I have had some feedback that some people think [name_u]Sam[/name_u] on its own is not substantial enough. I am curious why some other short names like [name_u]Max[/name_u], [name_m]Leo[/name_m], [name_f]Zoe[/name_f], [name_f]Tia[/name_f] etc. may not receive the same concerns. Thanks
I think [name_u]Sam[/name_u] on its own is just as usable as [name_u]Max[/name_u] in it own. I personally think each stands alone well without a longer, more formal name. Have people said to you that [name_u]Max[/name_u] is fine but not [name_u]Sam[/name_u]? The only possible reason I can think of is that [name_m]Samuel[/name_m]/[name_u]Sam[/name_u] is a biblical name and perhaps people therefore feel its nickname isn’t substantial enough? I don’t really know to be honest. Maybe it’s that [name_u]Max[/name_u] has been more commonly used on its own than [name_u]Sam[/name_u] has (I would imagine)?
I agree with you, I think it’s fine as a standalone
I like [name_u]Sam[/name_u] on its own. I prefer someone having the name that they go by rather than “but my real name is…”.
Although I prefer [name_m]Samuel[/name_m], there’s nothing shocking or negative about standalone [name_u]Sam[/name_u]. Totally acceptable. I know plenty of Joshs that are [name_m]Josh[/name_m], which is a similar thing.
It’s perfectly fine on it’s own
I think it’s okay, though I personally prefer [name_m]Samuel[/name_m] with [name_u]Sam[/name_u] as a nickname. In my opinion, formal names are more versatile and give you more options. A [name_m]Samuel[/name_m] could choose to go by [name_u]Sam[/name_u] or [name_u]Sammy[/name_u], but a person who has [name_u]Sam[/name_u] as his legal name doesn’t have the option of going by a more formal name.
To me the main difference between [name_u]Sam[/name_u] and something like [name_f]Zoe[/name_f] is that [name_u]Sam[/name_u] is traditionally a nickname for [name_m]Samuel[/name_m] while [name_f]Zoe[/name_f] is a name on its own (it’s not a nickname for anything).
As a mother of " A [name_m]Just[/name_m] [name_u]Max[/name_u]", I think [name_u]Sam[/name_u] is a perfectly acceptable name. I am a strong believer in naming a child what you are going to call the child.
I think [name_m]Samuel[/name_m] is more beautiful and interesting, but [name_u]Sam[/name_u] works fine on its own!
I think it works just fine on it’s own.
People will probably assume he’s a [name_m]Samuel[/name_m] but as long as you can deal with that, I see no issues with ‘just [name_u]Sam[/name_u]’.
I have [name_u]Sam[/name_u]! He’s just [name_u]Sam[/name_u]. His name is [name_u]Sam[/name_u] [name_m]Patrick[/name_m].
I have always liked [name_m]Samuel[/name_m] but not enough to use it but I have always LOVED the name [name_u]Sam[/name_u]. I love how it’s masculine but still soft and sweet. Suits my son perfectly.
We do occasionally get people calling him [name_m]Samuel[/name_m], but I just correct them and they don’t do it again. It doesn’t really phase people that he’s just [name_u]Sam[/name_u]. Our other children have names that could be a nickname, we’re a fan. [name_m]Just[/name_m] don’t see the point in using a full name if they’re never going to use it.