Is there any difference between these terms? I’ve noticed that, while ‘last name’ is by far the most common you see in the US, it seems to be either surname or family name in other countries. Any reason for this?
Well in countries like Japan and Hungary one’s last name is a given name and one shares one’s first name is shared with one’s family.
I think what alphaboi867 is trying to say is that in many countries, the family name is not usually given “last.” In Japanese, for instance, the family name comes first, followed by the given name (I’ve never encountered anyone with more than two names). For completeness, I should point out that many Japanese are aware of the English[-language] convention of putting the family name last; this means that you can never quite be certain which name is which on the English/Romaji side of their meishi (business cards), unless you cheat and look at the kanji/kana side. 
When I was growing up in the UK, the more common terms were Christian name and surname.
There’s an obvious problem with ‘family name’, in that it assumes the person has a family, and that the name comes from that family. This could easily create an awkward situation with, say, children in foster homes. However, I’m not sure whether ‘surname’ really is ubiquitous, here - I’d not be in any way surprised to see ‘last name’.
(BTW ‘Christian name’ has fallen well out of favour nowadays. ‘Other name(s)’ is the most common way to see it on paperwork.)
“given name/s” is how I normally see it written. I.e., the name/s that were given to you by your parents rather than inherited from them.
I can’t think how it was worded on the last official form I filled in, but surname is the term I always think of. The others sound a little contrived.
When I first got to the UK, I had a hell of a time remembering which was supposed to be my last name and which was my first.
Even now, the lecturers tend to call me by (half of) my Chinese name, thinking that it’s my first name, or last name, or whatever - I have no idea what they think it is, because my english name is right there on the sheet as well. I guess it doesn’t help that I think of my chinese name as my “middle name”.
This would be in reply to GorillaMan’s comment on christian names.
A lot of Japanese still can’t quite get a handle on Western names, since the convention is to address people you don’t know well, especially authority figures, by their family name - “Sensitibu-san” - whereas we tend to be on first name terms fairly quickly: I’d tell students “Call me Case”, and they’d call me “Mr Case” - or worse still “Case Teacher”. They really have a problem getting to grips with our less rigidly hierarchical structures of authority, too.
So how are foundlings named? If the authorities don’t know who an abandoned child’s parents are who names him/her?
I believe it’s often those who find her who decide on first names (I’ve heard of cases where they’ve been named after a celebrity who had recently died, the street they were found, etc.) If adopted, they’ll take the adopting parents’ surname.
A rose by any other name…
As a genealogist, these terms are interchangeable; it’s just a matter of convention in your locale. Supper/dinner, et al.
Serious students of onomastics generally use the terms as folllows:
The preferred terms are given name(s) and family name for what in the United States is usually called “first name” and “last name” and in the United Kingdom is usually called “Christian name” and “surname.”
A “family name” does not confer upon someone any particular familial status. It just indicates that it is a name that in ordinary circumstances would have been inherited from one’s parents unchanged and one that might be passed on to one’s children unchanged. This applies even if someone has deliberately changed his or her name or is estranged from his or her biological family or the family from whom the name was taken.
Christian name is used only when it is known that the name was given as part of a Christian baptism ceremony.
Surname is used for “extra” or “added” names, such as Alexander the Great.
First name and last name are generally avoided as being hopelessly ambiguous in a cross-cultural context.
Note that there are many societies in which people do not have family names at all, notably in southern India. They have only given names, such as former Indian Prime Minister H. D. Devegowda.
Hmmm…I had always heard that as a cognomen, with surname being syonomous with ‘family name’.
- Tamerlane
For the sake of nitpickery, I guess I would also like to add the although the Indians don’t have family names, they do often have names such as “Naresh s/o Shanmugam”, “s/o” being son of.
I’ve never seen this form myself with “s/o.”
Sometimes the initials preceding the given name include a father or grandfather’s name, but in that case it is a patronymic, not a family name, as is used in Icelandic culture.
Increasingly, it is common for south Indians whose families do not traditionally use family names to settle on a name to adopt and use in the Western style. For example, I have a friend who, along with his siblings, has adopted his father’s name as his family name. Often, various family members do not do so consistently.
In India, the issue of naming is often hard to pin down, because people tend not to be as picky about their own names as is often the case in the United States. For example, a name might have different pronunciations in different languages across India, and few people bother to correct such varying pronunciations. Also, since English is not the traditional language of most Indian families, many are cavalier about what English spelling is used to represent their names.
The University of Calcutta, for example, has a set list of transliterations of Bengali names into English and uses only those prescribed spellings on the diplomas it issues. If you write your own family name as “Banerji” or “Bonnerjee,” your University of Calcutta diploma is going to say “Bandyopadhyay,” which is a truer representation of the actual name.
Bengali Hindus, by the way, all have family names in the same manner that most Europeans or Americans do. This is not necessarily the case throughout India.
When I was growing up (in the UK as I mentioned above), “dinner” was a hot meal around noon and “supper” was a [generally] light meal later in the evening.
Please, don’t lets get started on this one. I had an early tea, and now yoy’ve got me feeling hungry again…
That was my point. Depending on where you live, the word takes on a specific meaning that may be different than in another region. In my memory, dinner and supper are interchangeable.
In P.B.S.‘s Manor House, they suggested that the luncheon+dinner and dinner+supper differences grew out of issues of class. The servants had to work during their masters’ main evening dinner, so they took their dinner earlier in the day.