The Briefing Room
General Category => World News => Topic started by: rangerrebew on July 02, 2014, 01:12:11 pm
-
Gov't to family: Girl can't be named Harriet
'Are they saying they don't want us here?'
Published: 21 hours ago
author-image Joe Kovacs About | Email | Archive
A family is in turmoil after the government of Iceland is suddenly saying the family’s 10-year-old daughter Harriet cannot actually be named Harriet.
Not only that, the family’s 12-year-old son Duncan can’t be named Duncan.
The reason? Their names do not appear on a government-approved list.
“The whole situation is really rather silly,” the kids’ father, Tristan Cardew, told the Guardian newspaper.
Cardew and his Icelandic wife Kristin are appealing a decision by the National Registry in Reykjavik not to renew their daughter’s passport because it doesn’t recognize her first name.
National law states the names of children born in Iceland – unless both parents are foreigners – be sent to the National Registry before the kids are six months old.
If the name doesn’t happen to match one on the recognized list of 1,853 female and 1,712 male names, the parents need to seek special approval from the Icelandic Naming Committee.
Some approved names on the list are Aagot, Arney, Baldey, Bebba, Brá, Dögg, Dimmblá, Etna, Eybjört, Frigg, Glódís, Hörn, Ingunn, Jórlaug, Obba, Úranía and Vagna.
Since the registry hasn’t recognized Harriet or Duncan, the pair have been traveling until this year on passports identifying them as Stúlka and Drengur Cardew, which is translated as Girl and Boy Cardew.
Harriet Cardew, 10, and her brother Duncan are recognized by their own family, but not the government of Iceland.
Harriet Cardew, 10, and her brother Duncan, 12, are recognized by their own family, but not the government of Iceland.
“But this time, the authorities have decided to apply the letter of the law,” said Tristan Cardew, a native of Britain who moved to Iceland 14 years ago.
“And that says no official document will be issued to people who do not bear an approved Icelandic name.”
The standoff had jeopardized the family’s vacation in France, until they applied to the British embassy for an emergency passport from the United Kingdom.
About 5,000 children are born annually in Iceland, a country with a population of just 320,000. The naming committee is said to receive some 100 applications, and rejects about half under a 1996 act aimed at preserving the language.
Houses in Iceland's capital of Reykjavik
Houses in Iceland’s capital of Reykjavik
Among its requirements, given names must be “capable of having Icelandic grammatical endings”, may not “conflict with the linguistic structure of Iceland”, and should be are “written in accordance with the ordinary rules of Icelandic orthography.”
That means names containing letters that don’t officially exist in Iceland’s 32-letter alphabet, such as “c”, are not permissible.
Additionally, names unable to take the grammatical endings required by the nominative, accusative, genitive and dative cases used in Icelandic are often rejected.
“That was the problem with Harriet,” said Cardew. “It can’t be conjugated in Icelandic.”
The Guardian notes the Cardew family could get around Harriet’s problem by giving her an Icelandic middle name.
“But it’s a bit late for that, and way too silly,” said Cardew. “Are they saying they don’t want us here?”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/govt-to-family-girl-cant-be-named-harriet/#FmAf5dc7GFv5tEPU.99
-
/roll-eyes
-
Their country, their rules, and the mother should have known them.
-
Oceander wrote above:
[[ /roll-eyes ]]
Why?
As we watch The West and its values collapse all around us, at least one country has the gumption to preserve its own culture.
I remember reading some time ago (may have changed since), but even though there is a [very] small population of islamics in Iceland, the Icelandics refuse to permit the construction of a mosque in their nation.
Again, cultural preservation (and those from the outside be damned).
When much of Western Europe has disappeared, I sense there will remain an Iceland, populated by Icelandics.
Good for them!
-
Oceander wrote above:
[[ /roll-eyes ]]
Why?
As we watch The West and its values collapse all around us, at least one country has the gumption to preserve its own culture.
I remember reading some time ago (may have changed since), but even though there is a [very] small population of islamics in Iceland, the Icelandics refuse to permit the construction of a mosque in their nation.
Again, cultural preservation (and those from the outside be damned).
When much of Western Europe has disappeared, I sense there will remain an Iceland, populated by Icelandics.
Good for them!
hmmm. I'm sure that the only thing that will keep some muslim from becoming a terrorist is that he was given an approved Icelandic name. That's right up there with insisting that "Redskins" is cultural colonialism/oppression and the only way to maintain the history and culture of Native Americans is to ban that name.
-
Oceander wrote above:
[[ /roll-eyes ]]
Why?
As we watch The West and its values collapse all around us, at least one country has the gumption to preserve its own culture.
I remember reading some time ago (may have changed since), but even though there is a [very] small population of islamics in Iceland, the Icelandics refuse to permit the construction of a mosque in their nation.
Again, cultural preservation (and those from the outside be damned).
When much of Western Europe has disappeared, I sense there will remain an Iceland, populated by Icelandics.
Good for them!
Do you support the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, in particular the part about religious freedom?
And your claim is false. There IS a mosque in Iceland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Iceland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk_Mosque
-
[[ Do you support the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, in particular the part about religious freedom? ]]
Quite frankly, no, I do not. For one (so-called) "religion", there must be an exception.
I believe the First Amendment should be changed to specifically remove "the followers of muhammed" from its protections and guarantees.
Call me names if you wish for making such a statement.
Western Civilization has an obligation to defend itself from those who would stealthily use our cherished freedom and the laws that protect it (as the First Amendment currently offers to muslims) to destroy us from within.
One has only to look to the current administration, taking note of its attacks on both Christians and Jews, to gain a small comprehension of what things could be like with more islamics in positions of power in America.
If we continue to permit this, we will have only ourselves to blame for what will happen.
We cannot continue to turn the other cheek to islam here on our own cultural soil.
islam will only see that as an opportunity to cut the other side of your throat!
-
enforcing some blinkered idea of what constitutes an acceptable name is not fighting islamic terrorism.
-
Eybjört is a much cooler name than Harriet or Duncan.
The parents should have chosen this one and saved themselves a lot of grief. :dx1:
-
Hel is a perfectly acceptable name. :whistle:
Iceland is the only place that follows the old naming routines of the Danes/Vikings still. It's an old bit of their culture and a perfectly fine one to wish to keep, though the phone book is horribly confusing at times.
First names basically (and with a few exceptions for various saints) have to be known in the skalds or the oral history. Last names are your father's or mothers first name with sson or sdottir attached. So Harriet would become Harriet Kristinsdottir. It's a weird little bubble of history.
There are other countries that have approved names, but they are slightly more flexible. I think it's worth preserving also.
-
Hel is a perfectly acceptable name. :whistle:
Iceland is the only place that follows the old naming routines of the Danes/Vikings still. It's an old bit of their culture and a perfectly fine one to wish to keep, though the phone book is horribly confusing at times.
First names basically (and with a few exceptions for various saints) have to be known in the skalds or the oral history. Last names are your father's or mothers first name with sson or sdottir attached. So Harriet would become Harriet Kristinsdottir. It's a weird little bubble of history.
There are other countries that have approved names, but they are slightly more flexible. I think it's worth preserving also.
When my great grandfather (in Sweden) went into the Swedish military in the 19th century, his name got chopped off because there were so many "ssons" that it got confusing. His son......my grandfather.......emigrated to the US with a completely truncated last name which doesn't sound a bit Swedish.
At some point that lovely tradition of being "Larssdotter" or "Nilsson" had to end.
Kinda sad, I think.
I'm glad Iceland is still hanging on to it.
-
History is worth preserving. Always, and all of it. Who wants a homogenous world wide culture? :shrug: