I, for my part, ask any candid reader if it was not bad enough to be called Broadfoot, without having it aggravated into Stephen Broadfoot? I feel confident I will here get a tear of sympathy from all unhappy Andrews and Peters, and Aarons and Samuels, with a smile of disdainful compassion from thrice-happy Franks and Charleys and Bills.
dcterms:bibliographicCitation
1852, William Harrison Ainsworth, “Tale of a Carpet-Bag”, in Ainsworth's Magazine, volume 21, page 17:
Subject Item
_:vb6513906
rdf:value
It is doubtless true that American English lacks a tradition for the pronunciation of Anthony, a name which was not often bestowed upon American males until the comparatively recent craze for supposedly swank "British" Christian names, like Stephen, Peter, Michael, etc., in this country.
dcterms:bibliographicCitation
1952, Thomas Pyles, Words and Ways of American English, Random House, page 245:
Subject Item
_:vb6513907
rdf:value
I thought that ideally it should be a name which could work whether he was serious and reserved or butch, a name like Stephen which could be Steve or David which could be Dave.
dcterms:bibliographicCitation
2000, Helen DeWitt, The Last Samurai, Miramax Books, published 2002, →ISBN, page 142:
Subject Item
_:vb6513908
rdf:value
Stephen reigned from 1135-1154, that nasty period of our history dubbed 'The Anarchy', when forces loyal to Stephen contested the throne with those of Henry I's daughter Matilda, who by rights should have been queen. Stephen, her cousin, plonked his own posterior on the throne.
dcterms:bibliographicCitation
2023 December 27, Stephen Roberts, “Bradshaw's Britain: the way to Weymouth”, in RAIL, number 999, page 52: