|
The Consonantization of America
|
Update:
One of
the readers at
www.Languagehat.com noted that many of the trends I report
reversed themselves after 1960 or 1970, and that the present naming
pattern is significantly different than the 1960 pattern. This is
true, and perhaps change has been cyclic to a degree.
The decline of f , o,
and e and the replacement of h by k were
apparently permanent, but a and i have
recovered and p has declined to approximately
where it was before.
The fact that the 2000 and 2005
numbers don't seem to add up to 100% is a sign that we
shouldn't take all this very seriously.
|
This site, based on census records, graphically depicts the rise
and fall of American baby names since the 1880s. Most of it is
pretty ho-hum: more Ashley,
less Mabel. However, I applied my powerful scientific mind to the
database and asked myself: "How are the letters of the alphabet
doing?"
What I
found was that some letters have been doing very well indeed, while
others have been doing badly. Specifically the group a, e,
i, o, h, f, w has plummeted, whereas the group d, p, s, t, k
has soared. In 1900 31.2% of all baby names began with letters in
the first group, but by 1960 only 9.4% did (fewer than a third as
many). As for the second group, in 1900 only 9.3% of the baby names
belonged to this group, but by 1960 30.7% did (more than three times
as many).
One
noticeable trend is a move away from names beginning in vowels.
In 1900 18% of the baby names began with vowels, but in 1960 only
6.9% did (fewer than half as many). A second noticeable trend is a
reversal of Grimm's law. P names have replaced F
names, and K names have replaced H names. F
and H went from a total of 9.3% to 1.8%, while P and
K went from 2.6% to 9.7%. Goodbye, Frank and
Harold and Florence and Harriet; hello, Kevin and Peter and Karen and
Pam! .
I don't
have any idea what the significance of all this is either, but could
it possibly be a good thing? Something certainly should be done! -- but
first, further research is required.
| |
1900 |
1960 |
Change |
|
1900 |
1960 |
Change |
| A |
06.8% |
03.8% |
|
D |
02.3% |
09.5% |
|
| E |
08.5% |
02.6% |
|
P |
01.8% |
04.2% |
|
| I |
01.5% |
00.2% |
|
S |
02.5% |
06.5% |
|
| O |
01.2% |
00.1% |
|
T |
01.9% |
05.0% |
|
| H |
05.5% |
01.0% |
|
K |
00.8% |
05.5% |
|
| F |
03.8% |
00.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
| W |
03.9% |
00.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total |
31.2% |
9.4% (3x) |
-21.8% |
Total |
9.3% |
30.7% |
+21.4% (3x ) |
Methodology:
I
eyeballed the graphs and did the arithmetic with a pencil on the
back of the proverbial envelope. I chose the years 1900 and 1960 and
the letters a, e, i, o, h, f, v, d, p, s, t, and k
because I got the most significant results that way. I didn't
include the vowel u because u-names have always been
vanishingly rare.
|
I am emersonj at gmail dot com.
Original materials copyright John J
Emerson
Return to
Idiocentrism
jjmrsnx |