On 2024-02-28 03:48:36 +0000, Snidely said:

> Peter Moylan presented the following explanation :
>> On 28/02/24 04:25, lar3ryca wrote:
>>> On 2024-02-27 01:22, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>> On 27/02/24 17:18, Hibou wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> My sister is older than I am and my brother is younger.
>>>>>
>>>>> Une aînée, un cadet, et un benjamin. For once it's true that
>>>>> French has a word for it (not that they're any help here).
>>>>
>>>> My francophone ex-wife was shocked when friends called their
>>>> second child Benjamin, while having the clear intention to have a
>>>> third child.
>>>>
>>>> The friends were following a different logic. Their children's
>>>> names start with A, B, and C.
>>>
>>> My wife's parents used 'D' for all their children; Donald, Diane,
>>> Darlene, Deborah, and Delphine (in order of oldest to youngest0.
>>
>> In the town where I grew up, the Denshaw family had 13 children, all of
>> whom had names starting with 'D'. Dalma and Denzel were in my class.
>>
>> It brings to mind the Dr Seuss story "Too many Daves".
>
> There were only 5 in my 5th grade class.
>
> /dps "coed, about 25 souls"

"Athel" is not the commonest of names. Nonetheless, in South Africa in
1990 I mentioned that to someone I had just met, who said not at all,
there are four Athels in my school.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 2024-02-29 20:11:12 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 19:55:14 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> Lodder) wrote:
>
>> lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-02-29 01:08, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's relatively common for a child to have the same name as one of the
>>>>> parents.
>>>>
>>>> Not in Denmark. I was surprised to find out that that is common in some
>>>> countries.
>>>
>>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>>> Name Jr.
>>> or
>>> Name II
>>> Name III
>>> etc.
>>
>> Almost completely limited to the US of A, as far as I know.
>> The Romans were not dumb enough to number themselves in Roman numerals,
>
> It seems to me there have been some names followed by a Roman numeral
> in the UK. The current one is Charles III. It's also been seen in
> Europe: Benedict XVI, Felipe VI, Frederik X, Carl XVI Gustaf,
> Hans-Adam II, Albert II, and Harald V to mention a few.

In some (I suspect many) it is standard for the eldest of the eldest
son to be named after his grandfather. The other night we saw a
programme about Christian VII of Denmark (the one who liked to
masturbate in public). Not knowing much about Danish kings I looked
them up, and saw that for numerous generations they alternated between
Christian and Frederik.
--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 2024-03-01 08:52:28 +0000, Bertel Lund Hansen said:

> Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> It seems to me there have been some names followed by a Roman numeral
>> in the UK. The current one is Charles III. It's also been seen in
>> Europe: Benedict XVI, Felipe VI, Frederik X, Carl XVI Gustaf,
>> Hans-Adam II, Albert II, and Harald V to mention a few.
>
> The Danish kings and queens are also numbered with Roman Numerals. Even
> our now former queen Margrethe has the number II in spite of a
> difference in spelling. The first one was queen Margrete I.
>
> In my neighbourhood there is a road named after a king, Christian X.
> GoogleMaps pronounces it "christian ex".
>
> Since 1426 our kings have been alternating between the names Christian
> and Frederik, except for a Hans that spoiled the system from the start
> (being second king in that sequence). Queen Margrethe II corrected this
> calamity by not naming her son Christian, which would have followed the
> system since her father was a Frederik. By naming her son Frederik she
> fixed the misorder, and we can now all breathe more freely. King
> Frederik of course has named his first son Christian.

I didn't read far enough ...

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 01/03/2024 01:15, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2024-02-29 18:01, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 29-Feb-24 20:59, lar3ryca wrote:
>>> On 2024-02-29 14:54, lar3ryca wrote:
>>>> On 2024-02-29 10:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>>> lar3ryca wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> We need a word like "famøs" to more easily say "He is famous for
>>>>>> being
>>>>>> famous."
>>>>>
>>>>> That reminds me of another word, because you actually have
>>>>> "infamous" to
>>>>> cover the meaning you seek.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, that is not the meaning at all. Infamous is, as you say,
>>>> used to describe someone who is widely known for his bad deeds or
>>>> any other distasteful actions or characteristic.
>>>>
>>>> The meaning of the phrase "Famous for being famous". (which I made
>>>> up, though I may not have been the first to arrive at the same
>>>> phrase), is roughly "widely known for no apparent reason, the person
>>>> or people having no discernible talent or attractiveness."
>>>>
>>>> An example that comes immediately to mind is an entire family of
>>>> Kardashians."
>>>>
>>>>> It has a different meaning in Danish.
>>>>> "Infam" is a very strong word about someone (or something) who is
>>>>> nasty.
>>>>> In the movie "Godfather" the Italian word "infamita" is used with the
>>>>> same meaning.
>>>
>>> I should probably point out that I make exceptions for some people
>>> who have what I consider 'talents' that I do not appreciate. In other
>>> words, people who are famous for being talented in some way that many
>>> folks seem to appreciate, but that I do not.
>>>
>>> Examples that come immediately to mind are rap 'singers', Jerry
>>> Seinfeld, and Will Farrell.
>>>
>> I'm not familiar with Mssrs Seinfeld and Farrell, nor their style of
>> singing.
>
> Have I confused you by using commas to separate three entirely different
> entities?
>

Not only commas, an Oxford comma too!

--
Chris Elvidge, England
I AM NOT THE NEW DALAI LAMA

On 29/02/2024 16:10, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2024-02-29 01:01, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>
>>> It is not very clear how the meaning transfered
>>> from the navy to the railways, and only in the USA.
>>> One may speculate that the original function was indeed
>>> for cooking for the train crews, on those long American distances.
>>
>> Changes in the meaning of words in different regions are often difficult
>> to explain. Take the word "famous" which is "famøs" in Danish, but while
>> "famous" is positive, "famøs" is not. A "famøs" person is sort of
>> well-known, but not for their qualities.
>
> We need a word like "famøs" to more easily say "He is famous for being
> famous."
>

That often seems to be covered by the term "celebrity". I recently saw a
few minutes of a TV programme with "celebrities", only one of whom I
recognised. In due course the titling told us who, and what, these
people were. One of them was described as a "TV personality".

>> Even within Scandinavia a word can have different meanings. "Rar" is a
>> word in Norwegian, Swedish and Danish. In Norwegian it means "rare"
>> (same word), but in Swedish and Danish it means "nice". We do, however,
>> have a reminiscence of the rare-meaning in the word "raritet" (rarity).
>>
>

--
Phil B

On 2024-02-29, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

> lar3ryca wrote:
>
>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>> Name Jr.
>> or
>> Name II

II generally means the child is named after a living relative other
than his father.

>> Name III
>> etc.
>
> Yes, I know that from some of the rich families. Isn't "Junior" also
> used alone?

Most famously on Hee Haw (although it was a nickname from the suffix
on his legal name).

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_Samples>

--
It would be unfair to detect an element of logic in the siting of the
Pentagon alongside the National Cemetery, but the subject seems at
least worthy of investigation. ---C Northcote Parkinson

On 2024-03-01, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> On 2024-02-29 20:11:12 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 19:55:14 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
>> Lodder) wrote:
>>
>>> lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-02-29 01:08, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's relatively common for a child to have the same name as one of the
>>>>>> parents.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not in Denmark. I was surprised to find out that that is common in some
>>>>> countries.
>>>>
>>>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>>>> Name Jr.
>>>> or
>>>> Name II
>>>> Name III
>>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Almost completely limited to the US of A, as far as I know.
>>> The Romans were not dumb enough to number themselves in Roman numerals,
>>
>> It seems to me there have been some names followed by a Roman numeral
>> in the UK. The current one is Charles III. It's also been seen in
>> Europe: Benedict XVI, Felipe VI, Frederik X, Carl XVI Gustaf,
>> Hans-Adam II, Albert II, and Harald V to mention a few.
>
> In some (I suspect many) it is standard for the eldest of the eldest
> son to be named after his grandfather. The other night we saw a
> programme about Christian VII of Denmark (the one who liked to
> masturbate in public). Not knowing much about Danish kings I looked

What a claim to fame!

> them up, and saw that for numerous generations they alternated between
> Christian and Frederik.

--
XML combines the efficiency of text files with the readability of
binary files.

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> "Athel" is not the commonest of names. Nonetheless, in South Africa in
> 1990 I mentioned that to someone I had just met, who said not at all,
> there are four Athels in my school.

My grandfather on my fathers side had a very unusual firstname. I hadn't
met or heard of anyone having the same name - until Elon Musk appeared.
Now the name is known all over the world.

There are at present 57 Danes named Elon.

--
Bertel, Denmark

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> I didn't read far enough ...

That's Usenet.

--
Bertel, Denmark

Rich Ulrich:
> It could be that I got it wrong, but I remember reading of some
> Roman numeral numbering within European families -- without,
> however, the American standard of being father and son.
>
> As I recall it, the numbers could increment around the branches
> of the family tree, increasing for whichever cousin or nephew
> came next, so it could be VIII or XI within a couple of generations.

That'd be the House of Reuss, in the so-called Holy so-called Roman
so-called Empire.
--
Mark Brader | [It was] based on a rather unique interpretation
Toronto | [of the law]... (and, by unique, we mean "wrong")...
msb@vex.net | --Mike Masnick

Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 2024-02-28 23:30:16 +0000, navi said:
>
> > Thank you all very much,
> >
> > "Whichth" can be used in a lot of different contexts that don't have
> > anything to do with family.
>
> This is the sort of question navi used to ask a lot, amounting to "how
> much meaning can be packed into one word?" English on the whole doesn't
> bother with such questions: if you need ten words to express a thought
> clearly you use ten words.

Clearly preferable to the German idea
of creating 20-letter words for the purpose,
if you ask me,

Jan

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 19:55:14 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> Lodder) wrote:
>
> >lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2024-02-29 01:08, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> >> > Peter Moylan wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> It's relatively common for a child to have the same name as one of the
> >> >> parents.
> >> >
> >> > Not in Denmark. I was surprised to find out that that is common in some
> >> > countries.
> >>
> >> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
> >> Name Jr.
> >> or
> >> Name II
> >> Name III
> >> etc.
> >
> >Almost completely limited to the US of A, as far as I know.
> >The Romans were not dumb enough to number themselves in Roman numerals,
>
> It seems to me there have been some names followed by a Roman numeral
> in the UK. The current one is Charles III. It's also been seen in
> Europe: Benedict XVI, Felipe VI, Frederik X, Carl XVI Gustaf,
> Hans-Adam II, Albert II, and Harald V to mention a few.

Do you really believe that this Charles calls himself Charles III?

Jan

Peter Moylan hat am 01.03.2024 um 00:20 geschrieben:
> That's a different system. Charles III is not the son of Charles II, and
> so on for many of the others you mention. It's true that European
> royalty uses Roman numerals, but they're not used in the way they're
> used in North America.
>
> In some quarters Charles III is considered brave for adopting the name
> he did, considering what happened to Charles II.

Adopt? It's the first of his given names. If anything, we should have
asked his parents. Is it common for UK kings not to use their first
given name?

Silvano wrote:

> Peter Moylan hat am 01.03.2024 um 00:20 geschrieben:
>> That's a different system. Charles III is not the son of Charles II, and
>> so on for many of the others you mention. It's true that European
>> royalty uses Roman numerals, but they're not used in the way they're
>> used in North America.
>>
>> In some quarters Charles III is considered brave for adopting the name
>> he did, considering what happened to Charles II.

> Adopt? It's the first of his given names. If anything, we should have
> asked his parents. Is it common for UK kings not to use their first
> given name?

It's been done. His grandfather George VI was Albert Frederick Arthur
George, and /his/ grandfather Edward VII was Albert Edward, and /his/
mother was Alexandrina Victoria.

--
Jerry Friedman

In article <urt0e6$1b12j$1@dont-email.me>,
Silvano <Silvano@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:
> Peter Moylan hat am 01.03.2024 um 00:20 geschrieben:
> > That's a different system. Charles III is not the son of Charles II, and
> > so on for many of the others you mention. It's true that European
> > royalty uses Roman numerals, but they're not used in the way they're
> > used in North America.
> >
> > In some quarters Charles III is considered brave for adopting the name
> > he did, considering what happened to Charles II.

> Adopt? It's the first of his given names. If anything, we should have
> asked his parents. Is it common for UK kings not to use their first
> given name?

He could have picked given name #3 and we would have had 'King Arthur', but
perhaps not.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Fri, 01 Mar 2024 11:58:49 +0000, msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:

>Rich Ulrich:
>> It could be that I got it wrong, but I remember reading of some
>> Roman numeral numbering within European families -- without,
>> however, the American standard of being father and son.
>>
>> As I recall it, the numbers could increment around the branches
>> of the family tree, increasing for whichever cousin or nephew
>> came next, so it could be VIII or XI within a couple of generations.
>
>That'd be the House of Reuss, in the so-called Holy so-called Roman
>so-called Empire.

Thanks -

From Wiki -
Since the end of the 12th century, all male members of the House of
Reuss are named Heinrich (English: Henry), in honour of Henry VI,
Holy Roman Emperor (1190–1197), to whom they owed the dominions of
Weida and Gera. For the purpose of differentiation, they are given
order numbers according to certain systems (see below, section
Numbering of the Heinrichs), and in private life they are
distinguished by nicknames.

So, it was a peculiarity of the House of Reuss, always 'Heinrich'.

Not the (slightly) more general practice that I expected.
Thanks again.

--
Rich Ulrich

On 01-Mar-24 1:18, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2024-02-29 17:29, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 01/03/24 03:10, lar3ryca wrote:
>>> On 2024-02-29 01:01, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>> J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It is not very clear how the meaning transfered
>>>>> from the navy to the railways, and only in the USA.
>>>>> One may speculate that the original function was indeed
>>>>> for cooking for the train crews, on those long American distances.
>>>>
>>>> Changes in the meaning of words in different regions are often
>>>> difficult
>>>> to explain. Take the word "famous" which is "famøs" in Danish, but
>>>> while
>>>> "famous" is positive, "famøs" is not. A "famøs" person is sort of
>>>> well-known, but not for their qualities.
>>>
>>> We need a word like "famøs" to more easily say "He is famous for being
>>> famous."
>>
>> We already have the word "notorious".
>
> Fair enough, but I won't use it in that sense, due to there being too
> many other related meanings.
>
Only today my wife commented that people now use "infamous" where they
simply mean "famous".
Her example was
"Try our infamous recipe for" <some dish>.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 2024-03-01 05:04, Chris Elvidge wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 01:15, lar3ryca wrote:
>> On 2024-02-29 18:01, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>>> On 29-Feb-24 20:59, lar3ryca wrote:
>>>> On 2024-02-29 14:54, lar3ryca wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-02-29 10:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>>>> lar3ryca wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need a word like "famøs" to more easily say "He is famous for
>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>> famous."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That reminds me of another word, because you actually have
>>>>>> "infamous" to
>>>>>> cover the meaning you seek.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, that is not the meaning at all. Infamous is, as you say,
>>>>> used to describe someone who is widely known for his bad deeds or
>>>>> any other distasteful actions or characteristic.
>>>>>
>>>>> The meaning of the phrase "Famous for being famous". (which I made
>>>>> up, though I may not have been the first to arrive at the same
>>>>> phrase), is roughly "widely known for no apparent reason, the
>>>>> person or people having no discernible talent or attractiveness."
>>>>>
>>>>> An example that comes immediately to mind is an entire family of
>>>>> Kardashians."
>>>>>
>>>>>> It has a different meaning in Danish.
>>>>>> "Infam" is a very strong word about someone (or something) who is
>>>>>> nasty.
>>>>>> In the movie "Godfather" the Italian word "infamita" is used with the
>>>>>> same meaning.
>>>>
>>>> I should probably point out that I make exceptions for some people
>>>> who have what I consider 'talents' that I do not appreciate. In
>>>> other words, people who are famous for being talented in some way
>>>> that many folks seem to appreciate, but that I do not.
>>>>
>>>> Examples that come immediately to mind are rap 'singers', Jerry
>>>> Seinfeld, and Will Farrell.
>>>>
>>> I'm not familiar with Mssrs Seinfeld and Farrell, nor their style of
>>> singing.
>>
>> Have I confused you by using commas to separate three entirely
>> different entities?
>>
>
> Not only commas, an Oxford comma too!

I always use the 'Oxford comma'. I feel it's necessary.

--
I don't think I got the job at Microsoft.
They haven't responded to my telegram.

On 2024-03-01 05:14, Phil wrote:
> On 29/02/2024 16:10, lar3ryca wrote:
>> On 2024-02-29 01:01, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>> J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is not very clear how the meaning transfered
>>>> from the navy to the railways, and only in the USA.
>>>> One may speculate that the original function was indeed
>>>> for cooking for the train crews, on those long American distances.
>>>
>>> Changes in the meaning of words in different regions are often difficult
>>> to explain. Take the word "famous" which is "famøs" in Danish, but while
>>> "famous" is positive, "famøs" is not. A "famøs" person is sort of
>>> well-known, but not for their qualities.
>>
>> We need a word like "famøs" to more easily say "He is famous for being
>> famous."
>>
>
> That often seems to be covered by the term "celebrity". I recently saw a
> few minutes of a TV programme with "celebrities", only one of whom I
> recognised. In due course the titling told us who, and what, these
> people were. One of them was described as a "TV personality".

That's annoying, to say the least. The other annoyance is 'celebrities'
who are referred to by their first name only, or worse, by a concoction
consisting of portions of their names. I kept hearing about 'Arod' and
'Jaylo' for months before I found out who they were.

>>> Even within Scandinavia a word can have different meanings. "Rar" is a
>>> word in Norwegian, Swedish and Danish. In Norwegian it means "rare"
>>> (same word), but in Swedish and Danish it means "nice". We do, however,
>>> have a reminiscence of the rare-meaning in the word "raritet" (rarity).
>>>
>>
>

--
ANAGRAMS
A DECIMAL POINT: I'm a dot in place.
ONE PLUS TWELVE: Two plus eleven.

On 2024-03-01 05:53, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>
>> "Athel" is not the commonest of names. Nonetheless, in South Africa in
>> 1990 I mentioned that to someone I had just met, who said not at all,
>> there are four Athels in my school.
>
> My grandfather on my fathers side had a very unusual firstname. I hadn't
> met or heard of anyone having the same name - until Elon Musk appeared.
> Now the name is known all over the world.

My paternal grandfather's full name was 'Turney Whitehead Phillips'.
He was one of the founders of the first Credit Union in Brtish Columbia.

> There are at present 57 Danes named Elon.

--
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?

On 2024-03-01 05:14, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2024-02-29, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>
>> lar3ryca wrote:
>>
>>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>>> Name Jr.
>>> or
>>> Name II
>
> II generally means the child is named after a living relative other
> than his father.

In my experience, it generally (in Canada) means that he has the same
first name as his father.

>>> Name III
>>> etc.
>>
>> Yes, I know that from some of the rich families. Isn't "Junior" also
>> used alone?
>
> Most famously on Hee Haw (although it was a nickname from the suffix
> on his legal name).
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_Samples>
>
>

--
Dogs have owners, cats have staff.

On 2024-03-01 00:35, Rich Ulrich wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:20:49 +1100, Peter Moylan
> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 01/03/24 07:11, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 19:55:14 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
>>> Lodder) wrote:
>>>
>>>> lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-02-29 01:08, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>>>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's relatively common for a child to have the same name as one of the
>>>>>>> parents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not in Denmark. I was surprised to find out that that is common in some
>>>>>> countries.
>>>>>
>>>>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>>>>> Name Jr.
>>>>> or
>>>>> Name II
>>>>> Name III
>>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Almost completely limited to the US of A, as far as I know.
>>>> The Romans were not dumb enough to number themselves in Roman numerals,
>>>
>>> It seems to me there have been some names followed by a Roman
>>> numeral in the UK. The current one is Charles III. It's also been
>>> seen in Europe: Benedict XVI, Felipe VI, Frederik X, Carl XVI
>>> Gustaf, Hans-Adam II, Albert II, and Harald V to mention a few.
>>
>> That's a different system. Charles III is not the son of Charles II, and
>> so on for many of the others you mention. It's true that European
>> royalty uses Roman numerals, but they're not used in the way they're
>> used in North America.
>
> It could be that I got it wrong, but I remember reading of some
> Roman numeral numbering within European families -- without,
> however, the American standard of being father and son.
>
> As I recall it, the numbers could increment around the branches
> of the family tree, increasing for whichever cousin or nephew
> came next, so it could be VIII or XI within a couple of generations.
>
> Does that ring any bell?
>
>>
>> In some quarters Charles III is considered brave for adopting the name
>> he did, considering what happened to Charles II.
>
> Wasn't there an American boxer who named his kids ...
> - Google - okay -
>
> George Foreman's 10 Kids: Why He Named All of His Sons ..
> https://people.com › Entertainment › Sports
> Mar 12, 2019 — There's George Jr., George III ("Monk"), George IV
> ("Big Wheel"), George V ("Red") and George VI ("Little Joey").

Reminds me of a joke...

A woman has just given birth to a girl.

The nurse say "What a beautiful baby! What are you going to call her?"

The woman says "Lenore, just like my other 4 girls."

"Oh", says the nurse. "Doesn't that cause confusion?"

"No, when I say 'Lenore, it's supper-time', they all come to the table,
and when I say 'Lenore, clean up your room', they all do it."

"OK, but what if you want to tell only one of them to do something?"

"No problem, I just use her last name."

--
A closed mouth gathers no foot.

lar3ryca wrote:

> That's annoying, to say the least. The other annoyance is 'celebrities'
> who are referred to by their first name only, or worse, by a concoction
> consisting of portions of their names. I kept hearing about 'Arod' and
> 'Jaylo' for months before I found out who they were.

In a tv program about computers one might hear "see plus plus". Do you
think that that is annoying to many people? Or is it just in both cases
a question of where your interest lies?

--
Bertel, Denmark

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 15:39:21 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

>On 2024-03-01 05:14, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2024-02-29, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>
>>> lar3ryca wrote:
>>>
>>>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>>>> Name Jr.
>>>> or
>>>> Name II
>>
>> II generally means the child is named after a living relative other
>> than his father.
>
>In my experience, it generally (in Canada) means that he has the same
>first name as his father.
>
More than that. The person has both the same first name and middle
name as the father. John David Jones's son John William Jones would
not be a "Jr".

>>>> Name III
>>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Yes, I know that from some of the rich families. Isn't "Junior" also
>>> used alone?
>>
>> Most famously on Hee Haw (although it was a nickname from the suffix
>> on his legal name).
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_Samples>
>>
>>

On 2024-03-01 21:50:07 +0000, lar3ryca said:

> On 2024-03-01 00:35, Rich Ulrich wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:20:49 +1100, Peter Moylan
>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/03/24 07:11, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 19:55:14 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
>>>> Lodder) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2024-02-29 01:08, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>>>>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's relatively common for a child to have the same name as one of the
>>>>>>>> parents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not in Denmark. I was surprised to find out that that is common in some
>>>>>>> countries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Usually, the child(ren) the call themselves:
>>>>>> Name Jr.
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> Name II
>>>>>> Name III
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Almost completely limited to the US of A, as far as I know.
>>>>> The Romans were not dumb enough to number themselves in Roman numerals,
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me there have been some names followed by a Roman
>>>> numeral in the UK. The current one is Charles III. It's also been
>>>> seen in Europe: Benedict XVI, Felipe VI, Frederik X, Carl XVI
>>>> Gustaf, Hans-Adam II, Albert II, and Harald V to mention a few.
>>>
>>> That's a different system. Charles III is not the son of Charles II, and
>>> so on for many of the others you mention. It's true that European
>>> royalty uses Roman numerals, but they're not used in the way they're
>>> used in North America.
>>
>> It could be that I got it wrong, but I remember reading of some
>> Roman numeral numbering within European families -- without,
>> however, the American standard of being father and son.
>>
>> As I recall it, the numbers could increment around the branches
>> of the family tree, increasing for whichever cousin or nephew
>> came next, so it could be VIII or XI within a couple of generations.
>>
>> Does that ring any bell?
>>
>>>
>>> In some quarters Charles III is considered brave for adopting the name
>>> he did, considering what happened to Charles II.
>>
>> Wasn't there an American boxer who named his kids ...
>> - Google - okay -
>>
>> George Foreman's 10 Kids: Why He Named All of His Sons ..
>> https://people.com › Entertainment › Sports
>> Mar 12, 2019 — There's George Jr., George III ("Monk"), George IV
>> ("Big Wheel"), George V ("Red") and George VI ("Little Joey").
>
> Reminds me of a joke...
>
> A woman has just given birth to a girl.
>
> The nurse say "What a beautiful baby! What are you going to call her?"
>
> The woman says "Lenore, just like my other 4 girls."
>
> "Oh", says the nurse. "Doesn't that cause confusion?"
>
> "No, when I say 'Lenore, it's supper-time', they all come to the table,
> and when I say 'Lenore, clean up your room', they all do it."

Very obdient, they must be.
>
> "OK, but what if you want to tell only one of them to do something?"
>
> "No problem, I just use her last name."

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.