Sullivan

@SlippySarah Call me uneducated but I don't the exact history of every single name used across the world in every culture and going back 2000 years+

Presumably you have given your child a name which is more commonly used as a surname which is why you are so snappy about me sharing a very average opinion.
I won't bother with calling you uneducated but I will say you are a tad contrary of you are going about criticising people for adopting surnames as first names when it's gone on throughout civilised history. Some names are only being adopted now but that doesn't make them any chavvier or culturally appropriated than all the names you have known since you were a kid. You are just someone who struggles with change. If it happened before your time it's ok. If it happens now, it's an abomination. It's just weird.
And no. No surnames as first names in our family that I know of although some of them may have been

@harrietm87 the point is it isn't a recent trend. It's always happened. You are just having a problem with the names that have been adopted in your lifetime as they feel unfamiliar so you take exception to them. But to claim that it's cultural appropriation or chavvy it all the other judgemental things it has been called on this thread when it's always gone on us a bit 🙄

I really like it and I’m usually a bit sniffy about surnames for first names.

I wouldn't use it but that's because it was the name of my school. It would remind me of school every day! Otherwise I quite like it.

Call me uneducated but I don't the exact history of every single name used across the world in every culture and going back 2000 years+

Presumably you have given your child a name which is more commonly used as a surname which is why you are so snappy about me sharing a very average opinion.

Not RTFT. Fine as a surname but not as a first name. Solomon has a similar sound and is much nicer.

@Moomoo36 given you are Scottish I'd use it but I'd use the Scottish spelling that the other poster mentioned.

I assumed that it was the same spelling as the hill but I'm not exactly top of the spelling class.

I love Sully. Makes me think of the pilot. Someone mentioned Sol, a player for the football team I support is called Sol Solomon. It’s catchy

@stingypeasant i can’t speak for Persian people. Yasmin has been an established first name for generations. Appreciate your other posts have gone back to the times of Alexander the Great so perhaps you’re taking a longer range view than me.

As an Irish person, I think the very recent trend for using Irish surnames as first names is annoying at the least and offensive at worst. Hope that clarifies things for you.

@harrietm87 but Yasmine/Jasmine was Originally a Persian surname. I'm really not understanding how you can differentiate

Im distinguishing between using a first name from another culture (like Zara) and using a surname from another culture (like Singh). There is a distinction. Surnames are traditionally passed down through generations and therefore tend to have distinct and specific cultural, ethnic, historic significance; first names do not (in the same way).

It's quite nice. Surnames as first names can be looked down on by some people but if that doesn't concern you, why not go for it? It's a good name and Sully is a very cute nn. Suli is quite a common Arabic nn for boys called Suleiman which is very similar so he's unlikely to be the only one.

I suppose it is a positive development in one sense. When I lived in England being Irish was terminally uncool. Not as bad as the bubonic plague I suppose but much worse than halitosis or dandruff.
The wheel is always turning I guess.

Not really. Ancient Greeks would often reuse names within the family (eg naming after grandparents) but the names didn’t denote specific family membership. Roman second names did, though.

I don't like it. I dislike surnames being used as first names (Cooper, Riley, etc)

Jesus the auto correct mixed with no glasses has thrown madness into my texting

@GeraltsBathtub Ithink you have this slightly muddled. For example, Alexander the Great. Alexander was his first name and he didn’t have a surname - ancient Greeks didn’t use them.

Yes. They didn't have fist names. They had Onr bane followed by their region usually. The one babe was more akin to our surnames. Like in many many cultures around the world. The one name linked them to something. A clan. A family. A sect. It was akin to a surname. Not a first name. You've confused yourself. And I know this. I'm not guessing. My ds studied classics. We have discussed this

Huh? You are just being selective. Why wouldn't Zara or Jasmine be cultural appropriation whereas the others are? Just because you think so doesn't make it so. Using names from other cultures is either cultural appropriation or it's not. You can't go around saying Finlay is CP but Zara isn't. You don't get to pick and choose

Alexander and Oliver were names when people were called 'Alexander of XXXX'. It was more akin to our surname. It was then a surname later adopted as a first name.

I think you have this slightly muddled. For example, Alexander the Great. Alexander was his first name and he didn’t have a surname - ancient Greeks didn’t use them. The name became a surname after use as a first name. Likewise Oliver, first used as a first name (eg Charlemagne’s pal) and then as a surname. Both probably originally used as surnames in a patronymic sense but without a -son, Mc- etc being added.

Oh and the Zara/Jasmin example isn’t analogous. A proper analogy would be if Singh or Patel or Wang or Romanov as a first name. It would be weird, and it doesn’t happen.

I didn’t say any names were chavvy. I said that Alexander and Oliver are in a different category from Mason and Grayson, and they absolutely are. I think you are actually agreeing on this point?

Fwiw I don’t think there is anything wrong with British people using random unrelated British surnames (like eg Mason) for their kids. I do however object to them using Irish surnames for their kids, not because I think it is chavvy but because I think it is inappropriate cultural appropriation.

I don’t like it because it shortens to Sully, as pp pointed out very negative meaning. Especially if you are hoping for another girl and he ruins the set…

Exactly. Nearly every Irish surname will have an origin of 'descendant of chieftain called X who ruled half of Munster in 510 AD' or similar. But these names then very quickly became surnames.