| |
|
Thank you for your input. I hadn't thought
about the changes in tradition. thank you. I can see the logic. I was just
saying that I had never seen it in the names that I had researched. I
wonder how you can tell if that had happened. Like I said, I had never
heard of it and have never seen it in practice in the northern hemisphere.
But I am doing the 1800's and that is why. I hope that here is a
respone
Jose
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 9:03
AM
Subject: [ranchos] Re: Naming
Patterns
Jose and Angie,
I seem to recall reading something about
this subject. It might have
been in "Retoños de España en la Nueva
Galicia" by Mariano González-
Leal. Possibly the Franco de Paredes
chapter. I would have to concur
with Angie's statements, unless my
memory is failing me. The case
study was where the husband added his
wife's surname to his own. He
might have been Franco and the wife
was Paredes so the husband added
Paredes to his own surname. The reason
for the addition is just what
Angie said: the wife's surname carried more
prestige than the
husband's. Steven may be able to shed some light
on this. I believe
he is contributing to the newest edition of
Retoños.
One thing we should keep in mind when you say "traditionally the
wife
keeps her maiden name" is that traditions change over time and it all
depends on what century you are debating. There is a big difference
in naming patterns in say 1580 and 1920.
Maria
--- In
ranchos@yahoogroups.com, "Jose Macias" <usa20@e...> wrote:
>
Angie; Though I can see the logic of what you say you may have
read,
I have never seen this to be the case in taking the surname of
the
wife.
> As you know, the child of Hector Garcia and
Rosa Mendez would be
for example Carlita Garcia Mendez. I have never
seen a man change
his name to Hector Mendez. It is not true in
Mexico, Central America
or South America, is it true maybe in Spain
or Portugal ? A family
name is very important and I have never seen
a case where a man would
change his surname to that of his wife's
father. I wonder where you
read this ? Traditionally the woman keeps
her maiden name in that way
even after marriage.
> I
know about the variations in the spelling of names. I have seen
some very
strange attempts to spell Indian names by phonetics.
>
Anyway, I found your entry very enlightening and will remember to
keep it
in mind as I look over the records from now on. If you will
tell me
where you have seen this practice, it would help me very much.
>
> Jose L. Macias
> usa20@e...
> ----- Original
Message -----
> From: aajay1073
> To:
ranchos@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 3:12
PM
> Subject: [ranchos] Re: Naming Patterns
>
>
> I read somewhere, {and I can't remember where, but I
tried
looking
> for my source for this information},
that if the wife's family
was of
> a higher status or
surname was 'better' {in using measurements
during
>
that time period}, then the males in the family took the wife's
> surname which would then pass to their children.
And the females
> took the husband's surname which would
get passed to their
children
> as the secondary
surname.
>
> In terms of mispellings or spelling
variations. Again, I read
> somewhere, the person
recording the name tended to be more
educated
> then
the general people. Therefore, it would have been 'beneath'
him
> to ask how to spell a name to someone who was less
educated them
he.
> The ability to read and write
was not wide spread, but more than
> likely even those
people who did know how to write, were probably
> still not
asked the correct way to spell their name.
>
> just
me two cents...
>
> Angie
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
> ranchos-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
ranchos-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of
Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|
|
| |
by Date 
-