Are these too similar?

[name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Rose[/name].

For twins or just sisters?

To similar in sound and feel, or cute?

[name]Just[/name] to clarify, I’m from [name]Scotland[/name] and so the starting sounds of [name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Rose[/name] sound different. OW and OH.

My twins are going to be called [name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Eilidh[/name] but I was debating this with DH and best friend and was interested to know what you thought.



They are more similar in sound in American pronunciation where both are roe, but even with the row/roe difference, with [name]Rose[/name] I would think that [name]Rowan[/name] was a boy. They’re a little too cutesy as sibling names I think.


[name]Just[/name] to clarify your pronunciation of [name]Rowan[/name], you say it as in “ouch”, with an OW sound? And [name]Rose[/name] is with the traditional “oh” sound, yes? Okay…

[name]Do[/name] I think [name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Rose[/name] are too similar for twins or sisters, or a sister and brother? Yes. Maybe it is because I am a twin, but the fact that they not only begin with the same letter ®, but the same letter sequence ([name]Ro[/name]-), bothers me. Also, both names are nature names, in different senses - a tree and a flower - but still they fit a theme. Now, I don’t have any problem with themed names to an extent, but I’d at least match them stylistically ([name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Laurel[/name], [name]Hazel[/name] and [name]Rose[/name]) and give each sibling a different initial, personally.

Also, I think [name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Rose[/name] are too different to work to their best. [name]Rowan[/name] is more of the modern set of names, with its unisex image and playful, soft sound. I think you’d get confusion as to whether you had boy-girl twins or girl-girl twins, for sure, at least in [name]America[/name]. [name]Rowan[/name] isn’t quite popular, nor would I call it trendy (definitely not tryndeigh, for sure!) - but, because [name]Rowan[/name] fits in with the theme of nature names, it could be considered “on trend,” if not actually trendy. [name]Rose[/name], on the other hand, is a classic, timeless, elegant name, a girl’s name through and through. It’s an unexpected choice as a first name nowadays (as is [name]Anne[/name]) simply because of its recent popularity as a middle name. [name]Rose[/name] is neither popular nor trendy, yet it does fit in with the revival of vintage nature names like [name]Hazel[/name] and [name]Violet[/name].

In short, I wouldn’t personally put [name]Rowan[/name] and [name]Rose[/name] together for siblings, but I do like each name separately very much!

[name]Lemon[/name] :slight_smile:

I really think they are to close.

Thanks for the replies!
I guess DH wins on this one, who’d have thought he’d have better taste than me!

I still have a soft spot for them but not to use now anyway.