My SO has a family tradition of having a second middle name for each child - [name]Mary[/name] for a girl and [name]Joseph[/name] for a boy.
It was never a cause for concern until he decided that he wanted to hyphenate his birth father and adoptive father’s last name and have his surname legally changed as such. I understand why he made the choice and fully respect his choice, however I’m starting to feel that five names might be one name too many for our future children.
First Middle Middle Last-Last (last name is 3 syllables in total)
I would definitely narrow it down to one middle name. Maybe contemplate choosing one of his last names for the children so that they don’t have to hyphenate…probably not an option, just an idea!
If I really felt the need for the additional middle name (rather than only using [name]Mary[/name] and [name]Joseph[/name]) I’ probably go with something 1 syllable to make it feel less fussy.
[name]Alice[/name] [name]Gale[/name] [name]Mary[/name] [name]Baker[/name]-[name]Smith[/name] isn’t nearly as bad as [name]Elizabeth[/name] [name]Fiona[/name] [name]Mary[/name] [name]Baker[/name]-[name]Smith[/name]
It’s definitely a lot of names, and I’d probably push for using [name]Mary[/name] only, but I don’t think it’s completely undoable.
I don’t think it’s ideal, but it isn’t too over-the-top. For me, I would rule out any princessy, fluffy type names because it puffs it up even more. [name]Arabella[/name] & [name]Raphael[/name] might not work for you as well as [name]Anne[/name] or [name]Wren[/name]. But really, you know what works for you.
It seems like all of these extra name issues come from your SO traditions & choices so feel free to use that as leverage and get full veto power!
It is definitely a lot of names, but maybe you could somehow combine you’re tradition and his last name by making the middle a smoosh name something like [name]Rosemary[/name], [name]Annemarie[/name] or maybe even [name]Amerie[/name]? or maybe shortening [name]Joseph[/name] to [name]Jo[/name]?
But in the end, I think five names aren’t too bad especially since the last name is only three syllable.
It depends on the names. I think __ ____ [name]Mary[/name]/[name]Joseph[/name] [name]Baker[/name]-[name]Smith[/name] won’t be too bad as long as you keep the other two names relatively short. It might be that your child decides to go primarily as ___ [name]Baker[/name] or ___ [name]Smith[/name] unofficially anyway, I know a couple of people with double surnames who’ve dropped one half of it, though one of those was more Spanish naming customs rather than it being hyphenated. It would be worse if your surname was a mouthful, like [name]Henderson[/name]-[name]Newbury[/name], but if it’s only three syllables, [name]Baker[/name]-[name]Smith[/name] is really no different from being [name]Henderson[/name] in terms of spoken length.
I’m one of those people who think that basically, no name is too much (because of number of names at least), especially if it has familial significance. (Having said that, [name]Uma[/name] [name]Thurman[/name]'s daughter does have quite a lot of name, even if it is very pretty) No-one I know with two middle names has encountered any problems at all, simply because few other people know what their full name actually is. [name]One[/name] example is a friend with five names - two middle names and a hyphenated surname - which has a total syllable count of 9, and her name has never been an issue on official documents etc. I say go with tradition here. Good luck anyway!
I don’t think it’s too much, and it’s not like it’s just naming for the sake of naming. [name]One[/name] is tradition and the fact that the surname is hyphenated makes it even less “too much”. Personally I think it’s too much when a kid has like four-five given names, to me the only ones with a legitimate reason to give their children that many names are the royals (and [name]Uma[/name] [name]Thurman[/name], but who are we kidding - she’s almost royalty); and surnames are in a class for themselves (there are a lot of different reasons to give a child several surnames, and I think that it’s alright to have several surnames).
I’ve seen people with that many names and even more and they weren’t royal. [name]Do[/name] what your gut tells you and if your gut tells you it’s too much then that’s fine. You also need to remember when your children are adults they will marry and might not have a hyphenated name. And if that’s the case 2 middle’s is not as much as it seems now…
I’m trying to be okay with it but the fact is that I strongly feel that five names is too many. I’m wondering if the second middle name can be put on the legal birth documents and remain unused on other legal forms or shortened to an initial. I will have to look into this.
My daughter has 2 middle names and a double-barrelled 4 syllable surname. It has never caused any problems and we’ve never not had enough room for the names. This baby will also have 2 middles with the d-b surname. We do lean towards shorter names so that helps. As long as it flows I don’t have a problem with it.
As someone with a long first name, [name]Alexandra[/name] and two mn’s [name]Sophie[/name] M____ and a three syllable last name I can say it doesn’t feel super long or cumbersome. [name]Both[/name] my mn’s are two syllables long. It might feel a little unconventional right now but I’d mull it over with a few combos for a while and see how it sits. My cousin has the same LN as me and both his daughters have two middle names in a 4/3-3-3/2-3 pattern and it totally works.
(Upside to a hyphenated last name is that the 3 letter monogram problem goes away. Something at always mildly bothered me.)
Firstname [name]Mary[/name] Lastname-Lastname for a girl
Firstname [name]Joseph[/name] Lastname-Lastname for a boy
That way you keep the [name]Mary[/name]/[name]Joseph[/name] tradition going in a modified form and pare the whole thing down to four names rather than five.
I don’t think it’s too many names, actually, especially if the names have significant meaning or a tradition attached to it. I think it’s quite lovely and attaches a family history to the child through the name. And, in normal, everyday life, the child will be known by first name and simple hyphenated last name. I think it’s worse to cut the child out from the family naming tradition simply because he or she has a (rather easy) hyphenated last name.
Is definitely a cultural question. Here in my country I’d say the most usual combination is “1stName MiddleName MomSurname DadSurname”, but some people have 4 surnames! (and, in extremis, they might get two more when they get married…). Unless you think the child will struggle with forms and that knid of stuff, go fot it - and yes, in real life he/she will be known by the 1st and last name.
If I were you, I would stick with the second middle name tradition. The fact of the matter is, you really won’t be using it too often, and it’s important to your significant other. On that note, I would recommend using a shorter firstname. The more syllables you have jammed into one name, the sloppier it sounds.
I also think it’s really kind of you to be putting so much thought and effort into this! It shows that you care about your partner so much.
I’m starting to get hesitant about using two middle names, as planned, for my own child, particularly if we hyphenate or somehow incorporate my last name as well.
However, in this case, I’d definitely use the two middles to stick with tradition. It’s a lot more charming if it’s a family thing and for a reason instead of someone just sticking their kid with 5 names because they want to.