Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Through discourse and quantitative analyses of the Tamahiyo baby-naming guides, I show a shift from a familiar voice emphasizing connections with readers to one emphasizing expert authority. Now also featuring fewer unique names, this shift may impact Tamahiyo’s influence on future naming trends.

Paper long abstract

This study examines how linguistic strategies and name recommendations in the Tamahiyo baby-naming guides reflect shifts in their authoritative status. First published in 2003, the Tamahiyo guide was an innovative newcomer, contributing to the popularity of unique names (Kobayashi, 2009). Today, the Tamahiyo brand has become a ubiquitous presence, with annual updates (Unser-Schutz, 2025). Because such guides must convince readers to follow their advice, Tamahiyo’s changing authoritative status affects what linguistic strategies they use and the names they recommend, especially considering public criticism of unique names and legal constraints on name readings introduced in 2025.

The study compares the original 2003 guide and the 2026-2027 edition, using a discourse analysis of the text and a quantitative analysis of their matched graphic/phonetic names lists. While much is unchanged between editions, with a variety of speech acts of different directness levels typical of Japanese advice (Tanaka, 2015), the newest edition uses a less familiar and intimate voice. Some hedges (e.g., yō ‘seems’), sentence final particles (100 over 515 pages (2003) vs. 59 over 485 pages (2026-2027)) and community-building terms (e.g., sempai mama ‘senior moms’) have decreased in frequency, with the newer edition instead frequently referencing external sources of authority (e.g., dictionaries, laws).

These changes are reflected in the names list. The 2026-2027 edition lists ~32% fewer matched graphic/phonetic forms (8,596 vs. 12,661). Fewer unique phonetic forms are listed (1,578 vs. 5,170), with fewer graphic variants per form (2.45 vs. 5.45). Although both editions emphasize choosing names that are not ordinary, this more limited list suggests that Tamahiyo’s shift in authoritative voice has been accompanied by a conservative shift in its recommendations. With the data suggesting that Tamahiyo increasingly prioritizes authority through expert knowledge over intimate connections, I also consider how these changes may affect Tamahiyo’s influence on future naming trends.

Kobayashi, Y. (2009). Nazuke no sesōshi ‘koseiteki na namae’ o fīrudowāku. Fukyosha.

Tanaka, L. (2015). Advice in Japanese radio phone-in counselling. Pragmatics, 25(2), 251–285.

Unser-Schutz, G. (2025). The role of baby-naming guides in the presentation of gender in names: A case study of the Tamahiyo baby naming guides. Sociolinguistic Studies, 19(1–2), 107–127.