2,228 names in this catalogue run to three syllables or more, and they average 32 registrations each. Two-beat dog names average 78 and two-beat cat names 167. The third beat is not a gradual cost. It is a cliff, and it is the sharpest single effect anywhere in this data.
Both species walk off the same edge
2,183 of them are recorded on dogs and 932 on cats. Neither is fonder of long names than the other once you account for how many names each catalogue holds — the drop happens at the same place for both, which suggests it is about mouths rather than about animals.
They lean female, and that is English talking
829 measure female against 592 male, and 776 end in -a. Female given names in English run longer and finish open more often. This slice is inheriting a property of the language rather than reporting one about pets.
What survives the cliff
494 of these are names a dictionary lists for people, and they average 73 registrations against 32 for the slice as a whole — more than double. A three-beat name a person could be called is treated quite differently from a three-beat name invented for an animal. If you want length, that is the safest kind to want.
Pick the short form before the household does
Every name in this slice has an abbreviation waiting, and it will be settled within a fortnight by whoever says the name most often. That is not an argument against three beats. It is an argument for deciding early which two of them you keep.
Are long pet names a bad idea?
Not bad, but measurably less used: 32 registrations per name against 78 for two-beat dog names and 167 for two-beat cat names.
Which long names are used most?
The ones people are also called. 494 of this slice are dictionary-listed given names and they average 73 registrations, more than double the slice as a whole.
Do cats or dogs get longer names?
Both about equally, in proportion to how many names each catalogue holds: 2,183 on dogs and 932 on cats.
Every count on this site is a tally of real registrations: pet licences and shelter intakes published as open data by New York, Seattle, Austin, Montgomery County, Cambridge, Zurich, Basel and four Australian councils. Popularity here is the average share a name holds across those registers, so a name common in a small city is not buried by one common in a large one. Five of the eleven registers are North American and they supply 86% of the records, so read the ordering as naming in those places rather than worldwide. Browse the whole catalogue or read how the data is put together.