|Subject:||Re: not what i'd call "traditional"|
|Author:||Lethe (Authenticated as reniannen17)|
|Date:||August 14, 2008 at 4:45:02 AM|
|Reply to:||not what i'd call "traditional" by aquamarina|
my excuse is that it was late last night when I posted, and while you're very nice about it, I realise I didn't word my summary very well. After re-reading the article again, it does seem to differentiate between enduring traditional names, and those considered 'old-fashioned' like Irene and Norman which are in decline.
I think you have a point about some of the names they comment on. Quite a few of them, like Gertrude and Norman I don't think have ever been particularly popular in Scotland compared to England, so it's harder for me to tell, but having been looking into the family tree, I would only expect to find such names from about my grandparents generation. Any further back and you run into a seemingly endless cycle of 'traditional' names like James, Andrew, Thomas, Mary, Catherine, Isabella, most of which are still popular today.
I agree with you, we do generally do alright in the UK, I struggle to find anything remotely as 'interesting' as Sabrinas posts in our bas.
*~ As bees flee hame wi' lades o' treasure, the minutes wing'd their way wi' pleasure ~*
|Because this message is archived you cannot respond to it.|
|Messages in this thread:|