Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

First Name--which to use?

Expand Messages
  • BeechCrRR@xxx.xxx
    Hello, Earlier today I signed on the list and so this is my first query... In going through the LDS records various versions are used for the same first name.
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 24, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello,

      Earlier today I signed on the list and so this is my first query...

      In going through the LDS records various versions are used for the same first
      name. Let's use Elizabeth for example. One can see this Elisabetha, another
      Erzsebet. I imagine one is Latin and the other possibly Hungarian. I
      imagine which spelling was used depended on who was in "control"
      (politically) at the time or the preference of the church pastor. Now I'm
      told the Slovak Elizabeth is Alzbeta. My question: which spelling of the
      first name should I use in our family records? I realize the answer to this
      question may be more of an OPINION, which is fine.

      While I'm at it here is another example: George. I see Georgius (Latin?)
      and Gyorg (Hungarian?). Slovak is Juraj.

      Jeff Feldmeier
      Allen Park, MI
    • sabinov@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
      The Hungarian for Elizabeth is Erze bet. When you find something in the LDS IGI or even in searching films, you ll see the name written in the preferred
      Message 2 of 4 , Oct 24, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        The Hungarian for Elizabeth is Erze'bet.

        When you find something in the LDS IGI or even in searching films,
        you'll see the name written in the preferred language of the records at
        that time, which may be Latin, Slovak or Hungarian depending on when and
        where you are searching.

        As for keeping the names in the records, people have different opinions
        and ways of doing it.

        Some "translate" everything into English, which is easier for those in
        the US, but may lead to confusion when someone tries to match with your
        info or someone later tries to confirm it with the actual records.

        Some use the name as its written in records, which may be several
        different things.

        Then there's the "comprimise" theory, which I personally prefer. In my
        database I put the first name as it's most commonly found or known
        (usually the English version if they were in US , Hungarian spelling if
        they were in AH) but in my notes I detail the explanation of the name
        and where I found any variants of it. In a few cases I have even noted
        in the name fields of another name the person went by, such as my
        great-uncle Bela, who changed his name to William in the US (Bela has no
        English equivalent, Bela =Bela) so he's listed as William (Bela) SILHAVY
        because even his first records in the US, such as ship manifest and
        naturalization records are Bela, but his death cert is William.
        Otherwise that would really confuse someone in later years.

        Now I suppose this has really confused you even more! Basically, there
        are different ways to do this, I would only advise you to be consistent
        in whatever method you do choose.

        I'd be interested in hearing if anyone does anything different than
        these 3 ways, which are the most common.

        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Maura Petzolt Mobile Alabama USA
        sabinov@...
        Helpful Hints for Successful Searching
        http://www.rootsweb.com/~irlwat/instruct.htm
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      • Ron Matviyak
        Maura, I would like to thank Jeff for asking and you for answering the question. I find your answers great - concise, clear and diplomatic as well. Preferred
        Message 3 of 4 , Oct 24, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          Maura,

          I would like to thank Jeff for asking and you for answering the
          question. I find your answers great - concise, clear and diplomatic as
          well. "Preferred language of the records at that time" is great!

          In just going through my first film, I had to quickly fall into your
          third, 'mixed' method, as individual names varied so much that I must
          plan on finding them under a different name. Using your method I hope
          to be ready with clear notes to minimize repeat lookups.

          Ron

          MATVIAK, STEFANIAK, KNAP, VALYO/VALLO, SOMOS and variations



          Maura Petzolt wrote:
          >
          > From: sabinov@... (Maura Petzolt)
          >
          > The Hungarian for Elizabeth is Erze'bet.
          >
          > When you find something in the LDS IGI or even in searching films,
          > you'll see the name written in the preferred language of the records at
          > that time, which may be Latin, Slovak or Hungarian depending on when and
          > where you are searching.
          >
          > As for keeping the names in the records, people have different opinions
          > and ways of doing it.
          >
          > Some "translate" everything into English, which is easier for those in
          > the US, but may lead to confusion when someone tries to match with your
          > info or someone later tries to confirm it with the actual records.
          >
          > Some use the name as its written in records, which may be several
          > different things.
          >
          > Then there's the "comprimise" theory, which I personally prefer. In my
          > database I put the first name as it's most commonly found or known
          > (usually the English version if they were in US , Hungarian spelling if
          > they were in AH) but in my notes I detail the explanation of the name
          > and where I found any variants of it. In a few cases I have even noted
          > in the name fields of another name the person went by, such as my
          > great-uncle Bela, who changed his name to William in the US (Bela has no
          > English equivalent, Bela =Bela) so he's listed as William (Bela) SILHAVY
          > because even his first records in the US, such as ship manifest and
          > naturalization records are Bela, but his death cert is William.
          > Otherwise that would really confuse someone in later years.
          >
          > Now I suppose this has really confused you even more! Basically, there
          > are different ways to do this, I would only advise you to be consistent
          > in whatever method you do choose.
          >
          > I'd be interested in hearing if anyone does anything different than
          > these 3 ways, which are the most common.
          >
          > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          > Maura Petzolt Mobile Alabama USA
          > sabinov@...
          > Helpful Hints for Successful Searching
          > http://www.rootsweb.com/~irlwat/instruct.htm
          > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        • Andy Verostko
          Jeff, I m sure you will get some very good info on names from the group and here is my opinion. The child was baptized at the church. What name do you give?
          Message 4 of 4 , Oct 24, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            Jeff,
            I'm sure you will get some very good info on names from the group
            and here is my opinion.

            The child was baptized at the church. "What name do you give?"
            asked the priest. "Juraj", was the answer. In the the records,
            the priest wrote Georgius because he was using Latin at that time.
            A few years later, a priest wrote Georgy because he was using the
            Hungarian form as the official language. However, in the vernacular,
            at home and in everyday life, he was "Juraj". So, in documentation,
            I have it recorded as written. In my data base for general
            presentation, I use the Slovak form if I believe him to be Slovak.
            There are cases where some ancestors of my wife considered
            themselves German and were generally baptized using the German
            Name form and that is the way is is in my data base. Notes define
            the reasons but the common visibility is the ancestry and language
            of that individual.

            --

            Regards

            Andy Verostko

            averostko@...

            http://www.bealenet.com/~averostko


            BeechCrRR@... wrote:
            >
            > From: BeechCrRR@...
            >
            > Hello,
            >
            > Earlier today I signed on the list and so this is my first query...
            >
            > In going through the LDS records various versions are used for the same first
            > name. Let's use Elizabeth for example. One can see this Elisabetha, another
            > Erzsebet. I imagine one is Latin and the other possibly Hungarian. I
            > imagine which spelling was used depended on who was in "control"
            > (politically) at the time or the preference of the church pastor. Now I'm
            > told the Slovak Elizabeth is Alzbeta. My question: which spelling of the
            > first name should I use in our family records? I realize the answer to this
            > question may be more of an OPINION, which is fine.
            >
            > While I'm at it here is another example: George. I see Georgius (Latin?)
            > and Gyorg (Hungarian?). Slovak is Juraj.
            >
            > Jeff Feldmeier
            > Allen Park, MI
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.