Talk:Jacques

Jacques = James

There are plenty of Wikipedia examples [1] and references [2] including the La Bible du Semeur (French translation of the Bible) that clearly show that James is the proper translation of Jacques. "Jack" and "Jake" are common phonetic mistakes among English speakers thinking that "Jacques" sounds like one of the other two, so it "must be the name." While some people named Jacques may be called Jack or Jake by English-speaking friends, but that doesn't form the basis of an accurate translation.

Jacob is unchanged in French (see Genesis chapter 49 of La Bible du Semeur). Jack finds its roots as a Middle English diminutive of John, unrelated to Jacques. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

No one is arguing that “James” is not a proper translation of “Jacques”. The issue is whether “Jacob” is also a proper translation. And plenty of references will explain that “Jacob” and “James” are the same name, which is why Jacob Bernoulli is also known as “James Bernoulli” and supporters of Kings James are known as “Jacobites”. —SlamDiego_←T 17:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It is was never my position that James and Jacob don't have the same root. That is without question. What is at issue here is that today they are separate, distinct names and are formally translated as such. Fifteenth century examples aside, "Jacobus" has gradually diverged in both French and English as James/Jacques and Jacob/Jacob and would today be translated as such. Today, the French equivalent of Jacob is Jacob. Names, as with many aspects of language, change and diverge. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 03:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The problem with your argument is that “James” and “Jacob” remain the same in English. This will persist because the equivalence applies to important historical figures; I have already given you a couple of examples. It might be that “Jacques” and “Jacob” have utterly diverged in French, but the article is talking about translation into English, and one does not impose the features of the language ostensibly being translated onto the target language. The fact that names do evolve and diverge doesn't empower one here to effect a division that would appeal to oneself.

It would be possible to assert, without claiming or insinuating that “Jacob” is an incorrect translation, that “James” would be the more usual translation, and that the French have ceased to treat “Jacques” and “Jacob” as the same name. (But be sure that this last claim is formally correct before making it within the article.) —SlamDiego_←T 16:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I would think that no more a reliable sources than the La Bible du Semeur(1992) The Louis Segond translation(1871), and the French Darby translation(1859) would be necessary to illustrate my point that Jacques and James have been separate, distinct names in French for some time. Your 15th 17th century examples are closer to the root than more recent 19th century examples I have given here.

I am not "effecting a division" to appeal to myself. I have no pawn here. The fact is, I discussed this very matter with an old friend of mine who was a linguistics expert. He corrected me when I mistranslated Jacques some years ago. He was one James DeBruhl (is own first name obviously James) who served as a translator for the US Department of War during WWII, was fluent in French, German, and Mandarin, and taught French as a foreign language for 34 years. Unfortunately, as he is now deceased, I cannot ascertain his source material. Regardless, it seems I have "Slammed" into a brick wall, so do with it what you will. I'm finished here. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 01:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

You are citing sources as to what has happened in French, when the issue is of how to translate, and a separation has not occurred in English. Your sense of history seems to have gone awry, as neither James/Jaacob Bernoulli nor the Jacobites are 15 Century figures; but, more to the point, we've not stopped using “Jacob” for “James”; 21st Century English hasn't stopped calling James Bernoulli “Jacob Bernoulli” (nor vice versa, if one thinks of him primarily with the latter name); and those seeking an adjectival form of “James” continue to throw it into “Jacob-”.

Personal communication is an insufficient citation. —SlamDiego_←T 04:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Falsifying what you wrote is very poor form. If you'd wanted to claim in reply that you meant to refer to the 17th Century when you wrote “15th century”, that would be fine; even an explicit strike through your original comment with a correction inserted after it would have been acceptable. But, as it is, you've made it seem to the reader (until, perhaps, he or she hits this comment) that I've misread your assertion. —SlamDiego_←T 17:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)]

I'll leave it to others to decide for themselves whether late is better than never here. —SlamDiego_←T 19:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't think "others" will give a damn. I gave up arguing with you several posts ago, but you just like keeping this thread alive. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 19:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

No, you didn't give up arguing, you just moved your arguments to edit summaries ([3] [4]) for two iterations after you declared “I'm finished here”, and now you're back to arguing here. Indeed, I have that low tolerance for eristicism to which you allude, and I'll shoot it down here. Now, let's see whether you want to keep this going. —SlamDiego_←T 20:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for proving my point. Cheers ++Arx Fortis (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

And that's your fourth shot since claiming that you'd finished. Gonna make it five? —SlamDiego_←T 22:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Jacques, James, Jacob are all derived from the hebrew name Yaacov. It's a mistake consider them different names. They are all the same name; the only difference between them is about biblical tradition. Jack Fax (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

“People with the given name of ‘Jacques’”

Are all these people referred to in notable discourse by just their first names (as Ann-Margret Olsson is called “Ann-Margaret” and as Madonna Louise Ciccone is called “Madonna”)? We don't want an über-trivial list of notable people whose first name is “Jacques”. —SlamDiego_←T 23:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

As all the people on the list are notable and each has a Wikipedia article, the list is not trivial. It helps readers find a person's article, when they know the subject's first name only, or last name only. WP addict 0 (talk) 13:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't follow. In the case of some names — and “Jacques” is likely to be amongst these — listing every notable individual with that name would simply creäte a useless sea. The Search field can already offer suggestions if the user wants them. —SlamDiego_←T 14:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Still think that you should include Hockey player, Inventor and knitter Jacques Plante. ````

"unknown progenitor"; "comes from the Hebrew name, Yaakov"

🤷🏼‍♀️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by IRiteGood (talk • contribs) 18:21, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

"Normans"

The article says: "...Normans, derived from "Northmen", were of Viking origin. In 911, Vikings settled in their namesake region, Normandy, in current day France...". In fact, there should be some information that such "Normans" - regarding modern borders - were rather of North-West-Polish origin, than truely Scandinavian. As they got more and more alienated from their culture, these people were eager to adopt new names, such as "the follower" Jacob/Jacobus. --188.110.191.144 (talk) 10:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Joseph Jacques immigrated from Germany in 1838

Joseph Jacques immigrated from Germany in 1838 to North Dakota as the government had the opportunity to homestead farmers. Joseph had 3 Children Elmer, Regina and Ruth. He and other immigrants had to fight and eventually live among the American Indians of the Dakota territory. 24.121.159.244 (talk) 15:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)