Re: Real names
- --- On Fri, 8/31/12, Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...> wrote:
> >> in different spheres / communities. I know judgingPerhaps a given name especially is more like the ISBN. It serves as a means
> a book by
> >> it's cover is supposedly Bad, but a cover usually
> tells you
> >> everything you need to know about how a person
> >> with the world or wants to be perceived by the
> world: a name
> >> is just part of a person's dust jacket.
> The analogys seems inapt. I don't think a
> book's cover art, or even
> its title, is a good analogy for person's name -- certainly
> not given
> names, and only rarely for self-chosen names.
of retrieving data or finding the book on the shelf / person in the
> From a person's givenA highly unreliable guess! Especially given the way biblical and Christian
> name you can make a guess at their ethnicity,
names have spread around the world, American slaves being given their
masters' family name, immigrants to the US taking on or being told to
take new names.
I think you might get a *slightly* better gauge of ethnicity or at least
ethnic heritage from the surname.
> and maybe at their ageAnd I know several Jasons over 45, so this is about as haphazard a guess
> (based on when certain names for babies were most popular;
> somebody named "Jason" is probably under 45), but that's
> about it.
as the person's ethnicity!
> From their nickname or online handle you might get a littleIf you can make sense of the nickname. Mine is not as immediately
> bit more
> information about their personality or interests,
transparent as some others. But even then, nicknames don't necessarily
tell you anything about the person. I've used throw-away email accounts
with perfectly sensible English words that don't reflect anything personal
> but probably not asOf course. The quality of either simply reflect the artistic ability of
> much or as reliable information as you'd get about the
> typical book from its title or its cover design.
> > Well, the cover of a book only tells you about the
> marketing aims of the
> > publisher and the erotic fantasies of the artist, not
> so much about the
> > content of the book itself. A lot of books with
> exciting cover art and
> > enticing blurbs on the back have turned out to be
> horrifically unreadable
> > as stories.
> The *quality* of the cover art, typography, layout, etc. may
> have very
> little correlation with the *quality* of the writing and
the painter and writer respectively. What I'm saying is that the picture
itself -- imagine if you will the stereotypical wild blonde haired, D-cup
wielding, orc-head-smashing barbarian heroine -- doesn't tell you all that
much about whether the story contained within is a good read or not. The
girl on the front may or may not play a prominent role in the story. The
scene depicted may not even be part of the story line! Even if the story
has a heroine, she may be described in the book as a short, slim black
haired girl who relies more on throwing knives and stealth -- quite unlike
the basher on the cover! The role of the cover art is simple and clear-cut:
hook the potential buyer and turn him into an actual buyer! This is why
they put sexy girls on car hoods and coke commercials. Sexy girls sell
products and it's really no different for books.
> And a lot of covers don't represent the detailed content ofSure.
> the book
> with a high degree of accuracy. But once you get to
> know the cues and
> conventions, they are a halfway decent guide to what genre
> and subgenre the book falls into.
> Not a perfectly reliable guide, but farThis is a) exactly what you have to do with most books published before
> more reliable than facing a shelf of indentically formatted
> books with
> no cover art, only the title and author's name in a single
> font... you'd have grab each book whose title looks halfway
> interesting and read the first page or so, rather than
> filtering them by their cover art into the genres you're
> interested in
> and those you aren't, so you don't have to read the first
> pages of so
> many books to find the ones you want to read.
the 1930s or so and b) exactly what you have to do when confronted with
an unknown person the only thing about whom you know is the name! Take a
little time to get to know.
For example, I found a xix century book in the F/SF racks at the local
shop. I forget the title -- Fairy Queen Something-or-Other. Looked
interesting based on the title, but the prose was just so horrible -- that
condescending tone authors of the time used when addressing children --
that regardless of what merit the story itself may have had, the book was
entirely unreadable. Especially for the price they wanted for the book.
If there were a good story in there, it would have to be rewritten.
So, I think the original analogy is not entirely inapt. A similar process
of piqued interest and careful investigation is required to discover
whether a book is worth reading or a person is worth befriending. Whether
it's the picture on the front of the book or a resume or first introduction
of a person -- all that is just advertising hype. You don't really learn
much about the book or the person from those first impressions. Which is
why we have the old bromide "you can't judge a book by its covers" in the
first place, and why we apply it to people as well!
> Jim Henry
- On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Alex Fink <000024@...> wrote:
> Some people here have mentioned naming schemes where, in various ways,I just thought of one example. The American Deaf community. Sign names
> names are arranged to be nonwords. But this kind of thing feels rather
> unlikely to me. Names being straight-up meaningful (maybe plus a
> name-making morpheme), natural enough; names being chosen from a standard
> stock most of whose meanings have been long forgotten, fine. But an actual
> constraint _against_ a name being a word? Names assembled bespoke for
> their sound-taste, or omnium gatherum out of syllables, with no particular
> invocation of any words intended? Do these things actually happen? (often?)
> I suppose modern-day black Americans kinda exemplify a form of the second
> pattern, so there's one. (And it can be accounted for. Here is David Zax
> tracing its origins back to 60s black separatist sentiment:
> Do those of you with this kind of pattern have such explanations for it?)
are almost never actual words but are sometimes words that have been
altered in some way, often to utilize the initial of the Deaf person's
English name. For example, I had one friend whose English name was Patty.
She had very bright eyes, so her sign name was STAR modified to be signed
with two Ps instead of the normal 1 handshape. Other sign names are simply
the initial of the English name placed by, or mimicing, some prominant
feature fo the Deaf person, whether physical or behavioral. My sign name
has always been A placed at my right temple. The Deaf person who gave it
to me gave three reasons -- 1) Adam in the Bible is signed the same way, 2)
I was (and still am) very interested in Asia, and 3) I am smart. However,
when I attended some summer classes on Sign Language Linguistics a few
years back at University of North Dakota, it just so happened that the
director of the Linguistics program, one Albert Bickford, signed his name
exactly the same way, so for that summer, my name got changed. The
classmate who remaned me was from Thailand and a native signer of Thai Sign
Language, and so my name was transformed to a gesture outlining my goatee
(which is now a full beard, so...). I finances ever allow me to go back
and continue that course work, I may have to revert to my alternate name
for the duration. So, that's one example of a real world cultuer in which
names are neither meaningful words, nor drawn from an inherited stock set,
but ARE frequently either nonce coinages or words warped in some way or