7 Rules for Identifying People by Place Names

background image 237

George R. Stewart, if he is remembered today at all, is noted as the writer of Earth Abides, a seminal work in the science fiction subgenre of the postapocalyptic novel. But to some language geeks he is hailed as an onomastician, a scholar of place names. Stewart, in the 1930s, is perhaps best known in the latter role for proposing a schema for how to identify someone according to their place of origin or residence.

Journalist and scholar H.L. Mencken was reportedly so impressed with the following distillation that he named them Stewart’s Laws of Municipal Onomastics:

1. Add -n to a place name ending in -a or -ia (Atlantan, Californian).

2. Add -an to a place name ending in -i or sounding like -e (Hawaiian, Baltimorean).

3. Add -ian to a place name ending in -on (Washingtonian).

4. Change -y to -i and add -an to a place name ending in -y (Schenectadian).

5. Add -an to a place name ending in -o (Ohioan).

6. Add -ite or -er to a place name ending in a consonant or a silent -e (New Englander, Seattleite).

7. Delete -s and add -tan to a place name ending in -polis (Annapolitan, for Annapolis).

That’s an impressive and helpful set of rules. Unfortunately, many people didn’t get the memo, so we find the rules widely broken. For example, someone from Florida is a Floridian, not a Floridan, and one writes of San Franciscans, not San Franciscoans. Parisians breaks the rules (it should be Parisite — ouch — or Pariser), as does Chinese (Stewart’s rule dictates Chinan).

Then there are classical affectations like Cantabrigian (Cambridge), Novocastrian (Newcastle, in Australia), and Oxonian (Oxford); more or less well-known foreign language alterations such as Flemish (Flanders), Madrileno (Madrid), and Muscovite (Moscow); and references — some famous, others obscure — based on state nicknames, think “Bay Stater” (Massachusetts), Hoosier (Indiana), and Nutmegger (Connecticut).

Thus, like many other attempts at codifying human behavior or custom, Stewart’s laws are breached as often as they are observed, but they’re still a useful guideline. Ultimately, though, let your fingers do the walking through a dictionary, geographical dictionary, atlas, or other resource.

Stop making those embarrassing mistakes! Subscribe to Daily Writing Tips today!

You will improve your English in only 5 minutes per day, guaranteed!

Each newsletter contains a writing tip, word of the day, and exercise!

You'll also get three bonus ebooks completely free!

20 thoughts on “7 Rules for Identifying People by Place Names”

  1. Thanks! (Have had this conversation several times recently!) So, if you live in Forest Acres, you’d be a Forest Acresite or a Forest Acreser? (Somehow, neither sounds right.)

  2. Baltimore ends in a silent -e, and thus would belong to rule 6 not rule 2. The e is only sounded when followed by the -an suffix.

  3. Parisian is probably spelled that way under French rules, not Stewart’s, where many people/place names end in -ain/-aine. Chinese may also have a similar reason, it is chinois in french.

  4. Actually, we tend to be known as Baltimorons.

    Of course, prepare for trouble if you actually call us that, especially if you’re not a Baltimoron.

  5. I say we just make ’em up as we go along! You can call me a Floridan, a Floridite or a Florider, if you want, or a former New Yorkite, New Yorkian, New Yorkist…
    As long as we have Cantabrigians and Novocastrians (which to me sound like aliens from other planets), I think the rules are more observed by being broken, and anything is game as far as I’m concerned! If I were writing a book of fiction, I’d have fun with it. If I were writing a book of non-fiction, I’d just say, “He was from Cambridge” or “She is from San Francisco,” and skip the whole caboodle! Too many rules spoil the…whatever.

  6. I might mess up the spelling here, but folks living in New Orleans are Orleanians (or New Orleanians). As usual, there’s no rule applicable to New Orleans.

  7. Arviarmiut? Moose Javian? Nanaimoite? Valdorian? Hoo-boy. Good thing I’m not a writer, because I’d spend all day looking this stuff up to verify it before I wrote something, and get lost in the fascination of all these bizarrities. Plus I think a person from Whistler should just be a Whistler…unless, of course, s/he can’t whistle…

  8. Happy to be a simple Texan (as opposed to a Texasite or Texaser, rule 6). Some rules definitely are made to be broken in favor of something easier!

  9. Hello! Here in the UK we have one or two strange ones — who would ever have guessed?

    We have Liverpuddlians, from Liverpool, of course, Novocastrians from Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Salopians from Shropshire. My wife is, strictly speaking, a Kentish Maid (had she been born the other side of the Medway she would have been a Maid of Kent.

    And there is never any need to ask if someone is from Yorkshire – he or she will tell you within moments of meeting you.

    Fascinating little piece – I loved the idea of Parisites!

  10. Plus I think a person from Whistler should just be a Whistler…unless, of course, s/he can’t whistle…

    Make that a Siffleur

  11. In defense of Stewart, the proposals are specifically for municipal demonyms, not for nations, states, or provinces. And I think they are meant as a guide for forming such terms when no guidance exists– not for replacing ancient, traditional, long-established terms that already exist.

  12. If the Children of Israel were known as Israelites, and peoples of Canaan, Canaanites; what are the people of Paris called?

Leave a Comment