I’m so fond of your [name_f]Petra[/name_f] [name_f]Apolline[/name_f] [name_f]Joy[/name_f]. I thought I’d seen [name_f]Petra[/name_f] [name_f]Apolline[/name_f] in your usercard some months ago and I just loved it. I’d been hoping to see her again. I’m drawn to compact, high energy names so I was happy with just the two, but now that I see her with [name_f]Joy[/name_f], it seems she is whole. She’s in complete balance. No name competes or diminishes another in space or meaning. I adore the way [name_f]Apolline[/name_f] holds the centre. She criss-crosses the ‘e’ and ascending ‘t’ from [name_f]Petra[/name_f] with the ‘o’ and descending ‘y’ from [name_f]Joy[/name_f]. It’s exquisite.
I can also see [name_u]Jule[/name_u] in place of [name_f]Joy[/name_f]. I like that very much, though it would make for a rather honour-heavy name with the three honours. I see this in two lights. [name_f]My[/name_f] mind first goes straight to the imbalance with H and A’s names, H in particular. The number of names given and the relative significance. But then I think, if you feel strongly about giving a girl two middle names and are going to do it either way, then both names being honours feels like the strongest reason to do so. It avoids the extra name from appearing ornamental. It’s possibly the last time you will name a baby of yours, so you pass on family names while you can. It doesn’t matter that one child received more than the others. They all have their own special naming stories and the family names and memories continue to live on in this next generation.
As an aside: Does the [name_u]Roche[/name_u] surname mean ‘little rock’ in your family’s context? The shared meaning with [name_f]Petra[/name_f] looks like a concrete link to that side of your family. It may not be apparent on paper alone, but it feels deeply rooted and the way to get there seems straightforward to me.
Also, I’ve been wondering if any of those criteria ratings led to a change or strengthening of your name direction?