Tonight were gonna name like it's ... Yep. 1999.
We've lost hours in deep data dives, and to think two years ago when we first fell in love with naming, we didn't even know the website existed. The SSA data is so interesting to search and sort and analyze and of course predict. It seems like every week we see ten new instagram accounts, claiming to be just another "in love with names." We've noticed that just like us, people are simply obsessed with all things names. Why? The interest is timeless. While the drive to create content has faded a bit for us, our passion for the subject has not. Not only do we still find new names every single day, there is always a new naming trend, an audience question to ponder or a naming challenge to embark on.
It had been weeks since I (Mom) had logged into Pinterest and upon doing so literally came across four names I'd never ever (ever-ever) heard. It sparked in me a renewed feeling of excitement. This "hobby" really can stand the test of time. That's what is so intriguing about naming to me. Just when you think you've heard it all, you hear something new and that spark is a burning flame. A passion for baby names. If you're wondering about those new-new names, they were Annecy, Brey, Phenix, and Kypton. All were added to our board, "Name Signs-Wooden" a collection of rustic, woodsy decor. These wooden signs may be on-trend but it got me thinking, are the names on them going to stand the test of time?
In researching for our video, The Top 25 Names for Girls in 1999 I found myself wondering, is this collection timeless like our passion for all things names? Or are they just a passing trend like those wooden name signs that seem to be all the rage? Here are a few things I noticed as I pondered, do the names of 1999 stand the test of time?
Topping the list for girls back in 1999, was Emily. It's current rank is 13. It seems like this one is for sure timeless, even inside the Top 100 as far back as 1901.
Today at number one is a familiar Emma, who back in '99 was already sitting in the Top 20. Her popularity curve is an interesting one, as she sat in the Top 20 in the early 1900's as well, but dipped close to 500 at one point in the 70's.
Abigail and Olivia are two that increased in popularity since the 1999 data came out. Abby, since 1952 has also been in the Top 1,000, so the nicknames that we know Abigail goes by adds to this classics continued popularity. As well as Abbie, which has also been on the list of 1,000 except for a just a few years.
Victoria did not see a ton of change, from 16 then to just 21 now, this one seems to stand the test of time.
Taylor is a popular unisex option whose male counterpart spent most of the nineties in the Top 100. We've been looking at recent data to see when more of these names will top the lists. The number one user search that leads people to our Youtube Channel is "gender neutral baby names."
Jessica, who spent time at #1 from 85-90' and 93-85' has taken one of the biggest drops, sitting now all the way down at 312.
Megan dipped the lowest.
1999: #15
2018: # 545
Madison at number 7 then, still has a spot in the Top 25. With alternate spellings, Maddison & Madisyn, both within the Top 1000, this one is sticking around.
For Alyssa 99' was her heyday! Being an Alissa, this stirred up in me the classic namer debate, are different spelling really different names?
Another great question to then consider, which names that have multiple spellings are truly most popular? (I'll do this digging another time)
Back to our original musings. Do the names of 1999 stand the test of time? While a few have definitely stuck around, and the rest have dipped into the 100-200 range, there is one name that shifted just three spots.
Elizabeth
1999: #10
2018: #13
But it's when you take a deeper look at the popularity of this name over time, that you realize like I did, it is perhaps be the most timeless girl's name there is. Since 1900 Elizabeth has only dipped as low as 26. TWENTY. SIX. There is no popularity curve. There is no doubt that this name truly stands the test of time.
We've lost hours in deep data dives, and to think two years ago when we first fell in love with naming, we didn't even know the website existed. The SSA data is so interesting to search and sort and analyze and of course predict. It seems like every week we see ten new instagram accounts, claiming to be just another "in love with names." We've noticed that just like us, people are simply obsessed with all things names. Why? The interest is timeless. While the drive to create content has faded a bit for us, our passion for the subject has not. Not only do we still find new names every single day, there is always a new naming trend, an audience question to ponder or a naming challenge to embark on.
It had been weeks since I (Mom) had logged into Pinterest and upon doing so literally came across four names I'd never ever (ever-ever) heard. It sparked in me a renewed feeling of excitement. This "hobby" really can stand the test of time. That's what is so intriguing about naming to me. Just when you think you've heard it all, you hear something new and that spark is a burning flame. A passion for baby names. If you're wondering about those new-new names, they were Annecy, Brey, Phenix, and Kypton. All were added to our board, "Name Signs-Wooden" a collection of rustic, woodsy decor. These wooden signs may be on-trend but it got me thinking, are the names on them going to stand the test of time?
In researching for our video, The Top 25 Names for Girls in 1999 I found myself wondering, is this collection timeless like our passion for all things names? Or are they just a passing trend like those wooden name signs that seem to be all the rage? Here are a few things I noticed as I pondered, do the names of 1999 stand the test of time?
Topping the list for girls back in 1999, was Emily. It's current rank is 13. It seems like this one is for sure timeless, even inside the Top 100 as far back as 1901.
Today at number one is a familiar Emma, who back in '99 was already sitting in the Top 20. Her popularity curve is an interesting one, as she sat in the Top 20 in the early 1900's as well, but dipped close to 500 at one point in the 70's.
Abigail and Olivia are two that increased in popularity since the 1999 data came out. Abby, since 1952 has also been in the Top 1,000, so the nicknames that we know Abigail goes by adds to this classics continued popularity. As well as Abbie, which has also been on the list of 1,000 except for a just a few years.
Victoria did not see a ton of change, from 16 then to just 21 now, this one seems to stand the test of time.
Taylor is a popular unisex option whose male counterpart spent most of the nineties in the Top 100. We've been looking at recent data to see when more of these names will top the lists. The number one user search that leads people to our Youtube Channel is "gender neutral baby names."
Jessica, who spent time at #1 from 85-90' and 93-85' has taken one of the biggest drops, sitting now all the way down at 312.
Megan dipped the lowest.
1999: #15
2018: # 545
Madison at number 7 then, still has a spot in the Top 25. With alternate spellings, Maddison & Madisyn, both within the Top 1000, this one is sticking around.
For Alyssa 99' was her heyday! Being an Alissa, this stirred up in me the classic namer debate, are different spelling really different names?
Another great question to then consider, which names that have multiple spellings are truly most popular? (I'll do this digging another time)
Back to our original musings. Do the names of 1999 stand the test of time? While a few have definitely stuck around, and the rest have dipped into the 100-200 range, there is one name that shifted just three spots.
1999: #10
2018: #13
But it's when you take a deeper look at the popularity of this name over time, that you realize like I did, it is perhaps be the most timeless girl's name there is. Since 1900 Elizabeth has only dipped as low as 26. TWENTY. SIX. There is no popularity curve. There is no doubt that this name truly stands the test of time.
Do tell. What names do you consider timeless?
Comments
Post a Comment