I have known that 'name after' is used after persons. Look at this sentence:

The village is named after the donor's surname.

Is this usage is correct, if not what can be replaced in the place of 'after'?

  • Unlike "named after", "name after" seems like it would be rare, and shouldn't be used in that sort of context. ​ ​ – user10092 Mar 27 '16 at 10:29

Not just people. You can name something after somebody or even something else. It's name sb/sth after sb/sth. Think of Lake Mead.

The lake was named after Elwood Mead who was a commissioner of the U.S.

Also they use name sb/sth for sb/sth; it's more common in American English though, as in

She told us about his ​brother, Apollo, ​born in 1969 and ​named for the US ​astronauts' ​mission to the ​moon.

So to answer your question, I'd say, "yes you can name a village after a person."

| improve this answer | |

Yes, the usage is perfectly correct. It is used about buildings, streets, even villages, but it is most often used about babies:

She's named after her grandmother

"Named for" is also used, mainly in the US. This link has some information about the differences in usage.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.