Not only, there are places in scripture before G-d has revealed His name where biblical characters seem to be calling to Him. In those cases it's likely that the Masorah accurately records the way it was correctly memorized as Ad-nai in some cases and Eloqim in others yet overzealous scribes at some point had "updated" the scrolls to include the Name in those places.
It is the idea that the Scriptures we have are edited and updated that is inadmissible according to the doctrine of preservation. The idea that whole words were replaced goes far beyond a jot or a tittle being lost.
The Scripture not only says the Name was used before Moses, but that it was used to name a place (YHWH yir-eh). If this was an edit, it would not only be an edit of what was said, but would be giving a wrong place name.
In Exodus 6:3, "יָדַע" is not used as introducing something people were ignorant of (or else the Scripture is contradictory), but of revealing, as the word is used when David says "know my heart": God was not ignorant of David's heart before. Notice that it is after the wonders of creation are complete that God then begins to be referred to as "the LORD God". God was about to reveal his Name in a way he had not revealed it to the fathers:
"Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?
Or hath God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation, by temptations, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes?" - Deuteronomy 4:33-35
Not sure if this is what you meant; you seem like a smart guy probably you meant to say "K-riou is a translation of the Qere from Ad-nai, not a translation of the name".
I know you get that I'm just clarifying for others. So the Apostolic Writings accurately preserve for us proper ways to refer to G-d: "K-riou / L-rd / Ad-nai" and "Th-os, G-d, Qel/Eloqim"
"K-riou is about as literal as one can get for translating the Qere Ad-nai"... So the Apostolic writings do a bang up job in Greek of maintaining the Jewish tradition of not saying the name aloud....
Rather I meant to say that the tradition may have chosen "Lord" to replace the Name for the same reason the writers of the Greek Scriptures chose "Lord" to translate the Name in Greek. I do not believe there was any tradition at the time of Christ not to say the Name, nor can we say that Christ did not say the name in Hebrew when it was translated "Lord" in Greek.
The whole point of the shortened form of His name, Qah, (a nickname of sorts) is as a pointer to His fuller name while not profaning His full name. Your point actually helps make the case that the ancients were extremely careful with His name in that we only find this shortened nickname form embedded and NEVER the full name in any human name. Even my Hebrew name has His shortened, nickname embedded.
The 2nd part of what you wrote shows a misunderstanding of what holiness is. It's not "something which is easily accessible and used in a common way"; holiness is precisely the opposite.
Treating Hashem's name in like manner to a human name does not sanctify it; in point of fact it profanes it... by definition. (though perhaps not in certain prayer / praise contexts)
There were things that were to be only the domain of the priests or high priests or the whole tribe of Levi. Also the whole nation of Israel was sanctified as a priest among other nations: there are different levels, and each one is holy. God commanded all the Jews to wear the fringe, all the males to be circumcised and to appear at the Temple three times, and every firstling of man or beast was holy. Many things were holy which people interacted with every day.
The Scriptures are holy, and God commanded that they be written on doors and clothes and spoken of constantly, and: "Thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." - Psalm 138:2
Interacting with something more does not make it less holy, only interacting with it outside of the way and manner it should be. Thus there were things commanded for only the priests, and other things commanded for all the people to do.
Note that the Catholics made a tradition that the "common" people should not read or teach or even understand the language of Scripture, and that any who did so were profaning the holy Scriptures and were anathema. But, "To eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man": so breaking a commandment of men taught as doctrine profanes nothing.
As to names, the full Name appears in at least four names, not of people, but of places: YHWH yir-eh, YHWH nissi, YHWH shalom, and YHWH shammah.
Whether treating the Name the same as a human name is wrong depends on what one means by "treating it as a human name". If this simply means using the Name at all, then of course it is not wrong. If instead it means not giving the Name reverence then of course it is wrong; and a person can use the Name with reverence.
As a side note, capitalizing "God" and "Lord", at least in Scripture, is not from Scripture, since the Scripture does not make any difference when it refers to false gods or to the true God, but uses "El" and "Elohim" for both, and uses "Kuriou" in the same way for both God and human lords. While it is innocent to use capitalization, it would be adding to Scripture to say one must use it, as it makes a distinction that the Scripture does not make.
LOL just what "great harm" are you figuring comes from showing respect to G-d by not writing out various titles of His fully?
The harm is when a person doing it to show respect begins to think that others show less respect by not doing it.
Anything people make up to show respect can become this, especially when a group of people begins to do it.
Like the Talmudist who said that anyone who: "pronounces the Name the way it is written has no share in the world to come!"; this is condemning the innocent, and is an abomination.
Anything that dishonors one's neighbor ceases to honor and rather dishonors God.
"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." - Matthew 25:40
"Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me." - Mark 9:37
Respect for one another is a prerequisite of respecting God:
"Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." - Matthew 5:24
There is nothing wrong with using "God", "Father", and "Lord": these are well affirmed titles that God has given and used, but to say that we should not use his Name is outside of Scripture. Of course I have no ill feelings towards anyone who desires to show more respect to God, and out of the same desire, when inventing ways to honor him, one must be ever more sure not to dishonor him in the ways he places highest in Scripture.