If Mexico is conquered by another country, will people have to change their names and surnames?

I doubt there Will be a Change on The surnames and if anything there Will be a strong resistance movement yo Maintain The Spanish Custom of two names+two surnames(father and mother first surnames).and there Will be a preference for names that work in both Languages that only Change their pronunciation, as examples

Men:
David
Abraham
Tomás
Nicolás
Daniel

Women
Elizabeth
Maria
Emilia(emily)
Patricia
Linda

Etc
Ivan ist very popular aswell.
 
The closest analogy I have would be the Philippines. The Americans didn't really force the Filipinos to translate their names into English, but Filipinos started giving their kids (official) English names after WWII. And in my grandparents' generation, they freely switched back and forth between English and Spanish names depending on the situation (though their official name would remain in Spanish). Even I translate my name whenever I switch languages, although my name is spelled the same way across numerous languages :biggrin:.

I'm guessing a similar thing would happen in Mexico, where their names would remain in Spanish at least for a couple of generations. However, individual Mexicans may choose to translate (but not change) their names into French should they move to France (similar to a certain artillery officer), and the 3rd and subsequent generations may eventually drift to using French names.
 
Why not? The fact that áre bíblical, thus With a long tradition, Will mean those names áre prefered, Nicolás is a Greek names not bíblical BTW.
why? I mean The Indigenous people in México áre already Westernized, literally they áre Spanish creole cultural descent, they áre by definition part of the Westerner cultural Continuum, unless you think The Spanish aren't part of the west Culture.
In respect on how The Indigenous mexican get their surnames, they get it in The same way The Spanish farmers get theirs, from their work, place of Origin or some agricultural produce

Depends when you are talking about. 1820's, many are most certainly not fully westernized. Even as late as the 1970's you still had many groups who were only nominally westernized, or hispanicized, with syncratic forms of Catholicism and culturally insignificant trappings of modern society. Sure the closer to the present the more westernized they are as a whole. But even today you can find Mayans who share more with their ancestors than with my family and there are still several million indigenous who don't even speak Spanish.

If by Creole you mean mestizos and/or criollos, then that would indeed be different.
Ivan ist very popular aswell.

I have a cousin by that name. As a kid I took it for granted as a Spanish name, then I started learning about Russia. I also have another cousin with the name Adrian, another with Brian, another with Anthony (Spelled as such instead of the hispanicized Antonio) who goes by the nickname Toni.
 
Depends when you are talking about. 1820's, many are most certainly not fully westernized.
But The part of the country taht matter, The capital and more important cities, population centerville, institutions and Official religiond áre full inithw western cultural orbital, The fact The countriside Is not still fully westernized Is irrelevant, you don't govern from The countriside you do it from The cities.
Even as late as the 1970's you still had many groups who were only nominally westernized, or hispanicized, with syncratic forms of Catholicism and culturally insignificant trappings of modern society. Sure the closer to the present the more westernized they are as a whole.
The sincretism Is a form of westernized, and Even in Europe Today youbhave important humano groups that have "culturally insignificant trappings of modern society" and still their host Countries áre fully considered westernized.
But even today you can find Mayans who share more with their ancestors than with my family and there are still several million indigenous who don't even speak Spanish.
Ok I will need the source on that because by the latest mexican sources, the INEGI, only 7.500.000 people speak a Native language or if you prefer less than The 7% of the mexican Population, and by the same source only about a million don't speak Spanish, o less than 1% of the population, not several millions as you Say, The USA have a bigger proportion of his population that don't speak English

Anyways None of your arguments áre enough to explain why you Considere that México to their Independence date Is not a westernized country
 
But The part of the country taht matter, The capital and more important cities, population centerville, institutions and Official religiond áre full inithw western cultural orbital, The fact The countriside Is not still fully westernized Is irrelevant, you don't govern from The countriside you do it from The cities.

The sincretism Is a form of westernized, and Even in Europe Today youbhave important humano groups that have "culturally insignificant trappings of modern society" and still their host Countries áre fully considered westernized.

Ok I will need the source on that because by the latest mexican sources, the INEGI, only 7.500.000 people speak a Native language or if you prefer less than The 7% of the mexican Population, and by the same source only about a million don't speak Spanish, o less than 1% of the population, not several millions as you Say, The USA have a bigger proportion of his population that don't speak English

Anyways None of your arguments áre enough to explain why you Considere that México to their Independence date Is not a westernized country

I think you read into my post what wasn't there. I was speaking of the natives, not the nation as a whole. And I don't consider modern tech any indication of westernization, it's culture that matters. INEGI isn't always accurate especially when natives have reasons to avoid the census, historical, real or perceived but reasons nonetheless. Over the years they were westernized. A foreign power wouldn't westernize them to the Hispanic model but impose an anglo or franco model (or what have you) model.
 
With a POD after 1800 but before 1915. Mexico is defeated by the French in 1860 or conquered by Britain or another non-Hispanic European country sometime after 1800. Should people with Spanish surnames modify it to be French/English/etc.? A hypothetical example, that Miguel Alemán will be called Michel Allamand, or that President Venustiano Carranza will be renamed René Lambert? Or in an English-speaking Mexico can he keep names and surnames in Spanish?

Whoever conquers it (except the US) will establish a puppet regime--as indeed the French briefly did. Did people change their names under Maximilian? As for the US (though IMO the "all Mexico" movement never had much of a chance of succeeding) last I heard there were still plenty of Spanish names in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. To list a few members of Congress from Texas alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicente_Gonzalez_(politician) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veronica_Escobar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaquín_Castro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filemon_Vela_Jr. And remember that it would be much harder to establish "Anglo-Saxon" cultural dominance in the more thickly settled parts of Mexico than in Texas or the 1848 Cession.

Anyway, if the UK conquers Mexico, there will not be an "English speaking Mexico" except that the elite will learn it (as many did in OTL though culturally French had more prestige). As important as the English language has been to India, and despite the long British rule there, "Only a few hundred thousand Indians, or less than 0.1% of the total population, have English as their first language.[4][5][6][7] According to the 2001 Census, 12.6% of Indians know English." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_English Mexico is not like Australia or (non-Quebec) Canada, where English settlers can easily overwhelm a scattered Native population.

Indeed, keeping Spanish names would be a matter of national pride.
 
Let's put it this way - regardless of whether the target is French or English, the main challenge would be indigenous names. How would a native Francophone or Anglophone of the period specified in the OP transliterate Cuauhtemoc or Huitzilopochtli?
 
Nobody would have to change their names. More than likely, the subsequent generations will likely have more and more English or French given names. Naturally, there would eventually be a rise of English or French surnames depending on how long they remain in Mexico.

Ironically, English and French names ended up becoming moderately popular throughout Latin America in OTL, though I believe that's primarily through American influence.

Well, you have to remind that some of those names involved "butchering" the the writing involved (specially with Italian and German names, hell even surnames were used as first names)
 
Well, you have to remind that some of those names involved "butchering" the the writing involved (specially with Italian and German names, hell even surnames were used as first names)
Lets not forget things like how everybody that came from the middle east or the balkans was called a "turk", even the armenians, and this didn't stop with the end of the Ottoman Empire, it continued for most of the 20th century. There is probably other giant misconstruction about inmigrants that I am forgetting about.
 
Lets not forget things like how everybody that came from the middle east or the balkans was called a "turk", even the armenians, and this didn't stop with the end of the Ottoman Empire, it continued for most of the 20th century. There is probably other giant misconstruction about inmigrants that I am forgetting about.

Like all spaniards coming from Galicia thus becoming "Gallegos", although galicians are away from the stereotype of spaniard arriving to the americas...
 
Like all spaniards coming from Galicia thus becoming "Gallegos", although galicians are away from the stereotype of spaniard arriving to the americas...
Or all italians being napolitans or all jews being russian. There is a long list of inmigrant stereotypes to unpack.
 
Or all italians being napolitans or all jews being russian. There is a long list of inmigrant stereotypes to unpack.

Well where i live there is a custom to call almost any foreigner a "Musiú" (specially if it is from an european or anglosaxon backgroud) which it is a deformation of Monsieur, although there was not that much of french immigrants here...
 
Mexico is defeated by the French in 1860
But... why? What reason would the French have for conquering Mexico in such a way that Gallicization of the country would be seriously considered? Have you been reading pop histories or (God forbid) texts commissioned/sanctioned by the Mexican government on the period?
 
Top