of DAMON seems to be debated. Beside the Greek word “damatzo” (to tame) “daimon” (devine being, spirit) is another possible word to derive the name from. Mike doesn’t always have the space (or time) to discuss all possible meanings, sometimes he just decides. Sometimes ha adds other possible meanings, but tells us which one he favours. Sometimes Mike may be wrong, but is willing to learn (like we all are). I have stuck to wrong etymology, until someone convinced me, and if you have good evidence, that “daimon” cannot be the source of DAMON, let me know. And there is one more thing I have learned: If one meaning of a name is correct, a different one doesn’t necessarily have to be wrong.
The other examples you are giving are not as clear as you may think:
EMILY: The Latin word “aemilius” originally meant “eager, dilligent” and later took the meaning “jealous, rival”. But it is well possible, that the name is not Latin in origin, but Greek: from “aimylios” (clever).
CAROLINE: Who ever said, this means “woman”, was not as stupid, as you may believe. If you assume that CHARLES (KARL) means “man” (which I don’t believe is true) – why not translate CAROLINE as “woman”?
LORELEI: Of course it doesn’t mean “siren”, but she is one. So if sombebody called LORELEI (I have never heard of a real person by that name) said: “My name means ‘siren’”, I would not necessarily contradict.
Andy ;—)
The other examples you are giving are not as clear as you may think:
EMILY: The Latin word “aemilius” originally meant “eager, dilligent” and later took the meaning “jealous, rival”. But it is well possible, that the name is not Latin in origin, but Greek: from “aimylios” (clever).
CAROLINE: Who ever said, this means “woman”, was not as stupid, as you may believe. If you assume that CHARLES (KARL) means “man” (which I don’t believe is true) – why not translate CAROLINE as “woman”?
LORELEI: Of course it doesn’t mean “siren”, but she is one. So if sombebody called LORELEI (I have never heard of a real person by that name) said: “My name means ‘siren’”, I would not necessarily contradict.
Andy ;—)
1
I'm of the opinion that meanings don't change when their forms are altered. Period. (Well, except when the altered form coincides with another derivations, such as Alannah coming from both Alana and a leanbh "o child".)
Therefore, Charles and Charlie both mean "man", and very few people would say that Charlie means "little man" simply because Charlie's a diminutive of Charles. Similarly, Caroline still means "man" imo, because it's just another direct form of Charles, albeit one specifically meant for females.
To me, feminisations and masculinisations change what sex a name is used, but not the meaning--otherwise Mackenzie could legitimately mean "daughter of the wise ruler" (or, rather, Kenneth), instead of the correct "son of" as indicated by the Mac- prefix. You get what I mean?
There's only one exception to this rule that I'm aware of: Nerys, which perhaps derives from ner "lord". This name is said to have had its meaning deliberately changed to "lady" when ner was feminised. It beats me why this was so, but I do accept it. And it doesn't stop me from discarding my above opinion. Nerys is an exception to the rule, and imo most rules need an exception from time to time.
Miranda
Therefore, Charles and Charlie both mean "man", and very few people would say that Charlie means "little man" simply because Charlie's a diminutive of Charles. Similarly, Caroline still means "man" imo, because it's just another direct form of Charles, albeit one specifically meant for females.
To me, feminisations and masculinisations change what sex a name is used, but not the meaning--otherwise Mackenzie could legitimately mean "daughter of the wise ruler" (or, rather, Kenneth), instead of the correct "son of" as indicated by the Mac- prefix. You get what I mean?
There's only one exception to this rule that I'm aware of: Nerys, which perhaps derives from ner "lord". This name is said to have had its meaning deliberately changed to "lady" when ner was feminised. It beats me why this was so, but I do accept it. And it doesn't stop me from discarding my above opinion. Nerys is an exception to the rule, and imo most rules need an exception from time to time.
Miranda
1
Of course you are perfectly right: a man is a man and a woman is a woman. But I'm sure you have noticed that I am not reasoning from a strictly etymological angle. I'm just trying to imagine what it is like to bear a name meaning "man" (if Charles etc. does mean “man” at all) as a woman. So if someone called Caroline believes, that her name means “woman” (or as you say “little woman”), I would say, this is a legitimate adaptation – even though of course strictly spoken it is not correct.
Andy ;—)
Andy ;—)
1