NameTides

Sang

Sang peaked in the US in 1987 at #2,057, and is too rare now to appear in the latest official lists.

Sang as a boy’s name

  • US
  • England & Wales
  • Canada
Sang as a boy’s name, US, England & Wales, CanadaBabies per 1,000 in the published list, 1880–2025, for US, England & Wales, Canada. Gaps mark years with too few babies to be published.00.010.030.040.0518801900192019401960198020002020
Sang as a boy’s name, US, England & Wales, CanadaBabies per 1,000 in the published list, 1880–2025, for US, England & Wales, Canada. Gaps mark years with too few babies to be published.00.010.030.040.051880192019602000
Babies per 1,000 of the same sex in each published list. Breaks in a line are years with too few babies to be published.
Show the numbers
YearUSEngland & WalesCanada
2024#10,938 (6)——
2020#12,022 (5)——
2019#9,756 (7)——
2018#12,156 (5)——
2017#8,140 (9)——
2016#7,605 (10)——
2015#12,086 (5)——
2014#6,307 (13)——
2013#9,655 (7)——
2012#6,306 (13)——
2011#7,009 (11)——
2010#10,766 (6)——
2009#10,994 (6)——
2008#9,871 (7)——
2007#8,173 (9)——

The tide so far

  • Peaked in the US in 1987 at #2,057.
  • First recorded in the US in 1929.
  • In 1996, 24% of US babies named Sang were girls.

Spellings

Official statistics count each spelling separately, so we show them side by side rather than adding them up.

SpellingWhereSexLatest rankBabies
SangCanadaBoys—too few
SangEngland & WalesBoys—too few
SangUSGirls—too few
SangUSBoys—too few