Thursday, April 30, 2009

A short discourse on Surnames

So, I was thinking earlier today, there is a whole big unknown in the world of surnames and what to do with them when you get married.

Traditionally, the female would take the male's last name, and her's would disappear. There is now the rare occasion of the male taking the female's name, but the only instance I can actually thing of is the case of Jack and Meg White (divorced), of the White Stripes. Now, if everyone is all good for this idea, I suppose there is no problem, but it really isn't an equal practice either way. It also raises a question for gay couples, as that method really has no method for deducing who's name should be kept.

A solution to this would be for both parties to retain their names, but it would raise quite a bit of a questions in regards to any children and who's name would be passed down the line. I feel that it would also take away from the whole marriage ordeal. It would belittle the connection that is supposed to be established between two people who are one family committed to each other.

One could solve the child problem by hyphenating the parents surnames, and for that matter, there names could be hyphenated as well. Unfortunately in the long run, it may turn out itself a bit of a problem. If the tradition were kept, generations (or possibly divorces) down the line there would be lengthy, impractical names. I imagine surnames with over 10 hyphens in them in no time at all.

As a solution, I propose a portmanteau of the two parties name. That is, a blending of the two names into one word. For example, if the the two persons joining in marriage had the last names Jackson and Smith, perhaps the new surname could be Jacksmith. If the names were Cooper and Carlton, then the new name would be something like Coopton, Toner, or Carlter. The end result would largely depend upon taste and aesthetics, but the point would be that it would create a shorter and unique union between those two people. Their children could take it on, and incorporate it with their spouse's surname if they were to get married, and it would be completely fair an equal to both parties, by sacrificing a little bit of each other for each other.



P.S. that last line was a very cheesy, but you're going to have to deal with that.

2 comments:

  1. While this would solve the problem of whose name the couple would take. It creates a whole new problem in tracing your roots. You wouldn't know who you are related to and ancestry.com would go out of business. May I suggest a game of draw straws or Rock, Paper, Scissors?

    ReplyDelete