Namn på barn och kattungar

– likheter och skillnader idag jämfört med för tio år sedan

av Katharina Leibring

Välbekant är att dagens sällskapsdjur ofta får samma namn som dagens barn. Vid en undersökningar jag gjorde för cirka tio år sedan om vilka namn som då gavs till hundar och katter, visade statistiken att katterna gavs fler ”djurtypiska” namn, typ Gosan, Mysan, Sessan, Murre, Misse, än hundarna. Bland dem var det särskilt vanligt att tikar (honhundar) fick samma namn som småflickor.

Elsa som kattunge. Foto: Leila Mattfolk.

Detta fenomen var ganska frekvent också för honkatter, medan det för handjur av båda arter användes ett större och mer varierat namnförråd. Handjuren fick också personnamn, men dessa kom gärna från fiktiva eller verkliga förebilder, och överensstämde inte lika mycket med namntoppen för småpojkar. Jag skymtade också en trend där omoderna barnnamn, t.ex. Sören, Lennart, Torsten, gavs till djur.

En del av de här omoderna namnen har sedan börjat ges till småbarn – kanske främst enligt tregenerationsregeln för namns återkomst, men jag ser det som sannolikt att bruket av namnen som djurnamn underlättade så att namnen blev användbara igen. Detta skedde genom att presumtiva namngivare vande sig vid att höra de här namnen på sällskapsdjur, och att namnen på så vis kom i omlopp i namnbruket och sipprade in i den del av medvetandet som ägnade sig åt namngivning. Namnen upplevdes som moderna och kunde därmed också ges till barn.

Hur ser det ut idag, tio år senare? Kan någon utveckling eller förändring skönjas? Fortsätter populära småbarnsnamn att användas som djurnamn? De populära småbarnsnamnen är delvis de samma (Alice, William m.fl.) men nya namn har tillkommit på topplistorna. Genom att undersöka nyregistreringar hos försäkringsbolaget Agria för kattungar födda 2022 kunde jag göra ett antal iakttagelser. Jag ska påminna om att namn på djur gärna används könsöverskridande, men eftersom den statistik jag har tillgång till är könsuppdelad, och inga namn återfinns på båda listorna, kan vi här bortse från den aspekten.

Flera av de idag populära småbarnsnamnen (bland de som inte var lika vanliga 2011) är också mycket använda som namn på dagens kattungar. Runt 40 av de 100 vanligaste kattungenamnen finns även på 100-i-topplistorna för barn namngivna 2022. Samma antal gäller för de namn som är nya på kattnamnslistorna jämfört med 2011. Intressant här är att det har skett en större förändring bland hankatterna, det har alltså kommit in fler nya namn där. Vilka är då de nya kattnamnen, och vilka har blivit mindre populära?

Namn på honkattungar 2022

Nya honkattsnamn, som också är populära småflicksnamn, är Juni, Lily, Rut och Zoe. Några för närvarande omoderna flicknamn (men som är på försiktig uppgång) på listan är Kerstin, Siv och Sonja. (Här kan tillfogas att en svensk kändiskatt med stort Instagram-konto bar namnet Kerstin Strömstedt.) På kattnamnslistan, men inte på småflickslistan, finns namnen Chanel, Kiwi, Pepsi och Pixie, alla kända som vanliga namn givna till olika djurarter.

Några namn som har försvunnit från honkatternas topplista är de traditionella kattnamnen Busan, Flisan och Mysan. Borta är också Ida, Kajsa och Tindra – alla namn som minskat i popularitet som flicknamn.

Tyra som kattunge. Foto: Leila Mattfolk.

Namn på hankattungar 2022

På hankattsidan är Alfred, Dante, Frans, Loke, Milo, Oliver och Sam nya – alla också populära småpojksnamn idag. Nya som kattnamn är också de mer omoderna mansnamnen Benny, Hasse, Sven och Sören, liksom Albus, Aslan och Baloo; de senare kända från film och litteratur.

Hela 21 hankattsnamn har bytts ut från 2011, däribland kändisnamn (på katter eller personer) som Figaro, Gustav, Messi, Måns, Rocky, Tarzan och Tyson. Också de fortfarande populära pojknamnen, i toppen sedan millennieskiftet, Hugo, Max och Oskar, tycks ha tappat sin dragningskraft hos kattägarna.

Kattnamn som kommunikationsmedel

Om vi studerar namnen ur en kommunikativ synvinkel kan vi konstatera att Xenofons utsaga att djurnamn ska vara tvåstaviga (för att vara lätta att säga och uppfatta) fortfarande håller ganska bra. Den gamla föreställningen om att djurnamn ska innehålla ljuden /i/ och/eller /s/ för att lätt kunna uppfattas av det namngivna djuret tycks inte ha samma genomslag hos namngivarna idag – flera av de nya namnen innehåller inget av dessa ljud.

Frågor kring kattungenamnen

För att sammanfatta: kattungars namn visar nu ännu större överensstämmelse med populära småbarnsnamn än vad de gjorde för tio år sedan. De traditionella kattnamnen med ursprung i utseende eller läten har minskat i popularitet. Människobarn och djurbarn tycks namnges i symbios. Det verkar också som om namngivningen av handjur har tagit ett steg närmare hondjuren i det att ännu fler populära småpojksnamn används idag.

Att en del av de populärkulturella namnen byts ut när deras förebilder blir passé väcker frågor: Har namnen inte fått helt rotat fäste som djurnamn? Vad beror det på att namn med tuffa förebilder, som Rocky och Tyson, blivit mindre populära? Är tuffhet inte längre lika önskvärt i djurnamn, är förebilderna mindre kända eller har de här namnen blivit allt för vanliga på katter? Söker kattnamngivarna unika namn på samma sätt som många nyblivna föräldrar gör idag när de namnger sina barn?

Att läsa mer:

  • Agria: Namn på kattungen 2022 – så döper vi våra kattungar.
  • Leibring, Katharina, 2012: Staffan i den svenska kattnamnsskatten. I: Namn på stort och smått. Vänskrift till Staffan Nyström den 11 december 2012. Red. av Katharina Leibring (huvudred.), Leif Nilsson, Annette C Torensjö & Mats Wahlberg. Uppsala. S. 141–148.
  • Leibring, Katharina, 2015: Namn på sällskapsdjur – nya mönster och strukturer. I: Innovationer i namn och namnmönster. Handlingar från NORNA-symposiet i Halmstad 6–8 november 2013, red. av Emilia Aldrin & al. Uppsala: NORNA-förlaget. S. 134–152.
  • Meldgaard, Eva Villarsen, 1993: Kattens navn. 2000 danske kattenavne. Værløse: Billesø & Baltzer.

THE ROYAL HERITAGE OF NAMES

by Sofia Kotilainen

King Charles III will be crowned during the Coronation Service at Westminster Abbey on 6 May 2023. He has had several decades to prepare for this new position. “He’s been practising for a bit,” his sister, the Princess Royal, playfully told Canadian CBC News.

In the interview, Princess Anne summed up the meaning of coronation, saying that more than just being a big celebration, it is also an essential part of the responsibilities of the Crown. The Coronation is a combination of several traditional, historical and religious meanings. It symbolically strengthens the relationship of the people and their monarch and represents the continuity of the regime.

The coronation ceremony of May 2023 has been planned to be shorter and less extensive than in earlier centuries. According to media reports, King Charles also has had plans to renew the British monarchy, even though he will naturally honour the royal traditions and history. In recent months, there have been news of slimming down the amount of the members of the royal house.

Long-lasting commitment

There will certainly be changes in the British monarchy in the next few years, for the simple reason that the reign of Elizabeth II was so exceptionally long, and society and its attitudes have changed since 1950s. The coronation always symbolizes the beginning of a new era. Many things in the administration and practices of the court no doubt will be modernized and updated, but there is one immaterial heritage the kingdom has preserved for centuries and which will not be changed: the royal names carry long-lasting traditions.

Charles I and II (House of Stuarts) ruled in the 17th century. The new monarch of the 2020s will carry on this naming tradition. Within the House of Windsor, too, there are long naming traditions. If we consider the male line, there’s a continuation from generation to generation.

The King’s granddaughter, Princess Charlotte (who is said to look a lot like her great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth and also her father, the Prince of Wales), has inherited this name in a feminized version from her grandfather. She is also the namesake of both her grandmothers as well as Queen Elizabeth. Her brothers, George (the future heir of the crown) and Louis, also carry the traditional names of earlier generations of monarchs, and of their grandfather. King Charles himself inherited his forenames from earlier generations of the House of Windsor as well as the Duke of Edinburgh (Louis and Alexander in the princes’ names are inherited at least from Prince Philip’s forefathers):

  • King Charles III – Charles Philip Arthur George
    • Prince of Wales –  William Arthur Philip Louis
      • Prince George Alexander Louis
      • Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana
      • Prince Louis Arthur George

Even now in the 2020s, these centuries-old traditions continue to define the naming practices of the royal families. Why, then, are the royal families so committed to such long-lasting naming practices?

Onomastic literacy and the inherited names of royal families

In my research on name-giving practices, I have made use of the concept of onomastic literacy as an analytical tool. Onomastic literacy can be understood as the skills needed to interpret the cultural and social phenomena and meanings related to name-giving. Onomastic literacy skills are part of a person’s cultural capital. I have studied personal names in family networks utilizing this concept, and in the royal families of the United Kingdom and Sweden.

The concept of onomastic literacy helps researchers to contextualize the lives of their research objects more closely as part of the cultures and local communities of their times, thereby revealing the deep-rooted motives behind name choices and the slow change in mentalities affecting naming generation by generation. These are connected with identities, symbols and kin networks.

Onomastic literacy is part of the cultural and informational capital of each individual and family. Communal norms have governed interpretations of name choices, but in order to be able to choose a ‘suitable’ name, an individual has to be sufficiently familiar with the traditions of the family and the locality. It is a question not only of fashion but also of identities, values and ideals. For example, in royal families it has been important to maintain the prestige of the dynasty in the eyes of the people through name choices and the symbolic meanings connected with them.

Royal names are inherited from one generation to another, and this long continuity of important names results in slow change of the nomenclature and favours traditional names. Thus, personal names, not only surnames and the names of royal houses but also inherited forenames, could be described as a kind of a cultural DNA, which immediately expresses the family and royal house into which a person has been born. This has also been connected to trust in and the good repute of the royal family and its networks. For the subjects of the royal families and for the media, these ‘safe choices’ of inherited forenames also communicate their uniqueness and legitimate their status.

On the other hand, royal families cannot isolate themselves from society. That is why in the Nordic countries, for example, the name choices of the royal families, even as they respect older traditions, also reflect the greater freedom of choice that parents nowadays have in name-giving compared with earlier centuries.

The whole article in NoSo: Kotilainen, Sofia 2022. Utilizing the concept of onomastic literacy as an analytical tool: a methodological examination of the names of European royal families. Nordisk tidskrift för socioonomastik / Nordic Journal of Socio-Onomastics 2, 63–88 (Open Access pdf).

The alphabet of the land(scape): Children’s place-names

by Birna Lárusdóttir

Reading the landscape

“Children learned the alphabet of the landscape before and at the same time as they learned the alphabet of the book.”

This comment, in a place-name record put together in 1994 by Lúther E. Gunnlaugsson, farmer at Veisusel in Fnjóskadalur in northern Iceland, indicates that in Iceland in previous times, the ability to read the landscape, not least on the basis of place-names, was thought to be important. Each place-name represented a letter or sign, as in an alphabet, and as such, was part of a bigger whole.

Farm landscape through the eyes of a child.  Halldór Pétursson 1924.  National Museum of Iceland.

Lúther’s comment fits well with well-known theoretical ideas about landscape and the marks that humans make on/in it. Scholars have, for example, compared landscape to a text in which writing, reading and literacy are implicit, and also to a palimpsest manuscript – a manuscript whose text has been scraped off and written anew with new ink. In this way, landscape, along with the place-names in it, is multi-layered, constantly changing and often complex. At the same time, it is necessary for those who live in and interact with particular places to be able to read it, or read out of it – to understand what place-names referred to, and what kinds of meaning they contained.

Place-name knowledge in past times could be an indicator of an individual’s status within a particular group, and it could enable children to accomplish tasks or work that carried with it a certain responsibility. Thus, in a place-name record for the farm of Brekka in Svarfaðardalur in northern Iceland, we read how adults had names for every landscape feature at their fingertips: “…each hill, gully or cliff … on every upland heath between Bakkadalur and Holtsdalur.

These place-names were necessary for boys to know if they hoped to become a shepherd, because otherwise it could be difficult if, for example, the dairy-women asked where the ewes had been found, and if he could not identify the place by name then he was an idiot and would be laughed at by them.” Aged nine, having accompanied his uncle up on the heaths searching for sheep, the author of these words had become a competent shepherd who was knowledgeable about place-names in the area.

Children as authors

Children were not only passive readers of the landscape but also active authors. There are various hints that suggest this in the place-name records. The informants in the records had generally reached old age when the place-names were put down in writing but were happy to go back in time to their early years when they were recalled.

There are examples of ruins of shepherds’ huts in outer meadows that had names such as Markúsarkofi, Bensagerði and Rönkukofi, all most likely named after children who looked after the sheep, possibly by other children. Other examples of hut names include Bræðraborg (Brothers´ Butte), Krummastaðir (Krummi´s farm or Raven´s Farm) and Barnabaðstofa (Childrens´ living room).

Ruins of a shepard´s hut.  Öxnadalshreppur, N-Iceland.  The Institute of Archaeology, Iceland.

Sites of play were probably the most common places that children named: these were places that were central to their early world but did not have much significance in the daily life of adults. Examples of these may include Gullatóft at Austdalur in Seyðisfjörður in the east of Iceland, and Leggjabú at Dalbær in Hrunamannahreppur in southern Iceland: both names refer to toys directly.

There are other examples where play-sites were given farm-names, e.g. at Litli-Galtardalur on Fellsströnd in western Iceland where kids built “houses and halls, sheep-pens and fences” all around a certain hill. Fögruvellir (Fair Grounds) was nearby, as was Vallabú (Valli´s farm), “under a grassy overhang” – so-called because a boy called Valli built a structure there. At Austurhlíð in Eystrihreppur, southern Iceland, at a place called Kirkjulundur (Church Grove) there was a fenced-off plot where children buried dogs, cats and other animal friends. There was even a little church that the children had built: inside there was space for one person. These are all intriguing indications of how children named places to create a space for their games: they built their own world on the basis of various ideas taken from the adult world, adapted to their own sphere and rules.

Sometimes children’s place-names are not paid much accord in the place-name records. An example of this is found in the record for Staðarhraun in Mýrar in the west of Iceland: a certain channel that children called Kjóamýri because of Arctic skua attacks (kjói = Arctic skua) is mentioned, but the informant makes it clear that that name disappeared from use as soon as the children had grown up.

At Landakot on Vatnsleysuströnd on the Reykjanes peninsula there is a description of a boggy area called Móar where there were bare patches of earth and rocks to which children gave “various names, which hardly count as place-names.” Unfortunately, these names were not recorded.

In both of these examples we can see the assumption that place-names used by children were not thought to be of much significance: maybe the names had not been passed on to others or become established in the adults’ language, likely because they were only used within the children’s group and therefore the chances of them becoming fixed were smaller.

Another example, though, from Vatnsleysuströnd, might point to a contrasting idea: that children themselves were also part of the place-naming process: there, children came up with new names for places that already had names – thus they began to call “Síki” (Canal) by another name, “Sílalækur” (Small Fish Creek), and the ruins of the old farm-house at Stóru-Vogar “Rústir” (Ruins). Both of these names seem to have survived.

All of the examples in this paper derive from place name registers preserved in the archive of The Árni Magnússon Insitute, Iceland.  Most of them are accessible online at: www.nafnid.is

This paper is an English translation of the Icelandic Stafróf landsins: Örnefni barna that appeared on the Árni Magnússon Institute web page in November 2020. Translation by Emily Lethbridge.