Test Page: Difference between revisions

From Calontiri Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(Blanked the page)
Tags: Blanking Manual revert
 
(123 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Testing...


http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/CompiledNamePrecedents/Compatible.html
{| class="wikitable"
|François la Flamme
|2003.02
|Listed on the LoI as ''Medb ingen Mathghamhain'', this name was submitted as ''Medbh inghean Mathghamhain'' and was changed at Kingdom to match documented forms.
The byname ''ingen Mathghamhain'' combined the Middle Irish (c. 900 to c. 1200) ''ingen'' with the Early Modern Irish (c. 1200 to c. 1700) ''Mathghamhain'', and so violated RfS III.1.a, which requires linguistic consistency in a name phrase. Additionally, ''Mathghamhain'' is a nominative form, not a genitive form as required by Gaelic grammar in a byname. The fully Middle Irish form of this name is ''Medb ingen Mathgamna''. The fully Early Modern Irish form of this name is ''Meadhbh inghean Mhathghamhna''. As the Early Modern Irish form is the closer of these to the originally submitted form of this name, we have changed this name to that form in order to register this name. [Meadbh inghean Mhathghamhna, 02/2003 LoAR, A-Caid]
|-
|François la Flamme
|2001.08
|Listed on the LoI as ''Méabh inghean Thaidg ua Domnaill'', the submitter requested authenticity for 14th to 15th C Irish. The submitter documented ''Méabh'' from Ó Corráin & Maguire (p. 135 s. n. Medb). When multiple forms are listed after the colon in headers in OCM, the first form after the colon is usually a period form and the latter forms are usually modern. In this case, ''Méabh'' is almost certainly modern as it does not follow period spelling conventions. ['''Meadhbh inghean Thaidhg uí Domhnaill''', [http://sca.org/heraldry/loar/2001/08/01-08lar.html 08/01], A-Atlantia]
|-
|Jaelle of Armida
|1999.03
|[Medbh Gillacon] The name is being returned for lack of documentation for the given name. The documentation for the given name was taken from ''The Book of Irish Names'', which is not a reliable source. Furthermore, the form there was not ''Medbh'', but ''Meadhbh''. (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR March 1999, p. 10)
|}
http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/CompiledNamePrecedents/Compatible.html
{| class="wikitable"
|nçois la Flamme
|2003.07
|'''From Pelican: Regarding SCA-Compatible Status of Forms of the Name "Megan"'''Issues were raised this month regarding the SCA-compatible status of forms of the name ''Megan''. There is a precedent that states:
* There are some twenty Megans, Meghans, and Meggans already registered. As with Fiona and Corwin, I consider the name to be so much a part of SCA culture as to be acceptable, even if it is recent coinage. [BoE, 14 Apr 85, p.4]There are two significant factors that come into play when judging whether or not a name should be considered SCA compatible: number of registrations and continual popularity. SCA-compatible names that fall out of popularity may have their SCA-compatible status discontinued.
There are several forms of ''Megan'' that need to be addressed. These are:
* '''Meggan''': The spelling ''Meggan'' has been registered twice; once in 1971 and once in 1979. Given the lack of popularity of this form, we will discontinue registration of ''Meggan'' with the February 2004 decision meeting.
* '''Meghan''': The spelling ''Meghan'' has been registered 19 times, with the most recent registration being in September of 1993. An additional registration appears this month. Therefore, this name was moderately popular for a time, but has generally fallen out of popularity. Due to the lack of continual popularity of this name, we will discontinue registration of ''Meghan'' beginning with the February 2004 decision meeting.
* '''Megan''': The spelling ''Megan'' has been registered 39 times, most recently in 1998. In the few years up through 1998, the number of registerations of ''Megan'' per year were: 1998 (1), 1997 (2), 1996 (1), 1995 (3). Therefore, the form ''Megan'' was declared SCA compatible in 1985 and maintained a low level of popularity through 1998, when it was last registered. While this level of registration does not demonstrate sufficient continued interest in this name to warrant its retaining SCA-compatible status, three submissions this month included some form of the name ''Megan'' (one ''Megan'', one ''Meghan'', and one ''Megen''). Given this level of interest in the name in general, we are continuing the SCA-compatible status of ''Megan'' for now. Its status may be reevaluated in the future to determine if ''Megan'' continues to be popular or not.
* '''Megen''': The spelling ''Megen'' is dated to 1547 in Wyllyam Salesbury's ''A Dictionary in Englyshe and Welshe'' (London: John Waley, 1547). Therefore, this form is registerable as a rare, but documented, Welsh feminine given name.[Cover Letter for the 07/2003 LoAR]
|-
|François la Flamme
|2003.07
|Listed on the LoI as ''Megen de la Beche'', this name was submitted as ''Megan de la Beche'' and changed at Kingdom, with the submitter's consent, because no documentation could be found that ''Megan'' was a name in period. Further information from the submitter, forwarded by Kingdom, indicates that she now prefers the documented form ''Megen''. Therefore, we have registered this name as listed on the LoI.
The spelling ''Megan''was ruled SCA compatible in the precedent:
* There are some twenty Megans, Meghans, and Meggans already registered. As with Fiona and Corwin, I consider the name to be so much a part of SCA culture as to be acceptable, even if it is recent coinage. [BoE, 14 Apr 85, p.4]Further discussion regarding registerability of various spellings of ''Megan''is included in the Cover Letter with this LoAR.
The submitter requested authenticity for the 12th to 14th C. Lacking evidence that any form of ''Megen'' was in use in during that time period, we were unable to make this name authentic per the submitter's request. [Megen de la Beche, 07/2003 LoAR, A-Artemisia]
|-
|François la Flamme
|2003.07
|Listed on the LoI as ''Megen Forde'', this name was submitted as ''Meghan Forde'' and changed at Kingdom, with the submitter's consent, because no documentation could be found that ''Meghan'' was a name in period.
The spelling ''Meghan''was ruled SCA compatible in the precedent:
* There are some twenty Megans, Meghans, and Meggans already registered. As with Fiona and Corwin, I consider the name to be so much a part of SCA culture as to be acceptable, even if it is recent coinage. [BoE, 14 Apr 85, p.4]However, the spelling ''Meghan'' has not been registered since 1993. Therefore, there is insufficient popularity of ''Meghan'' to warrant this form retaining SCA-compatible status. We will discontinue registration of the form ''Meghan'' beginning with the February 2004 decision meeting. Further discussion regarding registerability of various spellings of ''Megan''is included in the Cover Letter with this LoAR.
The submitter requested authenticity for "family names from Ireland" and 14th C Irish-Norman. Lacking evidence that any form of ''Meghan''was in use in Ireland in period, we were unable to make this name authentic for the submitter's requested time and culture. [Meghan Forde, 07/2003 LoAR, A-Artemisia]
|-
|Jaelle of Armida
|1998.08
|[Megan of Westfield] Submitted as Tadgán of Westfield, the LoI states that the submitter preferred the name Megan but had no documentation. Since documentation has been provided from William Salesbury's A Dictionary of English and Welsh Names, we have changed it to the submitter's preferred form. (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR August 1998)
|-
|Baldwin of Erebor
|1985.04.14
|There are some twenty Megans, Meghans, and Meggans already registered. As with Fiona and Corwin, I consider the name to be so much a part of SCA culture as to be acceptable, even if it is recent coinage. [BoE, 14 Apr 85, p.4]
|}

Latest revision as of 10:42, 17 December 2022

Retrieved from "http://calontiri.info/index.php?title=Test_Page&oldid=9191"