Could this work?
[name]Michael[/name] [name]Theodore[/name] [name]Sim[/name]*n. ([name]Michael[/name] is a family name).
nn would be [name]Teddy[/name]
If not, do you prefer [name]Edward[/name] [name]James[/name] or [name]Edmund[/name] [name]James[/name] (nn [name]Teddy[/name])?
I do think [name]Michael[/name] [name]Theodore[/name] nn [name]Teddy[/name] could work! Why not? People go by their MNs all the time, although I think going by the FN would be easier. Why not [name]Theodore[/name] [name]Michael[/name] [name]Sim[/name]*n? [name]Michael[/name] [name]Theodore[/name] flows better, but if he’ll go by [name]Teddy[/name], I think [name]Theodore[/name] as the FN would work better. I do love [name]Edmund[/name] [name]James[/name], nn [name]Teddy[/name], though! [name]How[/name] quirky and cute!
I do think it can work. People often have a nn that has no relation to their name. I think [name]Teddy[/name] is an adorable nn for a boy.
Thanks! I would love to use [name]Theodore[/name] as a first name, but worry about the chipmunk connection…[name]Theodore[/name] [name]Sim[/name]*n? [name]Just[/name] me?
Funny, my dad is [name]Theodore[/name] [name]Michael[/name]. I agree that you should avoid putting [name]Theodore[/name] and [name]Sim[/name]*n together too obviously; as a mn it should be okay. [name]Edmund[/name] [name]James[/name] is the most appealing to me though.
The first thing I thought was chipmunks. Not a terrible association, but still the first thing to come to mind.