SENA, Personal Names Part 3, Conflict
WARNING: Do not cite this page as a reference. This page is on this wiki to make the content of SENA "searchable" and easier to find. If you think you find the information you seek here, go to the official home of SENA on the SCA Laurel Website to confirm the reference.
http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/sena.html
PN.3. Personal Names Conflict
http://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#PN3
PN.3A. Definitions
Conflict, as it is used in these rules, is a modern concept which derives from the requirement in the Governing Documents that names have sufficient difference to avoid undue confusion. To be registered, a new submission must be clear of conflict with all registered personal names; this means that it must avoid undue confusion with them. There are two types of confusion which must be avoided: being too close to a registered personal name itself, and claiming to be a close relative of a registered personal name. These are described in these rules as "identity conflict" and "relationship conflict". For identity conflict, a name submission is in conflict with a registered name when they are too similar either in sound or in appearance. A name submission that is substantially different in sound and substantially different in appearance from a registered personal name is clear of conflict with it. For relationship conflict, a name that makes an unmistakable claim of close relationship to a registered personal name is in conflict with it. This section of the rules sets the standards for how names can be substantially different.
PN.3B. Individuals Protected from Conflict:
A new personal name submission must be clear from conflict with all registered personal names. Non-personal names and personal names do not conflict. A name is registered and protected from the moment it is listed as accepted on a published Letter of Acceptances and Returns. Registered names will be listed in the Ordinary and Armorial as soon as possible, but they are protected as soon as the Letter of Acceptances and Return is published. We also protect the names of important people outside the SCA; they are addressed in [[1]] Presumption below.
PN.3C. Standards for Identity Conflict:
To be clear of identity conflict, two names must be substantially different in both sound and appearance. Because conflict is a modern concept, we consider matters such as meaning, language, etymological origin, etc. to be irrelevant for conflict. Only sound and appearance are considered for difference. Thus, the Latinized form of a name may be clear of conflict with the vernacular form. While we do not go out of our way to consider variant pronunciations, we do consider important period and modern pronunciations of name elements. To be substantially different, a pair of names must be different in sound and appearance under the standards laid out below. Names may be different in sound under one standard and appearance under another standard. Names are compared as complete items, so that Lisa Betta Gonzaga// conflicts with //Lisabetta Gonzaga, although the elements are different.
C1. Changes to Two Syllables:
Names are substantially different if changes in sound and appearance affect at least two syllables (including adding, removing, or reordering them). If the changes only affect adjacent letters or sounds, they must affect more than two letters or sounds to be considered under this allowance. Change in spacing is a change in appearance, but is not considered a change in sound. Changes to any part of the name count, including articles and prepositions. > For example, Alana Red// is substantially different from //Elena Reed//, because at least two syllables change in both sound and appearance. //Maria Smith// is substantially different from //Miriam Smith//, because it removes one syllable and changes another in both sound and appearance. //Richard Loudeham// is substantially different from //Richard Loveman, because two syllables have changes to them. > For example, Anne Jones London// is substantially different from //Anne Joan of London//, because it changes one syllable in both sound and appearance and removes another. //John de Aston// is substantially different from //John Asson//, because it adds one syllable and changes another in both sound and appearance. //William Underthecliff// is substantially different from //William Cliff//, because it adds three syllables. //Margaret atte Mor// is substantially different from //Margaret de la Mor; because it changes two syllables in both sound and appearance.
C2. Substantial Change to One Syllable:
New Rule (As of December 2020 Cover Letter))
Names are substantially different in sound if a single syllable between them (excluding articles and prepositions, such as de and the) is changed in sound as described here. The addition or removal of a syllable makes two names substantially different in sound. Two names are also substantially different in sound if the sound of a syllable is substantially changed in one of the following ways. If a vowel and the consonant or part of the group of consonants on one side of this vowel are different between the two names, we consider a syllable to be substantially changed. When the sounds of each consonant or part of each group of consonants on both sides of a vowel are different, we also consider the syllable to be substantially changed.
For example, here are some names that are substantially different in sound due to addition or removal of one or more syllables. Both Maria Smith and Marian Smith are substantially different in sound from either Mary Smyth or Marie Smyth: Maria and Marian both have three syllables, while Mary and Marie have only two syllables, so in each case the number of syllables in the name is changed. Likewise, Phillip Hollins is substantially different in sound from Phillip Hollinshead, because the bynames have different numbers of syllables. Similarly, Dorrin Brady is substantially different in sound from Dorrin O Brady: the bynames have different numbers of syllables, and the relationship marker O is neither an article nor a preposition.
For example, here are some names that are substantially different in sound due to appropriate changes to the sound of a single syllable. Connor MacRobert is substantially different in sound from Conan MacRobert or Conall MacRobert, because the vowel and the final consonants of the second syllable of the given names are different in each case. For example, William Dulford is substantially different in sound from William Muttford, as the consonants on both sides of the vowel in the first syllable of the byname have been changed. Likewise, Mary Catford is substantially different in sound from Mary Radford, and Godric of London is substantially different in sound from Godwin of London. For example, Margerie Clutter is substantially different in sound from Margery Catter, because in the first syllable of the byname, the first group of consonants has changed from cl to c and the vowels are different. Elyas Misson is substantially different in sound from Elyas Smithson, because in the first syllable of the byname, the first group of consonants has changed from sm to m and the second consonant has changed from s to th.
For example, here are some names that are not substantially different in sound. Brian mac Duinn is not substantially different in sound from Brian mac Cuinn, because only one group of consonants in the final syllable of the byname has been changed. (In this case, the group consists of a single consonant.) Lucas Smith is not significantly different in sound from Lucas le Smyth. The only difference in sound is contributed by the word le, which is an article translating as "the" and thus cannot contribute difference under this rule. Mary Jones is not substantially different in sound from Marie Jones. While the most common modern pronunciation of the given names uses different vowel sounds for the first syllables of the given names and breaks the syllables in different places, one important late period and modern pronunciation makes both names the same (as MA-ree). Thus they conflict. While we do not go out of our way to consider variant pronunciations, we do consider important period and modern pronunciations of name elements.
Insert/Delete
2. Substantial Change to the Sound of One Syllable: Names are substantially different in sound if a single syllable between them (excluding articles and prepositions, such as de and the) is changed in sound as described here. The addition or removal of a syllable makes two names substantially different in sound. Two names are also substantially different in sound if the sound of a syllable is substantially changed in one of the following ways. If a vowel and the consonant or part of the group of consonants on one side of this vowel isare different between the two names, we consider a syllable to be substantially changed. When the sounds of the each consonant or part of each group of consonants on both sides of a vowel are completely different, we also consider the syllable to be substantially changed.
For example, both here are some names that are substantially different in sound due to addition or removal of one or more syllables. Both Maria Smith and Marian Smith are substantially different in sound from either Mary Smyth or Marie Smyth: Maria and Marian both have three syllables, while Mary and Marie have only two syllables, so in each case the number of syllables in the name is changed. Likewise, Phillip Hollins is substantially different in sound from Phillip Hollinshead, because the bynames have different numbers of syllables. Similarly, Dorrin Brady is substantially different in sound from Dorrin O Brady: the bynames have different numbers of syllables, and the relationship marker O is neither an article nor a preposition.
For example, here are some names that are substantially different in sound due to appropriate changes to the sound of a single syllable. Connor MacRobert is substantially different in sound from Conan MacRobert or Conall MacRobert, because the vowel and the final consonants of the second syllable of the given names are different in each case. For example, William Dulford is substantially different in sound from William Muttford, as the consonants on both sides of the vowel in the first syllable of the byname have been changed. Likewise, Mary Catford is substantially different in sound from Mary Radford, and Godric of London is substantially different in sound from Godwin of London. For example, Margerie Clutter is substantially different in sound from Margery Catter, because in the first syllable of the byname, the first group of consonants has changed from cl to c and the vowels are different. Elyas Misson is substantially different in sound from Elyas Smithson, because in the first syllable of the byname, the first group of consonants has changed from sm to m and the second consonant has changed from s to th.
For example, here are some names that are not substantially different in sound. Brian mac Duinn is not substantially different in sound from Brian mac Cuinn, because only one group of consonants in the final syllable of the byname has been changed. (In this case, the group consists of a single consonant.) Margerie Clutter is not substantially different in sound from Margery Catter, because the given names sound identical and, although the first syllables of the bynames are different, the cl and c groups of consonants share a sound and the other consonant group is identical. Lucas Smith is not significantly different in sound from Lucas le Smyth. The only difference in sound is contributed by the word le, which is an article translating as "the" and thus cannot contribute difference under this rule. Mary Jones is not substantially different in sound from Marie Jones. While the most common modern pronunciation of the given names uses different vowel sounds for the first syllables of the given names and breaks the syllables in different places, one important late period and modern pronunciation makes both names the same (as MA-ree). Thus they conflict. While we do not go out of our way to consider variant pronunciations, we do consider important period and modern pronunciations of name elements. https://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2020/12/20-12cl.html
C3. Substantial Change of Single-Syllable Name Phrase:
Two names with a comparable single-syllable name phrase are eligible for this rule. A pair of name phrases are said to be comparable if they both have the same position in the name, such as given name or first byname. Comparable single-syllable name phrases are generally substantially different in sound if a group of adjacent vowels or of adjacent consonants within a word are completely changed, so that it shares no sound in common. In rare cases, the sound may still be too similar for this rule to clear the conflict. The change of a single letter is sufficient for two eligible name phrases to be different in appearance, as such name phrases are quite short. On a case by case basis, two-syllable names phrases may be eligible for this rule, such as Harry// and //Mary. > For example, John Smith// is substantially different from //Jane Smith//. //Anne Best// is substantially different from //Anne West//. //Ellen Lang// is substantially different from //Ellen Long//. //James Ed// is substantially different from //James Lead. In each case, an adjacent group of vowels or consonants is completely changed in sound and appearance. > For example, Matthew Joan// is not substantially different from //Matthew Jones// because the //n// and //nz// groups share a sound and a letter. //Richard Blott// is not substantially different from //Richard Lot// because the //bl// and //l// group share a sound and a letter. //Katerine de la Mar// is not substantially different from //Katerine de la Mor because they don't have comparable single-syllable name phrases and cannot use this rule.
PN3D. Standards for Relationship Conflict:
To be clear of relationship conflict, the submitted name must not unmistakably imply close relationship with a protected person. This includes, but is not limited to, a claim to be the parent, child, or spouse of a protected person. An unmistakable implication generally requires the use of the entirety of a protected name. The relational marker does not need to be in the new submission for conflict to apply. That is, if a registered item includes a relational marker followed by a complete name and the new submission is the same as that complete name, it is in conflict. Names are still protected from relationship conflict even if grammar requires that the name be modified in order to demonstrate the relationship. Adding an element not in the protected name is generally enough to remove relationship conflict. For example, Miryam bint Da'ud// is not an unmistakable claim to be the child of //Da'ud ibn Auda//, but //Miryam bint Da'ud ibn Auda// is. //Felicia uxor Willemi le Tailor// is an unmistakable claim to be the wife of a registered //Willemus le Tailor//, even though there is a change in appearance of the given name, because the change is necessitated by the grammar. However, //Felicia uxor William Taylor// is not an unmistakable claim to be the wife of //Willemus le Tailor//, as //William Taylor// and //Willemus le Tailor// are different enough to be clear of identity conflict under our rules. Similarly, //Llewelyn ap Owen// is an unmistakable claim to be the father of a registered //Morgan ap Llewelyn ap Owen. For example, Mary Elizabeth Smith// is an unmistakable claim to be the daughter of //Elizabeth Smith// even though a relational marker is not included. This type of relationship conflict occurs only in languages, such as English, where unmarked patronymics or matronymics are used. However, //Giulia Maddelena di Giacomo// is not an unmistakable claim to be the daughter of //Maddelena di Giacomo//, as Italian did not mix marked (//di Giacomo//) and unmarked (//Maddelena//) relationships in the same name. Thus, in this case, //Maddelena must be considered a second given name.
PN3E. Registration with Permission to Conflict:
The owner of a registered item may grant permission to conflict to a new submission for either identity conflict or relationship conflict. Such permission may be granted either individually through a letter of permission to conflict or universally through a blanket letter of permission to conflict. For identity conflict, any change to appearance and sound is sufficient to allow the registration of a personal name with a letter of permission to conflict. A submission identical to the registered item will not be registered even with permission to conflict. For relationship conflict, a letter of permission to claim relationship from the owner of the registered item is sufficient to allow the registration of a personal name. This does not require demonstrating that the individual has that legal relationship. You can give a stranger permission to have a name that appears to be the name of your child, parent, or spouse.