In my middle grade fantasy novel (currently in Rewrites), the MC, a modern-day twelve-year-old boy, goes back in time to early medieval Britain. While he's there, he meets a couple of the "little folk" (in the pixie/leprechaun/brownie sense). When I needed a name for these people, I decided, after studying the British legends and folk-tales about such people, to call them "hobs".
Now, "hobs" is an actual term for such folk (among other things, it's the source of the "hob" part of "hobgoblin"), but I was concerned that it might be too close to "hobbit" for many readers. I don't think it would be too much a problem, since:
1. It's an actual name from legend that happens to resemble Tolkien's own (and none of the other terms for such people in British folklore had the right feel here) - and Tolkien might have chosen the name for his own "little folk" because of its evocations. ("Might" being the word; I recommend the first two Appendices of "The History of the Hobbit, Part Two: Return to Bag End" by John D. Rateliff for more on that. Actually, I recommend Rateliff's two-volume work for anybody interested in "The Hobbit"; it's great.)
2. The MC has read "The Hobbit" (and probably "The Lord of the Rings"), and his immediate response to discovering that the "little folk" are called hobs is "You've got to be kidding me" (though he's tactful enough to only think it, not say it). He even checks to see if they have furry feet (they don't; at least, he assumes they don't, since they're wearing shoes).
3. The only traits they have in common with Tolkien's hobbits are those that hobbits share with the traditional "little folk" (small size, good at hiding, etc.).
So, with these three things in mind, the name choice is probably safe, but I'd like to make certain.
Now, "hobs" is an actual term for such folk (among other things, it's the source of the "hob" part of "hobgoblin"), but I was concerned that it might be too close to "hobbit" for many readers. I don't think it would be too much a problem, since:
1. It's an actual name from legend that happens to resemble Tolkien's own (and none of the other terms for such people in British folklore had the right feel here) - and Tolkien might have chosen the name for his own "little folk" because of its evocations. ("Might" being the word; I recommend the first two Appendices of "The History of the Hobbit, Part Two: Return to Bag End" by John D. Rateliff for more on that. Actually, I recommend Rateliff's two-volume work for anybody interested in "The Hobbit"; it's great.)
2. The MC has read "The Hobbit" (and probably "The Lord of the Rings"), and his immediate response to discovering that the "little folk" are called hobs is "You've got to be kidding me" (though he's tactful enough to only think it, not say it). He even checks to see if they have furry feet (they don't; at least, he assumes they don't, since they're wearing shoes).
3. The only traits they have in common with Tolkien's hobbits are those that hobbits share with the traditional "little folk" (small size, good at hiding, etc.).
So, with these three things in mind, the name choice is probably safe, but I'd like to make certain.
and 
