While focusing primarily on Hispanic surnames, the website has a lot to offer in the way of answers. http://home.att.net/~Alsosa/surnames.htm Elaine (who is researching Slepicka / Slepica / Chicken BECAUSE Slepicka loosely translates from the Czech to "little hen" and half my family *went* for it in the US, though I never saw one member of my family ever involved in raising chickens <grin> and as a child often wished I had a different surname) Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it. --Henry David Thoreau Hello Gordon On Saturday, May 17, 2003, you wrote >>>What is it about a final 's' in a British surname that indicates a > Germanic origin? >> I don't know much about words of Germanic origin, but I do know that the >> final -s- also often indicates "descendant or son of..." in Welsh and >> other languages (i.e., Jones - "John's son"). In this case (MULLINS), >> in "A Dictionary of Surnames" by Patrick Hanks and Flavia Hodges, is >> listed as definitely English and is one of several variations of the >> name MULLEN, meaning someone who lived by a mill, or an occupational >> name for a miller, originating from the Anglo-Norman French word >> "mo(u)lin, mulin" (mill). >> Barbara > Thanks, Barbara. May I ask the same sort of question as I asked about > location-names? Exactly what dialectal influence was it, and where in the > British Isles (or the earlier Germanic world, I guess), that caused people > to call themselves (or be called by their neighbours) by the possessive? I > mean, somebody who lived near the shallow part of a river was called > SHIELDS, according to a dictionary quoted earlier. Presumable that was in a > different part of the country/culture from the part that gave Will's family > the name Wills. So which parts of the country/culture are we talking about? > If Mullins was originally Mullin's, and the name was given to a miller by > occupation, how do we KNOW the first Mullin was a miller? Or are we just > presuming because of the name? > Another question is this. -n was a common plural-form in the Olden Tymes. > So was the first Mullin a family of Mullins? Or is the -n not a plural at > all or an adjectival suffix, which in other circumstances might have caused > the name to be written Mull-ine or Mull-an? As I ask this, I realise the > question looks frivolous; but it really isn't, because it goes to the root > of the matter. We presume a miller was called MILLER, because a miller is > someone who mills for a living, and vice versa. But why would his family > not be called MILLEREN or MILLERS? > There is some anomalies here that I for one would appreciate advice and > comment on. Do the compilers of surname-dictionaries offer any proof that > an ignorant old auditor can take to the bank? I have to assume they do, and > I would like to know what it is. Old auditors do not like anomalies. It > was unexplained anomalies that allowed Enron to make such a mess! > Thank you for any help. > Gordon Barlow