Meaning
We don’t have a verified meaning for Jung.
We only publish meanings we can cite to a source you could check yourself. Most sites will give you one anyway; the ones you find elsewhere are often copied between sites without verification.
Its story
Popularity since 1945
Hover over or drag across the chart to see any year.
See the 23 recorded years as a table
| Year | Per million |
|---|---|
| 1945 | 4 |
| 1967 | 4 |
| 1968 | 3 |
| 1970 | 3 |
| 1971 | 3 |
| 1973 | 3 |
| 1977 | 3 |
| 1979 | 4 |
| 1982 | 6 |
| 1983 | 4 |
| 1984 | 3 |
| 1986 | 5 |
| 1988 | 5 |
| 1989 | 4 |
| 1990 | 4 |
| 1991 | 3 |
| 1992 | 4 |
| 1994 | 4 |
| 1996 | 3 |
| 1997 | 3 |
| 1999 | 3 |
| 2000 | 3 |
| 2002 | 3 |
Where it’s loved
Most popular in these states
Jung isn’t concentrated in any one state. Either it’s spread evenly, or no state reaches the 25 births over three years needed before a rate means anything.
More like it
More like Jung
The numbers
Every figure
- Births in 2002
- 6
- Rank in 2002
- #9,392
- How rare
- 1 in 323,585 boys
- Since 1945
- 154
Jung was last recorded in 2002. Fewer than five boys have been given the name in any year since, which is the point below which the record stops reporting.
Most popular in 1982, at 6 per million boys born.
There isn’t enough data for a ten-year trend: Jung doesn’t appear in both ends of that window.
Figures from the US Social Security Administration’s 2025 release. How these numbers are made.