Help with baby name

peachyprice

How about just the number of syllables

moomoomama27

gunsandbanjos wrote: »

I think SM said that because she is a teacher and sees loads of these names in every class.. They have been done to death i imagine.

Nowadays that's not so much the case! Since the 'celeb culture' has taken off it's the stranger more 'unique' names that are becoming more common, the nice traditional names don't get used much!

I work in a school, the names one thinks should be more popular (like the above mentioned names), are actually uncommon!

rachbc

'Different' names are harder for boys. I wanted DS to be Rueben 13 years ago it just got snorts of dirision from friends - now I know about 5 under 3 Ruebens. Same with Felix.

Elliot instead of Ethan? Or Eli/ Elijah.

Rowan/ Rohan instead of Rogan - or Logan/ Morgan - though I'm not personally keen on Logan.

Or unusual versions of popular abbreviations - Ben (Benedict instead of Benjamin) Sam (Samson not Samual)

Aimless

I liked Ethan, Rowan, and even at a push Aiken, but none go with the surname so I've had to abandon them all. Every name I like ends with an N!

hethmar

Can you not think of some others? Im sorry but most of those sound really chav (from films or tv) to me. A good old fashioned name would be so much nicer - can you look back in your family history for something that would suit.

mrbrightside842

peachyprice wrote: »

I voted Ethan.

Archie's been done to death, people are even starting to name their dogs it here

Rylan and Rogan sound like made up names, I don't like made up names, they age terribly.

The only Connors I know are little gits.

My exact thoughts here! I only voted Ethan because of the reasons for the other names.

djdido2

I am due in ten weeks and am calling my little boy Max, I love it, I also have a Jack and I disagree that you should not name your child just because there will be 5 others in class. The name you pick is unique to your child and that makes him/her an individual.

Just saying!! I voted Ethan, just sounds nicer than the others.

angelil

I voted Connor. Ethan is becoming a bit too common now although it's OK. Archie reminds me of a little old man. The other two names are terrible.

A note on a couple of the other suggestions here: why 'Reece'?! It's spelt RHYS. And Reagan? Anyone who suggests that (especially for a boy!) clearly hasn't ever read or seen King Lear (although admittedly the evil sister's name is spelt Regan).

If you want something a little bit different but still traditional, you could look to the Bible: I'm not talking Nebuchednezzar territory or anything but Simeon, Levi, Elijah, Reuben, Jacob and Asher are all great Biblical names that still come off as being a bit unusual today

brummiebabe

Beki88 wrote: »

All the connors I knew growing up were all little blighters as well!

I was going to say that too....all the Connors I know are naughty!! Strange.

I like Archie - haven't read to the end so don't know if you've chosen....will have to go back & read now:rotfl:

brummiebabe

The way we decided our boys' names was to imagine them, at 18, in the pub with their mates....imagine their friends shouting the name across the bar...how does it sound???? If it sounds good, then great. If not, then think again!! Some names sound great for little kids....but think of them in the future too!!