Name Help is a series at Appellation Mountain. Every Saturday, one reader’s name questions will be discussed.
We’re relying on thoughtful comments from the community to help expectant parents narrow down their name decisions. Thank you in advance for sharing your insight!
Jen writes:
We’re expecting our third child any day now, and I thought I had the name picked out. But three separate (and totally unrelated) people have asked if that name is “short” for anything, and now I’m having doubts.
We have two children. Our son is James Engler LastName IV. We call him Jack, because Jim and James are already taken, and I have a sister-in-law called Jamie, and a nephew Jameson.
Our daughter is Elizabeth Avery. Elizabeth is my middle name, my grandmother’s name, and his mom’s name. Avery I just liked. (She was almost Avery Elizabeth, but we know two other Averys!) We call her Ellie.
We were all set to name our daughter Lucy Marie. Marie after his grandmother, and Lucy because I just plain love it.
But now three totally separate people have asked me if Lucy is short for anything. I didn’t think it had to be, but when I mentioned it to my husband, he said that he liked Lucille. I don’t hate Lucille, but I don’t love it the way I love Lucy.
Do I need a longer name for Lucy?
Hi Jen –
This is such an interesting dilemma!
First: there is absolutely no need to have a longer name for Lucy. Lucy is the most popular of the Luc- names for girls, at #62 in 2014. It’s traditionally given as an independent name, just like Mary. The ‘y’ ending doesn’t mean it is – or ever was! – short for something.
But even if Lucy was traditionally a nickname, there’s no reason to expect that would still be true today. Sadie was once short for Sarah. Many a Molly was actually a Mary, not so long ago. But today? Sadie is Sadie, Molly is Molly, and Kate, Jack, Tom, Maggie, and Charlie may not have formal names, either. There are plenty of good reasons to put the every day use name on the birth certificate.
That said, I think people are asking because they know that your Jack is really James IV, and your Ellie is actually an Elizabeth. Assuming they also know that those are both family names, they may be wondering if Lucy is actually named after your great aunt Lucia. (Or insert similar explanation here.)
I’m also guessing that if this was your first child, no one would think to ask.
So you’ve set a pattern that others are picking up on, but does that mean you have to continue the pattern?
I’m pretty sure you can guess my answer: of course not! There are good reasons to have a formal name, but if the name you love doesn’t require – or lend itself to one – there are equally compelling reasons to go nickname-free.
But what it you just plain want a formal name for Lucy, other than Lucille? You could consider:
- Louise, Louisa, or maybe even Eloise. Louise and Louisa are rare, but instantly recognizable as given names. Eloise is more familiar, but I’ve never heard it shortened to Lucy – and it might be confusing with a big sister called Ellie.
- Lucia, Lucinda, Lucienne, or Luciana – all of which are reasonably familiar. Lucia ranked #230 in the US last year, the most popular of the group.
- Or, for the really obscure, Luca, Ludovica, Lucretia, Lucasta, or Luscinia.
It’s impossible to know what Lucy would prefer. Maybe she’d love to be a Lucia, or maybe she’ll dislike correcting people, “Please call me Lucy,” for the rest of her life.
I’m inclined to tell you to stick with the name you love, especially if you’re not certain about which name you’d choose instead.
But I’m curious to hear from readers: is it important for Lucy to have a formal name/nickname, just like her siblings?
If you do think a formal name is a good idea, which one would you suggest?
Lucille is, I think, far and away the most obvious choice. Partially because of the great Lucille Ball, we all think of Lucille-called-Lucy as natural.
Assuming there are no family connections to any of the possibilities, I quite like the idea of Louisa called Lucy. James, Elizabeth, and Louisa. Jack, Ellie, and Lucy. It’s a sweet trio, and the formal names/nicknames do form a pleasing pattern.
If – and only if – that’s something you want to continue.
Readers, please vote in the poll! Would you give Lucy a formal name just to match her siblings’ names?
Lucy IS the formal version of this name: Historically, it did not arise as the diminutive of some other name. If people ask “What’s her full name?” or (heaven forbid) “What’s her real name?” simply respond firmly “It’s Lucy”.
I think Lucy is such a cute and sweet name! I met a little girl named Lucy and it was just perfect! As an Italian, I’m always surprised by the use of “Luca” as a girl name… It may become a reason for not using this awesome name 🙁
Some friends have a Lucy Marie. I am surprised how common it is. Your Lucy might appreciate ha
*having some distinction…just like her siblings. Lovely names, by the way.
Best wishes as you welcome your baby!
I agree with everyone else! Use Lucy because it gives you the warm fuzzies 🙂 I consider Lucy a standalone name myself (and chances are it will get shortened from time to time to Lou or Luce). I would only use a formal name if you genuinely like it. If there’s nothing you love as much as just Lucy by herself, then I would write off the comments you’re receiving as purely conversational (as Joanna mentioned). I doubt people are judging the validity of Lucy, and they certainly won’t be when your Lucy is here!
If there is a long form name that you like, I think it would be nice to continue the pattern. I especially love Lucia. But if not, I would use the name you love and go with just Lucy!
My son is Charles/Charlie and we are expecting a boy and I’m pretty sure we’re going to go with ‘just’ Leo for that exact reason! We don’t like any of the long-forms.
My eldest is a Lucy (Lucy Adelaide). We do get asked if it’s short for anything, but I think that is just general small talk. I wouldn’t let a harmless conversational question sway you.
I don’t personally care for any of the other Lu- names, and while I like Louisa, Louisa called Lucy feels random and unrelated to me. I vote that you use the name you love. (For what it’s worth, my Lucy gets called Lulu at home a fair amount. Her sister has a longer name – Cecilia – and is sometimes called Ceci) Maybe yours will end up with a nickname anyway, but at least this way the default is the name you like best.
I’m with the others and Abby in saying just name her Lucy if that is the name you love! Maree’s anecdote about a daughter who was intended to be called Lucy but ended up with a different nickname is exactly why you should name her Lucy. You have no control past a certain age what a child chooses to go by. While your daughter could still eschew the name Lucy and go with Lulu, Lucy would still be her given name and be with her forever. If you go with another name just to get to Lucy, Lucy could go by the wayside never to be heard again.
I am in favor of giving a child THE name you love, rather than a different name just to get to THE name in short form. It’s a roundabout (and less guaranteed) way just to get where you wanted to be in the first place.
In general I think Lucy is a perfectly acceptable given name, but I do think it’s a touch out of step with the very formal full names of the older siblings- “Elizabeth Avery” and “Lucia Marie” sound much more like sisters. Almost as much because of length as anything else- 3-3 syllables for Elizabeth’s full name vs 2-2 for Lucy’s. Going with Lucia brings it a litter closer to balance.
It’s not the end of the world if you go with the name you intend to use, of course, and Lucy will fit in just fine with Ellie and Jack for day-to-day. I doubt if many strangers will ever even notice. But *Lucy* will know her full name is much shorter and cuter than her siblings’ hyper-refined classics, and she may or may not like being the odd one out.
But Lucy is a classic?? It has a long history of use – lots of classics are short names, think mary james and John. Arguably the longer forms are more trendy and less classic – if mum prefers them fine but I cant see why a child would feel left out?
It has a long history of use but it’s a very different feel and style than the older siblings’ names- shorter, more on-trend, and cuter, especially since it can be heard as potentially short for something. Nobody will ever ask Elizabeth if her name is short for anything.
Lucy *is* etymologically short for Lucia, in terms of the history of the name, and Lucia/Lucius originated in Latin, so they certainly aren’t lacking in classical status. Lucy is also much higher on the popularity charts in both the US and UK than any of the longer forms, so I can’t see how it’s less trendy, either.
I really don’t think many people think about these things unless they are name nerds.
I think Lucy is the most stylish form, I agree people are probably asking because of the older kids’ names. It isn’t necessary to continue though.
Fwiw I know a lucinda who was supposed to be nn Lucy but ended up lulu – her mum regrets not using lucy.
I am with Abby on this one. If you love Lucy, use Lucy. If you feel you need a formal name, I would go with Louisa. But again. Lucy is fine on by itself.