She’s a classic appellation, almost as evergreen as Elizabeth or Mary.
Thanks to Lola for suggesting Laura as our Baby Name of the Day.
With centuries of use, Laura can’t be called trendy.
Baby Name of the Day: Laura
on Apr 01, 2011, Updated Apr 21, 2012
I was combing names together and really like Laurastelle.
Isn’t Lauren’s origin male?
Yes and no. Laurence was the preferred spelling early days; Laurencia the most formal feminine form. But in common usage, there was quite a bit of crossover in the use of short forms for many names in Medieval England. (Though I can’t find the exact spelling Lauren for either gender.)
In the 20th century, Lauren was used sparingly for boys until Lauren Bacall came along.
So … yes, it was male circa 1930, but would have been gender neutral circa 1390. I’d say Lauren sounds like a logical short form for either gender, but I can’t imagine parents picking it out of the blue for a son today. Larkin, on the other hand, could definitely work for a boy.
I seem to remember reading/hearing that the Loren spelling was the preferred masculine form. Is this true? What about Lorena then, is that then related to Loren?
Sarah A. – I went to college with a family from Norwegian roots, I believe. The twin brothers were Leif and Loren.
I just thought I’d add that Laura Secord is now the name of a chocolate company here in Canada: https://www.laurasecord.ca/en/
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with Laura, but I went to school with numerous girls with a Laurel name (all of whom went by Lori)… So Laura feels like more of a “mom” name to me.
I can’t believe you haven’t already done Laura, I always thought of this as a classic. It has been around for centuries, after all. I really like Laura, and I only knew one growing up (and she stood out in a crowd of Jessicas, Nicoles, Amandas and Stephanies), so I still think of it as fresh and new. I am also a huge fan of Laura Ingalls Wilder (the books, not so much the show), so I would use this name in honor of her.