This study explains the social tastes that have affected recent disputes about unique naming patterns. The study uses S. Lieberson’s social taste concept as its framework, and J. K. Skipper’s studies, which focus on subjectively estimated social class, as the methodological framework. Analysis is conducted using conjoint analysis (rank logit model).
First, respondents were shown several first names, and asked to estimate the social class (stratification) of its owner. The descriptive table of the results demonstrates that people can estimate social stratification from first names without any other attributions. These results support Skipper’s studies.
Second, in relation to social taste, three characteristics of first names were considered as likely to affect the pattern of social class attribution. The characteristics are the era when the name became popular, the readability of the Chinese character notation, and gender specificity. Conjoint analysis with the overall data demonstrated that all three characteristics affected social class attribution in practice. Era had the strongest effect. Furthermore, a within-characteristic comparison demonstrated that people considered naming patterns that follow existing norms as more highbrow than novel patters. On the other hand, a comparison between normative patterns demonstrated that people considered that partially distinctive patterns are the most highbrow.
Third, conjoint analysis of split data demonstrated that the relationships between naming patterns and estimated social class (stratification) described above vary with the person’s own attributions, cultural capital, and internalized social norms.
In summary, the study demonstrates that social taste about names is determined by assimilation into existent norms and cultural distinctiveness simultaneously. Furthermore, disputes about naming patterns occur when someone encounters names that are outside the tastes of the group to which they belong, or when people with different tastes encounter each other.
