This article focuses on attitudes to forenames. It is based on the results of a questionnaire (completed by 154 respondents), in which people were asked to comment on the appropiateness of a selection of forenames presented to them. The list included two categories of names: (1) new names either approved or rejected by the name authorities and (2) fairly unusual names from the 19th century. It emerges that, on the whole, the general public are more restrictive than the authorities. When it comes to first names that sound like last names, the authorities and the public are agreed on their inappropriateness. The strongest discrepancy is found for forenames with appellative connotations, of which members of the public disapprove. It is also clear that, as far as appropriateness is concerned, the public do not distinguish between new names and unusual 19th-century names.

Apart from these findings, there are indications of gender and ega differences in the study. Among those who gave conservative answers there were more women than men, and the average age in this group was higher than in the more tolerant group. Overall, the study reveals certain tendencies regarding attitudes towards forenames, but it also raises many new questions that still await an answer.