Should a name word after a credential join the suffix? John Smith PhD Jones reads middle Smith PhD #602

Why. A credential or generational suffix written in the middle of a name part has no rule of its own today. Whatever reads the part decides it by accident, and the three comma shapes give three different answers:

So without a comma the credential lands in a middle name. After a family comma it is a suffix and the word behind it becomes a middle name. After a suffix comma everything from the credential on is already a suffix, which is C2's tail rule.

Rationale. A writer who puts an unambiguous post-nominal after a name has marked where the post-nominals begin. A name word after it is more likely a credential the vocabulary doesn't list, or junk, than a resumed name. Reading the name past a credential, as the no-comma path does, turns a credential into a middle name, which is the one reading nobody intends. The suffix-comma path already reads it the proposed way.

Proposed statement.

1. The rule. In a part that a trailing rule reads, an unambiguous suffix word that stands after the name core starts the suffix run. Every word from it to the end of the part reads as a suffix, except a title word, which reads as a title:

   • John Smith PhD Professor → suffix PhD, title Professor.
   • Eric H. Holder Jr. Attorney General → suffix Jr., title Attorney General. The comma form Eric H. Holder, Jr. Attorney General already reads this way.

   A title word cannot start the run. 746 title words are in no suffix set (measured 2026-10-04), many of them surnames (King, Bishop, Judge), and Mary Jane King Smith must keep family Smith. The credential is the writer's mark that the post-nominals have begun, and a title has no such force. Reading a title from the end of a name otherwise still needs a comma or a period (H5).

   The parts a trailing rule reads are:

   • a name with no comma;
   • the part before a suffix comma;
   • the given part after a family comma.

2. What starts the run. A Latin credential acronym or a generational word (Jr., Sr., III), outside these exclusions:

   • the ambiguous class (ba, do, ed, jd, lac, ma, meng);
   • a single letter shaped like an initial (V, I, while III does start a run);
   • a connective that P3 joins between two name words (Josep Carod i Rovira is unchanged);
   • the non-Latin honorific words (さん, 씨, जी, 先生 and the rest), because an honorific followed by a name word is a different situation from a credential followed by one.

   A word that is also a title (MD, Ms, Lt., Sr.) starts the run, because position decides: after the name core it is read as the suffix.

3. The name core. With no comma, at least two name words must stand before the suffix word, because the family name has to exist first. After a family comma, at least one given word must. The comma already fixed the family.

4. Reported. Each name word the run absorbs is reported suffix-or-name, because a reader would hesitate over Jones in John Smith PhD Jones.

Examples (proposed, predicted):

Accepted consequences.

• An unlisted word lands in suffix. The field already holds three kinds of thing (decisions.md#suffix-field-composition), and this adds a fourth: name words the writer placed after a credential.
• The M2 rethink (Rethink the maiden-marker rule (M2): a marker stands after the current name and takes words up to the trailing suffix run #601) interacts with this. Jane Doe PhD nee Smith would read suffix PhD nee Smith, because the marker after a suffix is a word there.

Alternative considered. Lift the credential out and keep the name word as the family: John Smith PhD Jones would read given John, middle Smith, family Jones, suffix PhD. That is the family-comma path's reading today. It keeps every name word in a name field, but it treats a credential as something written in the middle of a name, which is the reading the rationale rejects.

Open questions.

1. Report it? Decided: yes (point 4).
2. John Smith, PhD Jones Split off to Should a comma part opening with a credential be a suffix comma? John Smith, PhD Jones reads family John Smith #603. It is a comma-structure question.
3. Generational versus credential Decided: both start the run (point 2).

Reach (measured 2026-10-04). Over the differential corpora (1,507 names), the trigger (an unambiguous suffix after at least two name words, then a name word in the same comma part) matches 8 names. All 8 are synthetic test strings or delimiter rows, not names someone typed. The rule is about consistency between the comma shapes, and about #601's clause (Jane Doe nee Smith PhD Smith), more than about real input.

How we'll know.

• Run the differential gate at every ledgered baseline, and classify every moved name.
• Measure how many corpus names have an unambiguous suffix followed by a name word in the middle of a part (done; see Reach).

Exclusions.

• No vocabulary changes.
• Ambiguous acronyms keep their words-to-spare rule.
• A part after a second comma stays C2's question.

Related: #601, #603, #548 (the two-Smith examples came from there), C2.