B. Helleland, C.-E. Ore & S. Wikstrøm (eds.) Names and Identities, Oslo Studies in Language 4(2), 2012. 257–272. (ISSN 1890-9639) http://www.journals.uio.no/osla surnames and identities SOLVEIGWIKSTRØM University of Oslo abstract This paper1, based on a survey of 314 Oslo residents, investigates the rela- tionship between surname and identity. The aim was to find out whether the modern individual experiences his or her surname as a part of his or her identity, and what bond exists between surname and locale. Late modern society typically reveals a fragmentation of individuals from family back- ground and place of origin. A hypothesized outcome of this separation, en- visages a further breach between the individual and the area their surname denotes. If one’s surname is experienced as part of one’s identity, what then is the main reason for this? Are there in fact different experiences of iden- tity based on some typology of names borne by individuals? [1] introduction In Norway, approximately 70% of the population bears a surname which is origi- nally the name of a farming area. Thus, these surnames represent certain connec- tions with specific places. As a result of this, it has been assumed that individuals with a farm name as surname may have an affective relation to the place the sur- name refers to.2 Norwegian onomastics has its roots in the patriot movement formed in the latter half of the 19th century (Helleland 1999), and farm names have been viewed as carriers of the nation’s distinctive character and history. In 1926, the Norwegian onomatologist, Magnus Olsen, asserted that the oldest farm names used as surnames were considered the most prestigious amongst Norwe- gian family names, and furthermore that these names were a reflection of the individual’s place in society (Olsen 1976 [1926]). Since the eighties, the concepts of post-modernism and globalization have widely been interpolated as encapsulating contemporary society. In the phraseology of sociologist Anthony Giddens, mod- ern social life is characterized by a separation of time and space; this condition of articulation of social relations across wide spans of time and space is seen in dis- embedding mechanisms which separate interaction from the peculiarities of locales, [1] The current paper is a re-edited version of my papers read at the two Names and Identities conferences at The University of Oslo (Wikstrøm 2007; Wikstrøm 2008) and further based on the main results of my Masters thesis (Wikstrøm 2009). [2] See, for example, the description of the project Names and Identities by Research Group for Ono- mastics at the University of Oslo, http://www.hf.uio.no/iln/forskning/forskergrupper/namn/ prosjekter/ [6th of July 2009]. [258] solveig wikstrøm and in institutional reflectivity which is the regularised use of knowledge over the circumstances of social life and forms a constitutive element in its organisation and transformation (Giddens 1991, 2). Modernity is essentially a post-traditional order, where the globalising tendencies are inherent, and thus, one would imag- ine that late modernity has caused a certain breach in the name-bearer’s view that the surname is a means for showing background related to family and “home- land”. [2] surname types in norway Until the latter part of the 19th century, most Norwegians didn’t carry surnames. The common name system provided the individual with a Christian name (in some cases more than one) and a patronymic whose function was to show who the bear- er was son or daughter of. In addition, the individual could be characterized by the name of the farm where he or she lived or came from. This name could change if he or she changed dwelling place. When the surnames became fixed as result of the first Norwegian law on personal names of 1923, the farm names and patronymics thus became the distinctive types of Norwegian surnames (Nedrelid 2002, 134). Surnames in Norway have been classified, as per Helleland, into five main groups: (i) Surnames from place-names, mainly farm names (ii) Patronymics (ending with -sen) (iii) Surnames brought into the country some hundred years ago by officers of the crown or craftsmen (iv) Surnames from recent immigration (v) Newly designated, “ornamental” surnames; often of the same type as group (i) (Helleland 1997, 51). Group (i) is, as mentioned above, the largest group. Some farm names are ancient, often more than a thousand years old, in both non-compound names such as Haug (‘hill’) and names compounded with for example -vin or -heim, where the ending is usually reduced, e.g. to -en and -um as in Vøyen and Holum. Often the more recent names refer to smaller farms and are given the definite form (e.g. Haugen, ‘the hill’). These names are relatively frequent. 26 % of the population bears a hereditary patronymic in group (ii). One masculine compound with -sen (‘son’) is the most frequently occurring surname in Norway — Hansen. The rest of the population bear foreign or constructed names. Some foreign names have been used in Norway for some hundred years, first mainly by Danish, German and Scottish officers of the crown or craftsmen (iii), such as Meyer, Møller and Smith. OSLa volume 4(2), 2012 surnames and identities [259] Even if these names are frequent in their countries of origin, they are however relatively infrequent in Norway and commonly associated with the bourgeoisie. Similarly, names from recent immigration (iv) are primarily a city phenomenon. Obviously, this is a very complex group, consisting of names from all parts of the world — the most frequent names from this group in Norway are Nguyen and Ali. The constructed names in group (v) are primarily of Swedish descent, as result of a tradition with ornamental names (Brylla 1995). Frequent names of this type are Lindberg and Berglund. Also belonging to this group are new names constructed on Norwegian ground which are aimed to resemble traditional farm names. [3] questionnaire The survey consisted of 22 questions, 13 for those who didn’t need to answer follow-up questions. Further, it was separated in 9 parts. In brief, the question- naire asks about what the present surname is, former surname for those who have changed name, reasons for name change, geographic connection, etymology, like or dislike of the surname, and the extent to which the surname is a felt to be a part of the individual’s identity. At the end of each part a text box is provided to encourage the respondent to give further comments. The text boxes are im- portant as they potentially supply valuable knowledge in additional information which otherwise might not be covered by the declarations in the questionnaire. The themes in the questionnaire are thoroughly described in Wikstrøm (2007). [4] respondents I chose to use what Dillman (2007) terms a mixed-mode survey; […] the Web is evolving as a mode that must be used in conjunction with more traditional modes such as telephone and mail. This means that there is an increase in the occurrence of mixed-mode surveys, whereby some data are obtained by the Web and other data are gath- ered by another mode or modes (Dillman 2007, 450). In light of this, I chose to have several groups of respondents who were invit- ed through different channels (such as members of a sports club or visitors to a specific web page); in all, six different groups participated in the Web survey. A control group was contacted by telephone as a random sample and asked to par- ticipate by filling in a paper version of the questionnaire. A total of 314 answers was obtained, with 49 of these constituting the control group (Wikstrøm 2008). Surveys on the Web require access to a computer online and some skill using it. This means that the more resourceful are assumed to answer the survey. I tried to check the partiality by comparing the answers I got from the different groups to record any potentially substantial differences in answers. This comparison re- vealed that the six groups who had answered the questionnaire on the Web did OSLa volume 4(2), 2012 [260] solveig wikstrøm not differentiate essentially from the control group. However, the groups dif- ferentiated from the population as a whole, according to figures from Statistics Norway (SSB), as overall the respondents proved to be slightly younger and con- siderably better educated. Thus, I have reached a specific part of the population. Unn Røyneland states that traditional sociolinguistics requires the selection of respondents to be representative of the actual population; for example, cover- ing all the members of a particular language group or dialect (Røyneland 2005). However, following Røyneland, a specific group of the population can usefully be investigated in respect to attitudinal meanings. In the interpretation of Broady, sociologist Pierre Bourdieu and associates seldom use random samples of respon- dents in investigation. Rather, they are interested in the individual and groups, in their attitudes and qualities which are representative in the sense that they portray certain social phenomena of interest (Broady 1991). The group I wished to find out about was urban citizens, those who presumably have a distanced re- lationship to their often rural family names. The respondents are accordingly not representative for the population as a whole in statistical sense, but they are representative for the part of the population I wished to reach. [5] change of surname By asking if, and then why, the respondent has changed her surname, I wished to find out if there are certain surname types which seem to be preferred. The most recent Norwegian law on personal names, in effect from January 1, 2003, has enabled greater freedom to choose the name that best expresses one’s iden- tity.