Talk:Amalia (given name)

Arabic, Greek

Why are you adding Arabic and Greek as origins of this name? Amalia is not a native Arabic or Greek name, it's borrowed from the Germanic form. Ogress 22:14, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Ogress, if you would care enough to refer the sources provided, you would find that this name exists in other cultures via different origins. All information that I have provided is backed up with sources. Plugee (talk) 02:03, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Furthermore, "amal" is not a Germanic word, but rather a biblical word that comes from Hebrew. This can also be attested to. Feel free to check any Hebrew–English dictionary. Plugee (talk) 02:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

A naming book in French printed forty years ago? It's not available. I looked for and found cites; every single thing I read was "from German amal". As for "Amal is not a Germanic word" - yes, it is. It's an old Germanic root that means vigor and activity and appears in many names. I cited it. It appears in noun compounds as early as Saint Amalia (Amalberga of Maubeuge). Also, the name form "Amalia" is not appropriate for a name in Classical Hebrew - which it'd have to be given the age of the name - and Arabic hadn't even appeared yet. And it's only a name for Christian Arabic speakers because it's a non-Arabic name imported into Arabic. :You are doing (fringeworthy) original research by claiming that the Semitic root found in Hebrew and Arabic is the source for the German word. Ogress 03:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Since when did a book have to be available free online to be a valid source? As is stated in the article, Amalia per se is not a Hebrew name, however the word amal (labour, work), from which the name is derived, is. You are correct that the name itself is not from ancient Hebrew. ::The name amal in Arabic means hope. It has nothing to do with the Hebrew. Amalia and Amala are feminine forms of this name. Plugee (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

You are not correct and the citations do not support you. 'ʿamal is a man's name and its relationship to Amalia is WP:OR. Your link is to some online dictionary. Direct cites about the meaning of the name "Amalia" (not ʿamalah) are unequivocal about its meaning. You claim that book supports your statements but you can't even quote it to prove it. I have provided two RS. Ogress 19:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

If you really cannot, because of whatever Islamophobic/Xenophobic rationale that you hold strong to, tolerate that there are other non-European etymologies of this name, I'm not about to sit here correcting you over and over again. Let someone with more time on their hands worry about your foolishness. However, adding incorrect information, as you have to this article, is intolerable. Here are some citations that assert that Amalia derives from Amal (עַמַל), a Hebrew word meaning "labour", "toil", "work". Plugee (talk) 21:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Putting aside the scholarly value of the book, your second cite does not even include the name Amalia and does not say what you claim it does. What you linked to literally says "Amalia, derived from the Germanic amal and means 'hardworking'". You literally cited against your own claim. The first name is not Amalia but Amal-Yah עֲמַלְיָה, a recent neologism, and is irrelevant because it isn't the same name at all.

Second of all, your personal attacks are inappropriate, ridiculous and offensive. You are just angry that the cites you keep throwing in the hope I don't actually look at them literally do not say what you claim they do. How dare you accuse me of Islamophobia and xenophobia. You are not only out of line you are clearly slinging mud without any clue as to who you are talking to. Ogress 23:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

You should not have reverted the edits that I made to the article. Many of them had to do with formatting and improving the article. No one is attacking you, and using that term only takes away from the dignity of real victims of wikipedia attacks, of which I personally have been a victim of. I will be reverting the edits to what they originally were after the moderator's conclusion. If you really feel the need to remove the part about Hebrew for now, then do so in a new edit. But please, DO NOT REVERT LARGE EDITS THAT AFFECT THE ARTICLE BEYOND WHAT YOU DISAGREE WITH. Plugee (talk) 04:42, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

This has now been done. In the future, try making new edits instead of simply reverting past ones. This way, any changes to the article other than what you wish to be removed will be preserved. Plugee (talk) 05:00, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

You need to take it down a notch, please. Ogress 06:15, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely not, Shrek. Take other people's ideas seriously if you want others to take you seriously. I'm starting to see that there's not much difference between an ogress and a troll. Plugee (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Arabic origins have been added with citations.Plugee (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

References

Origins

Per EdJohnston's suggestion:

• A Dictionary of First Names, by Patrick Hanks, Kate Hardcastle, Flavia Hodges, "Amalia, Latinized form of the Germanic name Amal...." --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:21, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: All the cites say "from Germanic amal", but Plugee doesn't care. He literally cited this above and then claimed it said the origin was Hebrew. Ogress 03:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

The "baby name" books are not WP:RS, or at least not nearly as good as the scholarly work on the subject of name origins cite that Plugee replaced; I have put that cite back. Ogress 14:45, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Arabic origins

Could we discuss the Arabic origin that I have proposed in earlier edits? I have presented valid sources that you may verify online on Google Books.

"Baby name" books are not WP:RS in this situation. Additionally, you allege that there is a special Arabic name that would be "عملية". That is the Arabic word for "operation" or "process". Women are given the name Amaliya (with an alif, not an ayn) because it's a Christian name borrowed from Europeans. Ogress 14:45, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Also, I cannot read those pages. They are not visible. And I do not trust you to quote the cites out because of your previous behavior misrepresenting cites. Ogress 02:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

It should at least be listed as an alternate origin. It's been cited in more than one published work. Are the links not working for you? Let me post them again here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plugee (talk • contribs) 17:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Take a look here and here. These are two reliable sources that indicate an Arabic origin. It would be reasonable to include these origins in the article. Plugee (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

References

Hebrew origins

The sources listed in the article, like the Oxford dictionary of names, indicate that Amalia comes from the Germanic name Amal, meaning work. However, there is no evidence of the world "amal" in any German dictionary having this meaning. "Amal" is in fact the Hebrew word for "work", "toil", etc. and so in all likelihood, it may be that the word "amal" (עמל) is ultimately of Hebrew origin. If anyone has evidence of this, please contribute. This interesting etymological question is proposed here. Plugee (talk) 18:03, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Really? There is no evidence of this? Here's a scholarly work cited in the article. On page 71, it notes, "Early recorded Frankish names are mainly dithematic. First elements included: [...] Am- or Amal- (active)"

• Wilson, Stephen (2003). The Means Of Naming: A Social History. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-135-36836-4. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

And this book, which claims to reveal the Hebrew origins of English words and names (and, by the way, appears to be mostly off-the-cuff claims, not scholarly work), says, ""Related names like EMERY, AMELIA, MILLICENT and perhaps EMIL(Y) are linked to the Germanic root amal (work, trouble)."

• Mozeson, Isaac E. (1 February 2001). The Word: The Dictionary That Reveals the Hebrew Source of English. SP Books. ISBN 978-1-56171-942-6. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

When both scholarly works and even a book trying to prove the Hebrew origins of English words say it's from a Germanic root, your argument is bad. Also, while not definitive (we can't cite Wiki to itself, but it is also sourced), wikt:Amalia also clearly lists its origin in Germanic. Ogress 18:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Also, amal wouldn't appear in a "German dictionary"; German has to be distinguished from Germanic languages. Ogress 18:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I still haven't seen proof that the word "amal" is not of Herbew origins. Let's hold off on judgement and see if other contributors have more to say about this. Plugee (talk) 18:26, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how to respond to you literally ignoring WP:RS. You do know that the Semitic root starts with ʿayin, not zero, right? And that the ʿayin was still pronounced in ancient times? Ogress 19:32, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the hebrew word begins with ayin. What does this have to do with anything? These are published works that were researched, Miss Ogress. Plugee (talk) 04:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

First, yes, there are public works. By scholars. Who published more recently than the American Civil War and have expertise in Germanic languages. I cited one, but you have decided to ignore it completely.

Also, What do you mean, "What does that have to do with anything?" How and when do you propose the Semitic root √ʿml was borrowed into Germanic? Concretely, not a novelist noticing Hebrew ʿamal coincidentally looks like Norse aml in 1863. Which, incidentally, was a time when linguistic studies were literally just beginning. Ogress 07:13, 12 June 2016 (UTC)