Cover not available
Part of
Cultural-Linguistic Explorations into Spirituality, Emotionality, and Society
Edited by Hans-Georg Wolf, Denisa Latić and Anna Finzel
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts 14] 2021
► pp. 151–184

Correspondences between Hungarian women’s marital names and the traditional family schema

 | Széchenyi István University
A marital name makes a statement about women’s cultural values with respect to their family schemas. In Hungary, adopting the husband’s full name by marriage is no longer required, thus women have the opportunity to choose from seven different name structures. The paper aims to uncover the motivations behind women’s preference for marital name structures as influenced by the traditional family schema that they maintain in their background. Data for this analysis is extracted from a questionnaire distributed to 533 women, which seek to obtain information on key elements of the traditional family schema. Results do not reveal a direct correlation between the selection of marital names and any single component of the traditional family schema; however, overall the results of the survey outline a systematic correspondence between marital names and women’s conformity or non-conformity to the traditional family schema. In conclusion, the various marital name structures reflect diverse family schemas, in particular, they are representatives of Hungarian women’s different extent of adherence to the traditional family schema.
Keywords: cultural conceptualizations, traditional family schema, Fuzzy Signature Model, marital name, name structure
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The practice of marital name changing
    • 2.1Marital names in Hungary
  • 3.The traditional family schema in the Hungarian context
    • 3.1The background of the traditional family schema in Hungary
    • 3.2The traditional family schema in the Hungarians’ present cultural cognition
  • 4.The survey: Questions and methodology
  • 5.Single component analysis of name structure vs. components of the traditional family schema
    • 5.1Family structure
      • A.Number of children
      • B.Number of siblings
    • 5.2Division of labor
      • A.Women’s share of housework
      • B.Husbands’ share of housework
    • 5.3Motivation of name changing
      • A.Influential factors
  • 6.Linkage between marital name structure and overall traditional family schema
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 8 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.14.08koc
References (45)
References
Aleksiejuk, K. (2013). Personal names on the internet: Usernames as address terms. Language and Society, 4, 187–198.Google Scholar
(2016). Usernames and identity construction on RuNet as seen in the example of the Posidelki (‘Gatherings’) forum. In C. Hough & D. Izdebska (Eds.), Names and their environment. Proceedings of the 25th International Congress of Onomastic Sciences, Glasgow, 25–29 August 2014. Vol. 4. Theory and methodology. Socio-onomastics. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Alford, R. D. (1988). Naming and identity: A cross-cultural study of personal naming practices. New Haven: HRAF.Google Scholar
Baker, M. & Bradbury, B. (2001). Families: Changing trends in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar
Blakemore, J. E., Owen, L., Carol, A., & Vartanian, L. R. (2005). I can’t wait to get married: Gender differences in drive to marry. Sex Roles, 53, 327–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blaskó, Z. (2005). Dolgozzanak-e a nők? A magyar lakosság nemi szerepekkel kapcsolatos véleményének változásai, 1988, 1994, 2002. [Should Women Work? Changes in the attitudes of the Hungarian population about gender roles 1988, 1994, 2002] Demográfia, 48(2–3), 159–186.Google Scholar
Bubu, N. G. & Offiong, I. (2014). An analysis of a new dimension of personal names and documentation in Ibibio folk philosophy: an exercise in linguistic philosophy. Journal of Integrative Humanism, 3(2), 137–146.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. (1983). Toward a functional theory of names and naming, Linguistics, 21, 341–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Czeglédi, I. (2017, October 8). A család szerepe mindennapjainkban [The role of family in our daily lives]. Mindennapi pszichológia. Retrieved from [URL] Accessed November 27, 2020.
Emens, E. F. (2007). Changing name changing: Framing rules and the future of marital names. University of Chicago Law Review, 74, 761–863.Google Scholar
Farkas, M. (2017, April 26). Fiatalabb anyák, kevesebb abortusz [Younger mothers, less abortion]. Mandiner. Retrieved from [URL] Accessed November 27, 2020.
Fercsik, E. (2002a). A tanári mesterséget űző nők asszonynevéről [On the marital names of teachers]. In E. Gréczi Zsoldos & M. Kovács (Eds.), Köszöntő kötet B. Gergely Piroska tiszteletére (pp. 41–45). Miskolc: Miskolci Egyetem.Google Scholar
(2002b). A házas nők névviselése a XX. század utolsó éveiben – öt év statisztikájának tükrében [The naming of married women in the last years of the 20th century – in the light of five years’ statistics]. Névtani Értesítő, 24, 99–107.Google Scholar
(2005). Az asszonyok megnevezésére szolgáló névformák és a névhasználat a XVII-XVIII. században [Naming forms for married women and name usage in the 17th to 18th century]. Névtani Értesítő, 27, 31–39.Google Scholar
(2010). The traditional and modern forms in the naming of Hungarian women. In M. G. Arcamone, D. Bremer, D. De Camilli & B. Porcelli (Eds.), Atti del XXII Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Onomastiche Pisa, 28 agosto – 4 settembre 2005. vol. IV. Antroponomastica (pp. 131–140). Pisa: Edizioni Ets.Google Scholar
Fülöp, L. (1983). Női és asszonyneveink XVI. századi levelekben [Women and marital names in 16th century letters]. Névtani Értesítő, 8, 53–9.Google Scholar
Gergely, P. B. (1993). Az erdélyi asszonyok régi megnevezéseiről [On the traditional naming of Transylvanian women]. Névtani Értesítő, 15, 118–25.Google Scholar
(1995). Mesterségűző asszonyemberek megnevezései az erdélyi régiségben [The naming of women holding a trade in the old times of Transylvania]. Magyar Nyelv, 91, 186–91.Google Scholar
Gooding, G. E., & Kreider, R. M. (2010). Women’s marital naming choices in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 681–701. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffnung, M. (2006). What’s in a name? Marital name choice revisited. Sex Roles, 55, 11–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hough, C. (Ed.). (2016). The Oxford handbook of names and naming. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keels, M. M., & Powers, R. S. (2013). Marital name changing: Delving deeper into women’s reasons. Advances in Applied Sociology, (3)7, 301–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kegyesné Szekeres, E. (2015). Identitás és névhasználat [Identity and name usage]. Publicationes Universitatis Miskolcinensis, Sectio Philosophica Tomus XIX, Fasc. 1, 232–247.Google Scholar
Kimmel, M. (2011). The gendered society (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kóczy, L. T., Purvinis, O., & Susniene, D. (2019). Some considerations on data mining from questionnaires by constructing Fuzzy Signatures based on factor analysis. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 36(4), 3739–3749. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kripke, S. A. (1980). Naming and necessity. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Laczkó, K. (1996). A mai asszonynév használat Budapesten [Contemporary marital name usage in Budapest]. Magyar Nyelvőr, 120(2), 161–167.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M. (1984). Stories, scripts, and scenes: Aspects of schema theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
MTI Hungarian News Agency. (2017, December 22). KSH: A magyarok többsége változatlanul hisz a hagyományos családban [Hungarian Central Statistical Office: The majority of Hungarians still believe in the traditional family]. Mandiner. Retrieved from [URL] Accessed November 27, 2020.
Nishida, H. (1999). A cognitive approach to intercultural communication based on schema theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(5), 753–777. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pais, D. (1951). A -né képzők [The -né suffixes]. Magyar Nyelv, 47, 1–12.Google Scholar
Papp, L. (1960). A nők megnevezése a XVI. század második felében [The naming of women in the second half of the 16th century]. Magyar Nyelvjárások, 6, 56–89.Google Scholar
Puzey, G. & Kostanski, L. (Eds.) (2016). Names and naming: People, places, perceptions and power. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Révész, K. (2001). Asszonynevek a szentendrei névhasználat tükrében [Marital names in the light of name usage in Szentendre]. Névtani Értesítő, 23, 57–75.Google Scholar
Rymes, B. (1996). Naming as social practice: The case of Little Creeper from Diamond Street. Language in Society, 25(2), 237–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheuble, L., & Johnson, D. R. (1993). Marital name change: Plans and attitudes of college students. Journal of Marriage & Family, 55, 747–754. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheuble, L., Johnson, D. R., & Johnson, K. M. (2012). Marital name changing attitudes and plans of college students: Comparing change over time and across regions. Sex Roles, 6, 282–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualisations and language: Theoretical framework and applications. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Cultural linguistics. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. E. (1987). Everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Somlai, P. (2013). Család 2.0: Együttélési formák a polgári családtól a jelenkorig [Family 2.0: Forms of cohabitation from civic families to present]. Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó.Google Scholar
Szabó T. A. (1956/1970). A magyar asszonynév és – még valami [The Hungarian marital name and – something else]. In Szabó T. A. (Ed.), Anyanyelvünk életéből. Válogatott tanulmányok, cikkek I., (pp. 48–54). Bukarest: Kriterion Könyvkiadó.Google Scholar
(1972). Annaasszony és társai [Anna wife and others]. In Szabó T. A. (Ed.), Nyelv és múlt (pp. 245–249). Bukarest: Kriterion Könyvkiadó.Google Scholar
vom Bruck, G., & Bodenhorn, B. (Eds.). (2006). The anthropology of names and naming. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zahuczky, M. (1997). Az asszonynévformák változásai városon és vidéken [The changes of marital name forms in the city and in the country]. In B. Gergely, P. & M. Hajdú (Eds.), A magyar névtani kutatások legújabb eredményei, I-II. (pp. 113–122). Budapest, Miskolc: Magyar Nyelvtudományi Társaság-ME BTK.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Baranyiné Kóczy, Judit, Diana Prodanović Stankić & Olga Panić Kavgić
2024. Introduction: Cultural Linguistics and the Social World. In Cultural Linguistics and the Social World [Cultural Linguistics, ], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.