Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

shortened names - what do you thinnk?

76 replies

hockeymum · 24/01/2006 08:29

Just wondering what people think about naming a baby a shortened name, rather than the full name. Is it OK? or do you think its important that they have the full proper name?

Just asking because I've been struggling for boys names for db and the only ones I really like a shortened ones (which I hate the longer versions of). My two favourites are Charlie and Theo, but I hate the names Charles and Theodore which are obviously the "proper" names.

What do you think? How did you get round this?

OP posts:
BudaBabe · 24/01/2006 08:31

Have a friend here who just had a baby Theo on Saturday - lovely name! And I think it is just Theo. With Theodore you run the risk of "Dumbledore"!!

I think nowadays it is OK just to use the short version.

nailpolish · 24/01/2006 08:31

i dont see whats wrong with it! i was christened a shortened version of a name - my parents didnt like the full version. and i like my name.

i have had times when people have assumed my name is the full version (like teachers at school) but its never been a problem

Bouj · 24/01/2006 08:35

Hello fellow due in May-er!!

I'm all for it. We deliberately chose ds's name so that it can be shortened. He is Samuel, but we hardly ever call him that, he is always Sam. We are thinking Jonathan this time around, which I don't mind, but really like Jon or Jonny. I know a few people who called their sons Charlie, and not Charles. So go for it. Also love, love the name Theo - but dh reckons all he thinks of is Cosby Show!

lucy5 · 24/01/2006 08:35

I dont think it matters, my db is Sam not Samuel, when we were considering names for dd, well before we knew she was dd we liked Olly not Oliver. My friend has 3 kids all of whom have long names on thir birth certificate e.g katherine but have always been called by their shortened names e.g Kate. In my opinion why bother with the long name if you are not going to use it?

edam · 24/01/2006 08:37

I do think it's preferable to give people the proper name that can be used formally ? for certificates/passports and so on. They don't have to use the long forms if they don't like them, but they won't be babies for ever and may appreciate grown-up names when they are. What if they grew up to be law Lords, or general secretary of the UN? You never know... also it allows those in authority to sound a bit over-familiar. If they are ever on the other side, up in court (although obviously they'd be innocent or only up for speeding!), they may not want the prosecution to sound like their best mate, for example.

FWIW I had a nickname, which is actually longer than my 'proper' name and not the same name anyway, as a little girl. Very glad that I had a formal name to revert to; it's a nice name for a little girl but a bit little girly for an adult in formal situations.

stripeybumpsmum · 24/01/2006 08:46

Personally, I think having a longer name in formal situations is better, because then you can control use of your more personal shortened or pet name for those you really want to use it. I have to confess we intend to chicken out and give db a name with lots of versions so as they grow up they can decide what their shortened name is. I think you grow into your name anyway - I hate people I don't know calling me by an abbrievation and will always correct them, but equally, the only times I ever heard my brother being called his full name, it was always prior to a telling off (he just doesn't suit his full name but the short version is very him).
I think people will shorten or elongate a name anyway - I know of a new baby 'Jim' but I can gurantee it will get changed like the couple who called their kids Ian and Lyn, who sign themselves 'Yonny' and 'Lynnie'

I suspect with names you just can't win, but FWIW I think Charles/Charlie and Theo all good (be prepared for latter to become Ted as in Bill and Ted, who was a Theodore).

Miaou · 24/01/2006 09:23

Hmm, it's a difficult one - I have to say I agree with edam for all the reasons she has stated. My db has just had a ds who they have given a shortened name which to my mind, if he becomes a law lord or politician or person of Jeremy Vine type gravitas - it will be totally incongruous! I feel they have taken away his options by only giving him the "little boy" name - after all, the full one could just go on his certificate for now, they don't have to use it! They also find themselves introducing him as "his name is x but it's not short for xyz, it's just x", so it makes life more complicated than it needs to be. I really love his name btw, I just think he may not thank them when he is older!

satine · 24/01/2006 09:33

We wanted to call our daughter Lola but we know she might grow up to hate it - and yes, if she's a QC or Prime Minister (!) she might need a more serious name, so we christened her Eleanor but I think in the case of Theo you'd be ok, that's not a 'babyish' nickname.

LipstickMum · 24/01/2006 09:35

My dp and I love shortened names and both of our girls have them. However, I was the one who wanted them to also have a longer version, 'serious' name, just in case! Dp couldn't have cared less.

harpsichordcarrier · 24/01/2006 09:40

yes I agree with Satine and Edam, I think a shortend name is not a great idea. I think names are very personal things, but if a child/adult wants to shorten it that's one thing, but shortening it for them...
I know a girl called Becky - which is pretty but... doesn't really command the sort of authority she may want to command as a grown up.

nailpolish · 24/01/2006 09:41

well, i dont think my name would have hindered me in becoming a law lord or doctor! my mum says she sometimes regrets it but im glad she didnt give me the full version of my name, im glad she gave me a name she liked and not because she thought it was 'for the best'

katzg · 24/01/2006 09:41

i have to say that when i was choosing baby names i imagined the name as an adults/job, eg would Dr Katie Jones on a name badge fill you will as mch confidence as seeing Dr Katherine Jones, does that make sense? or in a court of law the Right Honourable Billy Bloggs preciding or the Right Honourable William Bloggs.

One of my DD's names is shortenable and we have chosen a long version so she can decide in the future

Flamesparrow · 24/01/2006 09:42

I hate the idea of naming a child a long name when you plan to call them by a shorter/different one. Name a child what you plan to call them, and have done with it.

I don't get this whole "serious" name business - your name is your name whether you are called susan or sue, and people will accept it.

NomDePlume · 24/01/2006 09:42

same here, np. Although my name is a common shortening of a rarely used name (which I hate).

nailpolish · 24/01/2006 09:42

i dont think a name gives you authority, surely thats your prescence or personality

i dont find i dont get taken seriously just because my full name is a shortened version

nailpolish · 24/01/2006 09:44

yes

i would feel as confident with a dr called katie as one called katherine. ffs its the person not what they are called

Stilltrue · 24/01/2006 09:44

I would put the full version on his birth certificate, then just call him what you want, from birth. There are lots of Katies, Joes, Sams about after all. They may grow up wanting to be called Kate/Katharine, or Samuel; you will have given him that option if you register the full version of the name.

harpsichordcarrier · 24/01/2006 09:45

I don't agree actually. I think a name IS important and CAN cay a lot about you, whether you like it or not.

nailpolish · 24/01/2006 09:47

yes but a shortened version of a name doesnt automatically mean you are taken less seriously

maybe i should parp this thread

harpsichordcarrier · 24/01/2006 09:48

a child can CHOOSE to shorten it themselves of course. but that's different.

sweetkitty · 24/01/2006 09:49

DD is Abigail always shortened to Abbie though but at least she has the choice when older. But if you don't like Charles or Theodore then go with Charlie/Theo, I did notice that Abbie is far more common than Abigail on the name charts so I suppose more people must be using shortened names.

nailpolish · 24/01/2006 09:50

but hockeymum, the original poster, DOESNT LIKE the longer versions! shes not going to name her child a name she doesnt like, just on the off chance it may get shortened to a name she does like

trice · 24/01/2006 09:50

My Nana was christened Betty and always had no end of trouble with banks and doctors changing her name to Elizabeth.

I don't think Charlie would be a good name for a business card (although very cute on a toddler). I like Theo though and I think it stands alone quite well.

MrsBadger · 24/01/2006 10:01

I'm with starting with the full version and shortening it if appropriate - making the shortening formal is much easier than trying to revert to a longer version later.
A friend was named Lucinda (this was 30 years ago), but she got called Lucy more and more, and when she was 16ish she changed it formally by deed poll with her parent's permission.
My sister and I both have longish names with a bit of gravitas, and enjoy using them professionally and in formal situations - I love how it sounded when I got married / called to speak at conferences etc.
We're both called shortened versions in family / social situations, and I for one really appreciate the distinction!

What's that statistic? They'll be a child for 20 years and an adult for 60? A name has to last a long time.
Theo I could live with, but Sir Charlie? Dr Charlie? The Right Honourable Charlie Jones, MP?

Bomper · 24/01/2006 10:11

My ds is Ben, not Benjamin, just Ben, Can't see the point in giving them a name you are never going to use. And I think that Ben is just as 'formal' as Benjamin anyway. My dh is Nicholas, but is always called Nick, if anyone ever calls him Nicholas it's like they're talking about someone else!!