Board Thread:Off Topic/@comment-27447621-20160730160356/@comment-25936766-20160730162527

HookshotHotshot wrote:

Though I do have something to add. Someone, You mentioned on my message wall that we have to assume the rules here are the same as Remnant's rules, right? That means surnames are passed down usually by the father. So if one person and one person alone towards the top of a family tree changed their last name to fit the CNR, then their sons and daughters would have the same color-based last name. if that person had a son, that name would continue on to the next generation, and the next, and the next all the way to present day.

I don't see what your problem is with Last-name CNR characters. Could you explain why the scenario above would pose a problem to you? I don't remember doing that, must have been some time ago. But sure, I'll explain:

For starters, I'm not saying the rules are the same. Ruby doesn't share her family name with her father, but with her mother, so unless she changed her family name at some point, it's safe to say it's like in real life: The family name of the child is chosen by the parents. They share it with the father, mother, or both.

Now, my issue with family names is, they exist for long before the CNR was ever made. Family names go back to many generations. That means not all family names fit CNR. Then, if the parents were not willing to give their children a given name that fits CNR, then, if we assume it can be fulfilled through only last name, that means they were willing to change the name of their entire family tree, just to fit CNR, because one does not name their own family name, the best they can do is choose it.

Meanwhile, Ozpin said they named their children after colors. Again, one does not name their own family name unless they are badass enough to start one. That means the color names are the given names, normally the first names. Which means, it's the given name what must fit CNR.

To say that it can be fulfilled through only the last name, means to assume that people were willing to change that family name that goes back generations, just to fit CNR. When the simplest answer is that, they don't, they just named their children, instead of changing their family names.

This supported by how every named character has a name that fits CNR through only the given name. Lisa: there's a fish species called Lisa (yes, I looked it up. But I had to put "Lisa (Fish)" specifically to avoid pictures of Mona Lisa). James: At least 4 rivers called James River, 3 in the US, 1 in Texas, and last time I checked RT is in Texas. And yes, it's relatively well-known as a place for touristic kayaking or however you spell it.

Octavia: Both a plant genus, and an asteroid (technically "minor planet").

While sure, my argument is no hard fact, Occam sides with it more because it requires the least assumptions (people named their children after colors, just that, no "some changed their family names as well" assumption), and there is currently no evidence of a name that fits CNR through only family name.