[name]Just[/name] about every name is a place name, so I have no issue with it. When it comes to names of countries, it depends on what country it is. [name]Holland[/name] works, but Madagascar doesn’t.
I would not. A lot of place names aren’t my style- [name]India[/name] being the only exception- and I wouldn’t use them. Period. There would need to be a significant connection to that place for me to consider using it- like it was the city where I met my husband. But even then, I probably wouldn’t.
I think if you like [name]Holland[/name] it’s fine for you to use it. It’s just something that isn’t my style.
I absolutely love several place names that I have no connection to what so ever ([name]Holland[/name], [name]London[/name], and [name]Paris[/name] for example). It is most certainly not a no-no. If you think about it, many popular (or once popular) names are also place names ([name]Shelby[/name] is a county in [name]Tennessee[/name], and [name]Taylor[/name] is a city in [name]Alabama[/name] for example); people just don’t think about them all the time. For me, when I find a name that I love that’s also a place name, I don’t think about the place. I just think about that I love the name, and there just happens to be a place named it as well. My only exception to this is if I lived near the place that I loved the name of. I wouldn’t name a girl [name]London[/name] if I lived in or near the city, even if I loved the name. I still think the same about place names if the name/place in question is a common name or not.
No. I think it’s weird even with the common ones. And with an uncommon one, you’ll likely get asked about why you chose it, with the person assuming you have a connection to the place. I’d feel really weird answering, “Uh… no… I just thought it was cool.” But that’s me.
I don’t care if [name]Victoria[/name] is a place; it was a given name first. If I am using a flower name, I’m unlikely to care there’s some little subdivision named after that type of flower or tree, unless the MN/LN is something like Harbour or [name]Lake[/name] or [name]Cove[/name] that reinforces the impression of it being a suburb and not a child.
But in terms of [name]London[/name] or [name]Brooklyn[/name], no, I wouldn’t use those without a connection, and especially not names of nations. That’s just me though.
My two favourite names that break my own rules are [name]Ravenna[/name] and [name]Margaux[/name]. But I probably won’t ever feel comfortable actually using them, though they are very attractive in terms of sound. My husband does like [name]Ravenna[/name] as a feminine variant on [name]Raven[/name]; he likes the birds. I would still feel a bit odd about it.
Place names are generally not my style but I have to on my list [name]Florence[/name] and [name]Kingston[/name]. However both have family connection [name]Florence[/name] is my great grandmothers name and [name]Kingston[/name] is my great grandfather’s surname. I personally will only use them because of the family connection but if you like [name]Holland[/name] then I would say go for it [name]Holly[/name] would be an adorable nickname.
I definitely wouldn’t rule it out. At the moment I think Alaska is a spunky little name but I’ve never been there (would like to though!). I don’t think people should rule out a name because they have no connection to it - I have no connection to Greek mythology but I like a lot of those names! At the end of the day it’s more about what sounds nice and what feels right for you. I don’t think anyone has a right to tell you that you can’t use [name]Holland[/name], [name]India[/name], [name]Ireland[/name], [name]Solomon[/name] Islands or whatever just because you’ve never been there.
Ps. Please don’t name your kid [name]Solomon[/name] Islands. It doesn’t have a terribly nice ring to it
I’m not sure what I would. It depnends on the name. If it has history as a surname or first name, I don’t mind ([name]Wellington[/name] and [name]China[/name] for example). I mainly like [name]Wellington[/name] for the boots and the character on ‘The No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency’, and [name]China[/name] for the [name]Tori[/name] [name]Amos[/name] song by the same name, so those would be my reasons for choosing either of these names, and I would still probably put them in the middle spot.
I also love the sound of [name]Cairo[/name] and [name]Shiloh[/name] but I’ve never been to any of the places, nor do I have some personal connection to them, not even in popular culture. So I probably wouldn’t use them unless my SO for some reason had a connection, and even then only in the middle.
Other place names are so trendy it’s hard for me to even imagine using them on a child of mine. I used to like [name]London[/name] for a boy, but I’ve been to [name]London[/name] and I love [name]London[/name], so it wouldn’t be too strange. I also like [name]Paris[/name] for the mythological connections and again a song called [name]Paris[/name]. (and there’s a song called [name]London[/name] that I really like as well).
However, I love a name like Kestrel even though I can’t say I’ve never even seen a Kestrel. That wouldn’t keep me from using it, so I’m not entirely sure why it should be different with place names.
And I have to admit that if mythology interested people named their son [name]Paris[/name] I would be over the moon, I would not feel the same if someone without the same interest named their daughter [name]Paris[/name] because it sounds nice, or they like the place. Still there are worse names one could use! I would rather see a child with a place name the family has no ties to than a misspelled name or something.
I think a few specific place names like [name]London[/name] or [name]Brooklyn[/name] sound more like a geography lesson than a real name, but then again I like others like [name]Charlotte[/name] and [name]Austin[/name] just fine, so essentially it just boils down to personal preferences.
If you don’t have any connection to the place then it really just depends on whether the name has a special enough sound for you, apart from the location, to actually use it. I think [name]Holland[/name] could be a very cute name for a little girl, and I love the suggestion of nn [name]Holly[/name] (possibly [name]Lindy[/name]?). Really all I am hearing is that you have an excuse to take her on a great vacation when she gets older! =]
Well, living in the UK I wouldn’t use [name]London[/name]…and I wouldn’t use anything in Europe, either. Ones like [name]Dakota[/name] I might consider (though I really don’t like [name]Dakota[/name] that much) but I just think naming your child after a place is slightly odd. [name]Say[/name] they ever went to that place? Also, living too close to [name]Holland[/name], I wouldn’t use it myself. It is fine if you want to, but I would really think.
Nope, I wouldn’t. Then again, I also think place names that do have significance tend to come across as cheesy.
I would pick no-connection-[name]Holland[/name] over conception-place-[name]Holland[/name]. Conception place names are just TMI for me, haha.
And then if I didn’t have a connection to the place, it’d be an incessant question and I’m sure I’d get sick of it and my kid would be rolling his/ her eyes whenever he/she had to explain it.
I think the place names that were named after people are fine.
Pop-trendy place names are not my style at all, but I don’t feel like people need to be able to justify using them.
More out-there place names, I feel like do need a justification… even though usually I truly do not care what the backstory is.
As far as using place names go, I’d rather use a name significant to the place, rather than the name of the place itself.
I think that the more uncommon the place name is the more people will ask what the connection is. I know an [name]Egypt[/name] and her parents have no connection to [name]Egypt[/name] other than they liked the name. Though still my first question was ‘Are you from [name]Egypt[/name]?’
I think it’s just personal preference really, and it really just depends on the place/name. I mean I find [name]London[/name], [name]Camden[/name], [name]Ireland[/name], [name]Bristol[/name], [name]Brighton[/name], [name]Weston[/name] strange as first names because they are well known places in the UK. However, I like [name]Dakota[/name], [name]Kingston[/name] and [name]India[/name] so I guess for me I feel like I can like it when I don’t have any connection to the name as a place.
[name]Brooklyn[/name] sounded fine on [name]Brooklyn[/name] [name]Beckham[/name] being a celebrity and all but then when you hear it being used in very trashy/down market areas, my take on the name completely changes. So, yes I know [name]Brooklyn[/name] is a place, but I think of it as a name now and not a very nice one here in the UK because of how its been used.
I know of a little [name]Cairo[/name], and I think that sounds really cool. Some people will love it and others will think its plain stupid, just like how people feel the same with word names like [name]River[/name]/[name]Storm[/name]/[name]Blue[/name] etc.