Post by Lady Ten on Sept 25, 2012 21:25:00 GMT -6
Admittedly, I have not checked Ailuronymy before the time of making this thread, so I don't already have in mind what Grey and all his followers would say about this suffix. I'm pretty sure the general consensus does class it as traditional, though. Lyrical opinion on the matter, just based on what I've seen, seems to be mixed; some lyical raters might view it as pretty, while other namers of the same fashion might endorse something more supposedly-offbeat such as "brook" or "river".
As I've mentioned before, I was influenced by canon names to be more amenable to the suffix and developed part of my naming formula to accommodate it. A -stream cat "has" a stream, which is to say they have a fluid movement, a steady flow; the cat is graceful. It does not function equally well to say the cat has a brook or has a river, which is how I get away with accepting stream but not other bodies of water, since my interpretation of stream does not hinge upon the word's usage for bodies of water.
Others might take a different tack and use "stream" as an indication of swimming abilities, which, though a different interpretation, still is not so incompatible with my own (it's a similar skill at work). My question, though, is what those namers make of other body-of-water suffixes. Is stream considered "the" swimming/water suffix, while others are rendered redundant? Maybe Grey has addressed this issue in his own blog already, but for the rest of you, what are your thoughts on this suffix?
As I've mentioned before, I was influenced by canon names to be more amenable to the suffix and developed part of my naming formula to accommodate it. A -stream cat "has" a stream, which is to say they have a fluid movement, a steady flow; the cat is graceful. It does not function equally well to say the cat has a brook or has a river, which is how I get away with accepting stream but not other bodies of water, since my interpretation of stream does not hinge upon the word's usage for bodies of water.
Others might take a different tack and use "stream" as an indication of swimming abilities, which, though a different interpretation, still is not so incompatible with my own (it's a similar skill at work). My question, though, is what those namers make of other body-of-water suffixes. Is stream considered "the" swimming/water suffix, while others are rendered redundant? Maybe Grey has addressed this issue in his own blog already, but for the rest of you, what are your thoughts on this suffix?