Rufname

[august 0]

Hello,

 

in Germany (maybe in other countries as well, I don't know) everybody has 2 or 3 given names. One of these names is the one everybody knows and how everybody is calling the person. This is the "Rufname". In official papers and in genealogic lists all names are mentioned and the "Rufname" is underlined. There is no general rule if the first, second or third name is the Rufname.

 

How can I realize this in TMG? I know of other genealogic programs where e.g. you write a # in front of the Rufname which is not seen as part of the name but is used to indicate that this name has to be underlined.

 

Thanks for any ideas.

[GenerationGoneBy 0]

August,

 

I would create a custom place style [GIVEN NAME] [RUFNAME] [sURNAME]

 

You could set the Rufname off with quotes, or parenthesis, which ever fits your needs. Then the name would print Sarah Catherine Margaret "Margaret" Smith. THen if you wanted her to be known as Margaret Smith from then on, you could create a new name tag for her as Margaret Smith. Each tag has a drop down box where you can select the name you want that tag to use. You could just select Margaret Smith for each tag.

 

It would then print Sarah Catherine Margaret "Margaret" Smith was born...Margaret Smith married John Jones... Margaret Smith was a .... The only thing is I think for children's births it would use either her full name or her first name which would be Sarah. Someone else can clarify this for you.

 

This is how I handle nicknames in the US and it seems to work pretty good for me.

[Terry Reigel 0]

I see by experiment you can add underline codes - [uND:]Rufname[:UND] - to a name, and the name does appear underlined in reports (at least in narratives - I didn't check other types). But the codes themselves appear in all the screens in TMG. I'm not sure that's really an acceptable result for the primary name.

 

If you use mostly narratives it may be more satisfactory to create an alternate name using the underline codes, and use it only once in reports. You can also create an alternate name that uses only the rufname and surname, and use that for most instances in reports.

[august 0]

Thanks Teresa and Terry for your tipps. About these [uND:] codes I didn't know. I guess playing around with a combination of both of your tipps will lead me to solution.

[GenerationGoneBy 0]

August,

 

Bold works in names as well. You have to use the codes for each name part though, like [bOLD:] Mary Catherine Margaret[:BOLD] [bOLD:]Jones[:BOLD] But if you just wanted to underline the one name you could have Mary Catherine [bOLD:] Magaret [:BOLD] and on the Magaret would be bolded.

[Pierce.Reid 0]

August,

 

Bold works in names as well. You have to use the codes for each name part though, like [bOLD:] Mary Catherine Margaret[:BOLD] [bOLD:]Jones[:BOLD] But if you just wanted to underline the one name you could have Mary Catherine [bOLD:] Magaret [:BOLD] and on the Magaret would be bolded.

 

These are basically fudges to deal with a common practice in a number of cultures, including the "British" culture in many countries. It is quite common in my very British families to use a given name that is not a first name as a "common" name. For example, both my in-laws did NOT like to see their first names in print - they both used their middle names.

 

I like the idea of using a special character such as the # sign to indicate the "common" given name, which would then be underlined when used as part of the person's complete name. The system could possibly use another symbol to indicate a nick name that you wanted to use instead of one of the given names. This name could be displayed in quotes, as many people currently do, when the full name is displayed. It would also be used instead of the person's first name in any role sentences.

 

I realize that you can specify alternate name tags, and you can go through various role sentences for the tags that refer to this person and select the name you want used. But this solution would automatically cover a large percentage of those who did not normally use their first name. (I really don't like the look of using font codes to indicate a commn name, and that does not handle use of the common name in memo sentences.)

 

Pierce

[GenerationGoneBy 0]

Pierce,

My son doesn't use his first name, and I haven't had any issues doing what you want with name tags. Using a # to denote a common given name would be no different to me than creating a new name tag.

[John Cardinal 0]

I don't think it's a good idea to add formatting codes to the name data. Name parts can be formatted when reports are produced. Doing it that way keeps the data clean, and clean data is happy data. More importantly, however, I don't think it's necessary to bold or underline the rufname if you don't embed it as part of the birth/legal name, and I don't think it should be embedded. Embedding it in the birth/legal name is a shorthand for "usually known as" or "also known as" or something and is a lazy way to do it. Basically, you are combining two names in one name record. It's cleaner (and more correct, IMO) to keep them separate.

 

Given the above, my suggestion is to add a Name tag where the rufname is in the given name field and the legal/birth name is not present, and make that the primary Name tag. Add another Name tag, non-primary, which captures the legal name. You can add a memo or citation to the rufname Name tag to explain things if desired.