I know the name well, but cannot read it correctly: difficulties in reading recent Japanese names

The paper addresses the question: How difficult is it to read recent Japanese names correctly (as determined by parents/guardians), and in what ways does this difficulty manifest? The context is that even native Japanese speakers often cannot read name kanji correctly at first glance without explicit references such as furigana. Prior discussions and examples have suggested this difficulty, but empirical evidence has been lacking, making it hard—especially for those outside Japan—to grasp its extent. The study aims to empirically demonstrate the difficulty by analyzing actual name data, thereby improving understanding of Japanese naming practices and informing broader regions using Chinese characters.

The paper outlines structural reasons why recent Japanese names are difficult to read correctly. Unlike phonograms (hiragana/katakana) where writing and reading are fixed (e.g., さ/サ always read as “sa”), kanji are ideograms with multiple possible readings, making writing and reading independent. Three main reasons are summarized: (1) most kanji used in Japan have multiple formal readings, making selection of the correct one difficult; (2) special name readings (nanori) exist and are not fully taught in schools; (3) parents may assign arbitrary or meaning-based readings to kanji in names, leading to effectively infinite options for outsiders. Prior research indicates an increase in unique names in Japan, with growing variation in readings of common writings between 2004 and 2013. The situation contrasts with China, where most characters have a single reading, and with alphabet-based languages where orthography more tightly constrains pronunciation. The paper references descriptive works on Japanese naming and empirical studies documenting rising uniqueness in names.

Data comprised 7,779 names (boys: 3,762; girls: 4,017) of babies born between 2004 and 2018. Names were drawn from annual surveys of baby names conducted by Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company on their customers. While raw microdata are not fully published by the company, subsets of results are publicly available and compiled in an open dataset (OSF: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2WURJ). The analysis focused on names listed among the top 10 most common writings for each year across 2004–2018, examining the distributions of readings assigned to these writings. Sample sizes by year are summarized in the supplementary material. The dataset reflects real names used for official insurance contracts, ensuring that analyzed names exist in practice. The paper presents eight representative, common writings (boys: 大翔, 陽翔, 翔, 颯; girls: 結愛, 陽菜, 愛, 杏) that frequently appeared among the top 10 or top 100 writings during 2004–2018, and quantifies the number and frequencies of reading variations for each.

Common writings of baby names exhibited substantial variation in readings, making correct reading selection difficult:

• Boys’ names: • 大翔 (n=435) had 18 readings. Most common: Hiroto 51.72% (225); others included Haruto 15.17% (66), Yamato 13.33% (58), Daito 5.98% (26), Taiga 4.83% (21), Masato 2.30% (10), Taito 1.84% (8), Tsubasa 1.61% (7), and several at 0.46%–0.23%. Unique meaning-based readings included Tsubasa (wing) and Sora (sky), where one kanji acted as silent, adding meaning but not sound. • 陽翔 (n=184) had 10 readings. Most common: Haruto 80.43% (148); others included Hinato 8.15% (15), Akito 2.72% (5), Hiroto 2.72% (5), Hinata 1.63% (3), Haruhi 1.09% (2), Hibito 1.09% (2), Hyuga 1.09% (2), Hikaru 0.54% (1), Yamato 0.54% (1). Unique readings included Hinata and Hikaru with 翔 as a silent character adding the image of flying. • 翔 (n=145) had 4 readings. Sho 68.97% (100), Kakeru 26.90% (39), Tsubasa 2.76% (4), Sora 1.38% (2). Half of the readings stem from the kanji’s meaning/image rather than formal readings. • 颯 (n=52) had 7 readings. Hayate 57.69% (30), So 21.15% (11), Hayato 7.69% (4), Riku 7.69% (4), Ibuki 1.92% (1), Ryu 1.92% (1), Sora 1.92% (1). Unique readings included Ibuki (breath) and Sora (sky), assigned from semantic associations (wind/nature) rather than formal pronunciations.
• Girls’ names: • 結愛 (n=259) had 14 readings. Yua was the most common, with many alternatives such as Yuina, Yuna, Yume, Yui, and others; unique constructions included Yura, combining Yu (from 結) with ra derived from the Japanese transliteration of “love” (rabu) truncated to ra. • 陽菜 (n=401) had 8 readings. Hina was most common (75.31% [302]), followed by Haruna (17.96% [72]), Hinata (2.74% [11]), Hana (2.24% [9]), and several low-frequency forms. Unique readings included Hana via abbreviation (ha from haru + na) and Hinata with 菜 silent, adding a fresh/green image. • 愛 (n=18) had 4 readings. Ai 50.00% (9), Mana 38.89% (7), Manami 5.56% (1), Megumi 5.56% (1). • 杏 (n=125) had 5 readings. An 83.20% (104), Anzu 13.60% (17), Momo 1.60% (2), Anna 0.80% (1), Ko 0.80% (1). Momo arises via association with karamomo (“Chinese apricot”), abbreviated to momo. Across examples, readings differed markedly in pronunciation, length, and meaning. Even single-kanji names had multiple readings. The prevalence of meaning-based or abbreviated readings, and the use of silent kanji, further complicate correct reading at first sight.

The findings empirically substantiate that recent Japanese names—even common and short single-kanji ones—often have numerous possible readings. This validates everyday experiences in Japan where names are frequently misread without explicit guides (e.g., furigana). The multiplicity arises from formal readings, nanori, and creative practices giving meaning-based or arbitrary readings, sometimes using silent kanji or abbreviated sounds. Consequently, choosing the correct reading among many plausible options is difficult or nearly impossible at first glance. The results illuminate contemporary Japanese naming practices and distinguish them from contexts like China, where kanji readings are more fixed, and from alphabet-based languages where orthography constrains pronunciation more tightly. The study also exemplifies mechanisms by which unique names are created (semantic readings, abbreviations, silent characters), complementing prior evidence of increasing uniqueness in Japanese naming.

This study provides empirical evidence that common writings of recent Japanese names have many reading variants, making accurate first-glance reading difficult, even for native speakers. By quantifying reading variation for eight frequently used writings across 2004–2018, it clarifies how formal readings, nanori, semantic associations, abbreviations, and silent kanji contribute to ambiguity. The work advances understanding of Japanese naming practices and offers insights relevant to other regions using Chinese characters. Future research should employ more representative and comprehensive datasets to estimate population-level distributions of readings, track temporal change in variation, and examine social, regional, and demographic factors influencing reading choices.

The dataset, derived from an insurance company’s annual name surveys, may not be fully representative of all names given to newborns in Japan. Therefore, the number of reading variants and their relative frequencies may differ from population values. The study’s goal was demonstration rather than exhaustive enumeration; more representative data would be required to generalize precise distributions of readings across the population.