I’ve been toying around with (and loving!) [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name]/[name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] lately. [name]Samuel[/name] is definitely staying, and so is [name]John[/name] (it’s a family name), and I love [name]Gaspard[/name]. It holds ties to my little sister and my best friend (who passed away 2011), but I can’t help but feel some hesitation. I almost feel like I’m trying too hard. It’s not that it’s that out-there–it’s just that my naming style is… very safe, I think. And I’m not sure [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name]/[name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] was really what I was originally going for. I think it might just be that it was so hard for me to find a [name]Samuel[/name] combo I love (it’s literally taken me years) that it’s taking some convincing to see that this really is right, even if it wasn’t what I was originally looking for–I felt the same way with my [name]Eva[/name] combo, and I’m utterly in love with [name]Eva[/name] [name]Felicity[/name] [name]Claire[/name] now.
[name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name]/[name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name]. Yay or nay? Also, which order? [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name], or [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name]? I like the look of [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name] better (and I like keeping [name]Samuel[/name] and [name]Gaspard[/name] together), but I almost feel like the flow of [name]SAM[/name]-yuhl [name]JOHN[/name] gas-PAHRD flows better than [name]SAM[/name]-yuhl gas-PAHRD [name]JOHN[/name] does.
[name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name] flows nicely, but I first though [name]Gaspard[/name] was a last name. And how are you pronouncing it?
I like it. The reason I suggested [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name] to you is because of what you said up there, [name]Samuel[/name] and [name]Gaspard[/name] look lovely together. I don’t care about perfect flow, and honestly I don’t think putting [name]John[/name] in the middle makes much of a difference. I also see that you pronounce [name]Samuel[/name] with two syllables! [name]Fancy[/name] that!
I like the flow of [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] the best but when I put your LN on there, it seems of with [name]Gaspard[/name]. So with your LN I think I prefer [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name]. I love [name]Samuel[/name] and [name]John[/name] together and [name]Gaspard[/name] really adds some pizzazz to these classics.
The degree to which [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] flows better than the alternative outweighs, [name]IMO[/name], the visual benefits of [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name]. I’d go with the former.
lol, @ottilie and @renrose, how do you say [name]Samuel[/name]? It confuses my brain to try and say it any other way.
Urgh, this is not helping. It’s just reinforcing the fact that I [name]LOVE[/name] the look of [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] together, but [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] sounds much better to me. I don’t put a terribly lot of stock in flow, but [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] just sounds so much better!
I feel like the breakup between [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] flows a little better. I think the first middle name should be the one you like better regardless of flow. Most of the time the second gets knocked out. You should also write it out on paper like it was his signature. An example is [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] G. or [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] J. I know in my signature I make my middle just my initial so [name]Samuel[/name] J.G. or [name]Samuel[/name] G.J. also could be an example. I think writing it out might help get a mindset of what could be easier for him or maybe more fun to write. I’m also wondering what happened with [name]Fitzwilliam[/name], is it out officially?
I actually prefer the flow of [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name], over the other combo. With [name]John[/name] in the middle it feels choppier, [name]IMO[/name]. I think my pron. is juuuuust slightly different than yours ([name]SAM[/name]-yule Gass-PAHR [name]John[/name], without the -d sound on [name]Gaspard[/name]) but yours is probably right.
Oooh yes yes yes. [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] is very distinguished. I much prefer the name in this order, as you linger on beautiful [name]Gaspard[/name]. Also, to build on Babyninja’s point: I like the look of [name]Samuel[/name] J.G. rather than [name]Samuel[/name] G.J. In the former, the curve of the J hugs to [name]Samuel[/name] and the open mouth of the G leads you forth into the last name, whereas in the latter the GJ becomes a contained set of brackets. [name]Fussy[/name]? Who me?
lol, [name]Emma[/name], I do like the look of [name]Samuel[/name] J., especially in cursive. What a handsome signature that would be! Although now that I’m seeing [name]Samuel[/name] J.G. [surname]–I can’t help but sing “J. G. Wentworth, 877-[name]CASH[/name]-NOW!” Please tell me I’m the only one that thought of that! Let’s just hope I don’t marry a Mr. Wentworth! (Although the [name]Jane[/name] [name]Austen[/name] addict in me would secretly love it–Persuasion is my favorite of her works!)
@cortin - The only other way I can think of is [name]SAM[/name]-yoo-uhl or [name]SAM[/name]-yoo-el–I think I remember one of my British friends saying she used to teach a little boy whose mother insisted he was only ever to be [name]SAM[/name]-yoo-el, three syllables. It always seemed way too forced for me, though–sort of like saying EV-er-ett, I just can’t do it! It’s EV-rhett!
@greyer - meh, it could be yours, as well. I just barely pronounce the “D” on the end. I just looked it up on forvo, as my French isn’t exactly up to par, and it sounded almost like GAS-pahr. Sort of closer to [name]Caspar[/name]? Which would mean [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name] might actually flow better! Urgh, and just when I was seeing the merit of [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name]!
I prefer [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gasper[/name] [name]John[/name] to [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gasper[/name]. Having [name]Gaspar[/name] in between the two classic kinda names also feels like it balances out the whole name a bit better. And I don’t think one version really flows that much better over the other anyways. They both work.
And I think it’s a great combo, by the way (either way). [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] LN would be a bit boring for my taste, but throw [name]Gaspar[/name] in there and suddenly I think it’s a fantastic name.
I think [name]Samuel[/name] [name]John[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] is wonderful. I like the flow of these three names together. [name]Eva[/name] [name]Felicity[/name] [name]Claire[/name] is very pretty too!
I really like [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] [name]John[/name], and I pronounce [name]Samuel[/name] as two syllables. I think [name]Samuel[/name] [name]Gaspard[/name] sounds amazing together, and if [name]Gaspard[/name] is at the end it will sound like a double barrel surname, rather than two middles.’
ETA: I think Gaspard is lovely, but maybe my pronunciation is off. I’m saying “SAM-yool GASP-ard John”
Really like [name]Gaspard[/name]. Saying it out loud is fun.
Let’s just hope I don’t marry a Mr. Wentworth! (Although the [name]Jane[/name] [name]Austen[/name]