Chapter 1 Introduction: The cultural aspect of personal names

The nexus between language and culture is grounded on the fact that language expresses, embodies and symbolises cultural reality (Kramsch 1998). Such a nexus falls within the ambit of anthropological linguistics. The majority of personal names are derived from words already in use in a language. Names also indicate language structure (Anderson 2007); hence, Utley (1963) argues them to be part of the grammar of a language. However, their meaning is socially constructed within a particular culture (Aceto 2002) and these cultural meanings warrant an anthropological-linguistic perspective that is concerned with relations among language, society and culture, involving speech communities, the performing of language and socio-cultural representations in language. In practice and literature, the domain of anthropological linguistics is interchangeable with that of linguistic anthropology (Foley 1997; see also Nassenstein and Völkel 2022 for a more detailed description of the framework of this book series). The study of names (proper nouns) is part of language studies and it, too, cannot be separated from cultural and social performance. An interrogation of anthroponyms (personal names), for example, goes beyond the structural appreciation of language into the domain of anthropological linguistics, which attempts to explain hidden meanings behind language use, different forms of language and the use of registers and style (Foley 1997). Different types of anthroponyms have been analysed in linguistics, anthropology and philosophy, and they have been proved to be referential, descriptive, symbolic and in some cases to have psychological effects and power.

From a cross-linguistic perspective, names are a typological universal. This means they are found in all human languages around the world, and they are used by people of all societies (Hocket 1963: 17). However, typological studies show that they differ in form, function and usage across languages and cultures. Therefore, Van Langendonck and Van de Velde (2016: 18) define a name on cross-linguistically shared semantic-cognitive grounds as “a nominal expression that denotes a unique entity at the level of established linguistic convention to make it psychosocially salient within a given basic level category”. As such, they are definite, mostly singular and without a defining sense (as compared to common nouns).

Anthroponyms, in particular, are proper names of humans, denoting individual persons or groups of people. Person-denoting names for individuals are, among others, given names, surnames, nicknames and pseudonyms. Some of these names include a relational component, i.e., a connection to another person is established, such as the mother in matronyms, the father in patronyms or the children in teknonyms. Apart from surnames, which also refer to a group of people based on family ties (just like clan names), other group anthroponyms denote communities based on other social criteria, e.g., ethnonyms (names for ethnic groups, such as tribal names) and demonyms (names for groups associated with a particular place, i.e., anthroponyms of toponymic origin). Such names often differ considerably depending on whether they are self- or third-party designations. According to Van Langendonck and Van de Velde (2016: 33), anthroponyms are the most prototypical type of names, and they are probably the best studied kind of onomastics. However, there is a strong bias towards research on Indo-European languages. Hence, a broader range of languages needs to be studied in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of onomastics, and anthroponomastics in particular – an aim to which we want to contribute with this book.

A second objective of this publication is to focus on the study of personal names from an anthropological-linguistic perspective. Foley (1997) characterises anthropological linguistics as an inter-discipline of linguistics and anthropology, situating language in its social and cultural context, whereby it is both cultural practice and social structure. Names are not only a linguistic phenomenon in terms of their formal features, etymological meanings1 and historical-linguistic developments, but there is also a strong cultural component (see also Bramwell 2016). The socio-cultural meaning and function of names, their use or non-use (e.g., name avoidance or taboo, honorific forms), naming and name change practices (e.g., at birth or marriage), and so forth, are aspects which make this clear. Anthroponyms describe social subjects, together with ideas of interpersonal relationships and social interaction, which are culturally constructed realities. As such, names and naming practices have developed in specific social contexts to fulfil particular functions beyond reference to or the address of specific persons. According to Alford (1988), personal names are cultural universals that are reflective of the specific cultures that create them.

While, in the western tradition, names were established as meaningless be­­yond being individualising (Suzman 1994), later studies have established that even in these western traditions, personal names in fact carry social and cultural aspects such as gender, religion and history (Pilcher 2017). The cultural specificities of names and naming conventions make them part of active metaphorising, “a culture-specific speech practice which demands explication within an ethnopragmatic perspective” (Goddard 2004: 1211). This leads to the third aim of this volume, which is to demonstrate the communicative and cultural pragmatics in names. The use of names is embedded in social contexts; it varies according to the interpersonal relationships between the participants in communication (i.e., speaker, addressee and/or referent – be they namer, named person(s) or name hearer(s)2) and the situation (e.g., formal or informal contexts). Furthermore, the use, non-use and choice of alternative names for a person creates social meanings such as politeness, respect, disrespect, offense and even magic attack.

This book gives multiple illustrative examples of the broad cross-linguistic variety of anthroponyms and their cultural characteristics and meanings. It is an interdisciplinary and cross-linguistic ethnopragmatic exploration of personal names, which can only be understood when studied in the context of the culture that produces them. According to Goddard (2004: 1211), ethnopragmatics refers to “explanations of speech practices which begin with culture-internal ideas, i.e., with the shared values, norms, priorities, and assumptions of the speakers, rather than with any presumed universals of pragmatics”. The ethnopragmatics of names speaks to their performative functions within cultural contexts; hence, this book incorporates the idea that names are part of speech acts as they perform specific cultural functions.

The volume is themed along Austin’s (1975) idea of “How to do things with words”. Here, the focus is more specifically: How to do (cultural) things with peo­­ple’s names. Anthroponyms fulfil certain communicative actions beyond the ref­­erential (Lynch 2016). Choices of personal names are functions of language choice which are shaped by the motive, which can be expressive, appealing or representative (Hymes 1972). Leech (2003) identifies five functions of language in culture and society: 1. informative functions, referring to the subject matter (the name bearer); 2. expressive functions, referring to the speaker (the namer); 3. directive functions, referring to the listener (those addressed in the naming); 4. phatic functions, referring to the means of communication (names as a communication bridge); and 5. aesthetic functions, referring to the messages (the styling or typology of names). The various chapters in this book demonstrate how personal names, as part of language, perform culture. According to Duranti (2009), language use is constitutive of our social life. That is, speaking does not just happen in social interaction, speaking itself is social interaction. Names are part of action and are equivalents to action (Malinowski 1935), they are part of language which is a form of social interaction, and they are to be understood within particular activities (Wittgenstein 1953).

Personal names and naming are entwined in culture through naming ceremonies, practices and conventions. According to Lynch (2016), names and naming are essential practical rituals of everyday life. They go beyond the structure of language to index social structure and roles (Ndlovu 2022). Mensah and Rowan (2019) observe that names and naming interface with every facet of life; they are indicators of social structuring such as sex and gender (Pilcher 2017; Ngubane 2013; Koopman 1979), identity, status and class (Ndlovu 2022) and kinship structures and history (Mensah and Iloh 2021). Personal names also “do religion”; they are a communication bridge between people and their deities (Mensah 2015, 2020; Sagna and Bassène 2016; Mamvura 2021; Abubakari 2020). Research has also established that names...