A few weeks ago I posted a link to the most popular pet names. Here's another article about it.
And here's a listing of the top 30 names.
One of the things it made me wonder about was how these names became so popular? I'd understand if these names were descriptive, since pets share characteristics, and something like "Speedy" or "Brownie" or "Nosy" could come up a lot. But many of these are names we associate as "people" names. What is making so many people decide to name their pet "Max"? We actually own a dog named Maggie, although we adopted her after her naming, so that's not our doing. I'm not a big believer in naming pets with "people" names. And if I were, it sure wouldn't be something ordinary like just a first name. No, it would be something like President Bush, or Jimmy Swaggart, or Rachael Ray. And mostly that would be for the pure enjoyment of saying things like "We're taking President Bush in to be neutered" or "You better go clean up Rachael Ray's poop" or "Quit licking your butt, Jimmy Swaggart". And that's no small enjoyment. On the other hand, I guess I'm more old school, I like the idea of naming a pet after a perceived characteristic, or a resemblance to something. We humanize our pets more than we should as it is, giving them names traditionally meant and currently used by people seems just a bit too much. I wonder if there has been any study into whether societies have done this historically, if it is a growing trend, and what may be driving it. I find it curious.
Posted by PSoTD on
Friday October 19, 2007 at 7:58am |
|



Gerby2
Gerby3
and so on. Good luck!