<serious question> Do you include in that the use of non-standard characters? Or at least non-standard-in-English characters (assuming we’re rendering the names in English).
Diacritics are the simple / obvious example. My mother’s legal, given name included a circumflex (an â as it happens)… I don’t ever recall her insisting on it, and it certainly was usually ommitted…
I’m curious what your feeling is on this… not a trick question or a trap… my feeling is that – to go a bit broader than a diacritic – if I were to insist that everyone use say, hiragana, to express my name and wasn’t allowed to render it in latin characters, then I’d say I was the one being dickish, not the person who failed to comply with my demands.
Life’s too short for shit like this, in my opinion.
I would capitalize it, out of habit, and never give it a second thought. I would, ‘uh huh, uh huh’, through as many requests, as are required, before they figured out, I don’t really care what they think.
My soon to be, new son/daughter in law, with an explanation, I might make a little effort.
But not ever, not even once, would I feel bad about getting it wrong.
So, if you agree to write her name as she pleases, in all lower case, do you capitalize it when you’re beginning a sentence?
“Mary sullivan went to the market.” or
“mary sullivan went to the market.”
And if you capitalize Mary because it’s the beginning of a sentence, will she be annoyed? Because if that would annoy her too, I’d think it’s simply attention getting behavior.
Personally, I’d do it her way on any sort of casual or inter-office communications, but the conventional way on anything official. Simply because if it were casual, no skin off my nose. But it were official, and I didn’t capitalize, and my boss read it, well, his head would explode. And I’m the one who’d have to clean that up.
I follow Miss Manners’ sage advice–call people what they want to be called. IMHO, this extends to pretentious crap like this.
Using lowercase is just so trite! If someone wants to challenge conventional naming conventions they should really think of something new.
And…I have the answer!
Color.
Naturally, color changes would be impossible in some circumstances, but there are so many places where it actually would be possible. Like here, for example. I could insist on being referred to as Green Bean. Or better, Green Bean. It would be great! I could insist that people use color printers/copiers for everything involving me. I could carry around a green pen and insist that people use it if they’re writing down my name. I could even get pissed off if people don’t have a green pen on hand!
Color. I’m telling ya. It’s the new frontier of pretentiousness.
See, this is what gives me the vapors about the whole thing. If I were, say, sending out an email with a list of who would be attending a meeting, I would NOT want to write “Mary Smith, John Jones, and jane doe.” It looks like I carelessly forgot to capitalize Jane Doe and failed to proofread. I’d probably just capitalize it and let her be pissed off in that case.
I never said that only one person could be dickish. But, a person’s name is a person’s name and they get to have it written however they want. You can then take that information and form an opinion, negative or otherwise, of that person. I don’t care.
I’m not telling her what she can and can’t capitalize. She can write it any way she wants. If I knew this person, I wouldn’t comment on it, criticize it, or tell her the right way to do it. I just wouldn’t participate in her folly.
I will address people with the name with which they wish to be addressed. (I won’t necessarily kowtow to ridiculous requests for a title, though.) That includes stupid capitalization.
I mean, to be honest, there’s four million Scots out there with really stupid surnames. Why is a name like MacKinnon so frequently spelled with a capital K? There’s no reason to not spell it Mackinnon. And please don’t explain to me that it’s because “Mac” means “son of” pr whatever. I know, but we don’t spell names like PeterSon. If you’ve been giving the Scots a pass all these years on their absurd spellings, why not e.e. cummings?
I can think to myself that it’s pretentious and egotistical, though.
When you start insisting that academic journals follow your own idiosyncratic, stylistic conventions for your name’s presentation… that’s crazy. Colour, font, capitalisation: these aren’t actually part of your name; they’re aspects of the name’s presentation, which shifts with context.
Are you really suggesting that an academic journal shouldn’t use McDonald, van der Wal, ffoulkes, or Ó hEachthianna? In each case, the capitalisation is part of the name, just as much as the spelling and spacing.
The point is that varied capitalisation is a feature of the way names are written, and that refusing someone’s choice of capitalisation is no different to refusing their choice of spelling. If people can create new names, and they do - Beyoncé is one of the more famous recent ones - creating new ways of writing them shouldn’t be an issue.
Spelling is a completely separate matter–it does not affect readability by shirking convention. Your name could be Zxwcrvt and it would still be recognisable as a proper noun.
Tiger_Lily, I think you respect your colleague’s name spelling preference. I would further that by suggesting the use of the appropriate font, and a suitable and standardised colour, e.g:
"To All Staff,
Please acknowledge the narcissistic needs of mary sullivan and understand that this in no way makes her special."
As an aside, I would like it noted that from now on, I demand that my name be written in braille only.
