Questions (and answers)
- Thread starter debirlfan
- Start date
Noway
Montana
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2008
- Messages
- 5,757
- Reaction score
- 10
Yes, thank you!
That link I found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_%28name%29#Junior.2C_Senior.2C_and_Roman_numerals described various scenarios ... including people who "make their own rules" like George Foreman who named his sons after him and added the appropriate suffix: George Edward Foreman II through VI.
In connection to the Jr. versus II issue (from that link):
In cases where a child is given the same name as a relative who is not the child's mother or father, it is considered correct to give the child a numerical suffix. For example, a child named John William Scott, after his uncle John William Scott, would properly be considered John William Scott II, as opposed to "Junior." Junior is not used because, in this example, John William Scott is not the child of John William Scott, senior. If John William Scott II were to have a son, he could then be named John William Scott III or John William Scott, Jr., depending upon the family. While it is not technically the social norm to use "II" in place of "junior" for children born directly to a same named parent, there is no social rule against the usage of "II" instead of "junior" for a same named child. Often, II is used by families who want to avoid having their children referred to as "junior" as a nickname.
I've seen Ray's father referred to as both, but would think Ray would know more what his father goes by (Ray II).