For interest, please try
not to look up the following before you answer.
If you heard that Person A was Person B's
namesake, would you assume that:
(a) Person A was named after Person B
(b) Person B was named after Person A
(c) Both (a) and (b) equally likely
(d) None of the above [please provide your interpretation in this case
]
a. I was named for the sake of my father, just as my son is named for my sake.
(edited: I had it right and then put the wrong letter!)
I'll go for d).
In its normal use, whatever it may have originally meant, it merely implies that A and B have the same name. No cause/effect relationship is implied at all.
Edit:
Merriam Webster online says d), especially c)
ReEdit:
Or at least my interpretation of d).
I have always admired the custom of naming a child after some much loved
adult, especially parent or grandparent. That's one reason I do not llke
picking names of celebrities or "popular" names which will be out of style in a decade.
Our family avoided Jr.'s and Roman numberals.
I'm with Faldage on this one (even before scrolling to his M-W reference). In fact, yesterday I sent an email wherein I used namesake in just such a casual, non-causal way.
My Aunt Elizabeth and I call each other "my favorite namesake." I honestly thought I was being jocular, and up to this very moment would have gone with TEd on choosing
a).Live and learn. Thanks for the interesting thread, mein Fingerlein!
casual, non-causal Nice turn of phrase, there, Mizz b
Can be (and is) used two ways:
1: the person for whom a child was named (doesn't have to be a parent)
2: either or both of two people with the same name ("We are namesakes!")
I think that makes my answer "a) and d)".
And I just asked my secretary what it meant and she gave me that exact answer, independently. So it must be true!
Humpty-Dumpty would be pleased. "When I use a word, it means exactly what I want it to, no more and no less." (or words to that effect) -- Lewis Carroll
Roman numberalsApologies for drawing attention to a typoe, Bill, but this one's great! I get an image of Romans dressed in excessively tight overalls, pained expressions on their faces.
No cause/effect relationship is implied at allMy dear Nunclage,
D'oh! I knew there were more categories of "neither" to allow for, and had actually referenced M-W not that long before. I'd meant (c) to cover this scenario.
Hey ho. Got a really nice definition out of you and boronia anyway - "non-causal, casual" will definitely stay with me
But there is definitely something about (a), which I'll make explicit elsewhere...
"a) and d)"Well, wofa, my newNuncle Fal has produced a cogent summary of why (d) is the only correct answer. However, that's "by the book" (M-W in this case).
(a) -- a namesake is the (more) original person with the name -- was my first response when asked, as it appears to have been yours, your secretary's and TEd's. Oh, and Auntie Elizabeth Fischhoek's. That's enough people in a small sample for me to judge this a common usage, and therefore a reasonably valid meaning. (d) remains the primary meaning, of course.
So, wofa, I'll have a quick flashback to my days reading Marvel comics, and award you a No-Prize. Congratulations!
Incidentally, my wife went for (b) as first choice - hence this thread. And the phrase that kicked it off was on a recent Elvis special on UK TV in which I think Elvis
Costello was called the King's "namesake".
[f. name n. The use of sake is peculiar, but the comb. may have originated in two persons or things being mentioned or coupled together ‘for the name's sake’: for examples of name-sake in this sense, see sake.]
A person or thing[E.A] having the same name as another.
1646 Sir T. Browne Pseud. Ep. 170 Nor [does] the Dog~fish at sea much more make out the Dog of the land, then that his cognominall or name-sake in the heavens. 1657 J. Watts Vindic. Church Eng. 89, I shall here dehort you from being of Iohn and Iames, (though you are the name-sake of the one). 1712 Addison Spect. No. 482 32 Another..subscribes herself Xantippe, and tells me, that she follows the Example of her Name-sake. 1797 F. Burney Let. June, It was a very sweet thought to make my little namesake write to me. 1826 Scott 26 Mar. in Croker Papers (1884) I. 319, I enclose a letter for your funny namesake and kinsman. 1867 Freeman Norm. Conq. (1877) I. iv. 182 The unhappy descendant and namesake of the great Emperor.
attrib. 1650 Fuller Pisgah ii. 64 Looking southward behold the City of Nebo, at the foot of its namesake mountain. 1860 Forster Gr. Remonstr. 26 Postponing Luke to lucre; and setting more store by a handful of marks than by all the doctrines of their namesake saint.
yes, the answer is clearly d, in that no relationship is implied.
Uhh, "a" was my intital response before reading further, shona...JFTR.
the answer is clearly dYes, Nuncle - by
two books, now.
Though Juan has given yet another first-guess vote to (a), so I still think (a) gets second preference.
his cognominall or name-sake in the heavensNice synonym. Speaking of which, would "cognonym" be another?
It's (a) in my book. It may be used in a fast and loose sense which renders it either or, and (d) may be the exactly correct answer, but if you tell me that so-and-so is so-and-someone else's namesake, I assume (a).
if you tell me that so-and-so is so-and-someone else's namesake, I assume (a).
Context be damned and Devil take the mindlost.
...and don't consider the etymology.
...and don't consider the etymology
Yup - that would decimate the theory!
...and don't consider the etymology.Etomology is for insects..."A".
yeah, I know there's 'sposed to be an "n" in there
>but if you tell me that so-and-so is so-and-someone else's namesake, I assume (a).
Once again my antipodean antithesis has backed me into a corner from which the only escape is to agree with him.
Fish, I think that the phrasing of your quiz...
If you heard that Person A was Person B's namesake, would you assume that: would direct one to...
(b) Person B was named after Person Ainasmuch as A comes before B.
But to answer as to how I understand the word "namesake" is used, is...
(E) All of the above.Examples:
(a) Person A was named after Person BBaby points up at grandpa and sez, "Namesake!".
(b) Person B was named after Person A Grandpa points down at baby and shouts, "Namesake!".
(c) Both (a) and (b) equally likely Definitions extend beyond words and dictionaries and are augmented by situations, so sure, why quibble, equal.
(d) None of the above [please provide your interpretation in this case ] A B and C refer to folks only. The word "namesake" can be applied and understood as a geographic place, or for that matter, anything with a name. So A, B and C can't be correct until you add an
(E) All above are correct, then all become correct. I think. -
-
Like in this sentence...
" Birmingham, Alabama is the namesake of Birmingham, England." In this case it doesn't matter which name came first, I've heard it both ways.
Cheerio,
Milo.
Once again, I am happily snuggled in between CK & sjm; a, without a doubt, and devil take the hind leg.
" Birmingham, Alabama is the namesake of Birmingham, England."
Great! Or "The Seneca Indians are the namesake of Seneca, the Roman philosopher, statesman, orator, and tragedian."
The Seneca Indians are the namesake of Seneca, the Roman philosopher
Surely there has to be some connection, however notional, between namesakes other than just coincidentally the same spelling for two different things in two different languages. But perhaps the Greek name Seneca actually was the origin for the name of that Indian nation and it is not an Indian word at all – perhaps I should look it up. So – I have searched and searched but cannot find the origin of the name of the Seneca Indians. I now know far more about them than I did, which was practically nothing I’m ashamed to say, but can someone please tell me – why Seneca?
A second question that came to mind during my reading was what makes a nation? The dictionary definition of nation is quite broad and there are sections within many/most countries that would have qualified as nations in the near or distant past (I am sure we could all draw up a list, for example Italy and Germany were, until unified in the mid-nineteenth century, made up of separate self governed states and some Bretons, Basques and others would still like to be separate!), but they are no longer referred to as nations. So why are these called Indian “nations”? What is special here?
dxb.
Their name for themselves is variously given as Nod-doh-wa-ge:o:no (yes, the colons represent a phoneme, but I don't know what it is) or Onondowahgah both of which mean People of the Great Hill. AHD gives the origin of the name Seneca, referring to the Indians, as From Dutch Sennecaas, probably of Mahican origin. M-W adds that Sennecaas means the Iroquois living west of the Mohawks. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some connection with the Roman of the same name, if only in affecting the spelling. I included the two only to indicate that, in my opinion, there need be no connection between two entities for them to be called namesakes.
Nation originally referred to a people and not to a political organization. It derives from the Latin word meaning to be born.
What's special? long History..
here is a blurb from one US government site...
The federal government recognizes the unique political relationship, based on treaties and history, between the Indian nation governments and the federal government. In the NY/NJ area, seven are recognized by the federal government as “federally-recognized Indian Tribes”(see map below), with whom the federal government has a government-to-government relationship. Some, but not all, Indian nations or Tribes, apply to the Bureau of Indians Affairs for federal recognition. Such recognition allows the U.S. government to interact with these nations on a government-to-government basis and to provide services it cannot provide to nations that are not “federally-recognized”. The federally-recognized Indian nations (in NY/NJ) include: Cayuga Nation; Oneida Indian Nation (OIN); Onondaga Nation; St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (SRMT); Seneca Nation of Indians (SNI); Tonawanda Band of Seneca's; Tuscarora Nation.
all of the nations have web pages, i could get you urls if you want more info on a specific nation..
Birmingham:Birmingham::Seneca/:Seneca
Thanks, Faldage and Of Troy. That helps me fit the name Seneca to the tribe and understand that the Gov't agreement gives it and others "nation status". That is special. I found the websites for the various nations listed on another page that I came across and am slowly browsing them. Fascinating reading.
Thanks again,
dxb.
