I’m big on nicknames. That’s just how I roll. For example, in addition to his other nicknames, I have started calling Josh “Ragnar the Invincible” because this morning when I was feeding Hannah he came in with a blanket around his shoulders (I think to make me feel bad for not wanting to heat the house to 97 degrees) and looked like a Viking.
Anyway, the point I’m pondering is: who gets to decide what nicknames are short for what regular name? To continue the Viking theme, if I wanted to name my child “Aethelrod” and call him “Tim” is that so wrong? After all, some nicknames we take for granted don’t match the real name at all (for example, shortening “Margaret” to “Peggy”).
Josh wants to have a son named for him, to encourage a long line of Joshua Ellsworth Gillespies adding to their Roman numeral suffixes in perpetuity. I think it would be confusing to have two Josh’s running around the house. We have family friends with three generations who go by “Jim,” “Jimboy,” and “James Franklin.” That’s all right for them, but I am SO not going to call my son “Joshboy.” That’s simply ridiculous! Anyway we wanted to call our first son “Jack.”
To make a short story long, we might name our first son Joshua Ellsworth Gillespie II and call him Jack, even though Jack is not traditionally short for Joshua. Wanna make something of it? 🙂 Hey, it’s better than calling our son Aethelrod, Joshboy, or Peggy.