Tahlia
Given to 3,504 babies in the United States, 1970 to 2025. Every figure below is a count of birth registrations, not an estimate.
By register
By decade, every selected register together
Asked and held nothing for this name: Norway (1945–2025), Sweden (1998–2022), Belgium (2016–2025), Switzerland (2000–2025), Poland (2000–2025), Argentina (2012–2024), Finland (living citizens, 2026), Greenland (2002–2025). That is not a count of nought — each of those registers was searched and does not carry this spelling. Every one withholds its smallest counts, on its own rule, so a name can be real there and still absent from what they publish.
Narrow these tables
The sum at the top of each table adds counts that were not made on the same rule — the Americans publish a name only where five or more babies were given it in a year, ONS redact any name given to two or fewer in total, Finland counts living citizens rather than births. It is an indication of how widely the name is recorded, not a measurement of how many people have it.
How it is said
Not recorded. The pronouncing dictionary used here has no entry for Tahlia. That does not mean the name has no settled pronunciation — it means the source is a dictionary of English words that happens to contain many names, and it is thinnest on names coined recently. Nothing is guessed here, because a guessed pronunciation of somebody's name is worse than none.
Where these numbers come from
United States, 1880 to 2025
As a girl's name, Tahlia was registered 3,504 times in the United States between 1970 and 2025, most often in the 2010s.
England and Wales, 1996 to 2025
1,346 babies, from a register that begins in 1996. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: Office for National Statistics. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. The registers withhold small counts on different rules — ONS redact a name given to two or fewer babies in total, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
Scotland, 1974 to 2025
46 babies, from a register that begins in 1974. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: National Records of Scotland. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence. The registers withhold small counts on different rules — NRS suppress a name given to two or fewer babies in a year, under section 38 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
One thing about the Scottish figures that is true of no other column here. NRS ignore accents: in their words, Chloé, Chlöe and Chloe “are all counted as the same name”. So a Scottish count covers every way of accenting a name, and the counts beside it do not.
Northern Ireland, 1997 to 2025
3 babies, from a register that begins in 1997. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: NISRA. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence. The registers withhold small counts on different rules — NISRA print every name and withhold only the NUMBER, whenever it went to fewer than three babies in a year, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
NISRA fold accents before publishing, in their words: “Names containing accents have been recorded without those accents.” Only Scotland does the same. So a Northern Irish figure covers every accenting of a name and most of the figures beside it do not.
Ireland, 1964 to 2025
3 babies, from a register that begins in 1964. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: Central Statistics Office. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. The registers withhold small counts on different rules — the CSO name a name once it reaches three in any single year and then leave every quieter year blank, so an Irish total is a floor, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
Norway
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Norwegian figures for 1945 to 2025. SSB list only names used by at least two hundred people in the previous year, so an absence here usually means the name was never that common in Norway rather than never used.
Sweden
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Swedish figures for 1998 to 2022. SCB published a name only where at least two babies of that sex were given it, and at least ten before 2004, so this means the name never cleared that bar.
France, 1900 to 2023
91 babies, from a register that begins in 1900. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: Insee. Licence Ouverte / Open Licence 2.0 (Etalab). The registers withhold small counts on different rules — Insee withhold the YEAR rather than the name, pooling the births of a name given to fewer than three babies of a sex in a year into one undated record, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
Belgium
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Belgian figures for 2016 to 2025. Statbel publish a figure only where at least five babies in a single municipality were given the name, so this means it never reached five in any one town — not that no Belgian child has it.
Austria, 1984 to 2025
3 babies, from a register that begins in 1984. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: Statistik Austria. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. The registers withhold small counts on different rules — Statistik Austria withhold no count at all — where a name was given fewer than four times in a year they withhold the district instead, and publish the number, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
Austria is the only column on this page that is a total rather than a floor: nothing is held back except which district a birth was in. Two things do limit it. It records first names only, so a child registered Anna Maria is an Anna. And its coverage widens twice — to 2009 it counts only babies with Austrian citizenship, from 2010 every baby born in Austria, and from 2015 also babies born abroad to mothers living there — so the later decades are larger partly by rule and not only by naming.
Austrian spellings are also partly folded. Statistik Austria transcode names so that spellings alike but for their marks come together, and the only marks that survive are the six German umlauts. So an Austrian figure for an unaccented spelling covers the accented ways of writing it as well, and the figures beside it do not.
Switzerland
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Swiss figures for 2000 to 2025. the Federal Statistical Office publish a fixed list of first names and do not say how a name gets onto it. So this may mean the name was never given in Switzerland, or only that it is not on that list.
Poland
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Polish figures for 2000 to 2025. the Ministry left out any name given fewer than five times in a year up to 2012, and fewer than two from 2013. So an absence in the early years is a weaker statement than an absence in the later ones.
Canada, 1991 to 2024
360 babies, from a register that begins in 1991. Its decades cannot be compared with the American ones, which reach back to 1880: where the two tables above put them in the same row, they are counting different lengths of record.
Source: Statistics Canada, table 17-10-0147-01. Adapted from Statistics Canada, First names at birth by sex at birth, 1991–2024. This does not constitute an endorsement by Statistics Canada of this product. The registers withhold small counts on different rules — Statistics Canada withhold any name given to fewer than five babies in a year, and publish no single-letter name — the same bar as the Americans, set by a different authority, and the Americans hide one given to fewer than five in a year — so a name in one table and not another may only have met different thresholds.
Canada is usually said not to have a national name register, because births are registered province by province and most published lists are provincial top tens stitched together. Statistics Canada do assemble them: this is one table for the whole country, built from the Canadian Vital Statistics birth database together with Retraite Québec’s list of names.
Argentina
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Argentine figures for 2012 to 2024. RENAPER publish a figure only where a name was given to at least two people, so this means it was rarer than that, or was given only outside 2012–2024.
Finland
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Finnish figures at all. DVV publish a name only where at least five living Finnish citizens hold it, so this means fewer than five do — not that no Finn was ever given it.
Greenland
Not in this register. Tahlia does not appear in the Greenlandic figures for 2002 to 2025. Statistics Greenland suppress nothing, so — as with Austria — this means no resident of Greenland born since 2002 has the name, rather than that it was too rare to print.
The Social Security Administration publish the name on every United States birth registration from 1880 onward, and dedicate the data to the public domain under CC0. This page adds nothing to it: the counts are theirs, grouped by decade.
One gap, and it matters here more than anywhere. SSA publish a name only where five or more babies were given it in a year. A name you cannot find is not a name nobody used — it is a name used four times or fewer, and no site built on this data can see it.
Neither a meaning nor a pronunciation is recorded here for this name. Pronunciations come from the CMU Pronouncing Dictionary, which does not have every name; meanings are not on the site at all yet. Both gaps will be filled from named sources or left visible, rather than with something plausible.