Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m happy

The origins of the Family name Blanckman/Blankman, is found mainly in Sweden, Finland and The Netherlands.

The linking of the Blankman surname exclusively to Ashkenazi origins is wrong. Our name Blanckman was most likely given to Finns who served in the Swedish military, which had difficulty with the Finnish Language. It possibly denotes someone of light complexion and perhaps blond hair? It could also have been given to a metal polisher as an occupational name, i.e. one who shines metal.
2 people like
this idea
+1
Reply
  • 3
    Yours is the third post today that appears to be related to FamilySearch's "About Me" feature. I think it shows they should stay well clear of providing this kind of information, which is probably causing as much displeasure to recipients as the opposite!

    I would be interested to know what sources are being referred to in producing such information. On this specific issue, there is just a secondary reference to Ashkenazic Jewish links in the websites I have checked out.

    See also:
    https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... and
    https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 1
    I agree, Paul. I think FS goofed in their attempt to attract people to the site. This "about me" feature needs to be dropped soon and hopefully, it will be, considering the new threads that have been opened about how wrong the information is (as far as the persons making the posts are concerned).
    • On my own surname, It arrived in this country from Switzerland and the pronunciation of it produced the surname Hoover. While it was also found in other area of Germany and Austria, it was very, very common. As common as Smith is in this country.

      The point being, is that the information, regardless of the source, is not accurate or complete, as far as the knowledge I have of my ancestral Huber lines.

      While fun and games are okay, the site really needs to focus on the serious aspect of researching one's ancestral lines, and putting together the stories of those relatives. If FamilySearch wants to make a site for fun and games, that's fine, but it should not be part of FamilySearch.org.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • They happen to be the most popular campaigns and the majority of users that are chosen to receive these get good results and they enjoy that. The user engagement metrics are really high. And that is one of the core hopes- to have users engage/re-engage in family history.

    These "about me" campaigns are always going to run into inaccuracies. These aren't probably as useful to the big researchers like here on GetSat.
    • First, thank you for checking in with this thread.

      FamilySearch management needs to rethink its priorities. Does it want to become known as a trash site, where nothing is to be trusted, or does it want to fulfill the scriptural mandate to prepare a record that is worthy of all acceptation?

      Campaigns are so-so, but when they put out garbage, specifically incomplete information, then they need to stop the madness.

      Donald makes some very good points about his surname. The user engagement needs to measure satisfaction, and given that at least three posts today have indicated inaccurate information, that says a lot.

      This is a little like the GEDCOM ingest problems: Ignore the naysayers.
    • Onomastics is a fuzzy study, so even a recognized source written by a PhD, who I believe the leading expert in the field, will never be perfect. Hoffman literally means something like "Land-man," so it could be a gardner, farmer, landed farmer, or steward. Anything that could be associated with land, maybe even a medieval serf, who was tied to the land.

      We have metrics that we use to measure success (far beyond click-through rates) and each of them indicates that this campaign is home run. With this campaign, we're not ignoring the naysayers, but we are balancing the feedback with our success metrics and making the informed decision to continue.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 2
    When a big powerful entity such as FamilySearch purports to be the final arbiter and authority on the origin of your family name, what is one to do when their version does not include other explanations of such origin? My objection was the "exclusivity' implied in their pronouncement. As a genealogist since 1949, I became aware many years ago that there were many families using the name Blankman/Blanckman, whose origins were in Russia, Kiev, etc., and they were of Ashkenazi Jewish faith. In fact, one such person became a friend of mine and he was also interested in finding out more. I convinced him we should have our Y-Chromosomes sequenced and compared, which we did several years ago. It turned out his Y-Haplogroup was J and mine was N, indicating that his family's probable origin was the Middle-East, whereas mine was in China, Siberia and Russia, spreading into Finland, and of Uralic Linguistic Origins. My point is that there are usually many possible explanations for family name origins, and no one conclusion fits all, and that fact should be included in any explanation offered for public consumption. Family names are a relatively recent phenomenon, and one should be prepared to use scientific designations for one's deep ancestry in pre-historic times.
    • Actually, Donald, it is not the final arbiter on the origin of family names. I looked at one (mine), and each point was a not absolute, but used words like possibly and similar "hedge" words that do not suggest that "this is where your family name came from" and "this is the meaning of your family name."

      If anything, each name should have a "there are likely other ways your family name came into existence" disclaimer.
    • Thanks Tom. I like your disclaimer. Names come into existence in different parts of the world, and are assumed by people for their own reasons, all the time. Names are not always used because of historical connections, occupations, physical appearance, or traditional considerations. Sometimes, a perfectly innocent name in one culture turns out to be an unfortunately embarrassing word in a newly adopted culture. Babies are not born with a name stamped on their foreheads (yet), however, a name used in a family for many generations, is a powerful incentive to go along with the tradition, even if you don't particularly like something about the name. I feel sorry for children given up for adoption at birth wherein the names of the birth parents are legally withheld from them for life. With the arrival of DNA sequencing on the marketplace, the tools to overcome this problem are now available to those who want it. I have always maintained that our cherished genealogies are just approximations until they can be genetically confirmed through testing. I'm quite sure that the doctor signing one's birth certificate had no idea who the real father was, unless he was present at the child's conception! lol
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 2
    Since FamilySearch is just pulling information out of two copyrighted sources, at least for all the names I've looked at:

    Dictionary of American Family Names © Patrick Hanks 2003, 2006
    Dictionary of First Names © Patrick Hanks and Flavia Hodges 1990, 2003, 2006

    they cannot change anything or add anything. The only possibilities I see is that you send this information into the authors for consideration in a future version of their work which FamilySearch might then get permission to up date to or FamilySearch gets so many complaints about the accuracy of these volumes that they drop this section all together.

    Maybe what they should do is make the source much more clear by having the source reference is larger, blacker type than the tiny, faint grey that it is now.
    • view 1 more comment
    • Gordon, thanks for your responses to these threads. I need to get into a better habit of monitoring getsatisfaction like a hawk when a campaign goes out for this experience.

      You are correct that we can't change or add anything to the current definitions, because we are citing the works from Oxford University Press. If we write entirely new definitions though and drop the citation entirely, that could work, but we are some ways away from being able to do that if the feature is ever developed at all.
    • Randy, you sound as if you are a staff member of FamilySearch. It is helpful for staff members to identify themselves by including (Employee) or (Official Rep) etc (see Joe Martel's posts above) in their name, so that GetSatisfaction users can distinguish between posts made by fellow FS users and responses to issues by FS employees.

      Thank you
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated