View Message

[Opinions] Nickname or full name?
I kind of like the name Sarah, but I couldn't really use it as it is my name. But I've started to really like the nickname Sadie. So I could use the nickname Sadie, but her official name would be Sarah.So that made me start to think: If everyone's is going to call her Sadie, why even name her Sarah? Would Sadie be better?I've also always loved Ella as a nickname, especially for Arielle. I would probably call her Ella, but introduce her as Arielle. Do you think this makes a difference?So the bottom line is: If you're not going to call your child by her first name, would you just give her/him the nickname or not? I am not asking if you prefer Sarah or Sadie as names, this is just in general. Or does it depend on the (nick)name?
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

My mom tried to choose names that did not have nicknames. She was the kind of person that felt, if you are going to call them by the nickname, why even give them the full name to begin with. (She got it right, btw, 2 out of 3 times, I don't know how she could think that Caitlin wouldn't have a nickname!)I'd much rather have options, as a parent, as a friend, as the person with the name. A young child paired with a long heavy name that's difficult to pronounce... they're a kid they need a nickname that fits them. As an adult... they don't need to go by as Tootsie or whatever. I like that a name and its nicknames can grow with a person. When I look for names, I look for names that I could come up with nicknames.Oh... and I love Sarah nn Sadie and Ariella nn Ella! Very cute!
vote up1
I would never give just the nn. If the more formal name is a person's legal name, then they always have it as an option. For example, the child may eventually be in a profession or in some official capacity, and prefer a more formal name. Also, I think a lot of nicknames don't age well.
vote up1
I prefer longer names as official names, in general. Even if you only call her by a nickname, doesn't mean that in the future, she won't prefer her longer name or a different nickname. Nicknames usually don't give such options. Although it probably wouldn't make much difference in the case of Sadie vs. Sarah, because they're the same length.
vote up1
I'd give them the full name...That way if they don't want to be known by the nickname when they're older, they have something nicer to fall back on.
vote up1
Sadie and Ella are really nice full names.
vote up1
I dislike most nicknames as given names. Sadie might be an exception, but I can see problems with that as the child ages. Quite often when people see a name like that they assume it is short for something else(Sarah? Mercedes?). Yes, it is wrong to assume, but it happens.
Aside from that, you give a child more options when you give them a whole name. And yes, I do consider most nns to be somewhat incomplete. (There are exceptions, though none come to mind right now.) By giving a longer full name you allow for that child to grow into he or she is, not just who you think he or she will be, if that makes sense. A full name with a nn lets teh person decide who he or she is or wants to be. You may have a Katherine called Katie, but she may rather be Kat or Kitty or Katherine.
Also the ability to use a nn lets the kiddo determine the closeness of the relationship. Only my absolutely oldest, closest friends can call me Kristy with out being corrected that that is not in fact my name. On that note I would also say that introducing her as Arielle, even when calling her Ella, gives her the power to determine what she is called by whom, and would be perfectly reasonable.
vote up1
It depends on the name. Both Ella and Sadie are nice first names.
vote up1
I dislike nns as full names, they don't age well. Even if your child is going to go by the nn her whole life, isn't it better to have a real name "on the dotted line", she might like it better herself when she grows up, or might prefer to use it in professional or official situations.As concerns the more general use of nns, I'm not a huge fan of nns, unless it's to shorten a long name. Otherwise, I'd be inclined to use a nn only when the child's very young or to call him or her from the other side of the house or something. And I don't really like the idea, that a lot of people here seem to have, of deciding a nn along with the name, it should be something that comes up spontaneously as the child grows.
vote up1
I think Sadie is fine as a name on its own, but I'm the opposite with Arielle and Ella.
vote up1
I prefer giving them a full name and calling them by the nn.I undertsand your point, but just because you are calling Caroline Carrie when she is little, doesn't mean it's always going to be that way. If she has Caroline to fall back on, she can go by it when she's older if she wants to.I, personally, also like the idea of having a longer name to put on certificates and job applications. I just think it allows differing degrees of familiarity in relationships as well.Also - when they're in trouble you get to call them by their full name. :D
vote up1
My personal view is that if you plan only calling your child by the nickname, you shoulg just give that as the full name. To me it seems a bit weird to name your child Sarah and then never actually call her that. I think Sadie would be good on it's own. There are some names that are too 'nicknamey' to do so (like "Sammy"), then another full name would be better (like "Sam", not necessarily the longest possibly version like Samuel or Samantha).So: I prefer Sadie as a full name, and yes, introducing her as Arielle would make a difference, sicne you're actually using the full name in that case (for the record: I prefer just Ella over Arielle, but not because of the nn thing)
vote up1