User talk:Mar vin kaiser

Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
• A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
• If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 12:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I've noticed some topical categories (such as Category:tl:Construction) that you've been adding to entries are a bit inappropriate. For example, the construction category is only really for things relating to man-made constructions and the processes associated with, well, constructing them. cave does not belong here, but rather in Category:en:Landforms. Also, if nakayukyok means crouching, then it doesn't belong in the construction category either I would say because it is neither a term used exclusively in talk of construction nor a term with one sense used exclusively in relation to construction AFAICT. I noticed though that the example sentence you gave for it talked about a building, so on that note be aware that entries should only be given topical categories based on their definitions, not example sentences. User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 12:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hiǃ Thanks for noticingǃ Sorry about that. I used the Tagalog word for "house" as a template for creating new articles for other words, and what I thought was the Category for construction meant words that were used for constructing Tagalog sentence, which seems very amusing, now that I think about it. Anyway, I'd like to ask, do you know how to make an inflection bot for Tagalog for Tagalog verbs? I'm knowledgeable about the grammar, but I don't understand the instructions on how to do it. I'm not good at anything that comes close to programming, so I'm at a loss here. If you could help me, thanks a lotǃ — This unsigned comment was added by Mar vin kaiser (talk • contribs).

Hi, I may be able to help you with that, but I'll probably be a bit busy for a while in the near future...I kind of tried to start making code for a bot to do Latvian entries to help another user a while back but between this and that IRL I never got too far with it. I may build on that or start from scratch depending on how bad it is. I'll try to get back to you sometime and see what I can do. Also, for replying on "traditional" talk pages like this, you can just edit the section instead of adding a new section to the page. User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 14:58, 10 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

To request the deletion of a page you create accidentally, replace its contents with {{delete|created in error}}. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 00:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi. You can't just copy material from other dictionaries. That will get us into legal trouble. Please read about copyright. Equinox ◑ 05:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

This is how you do it: {{prefixcat|tl|pa}}. User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 12:22, 5 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Do you mind adding {{Babel}} to your user page? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Kumusta ka! I don't speak much Tagalog, just bits and pieces, although a couple of years ago I had a really big interest in it. I remember seeing suglamuman as the form found in the Maugnaying ..., and doing a quick google search (with all those people who love posting their talang mga salita) I found suglamuman as the more widely seen form. But, I'm nowhere near a native speaker. Could you maybe shed light on this? DerekWinters (talk) 21:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. The actual word for "photosynthesis" in "Maugnaying talasalitaang pang-agham Ingles-Pilipino" is "suglaguman". I don't know where "suglamuman" came from, probably a corruption in the Internet. I have the actual book, but for proof, you can check the Google Books preview of the book, https://books.google.com.ph/books/about/Maugnaying_talasalitaang_pang_agham_Ingl.html?id=NG0iAQAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y and type "photosynthesis" on the search bar, and you'll see the word "suglaguman". By the way, I've been trying to delete the entry for "suglamuman" but I don't know how to. Perhaps you could, thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hey. Awesome! I'm glad we've found the actual word. Also, we'd have to ask an admin to delete it, but until then, is this good enough? suglamuman DerekWinters (talk) 03:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

If you created it and realized you made a mistake, or there's some other totally obvious reason, you can add {{delete}} or {{d}} with an explanation as the first parameter: {{d|Created in error}}. If there's any chance someone might disagree, use {{rfv}} (or {{rfv-sense}} for just one of the definitions) if the reason you want to delete it is that it's never used in the language, {{rfd}}/{{rfd-sense}} for every other reason (see WT:CFI for more). If you want to delete a template, a module, an appendix, or something else that's not a regular entry, use {{rfdo}}. If you realize that an entry has the wrong spelling, and there aren't any other language sections on the page where the spelling is correct, you can move the entry to the correct spelling. This will leave a redirect behind, but you can tag that with {{d}} and an admin will delete it for you. If there's some reason you can't move it yourself, use the {{rfm}} template. For all of the request templates (as opposed to {{d}}/{{delete}}), the template creates a box with a "+" in it. Click on the "+" to post an explanation to the appropriate request page.

I hope this helps. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello, in your edit to 臘月, you put la̍h-ge̍h as Quanzhou. Shouldn't it be la̍h-ge̍rh? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 12:42, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung yeah, sorry, I think I was in a hurry that time and didn't notice. Thanks! By the way, I don't have any book sources for Taipei and Kaohsiung. Are there any online if you know of any? I've found Taiwanese online dictionaries, but I'm always not sure whether they show the Taipei or Kaohsiung pronunciation. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:59, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think the only one that I'm sure of is the MOE dictionary. When there are two readings, the first is Kaohsiung and the second in Taipei. Also, for or in Kaohsiung/Tainan, I don't think it should be shown in the POJ, but in the IPA, which is to be fixed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:04, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

One more question: how are o and ian/iat pronounced in Quanzhou/Zhangzhou/Xiamen? Is the IPA generated by the module correct? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:07, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

I just edited 結果 which has the iat and the o sound, and the IPA generated seems to be correct. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:13, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

So iat is pronounced as /iat/ (not /iɛt/) and o is pronounced as /ɤ/ (not /o/)? Right now, ian is /iɛn/, is that also correct? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:19, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Actually, now that you mentioned it, for "ian" and "iat", yeah, we do pronounce it like "ien" and "iet", represented better by "ɛ". Sorry, my mind was clouded by the generalization that the romanization was already phonetic, which now is evidently not. For the /ɤ/ or /o/, I'm not too sure. I think it's dialectal. Maybe we can consult a source that shows IPA? I can't trust these romanizations anymore. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:28, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I think they're allophones, interchangeable. Not sure though. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:44, 18 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung Re:"When there are two readings, the first is Kaohsiung and the second in Taipei.", could you kindly point me to the source? Thank you! Hongthay (talk) 15:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Hongthay In 音讀說明, it says that the "main reading" is 最接近通行腔的「高雄音」 and the "secondary reading" is 同樣具優勢地位的「臺北音」. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Double check your edit here, something went wrong with lua. -_- ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic seems fine to me. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Weird, it's appearing OK now. Never mind. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

I can't find 弓蕉 in Minnan Fangyan Da Cidian, so can you add the Quanzhou (and Zhangzhou) pronunciations? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for your contributions in Min Nan so far! Keep up the good work! I just wanted to tell you that you don't have to worry about adding qz,xm,zz,kh,tp: in entries with the same pronunciation across dialects... This will be done automatically after all the entries in CAT:Min Nan terms needing attention are checked. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:05, 24 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please fix it. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 13:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm a bit unsure about your edits to 曱甴 and 虼蚻. They are probably cognates, but I don't think Cantonese people ever use 虼蚻, and probably Min Nan doesn't use 曱甴. I'm not sure if we should be doing it like this. Pinging @Wyang, suzukaze-c as well. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:31, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I guess I was a bit prescriptive on that one. I apologize. Though there's a potential there of using one alternative form instead, like to standardize it for Cantonese and Min Nan. Anyway, at least we could indicate them on each other's entry. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:33, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Oh, wait. Min Nan DOES use 曱甴. Well, at least Teochew does. Based on what I found here http://baike.baidu.com/view/29873.htm. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Actually, it generally says that 曱甴 is used in Min Nan, Teochew, Hakka, Wu, and Cantonese. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've put some notes on both pages. What do you think? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:08, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Greetings, do you have an idea where I could verify Tagalog kreyosota meets WT:ATTEST? --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Greetings, would you know where I can verify that kulaysukatan meets WT:ATTEST (diff)? --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Check out this manual alphasyllabary for the Baybayin script, if you want. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 06:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Lo Ximiendo I haven't seen this before, so thanks. But why did you show this to me? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:08, 4 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

I thought, that other Tagalog-speaking users of the Wiktionary would be interested. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I am interested. Thanks for sharing. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I've very recently begun learning Tagalog, and have noticed that there aren't a ton of entries for it on Wiktionary. Though my knowledge of the language is less than rudimentary at the moment, I've taken the liberty of helping to fill that gap, by creating entries for words as I learn them (a complete list of these can be found at the bottom of my user page). Would it be possible for you to check these from time to time, just to make sure I'm not making mistakes? I've been adding them all to "Category:Tagalog terms needing attention," with a note that the entry was created by a non-native speaker. I don't mean to create extra work for you, but I do want to make sure I'm doing things right. I would greatly appreciate it if you could let me know if I make a mistake, so I can avoid repeating it in the future, and also so I can improve my knowledge of the language!

I also have a couple of general questions:

1. I assume the lemma for verbs is the root, but what verb forms do we include in the header on Wiktionary? It doesn't look like it's automated, so I would like to make sure those are present in entries I come across or create.
2. If the lemma is in fact the root, should the definition line include "to" before the English root, or is that misleading? I noticed that verb entries currently do this, but I think it could be confusing to include it, as it implies that the root is in fact an infinitive.
3. Should we or should we not include stress accents in the header of Tagalog words, as at mabuti? This is similar to what is done in Latin (the page title omits the accent, while the header includes it), is useful lexographic information and potentially helpful to users, and can help distinguish between homographs, such as at maybahay. On the other hand, it is my understanding that only dictionaries include the accents, and they do not appear in regular writing. That in itself isn't an argument against having the accents, of course, given that this is a dictionary.... It is something that needs to be a set standard, and since there don't seem to be many active users who edit Tagalog, I figured you would be the person to ask how to handle it, before I screw things up. :P
4. Related to the above question is that of marking glottal stops. This seems to have been done at kayo, but my understanding of their use in Tagalog is too limited to provide any input on the subject, or to reliably mark them if we do decide on their inclusion.

I noticed that Rgt2002 seems to be working on conjugation tables, which will be extremely helpful once implemented. Between us, and any other active editors, we should sort out what the standards for Tagalog will be—and if they are already in place, please enlighten me! I'm a big proponent of consistency, so I want to make sure entries will be uniform early on, rather than trying to bring it all together once we have a sizeable Tagalog corpus.

Thanks in advance, and apologies for my tendency to be somewhat verbose! Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser--Just wanted to make sure you saw this. I don't mean to nag you, and I must apologize for taking up so much space to say what I have to say, but when you have a moment, I would greatly appreciate your input! Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Andrew Sheedy Hi. Sorry for taking some time to respond to you. Anyway, thanks for taking an interest in improving the Tagalog content in the English Wiktionary. Sure, I'd be glad to answer your questions, and I do agree that we need to be consistent, and it's good to make all Tagalog entries uniform early on. Anyway, on to your questions:

1. Actually, there is a problem with the root being the verb lemma. That's because the conjugation in Tagalog is not exactly the same as how you would think of European language conjugations. Firstly, one root could yield to many, sometimes opposite meanings. For example, the root word "bilí". "Bumilí" means to buy, but "magbilí" means to sell. The root word "talo", "matalo" is to lose, but "manalo" is to win. Secondly, some Tagalog verb conjugations are regarded in Tagalog dictionaries as adjectives, for example, "nakamamatay" (deadly). Therefore, if you look at it being a verb conjugation, it shouldn't be a lemma, but if you look at it as an adjective conjugation, it should be an adjective lemma. Personally, as of now, I don't make that much verb entries in Tagalog, as you can notice, because of many problems that arise in making these entries. I mostly make noun and adjective entries, since there are no problems there. There are actually some other problems in creating verb lemmas I discussed with Rgt2002, but I can't remember them as of now.
2. Yeah, related to my answer in no. 1.
3. Actually, at first, I was against this and preferred to show the stress in the Pronunciation section instead. However, it has become sort of arduous for me to keep editing the pronunciation section for each new entry. And also, all Tagalog dictionaries put the stress mark with a diacritic on each entry. Therefore, I've started to like using it, and have put it in the new entries I've done. By the way, there are three diacritics used. First one is the acute sign, which if placed in the last syllable indicates stress on the last syllable, and if placed in other syllables, indicates stress on that syllable but it is never put on the penultimate syllable. The second one is the grave sign, which is put on the last syllable to indicate stress on the penultimate syllable and a glottal stop at the end of the last syllable. The third is the circumflex sign, which means that the stress is in the last syllable and the last syllable has a glottal stop. That's basically it.
4. The mark done on the kayo entry is pretty rare, as I've never seen that in dictionaries. The correct marking, I think, would be kayó.

Yes, Rgt2002 has been working on a conjugation table. But it's more complicated that it looks. Because some verbs in the conjugation table can be considered their own lemmas. That's why it's not easy. I hope I managed to answer your questions. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:55, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Whatever everybody comes up with, it should be placed at Wiktionary:About Tagalog, and you should create a redirect to it at Wiktionary:ATL. That way there will be a standard based on community consensus that anyone can easily find once they learn how the About pages work. Look through the About pages for other languages to get an idea for how people tend to do this (though About Tagalog will need to be different in some ways, just as all the other About pages are different from each other). Chuck Entz (talk) 03:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for responding! I don't mind waiting as long as I'm not ignored completely. :D

I didn't realize that verbs changed in meaning so much, depending on the form, but I think this could be managed. If we decided to treat bumili and magbili as forms rather than lemmas, we would describe them as has already been done at bili (this works just fine, and is consistent with what has been done in other languages). Alternatively, if it makes sense to do so (I'll be able to make more educated suggestions when I learn how Tagalog verbs actually work...), we could have the forms bumili and magbili as lemmas and eliminate having overlapping definitions, while defining bili as the root of whatever form(s) we choose to use as the lemma.

Good to know about those other accents! Could you point me towards an actual Tagalog dictionary (if there are any free ones online) so I can see what the dictionary forms are and avoid making mistakes? I think we can agree to have the accented forms in the header, but not the title of the actual page (as is alrady the case for the most part). I have changed the header of kayo per your recommendation, and I think the accents you mention should suffice for indicating glottal stops.

One last thing (related to my own editing): do you think it is pointless to add entries I create to Category:Tagalog terms needing attention? I don't want to clutter it up for no reason, so if you think the entries I've created thus far are error-free enough that I can just check them myself once I have a better grasp of the language, and not bother you or other editors with them, be sure to let me know. If you could check a few that I have created (see my user page) and remove the {{attention}} tag when you're done, that would be great. Let me know if I should avoid editing pronunciation, if it looks like I'm not getting them all right (I only add it when I can hear a recording of a native speaker saying the word). :P

Thanks again for your time! If you could point me to a Tagalog dictionary as soon as you see this, I would appreciate it. Our policy on verbs can wait till you actually have time, but in the meantime, I want to maximize what I can contribute. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser So, any Tagalog dictionaries I could use that have the accents? Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:32, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is that a no? :D Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Andrew Sheedy Thanks for reminding me to reply, because I forget. Sorry though for taking a long time. Anyway, most Tagalog/Pilipino/Filipino dictionaries have those diacritics. They're actually a standard not only in Tagalog dictionaries, but in dictionaries of other Philippine languages. I'm gonna suggest three dictionaries, two are out of print. They're the most complete dictionaries to date, in my opinion.

1. Tagalog English Dictionary by Leo James English

2. Vicassan's Pilipino-English Dictionary: Vito C. Santos (out of print, an abridged version is still in print)

3. Diksyunaryo-tesauro Pilipino-Ingles - José Villa Panganiban (out of print)

Aside from these, most dictionaries you'd come by (from the Philippines) most likely have them. Anyway, I've been spending some of my time thinking, what to do with the Tagalog entries in Wiktionary. Firstly, I've come to the conclusion that is the same with conclusions made in all the three dictionaries I gave. The conclusion is that all Tagalog root words are never verbs. Most are nouns or adjectives. Some are adverbs, conjunctions, articles, etc. This is a mistake some small dictionaries make. Secondly, I've been consulting with a university professor on how to manage the Tagalog verbs. It's just very vast, and it's hard to generalize to all Tagalog verbs. There's always bound to be some exceptions for some verbs, and for some affixes. Anyway, more on that next time, until I get a better grasp of it. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 04:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Perfect, thank you! I'll have to look into getting one of those. The first one looks pretty good, but based on what I see on Amazon, it's quite pricy....

Whatever you do decide for verbs, be sure to let me know. I'll avoid adding them until I have a good dictionary to reference, but eventually we'll have to decide on something. It's a pity school interferes with my language studies so much, as I haven't been progressing very much in Tagalog, and as a result, won't grasp the way Tagalog verbs work for a good while yet. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:20, 6 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is the Pronunciation header coming up right for you? It comes up as an error in my browser. ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic There was an error in the Min Nan and I've fixed it.

Mar vin kaiser, I believe the error was caused by ln̂g in the POJ. I think it might have been a mistake in Min-Fang-Da on 可能. Even though in Quanzhou, 能 might be pronounced as [lŋ], the POJ is still nn̂g since there is nasalization of the initial. I checked 能 in Min-Fang-Da, and it's nng in Quanzhou. Next time, please check that there's no error before saving to be safe. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:05, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for fixing. Actually it makes more sense for me that 能 is nn̂g instead of ln̂g. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

When is 蓍實 pronounced that way? ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, my mistake. I placed it in the wrong one. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll fix it. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Thanks for fixing my edit at "tore." I was wondering if you might also be able to check my Tagalog translation for "PBCom (Philippine Bank of Communications) Tower" (tallest building in the Philippines) as: "Tore ng mga Pilipino Bangko ng Komunikasyon." There isn't much of an entry on the Tagalog Wikipedia, where it is just listed as "Toreng PBCom." Nicole Sharp (talk) 23:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

In the Etymology section, 中 is incorrectly transcribed as zhōng (it should be zhòng). Would you know how to fix that by any chance? ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic We generally don't use {{zh-compound}} unless {{zh-forms}} is insufficient. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Mar vin kaiser. Thanks for your work on Min Nan and on Chinese entries in general. Just two things on Min Nan:

1. Make sure you check 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典, which has more information than moedict.tw, especially on pronunciation.
2. I think we should have some consensus on the ordering of pronunciations. I've observed that you always have it in this general order: Quanzhou, Taipei, Kaohsiung, Xiamen, Zhangzhou. I know you speak the Quanzhou dialect, so you would naturally want to put that dialect first. However, I think this order might be problematic since I would think most users looking for Min Nan pronunciations would want to be looking for either the Taiwanese or Xiamen pronunciations first. The Xiamen dialect has been the prestige dialect because it is sort of a middle ground between Quanzhou and Zhangzhou. Recently, the mainstream Taiwanese dialect has also risen to be a prestige dialect because of its great presence in Taiwanese media, which has definitely been influencing the Min Nan region in mainland China and the Hokkien diaspora. Quanzhou, while preserving many linguistic features not present in other dialects, probably does not serve the purposes that the Xiamen and Taiwanese dialects serve. I think we should follow 閩南方言大詞典 and put it in this order: Xiamen, Quanzhou, Zhangzhou, Taipei, Kaohsiung. Let me know what you think. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:47, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
   1. Actually what I do is I do it alphabetically, "Quanzhou, Taiwanese, Xiamen, and Zhangzhou", and if Kaohsiung and Taipei have different pronunciations, and Kaohsiung is different from Zhangzhou, I also do it alphabetically, "Kaohsiung, Quanzhou, Taipei, Xiamen, and Zhangzhou". Well, any order is ok for me. Furthermore, I use this site for further resources on Taiwanese. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

      Sorry for misunderstanding your ordering. But I still think that ordering the dialects alphabetically is still problematic. And I do use that website too; that's where the data in the Min Nan data modules comes from. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:04, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

      Chiming in here, given any thought to automate the ordering? Hongthay (talk) 08:00, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

      @Hongthay This would be problematic when we want to show certain groups of pronunciation before others, e.g. colloquial readings before literary readings. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

(Resurrecting this discussion) I still think ordering the regions alphabetically is problematic. Oftentimes, this makes Quanzhou go in front of the more widely accepted standard varieties, namely Xiamen and Taiwan. It's generally unhelpful for learners of Min Nan, who are less likely to encounter the Quanzhou dialect. @Hongthay, Wyang, Suzukaze-c, any thoughts on how this can be made consistent while keeping usefulness as a priority?

Another thing is that for single character entries, I think it would be more helpful to have vernacular readings before literary readings unless the literary readings are much more common in daily usage. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:49, 27 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Personally I think that the current display, where the region of the reading is not immediately visible, could be improved. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:19, 27 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

I actually prefer to split the collapsed display by region. i.e.

* Quanzhou: ge̍rh /gəʔ²⁴/ replace g with ɡ, invalid IPA characters (g) {白}, goa̍t /guat̚²⁴/ replace g with ɡ, invalid IPA characters (g) {文}

* Xiamen: <..> /../, <..> /../ (in a certain region order).

The split-by-poj approach is easier to implement, however. Wyang (talk) 22:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Do you have a source for the Taiwan pronunciation? MoeDict gives it as sàozhou. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:54, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I use 兩岸辭典, which Justinrleung suggests for Taiwan-Mainland differences. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi, can I ask you where you got so many readings for 遐? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:57, 2 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Sorry. I confused the character "遐" with "暇". Corrected it. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I note moedict's reading of dàijìn, qǐjìn and gànjìn respectively. Are we sure jìng is the standard pronunciation for 勁 in Taiwan? ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:47, 6 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic, do NOT reference moedict's 國語辭典 (which is a mirror of 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本) for standard Taiwanese pronunciations. Please see the discussion on this here and here. Both 國語辭典簡編本 (帶勁, 起勁, 幹勁) and 中華語文大辭典 (aka 兩岸詞典: 帶勁, 起勁, 幹勁) have jìng. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:20, 6 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Gotcha. Thanks for filling me in on this. I was using the Mac desktop version. When I select 兩岸詞典 the jin/jing info comes up. Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:53, 6 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic, no problem! Just to make sure, 國語辭典 and 兩岸詞典 are two different dictionaries that are available on moedict. Whereas 國語辭典 (the default in moedict) is useful for definitions, 兩岸詞典 is useful for "standard" pronunciations (though sometimes it could be wrong, so I usually back it up with 國語辭典簡編本), cross-strait vocabulary differences and contemporary words. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Any idea why 軍事訓練 in the etymology only displays traditional characters? ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I just copy paste how it was used in one of the articles I saw. But of course, I do think that it would be better if it displayed the simplified characters. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:49, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Most Wiktionary templates do not have the code to convert Chinese traditional to simplified (which is why we have a bunch of modified templates at Cat:Chinese templates). —suzukaze (t・c) 05:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

That template should only be used in a definition line. I've changed it to show the simplified as well. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, could you check Kang? Is it true that it's from 陳? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, yeah, I saw your first message. I'm working on it. Asking my friends who has Kang as their last name. It's hard though, since there has been a lot of surname exchanges in Philippine history for the immigrating Chinese in order to gain citizenship. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:04, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I see. Thanks for working on it! It just seems weird that Kang is so different from 陳 (Tân). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I plan to add the entries on (almost) each of Western Pacific storm names to Thai Wiktionary. I'd like to ask if you could help me with the IPA transcription for these Tagalog words: bilis, danas, hagibis, hagupit, imbudo, lupit, malakas, maliksi, molave, simaron, talas, talim. --Potapt (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your edits on these entries. Just one thing, I didn't put Protestantism as a label because they're not only used by Protestants; they're also used by the LDS, Jehovah's Witnesses and non-Christians. The Catholic versions seem less common (seeing that most Chinese Wikipedia articles use "Protestant" names.) What do you think? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 08:09, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung Hi. I understand your concern. Well, the reason I put "Protestantism" is because those terms are used in translations of what is called the Protestant canon (basically the Bible with 66 books). Basically, LDS, JW, and other non-Protestant groups use the Protestant canon, even though they themselves are not Protestant (technically). Honestly, I really don't understand why these terms should be different for each group, but then again, as Wiktionary, we're just describing language. So, that's why I labelled it with "Protestantism", since these terms are used in translations of the "Protestant Bible" (Bible with 66 books), and I label terms with "Roman Catholicism", for terms used in translations of the "Catholic Bible" (Bible with 73 books), and same goes with Eastern Orthodoxy, which I plan to add in the future. For example, for Joel, in Protestant translations, it's 約珥; for Catholic translations, it's 岳厄爾, and for Eastern Orthodox, it's 約伊爾. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Their translations into Chinese are different because of historical reasons. The most common version used by Protestants is 和合本, while Catholics usually use 思高本. Other (more modern) translations have followed either of these two translations' conventions depending on their audience. AFAICT, the LDS church uses 和合本 as well (so that's why they're using the "Protestant" names). JWs use the NWT, which uses the Protestant names. I'm not sure about how Chinese Jews would go about this. (I don't know if they have any Chinese translations). I guess we could keep the "Protestantism" label, but should we be putting other labels in? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I just took a look at 聖經 (shèngjīng) at the Chinese Wikipedia. They seem to use the "Protestant" names for the Jewish Bible as well. We might have to put in a "Judaism" label as well? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Just popping by, but if there are too many religious groups using it to fit their names in a label, maybe usage notes would be better? Andrew Sheedy (talk) 22:17, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Andrew Sheedy: yeah, that's probably a good idea. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Actually, usage notes sounds like a great idea! I'll do some more research on terms usage of Jews and other religious groups in the mean time. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I just wanted to tell you that we shouldn't be putting such notes just because one dictionary, namely Minnan Fangyan Da Cidian, uses X. Min Nan is not standardized in Mainland, so it would be very prescriptive to say so. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 12:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, so that's one issue I really want to settle with the community. Because in creating entries, for a specific word, there are 2 or more ways to render that word into characters, notably a difference between Taiwan and 閩南方言大詞典. And so far, our entries in Min Nan have been a mix of the Taiwan standard and 閩南方言大詞典. It's especially difficult when there are words that exist only in the Mainland, but that word contains a character word that is represented in Taiwan by another character, so there comes the inconsistency of which character to use. That's why so far, I just avoided making entries that involved these issues. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I think it will have to be considered case by case. Ideally, we should have attestation outside of dictionaries. If we don't have that, I would generally stick with the MOE standard unless 閩南方言大詞典 has something better to offer (i.e. etymologically more justifiable, as with 掌甲, which is also used in other varieties of Min). Of course, there are also dozens of other dictionaries, especially from Taiwan, that use different characters from both sources. That's why it's quite incorrect to say X is used in Mainland when we haven't considered actual usage and all dictionaries. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 12:55, 21 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

A general question about Hokkien that "X" reminded me of: regional patterns of rendering certain sounds like the "s" in POJ "si", for example, ranging from the letter "C" to something like "she"? If it exists, does it affect IPA? Thanks! Hongthay (talk) 15:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Hongthay, there are two ways of transcribing in IPA. One is broad (or phonemic) transcription, in which case it would always be /s/, the "underlying" sound. The other way would be narrow (or phonetic) transcription, where it would be [s] or [ɕ], depending on the speaker's idiolect/dialect. This would similarly apply to ch(h) ([t͡s(ʰ)], [t͡ɕ(ʰ)]) and j ([d͡z], [d͡ʑ]). Currently, we automatically have /ɕ/, which may not be ideal. I've discussed with @Wyang about differentiating phonemic and phonetic transcription before, but if we do this, it will need a lot of recoding for every lect we're covering with {{zh-pron}}. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

In what sense would this be a dialectal term? The 现代汉语规范词典 doesn't mention anything like that, and moedict lists literary some quotations. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:58, 22 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic The entry for this word has a label "dialect" in the Pleco Chinese dictionary app. Also, The Cantonese dictionary upgrade that Pleco has says that this word is a colloquial word in Cantonese. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I see. Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Could you please provide a reference for your definition here? AFAIK, it only means 名秘密的传闻. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:06, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic Made a mistake, copied the definition of 秘本 by accident. Corrected it already. Thanks for pointing it out. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 17:27, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

No worries. Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

跋涉 strikes me as a pretty straight forward verb. Why the literary tag? ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:18, 22 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic Yeah, we can remove it. My dictionary labelled it as "literary", so that's why I put it on. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Which dictionary is that? I find 现代汉语规范词典 is a good one to check for literariness. ---> Tooironic (talk) 14:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

I created an entry for the Tagalog gay slang (Beki) word shunga, but other words or phrases used by the Filipino gay community are still missing, such as "kalerki", "pak ganern", "itech", etc. Please help me with these, if you have heard of any of those slang.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

These should only be used when a term is only used in that context (like a technical term only used by anatomists and medical doctors). Otherwise, put it in a category at the bottom. For example, see my changes at taringa. Thanks! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:59, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for your contributions for Philippine Hokkien! I was thinking if you could help out with the IPA. We just need to know the tones and the allowed initials and rimes. Do you think the phonological system is entirely the same as the Jinjiang dialect? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:26, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Thanks for that. Just a note to writing the IPA for Philippine Hokkien, regarding the situation of the Hokkien spoken in the Philippines. Basically, all of the major cities in the Philippines (Manila, Davao, Cebu, Tacloban, Iloilo, Cagayan de Oro, etc.) have Chinese communities and all speak the same Hokkien, since more than 90+% of them have ancestry from Jinjiang and Shishi, which is basically exactly the same. However, it is observable that there are currently two communities of Hokkien speakers in the Philippines. The first one would be those that immigrated in the early 20th century or mid 20th century. The second one would be those that immigrated in the 80's, 90's, and 00's. Even though both come from the same locality in Fujian, the accent seems to have diverged somewhat. Well, for the new immigrants, they seem to have adapted the sounds /ə/ and /ɯ/ present in Quanzhou Hokkien that shouldn't be present in Jinjiang Hokkien. However, this adaptations is only in some words, like 說, the 2nd group would say "serh", while we say "seh". We, the first group, never use those sounds. Also, some vocabulary differences, like for "bread", we say "bīn-thâu", while they say "mī-pau". However, the 1st group outnumbers the 2nd group, in my opinion, although the 2nd group is indeed growing as more Chinese immigrate to the Philippines. However, I've met a lot of new Chinese immigrants that tend to adapt to the way we (the 1st group) speak, since we're more populous. Based on what I said, what do you think? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Ah, that's interesting! I think we should only worry about the first group, since they're (still) the majority and they've basically had enough time to have its own development (evidenced in different vocabulary). The new immigrants would be in the same situation as recent Chinese-speaking immigrants in North America, who would not differ much from people in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. That said, is it ok to say that the phonology of Philippine Hokkien is essentially identical to that of Jinjiang? If so, I could probably start implementing that in Module:nan-pron. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: If you watch this Youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dKcLf7we_Q, this more or less is the same accent we have, except for the vowels that these Jinjiang people tend to turn to /ə/ and /ɯ/ sounds. Also, we speak more clearly, our syllables are more enunciated. The people in the video tend to muddle the sounds together. Basically, the speech in this video and our speech have the same phonology. That's all I can say. But I sometimes disagree on how academic material writes the phonology of Hokkien speech. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Alright, I've added IPA for Jinjiang and Philippine Hokkien. If there's anything that doesn't look right to you, please tell me. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Thanks for adding IPA for Philippine Hokkien. I just noticed that you added tone sandhi for 陽上, which is actually correct. How did you know that 陽上 goes from 33 to 22? I've never seen this written in any source, but I just know it from personal experience. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 03:52, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

The tone sandhi info comes from 晋江市方言志 in 福建县市方言志12种. It can also be found in 晋江市志 (chapter 39). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung For the 7th tone, the same applies in Philippine Hokkien as Quanzhou Hokkien. Please correct, thanks! By the way, when I say 7th tone, I mean 陽入. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:06, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Do you mean 陰入? I think 福建县市方言志12种 might have a mistake then. 晋江市志 says 陰入 (-p/t/k) becomes 陽入, but 陰入 (-h) doesn't change. Is that right for Philippine Hokkien? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 12:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yes, sorry, I mean 陰入. And yes, that is right for Philippine Hokkien. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Alright, fixed for both Jinjiang and Philippine Hokkien. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 12:56, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

I have been busy adding many Filipino surnames, and on some cases, to prove the surname exists, I add a citation to verify it's usage. Is it okay to add citations for surnames, in case one doubts that the surname doesn't exist? To be aware, there are already about 630 surnames listed in Tagalog, and if possible, you can work on adding more, especially to record over 1,000 surnames. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 14:33, 1 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

How come Tagalog Wikipedia has siopao instead of siyopaw? Is this spelling wrong/uncommon in Tagalog? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: You ask a very important question lol. I'll just give you the most objective facts before I give my opinion.

1. In all Tagalog dictionaries I've checked, the entry for this food is "siyopaw". At times, some of those dictionaries would include variant spellings such as "syopaw" or "siopaw".
2. As all printed marketing in the Philippines is in English, the most likely spelling you'll see in the Philippines is "siopao".
3. The only dictionary where I see the spelling "siopao" is in the "UP Diksiyonaryong Filipino", and it is listed as a variant spelling of the main entry "siyopaw".
4. In traditional Tagalog orthography, "siopao" would technically be pronounced as "si-o-pa-o", as consecutive vowels would have glottal stops between them.

So, in my opinion, "siyopaw" is the correct Tagalog spelling, but since it would be very rare for you to find even a menu or food ad in Tagalog in the Philippines, you'd hardly see this spelling, and would only see the spelling "siopao". Therefore, most people perceive this spelling as the only existing spelling. And personally, I don't consider "UP Diksiyonaryong Filipino" a good dictionary, since the way the editor made that dictionary is somewhat controversial, by lifting the top 1000 most common English words, and dumping them into the dictionary as actual entries in the language, even if they're not recognized as actual words in the language. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Ah, ok. I wonder where the English spelling comes from then since it's kinda weird for loanwords to have such a different spelling. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:08, 2 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Well, it could have come from using Spanish orthography initially. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

What do you mean by "things during food season"? ---> Tooironic (talk) 17:18, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic: It looks like the 3rd definition here. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:07, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Aren't these simple nouns, not proper nouns? SemperBlotto (talk) 06:36, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

@SemperBlotto: I don't know really. It's just that in Philippine languages, the days of the week are capitalized on their initials, like in English. And there is a notion that words with capitalized initials are proper nouns. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

See our definition of (deprecated template usage) proper noun. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello. May I ask you to stop using {{etyl}}? It's currently being phased out and replaced by {{der}}, {{inh}} (for inherited terms) and {{bor}} (for borrowed terms). Thank you! --Barytonesis (talk) 10:25, 12 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Barytonesis: Hi, actually I do normally use {{der}} and {{bor}}, but whenever I create an entry with a similar etymology as another word already existing, I just copy-paste the etymology, and a lot of times it would be {{etyl}}. For example, look at the entire entry lima. Each entry there uses {{etyl}}, and it just saves me time if I copy-paste the etymology notes. I'll just wait for someone to edit the entire article on one go, changing everything to {{inh}}. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:28, 12 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Did you mean to add two different languages here? DTLHS (talk) 18:28, 25 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

• @DTLHS: Thanks for noticing. The other one was meant to be in Lubuagan Kalinga, a related language. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Please fix the entries. DTLHS (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Could you check the POJ you added? —suzukaze (t・c) 18:50, 4 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Suzukaze-c: Corrected, thanks for spotting. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

What is the source for derivation from Japanese? —suzukaze (t・c) 09:52, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Suzukaze-c: From Tagalog dictionaries. I'm not sure which Japanese word it comes from, though. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hmm. It seems weird and un-Japanese to me. @Eirikr, do you have any thoughts? —suzukaze (t・c) 04:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

@suzukaze, Mar vin kaiser --

Definitely not from modern Japanese. Medial /p/ is rather unusual in formations like this; ancient medial /p/ became modern /h/, /b/, or /w/, or sometimes disappeared altogether. Medial /p/ does appear in some compounds, but generally with either gemination, or with a nasal preceding.

Given the senses listed, the closest Japanese term that comes to mind is 煎餅 (senbei, “thin wafer made of rice starch”), but that clearly has no phonological similarity to Tagalog apa.

The closest phonological matches would be 網端 (aba, “edge of a fishing net”); 浮子 (aba, “attachments to the edge of a fishing net: either floats or weights”); or 網場 (aba, nonstandard alternative for amiba, “net place”, referring either to the place one sets a fishing net to catch fish, or the place one lays out a fishing net to dry). While /aba/ might conceivably be borrowed as /apa/, the senses in Japanese are completely different from the Tagalog.

The only Japanese terms that even start with /apa/ are all borrowings, mostly from English, like アパート (apāto, “an apartment”), アパチャー (apachā, “an aperture”), アパレル (apareru, “apparel”), アパトサウルス (apatosaurusu, “an apatosaurus”), etc.

For completeness, I'll also note that Japanese for English wafer is ウェーハ (wēha) in reference to silicon and often ウエハース (uehāsu) in reference to food, while ice cream cone is アイスクリーム・コーン (aisukurīmu kōn, variously spelled with or without the ・ interstitial dot).

Without more detail from the Tagalog reference, perhaps showing how Tagalog apa derived as an abbreviation from something else, and that something else shows a clearer connection to a possible Japanese etymon, I am left with the impression that the reference in question must be incorrect. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 05:58, 30 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. How would this term be considered informal? I'm a bit confused. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey, are you merging Malay and Indonesian? Note that you yellow-linked the Dutch etymology with this edit diff. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Lingo Bingo Dingo: I made a proposal before for merging, and the tone I got was positive. It's just that there aren't a lot of editors for Malay. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You need to stop merging. I did not see a consensus for this merger, and we need community support first. I am supportive, as you know, but trying to go under the radar is the wrong way to go about it. I proposed a vote, which failed, and you need to create a new vote or at least BP discussion if you want to overturn that. I have seen neither. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: I made a revote two years ago, but it didn't even start. Did I not properly cast the revote? I'm just not sure that if I cast another revote, it would be noticed, if you know what I mean. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Well, it didn't start because you didn't run it correctly. The instructions can be confusing, but the key is to ask for help rather than wait two years and then forge ahead doing whatever you want. The first step would be to post at WT:BP, where you would explain your reasoning (ideally with linguistic evidence from references), state your intent to create a new vote, ping all Malay/Indonesian editors, and wait to see what the community response is. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:42, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

( :/ —suzukaze (t・c) 00:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

The plural form of pundi-pundi seems strange - I can not find any hits in Google. Instead we have some hits of "banyak pundi-pundi" (like the plural of mata-mata). Similar issues happen on kelip-kelip.--Zcreator alt (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Zcreator alt: Yes. Whoever made the template generalized all nouns. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 17:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'd like to know where you're getting the Teochew pronunciations. There are quite a bit of errors. I suggest you use 潮州音字典 instead of Mogher, which is less complete and has some differences from 潮州話拼音方案 (e.g. ieu instead of iou). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yeah, I noticed those difference, which looks dialectal in origin. I actually base my Teochew edits on Mogher, since it differentiates which reading is used in which word. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:42, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Mogher's romanization scheme is slightly different from 潮州話拼音方案, e.g. ieu instead of iou. This is not a dialectal difference, but a notational difference. We are following 潮州話拼音方案 here, so we are using iou, not ieu. The dialectal difference is iou (Chaozhou) vs. iao (Shantou, among others). We currently list both pronunciations (iou vs. iao, iê vs. io), just like we do for Hokkien (but we currently haven't implemented regional codes yet, so regional information can go in mn-t_note for now if you want). I would recommend you use 潮州音字典, which is better than Mogher in terms of coverage (dialectal differences, characters, Teochew-specific definitions), and it does follow 潮州話拼音方案. Also, thanks for finding that 潮語課堂 website, which has some great stuff. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: I see now. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Just to be clear, is the only romanization difference is "ieu" and "iou", right? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:17, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

That's the only one I've noticed so far. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi again, I'm wondering where you're getting the pronunciations for words like 避孕套 and 英特網. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:17, 30 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: I found a copy of the Lonely Planet China phrasebook, and it has sections on several Chinese dialects, including Teochew. There's an online sample of a couple pages, here https://shop.lonelyplanet.com/products/china-phrasebook-chaozhou-chapter-2. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ah, ok. I found a copy of it. Thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. May I ask, is this used in literary Chinese with a Mandarin reading as well? See zdic for example. ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic: Well, this link apparently says it is used in Mandarin. However, the definitions seem different. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

In addition, both the Cross Straits dictionary and the 16797-entry Buddhist Terms dictionary available through Pleco offer the translation of "to burn incense", so I'll add this sense and leave it for now. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:28, 6 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

What do you think of the changes, that I made here? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

You have previously messaged me about the common problem of treating Tagalog verb roots as normal verbs, but what we can do about verb roots and triggers/focus (i.e. actor, object, benefactive)? I think we should need a separate type of lemma for verb roots, which includes meanings and all possible derivatives (including nouns and adjectives). We are also dealing with verb focus, and I am proposing it to be included in the headword of each verb lemma, through our {{tl-verb}} template (currently taken from {{head}}). I have been improving Wiktionary:About Tagalog, but there hasn't been any development on how we treat the root words many Tagalog dictionaries treat as verbs, so we can take time to discuss those. --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: What I said before was that words like "takbo", "kain", and "lakad" are not verbs per se, but nouns which are used for verbs through affixes. Actually, dictionaries like Leo English and Vicassan's, two of the big Tagalog dictionaries, also treat these words as nouns. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:51, 5 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: "Takbo" and "lakad" can be a noun on its own, but not in the case of "kain", where it can be considered a root, rarely attested as a word itself but can be an imperative form of the form affixed with -in (i.e. kainin). The same goes with many verb roots, including those from Spanish or English verbs (for example, Spanish componer, which gave the Tagalog verb root kumpuni) so we must be marking the rest as roots. I just made changes on the Tagalog headword module to mark Tagalog verb and noun roots. It's a must that we tag Tagalog words that only convey their meaning when affixed as roots. --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 17:58, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Pinging someone on their own talk page is unnecessary- they automatically get a notification whenever their talk page is edited. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:12, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: The word "kain" definitely can be a noun on its own, in many senses, as listed by Leo Santos. First sense is the "act of eating", ex. "Mabagal ang kain niya." or "Masarap ang kain niya". Second sense would be amount of food, ex. "Maraming kanin ang kain niya kanina". Leo Santos lists other senses but I'll leave it at that. "Kumpuni" also can be a noun on its own, in the sense of "repair" or "act of repair". "Maayos ba ang kumpuni sa kotse?" --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:27, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

I just found a copy of the Spanish-era Vocabulario de la lengua tagala (1850 reprint. original from 1650) on Google Books as a reference for many missing Tagalog words, especially archaic ones. I am beginning an import of words from that dictionary, but I cannot do it during weekdays, as I am studying in those days. Can you help? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 15:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I prefer to import words in modern dictionaries first, of which it is not yet complete. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I currently add Tagalog citations from Google Books using the Quiet Quentin gadget, but, are there any other sources other than Google? I see this with Cebuano entries, where online articles from Cebuano-language newspapers like Sun.Star and The Freeman are generally used as citations. There are also a plenty of Tagalog-language news websites which can be used as citations. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 14:38, 24 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, just wondering, where did you get this from? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:14, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: That is from "Kavalan Dictionary" by Paul Jen-kuei Li and Shigeru Tsuchida (Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:51, 2 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! This dictionary seems to distinguish between r and l, but the orthography as prescribed by 原住民族語言書寫 doesn't have this distinction. How do you think we should deal with this? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:54, 2 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: In my judgement, the best option is to have both as entries, but having one as the main entry (perhaps the prescribed one). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I've made ungray the alternative spelling. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:50, 3 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

The Cantonese pronunciation doesn't look right... @Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c, Is this word used in Cantonese? Dokurrat (talk) 15:19, 22 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Dokurrat: Thanks for spotting! I mistyped parts of the pronunciation. Fixed it now! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Dokurrat: I've removed the Cantonese since it's not actually used in Cantonese AFAIK. (Mar vin kaiser, after your fix it was still wrong - seoi2 instead of seoi3, but that's besides the point.) — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:15, 22 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that when you make Chinese entries, you often leave out Cantonese tone changes, like for 油 in 鞋油, which should be jau4-2 instead of jau2. Could you remember to add them in if possible? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:49, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yeah, I'll be more conscious next time! I don't always notice, since I don't speak Cantonese natively. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:52, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: Since you speak Hokkien, when you find that the Cantonese tone is a 2nd tone but the Hokkien tone for the character is not 上聲 (2nd tone in Taiwanese numbering, 3rd tone in Mainland numbering), it might be a case of tone change. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:55, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yes, I noticed that too when I learned Cantonese. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:57, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Not a problem! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:05, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I notice you’ve added quite a few entries under the heading of ‘Aibinomn’, but our categories and module data for that language, as well as Ethnologue and other sources, all spell it ‘Abinomn’ instead (without the first ‘i’). Either our entries or our infrastructure should presumably be changed to be consistent with each other. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 14:40, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Vorziblix: Oh, I'm sorry, I'll change it to "Abinomn". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:41, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Not just "presumably". Our linking templates use the language header as a target on the destination page (i.e. {{l|bsa|abe}} is the same as abe#Abinomn), which won't work if the spelling is different. Not the worst problem, but it's worth the trouble to fix it. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz: It's already fixed. I changed all spellings to "Abinomn". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I figured you would have. My comment was more "fyi" or "for future reference" than nagging. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 16:41, 25 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Do you have any reason for choosing 撓 over 擽 in entries like 畏撓 and 畏撓草? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:26, 13 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: None. I made the entry 畏撓草 first, before thinking of looking whether Taiwanese had its own character for 撓. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:28, 14 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

I see. I think we should use 擽 per Taiwan's MoE recommendation then. Min-Fang-Da seems to be inconsistent about this; it uses 蛲 for the standalone character but 挠 in 畏挠(草). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

How come certain Southern Min entries, like 了去, have two dashes in their transliterations? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:31, 6 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Lo Ximiendo: That indicates the neutral tone in Southern Min romanization. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 16:32, 6 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

If you mean liáu--khì, then how could the pronunciation of the neutral tone be shown? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:46, 6 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Lo Ximiendo: The automatic IPA generation for romanization neutral tones hasn't been made yet. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 16:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Now I understand why the two dashes are in certain entries of Min Nan.

(Also, can you imagine an animated film with Quanzhou Min Nan dialogue, that is similar to Spirited Away by Miyazaki, but has the setting of the German Empire?) --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 17:05, 6 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

By the setting, I meant the appearance of the spirit world.

Anyway, would the second character or the final character of the term 作塗的 have the neutral tone? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:05, 7 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I've noticed you've been adding Min Dong stuff lately. May I know what sources you're using? They seem to have words I cannot find in the resources I use for Min Dong. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:12, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Hi, everything came from Min Dong Wikipedia. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: You might want to be a little careful about it then. BUC isn't as straightforward as POJ. Also, many entries in Min Dong Wikipedia were created by anonymous editors, making it less reliable. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:23, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Some of the articles there though are sourced in 福州方言詞典, by this user Davidzdh. Anyway, I'll be more scrutinizing. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: 福州方言詞典 (1998) and 福州方言词典 (1994/1996) are the main dictionaries I use, but neither of them use BUC. You can also check out 閩英大辭典. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi, could you take a look at Mlgc1998's edits to make sure they're okay? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:00, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Isn't 茶包 supposed to be chhà-pâu in Hakka? --Apisite (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Apisite: I think you're right. The PFS Mar vin kaiser put looks like 斟茶. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:39, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Apisite: Yup, thanks for spotting it, my mistake. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:31, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

What are the Southern Min readings of 大公 and 大公國? Teochew and Hokkien are okay here. --Apisite (talk) 11:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, is the Min Nan reading of 仙鶴, sian-ho̍h, really Taiwanese? Thanks for answering if you do. --Apisite (talk) 15:53, 23 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Should we have a separate alphabets for every Philippine language? Mayon V (talk) 09:13, 24 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed you've started to work on Taishanese. I just have a few notes to make:

• I think you're using Gene Chin's Hoisanva Dictionary. It seems to be okay, but there are some differences from our system. A common one is -i, which is often -ei in our system (but not for instances). I would suggest you check with Xiaoxuetang.
• Tone changes are common in Taishanese and I think you're missing them. Gene Chin notates tone changes to a higher tone with a slash - be careful not to miss it! There's also a lower tone change to tone 4 - this is more tricky to figure out.
• Try to check other sources, like Stephen Li's dictionary. The tones are more clear with his dictionary, but the same problem with -i is there.

— justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 11:30, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: I see, thanks. So how does one resolve the "-i" problem? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 22:27, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: This blog post outlines some general guidelines, but to be sure, check the character at Xiaoxuetang and follow it (for most cases). I also use 台山方音字典, which has the -i/-ei vowel sorted out. (Email me if you can't find it.) — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Justin, just a note, this is exactly the sort of content that we could really use at Wiktionary:About Chinese/Cantonese/Taishanese (which you could then direct people to, once you write it out there). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: I think most of the content is there (at least implicitly). I'm not sure where/how I should be more clear. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: if we want it to be maximally clear, it should be explicit! This -i/-ei business, for example — that link was a good explanation, which I could not have divined from that page. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: Alright, do you think it's clear enough now? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, thanks! I hope that the page is clear enough that you could point someone to it instead of writing out the same tips. (I can't be sure, because I don't even have the requisite knowledge to know what all the pitfalls are!) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I think you're using Mogher for Teochew words. It seems like a good source, but I have some concerns. It's not clear to me now they regulate their entry submissions, which would make it less reliable. It also seems like they often default to listing a Chaozhou pronunciation, but it's unclear whether it's actually Chaozhou (as opposed to other places in the Chaoshan region). For example, searching up the word 夗, they list the Chaozhou pronunciation as in6, when it's actually ug8. I think we need to be a little more careful about adding terms from Mogher (especially into the dialectal modules). Also, please be careful to check the pronunciations from there; the romanization may be slightly different from our system. I don't remember every difference, but one of them is using -ieu instead of -iou. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:01, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Ok, thanks! So they don't differentiate sub-dialects within Teochew, and generalize everything as under Chaozhou, and they also have a slightly different romanization. Just wondering, do you know of any good Teochew sources to recommend? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: I usually use this for individual characters. For the other resources I use, see User:Justinrleung/Dialect Resources/Min#Chao-Shan (潮汕小片). The 地方志 (like 汕頭市誌, 廣東省誌方言誌, 普寧縣誌) used to be on the Guangdong 地方志 website, but they took them down. I can't find them anywhere else. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:15, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Cool compilation! Oh, I just found a good Teochew source online, and it's not in your compilation. It's 新潮汕字典 - 普通话潮州话对照 by 张晓山 published in 2010. It has both characters and words. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:28, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Sorry again for the late reply. Ah, I have this as well. I've included it in my compilation now. It's not exactly a great source for words though. I also have 新編潮州音字典. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘This one seems fairly reliable, and they do give regional differences in pronunciation where they differs from Chaozhou. The main issue is that they are only useful for individual characters, but not for words made up of multiple characters. The dog2 (talk) 03:53, 21 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

I was a bit baffled by your recent edits here. Two issues:

• In general, we're moving to {{synonyms}} rather than using the ====Synonyms==== heading. It's more compact, and lets us be more easily targeted in which sense each synonym belongs to.
• Unclear what you intend by the "Tsunagu" label. Presumably this is a placename? Is this けやぐ a dialect term from that place? The entry at けやぐ is deficient in detail, and doesn't explain this either.

I was tempted to revert, but then I noticed the username, and you're no vandal.  :) (I've been dealing a lot with a couple JA-clueless-and-apparently-compulsive editors.) So instead I'm posting here.

Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 16:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: Hi! Yes, My intention was to create Japanese entries, but of smaller Japanese dialects. In this case, it's of the Tsugaru dialect. Sorry, I mistyped that one. It's supposed to be "Tsugaru", not "Tsunagu", which is spoken in the Aomori Prefecture. I'm not against the more compact way of adding the synonyms. I just don't know how to put the qualifier marker "Tsugaru" into that template. I'm looking forward to having more Japanese dialects represented in Wiktionary. Perhaps it can look something like what the Chinese entries have done, where there is a chart of how to say "friend", for example, in each dialect in the country. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

{{synonyms}} has a |q1= parameter for qualifiers.

(Personally, I prefer ====Synonyms==== due to the freedom.) —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

I see. Thanks for showing me! I already edited the synonyms in 友達. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

You recently added ちんぐ (chingu) to that entry. I think that's Korean -- see 친구 (chin'gu). Is that a commonly accepted term in Nagasaki-ben? Is it at all restricted in usage to the Korean immigrant community? Very curious, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 17:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: Accepted term in Nagasaki. I'm sure of it. You can search for it in jlect.com. Actually, the use of the word ちんぐ is not restricted to Nagasaki, but a characteristic of Hichiku dialect (肥筑方言) spoken in western Kyushu. (edit: by the way I'm not sure how widespread Korean words are in Hichiku dialect, since many subdialects are under it, but definitely used in Nagasaki) The reason for this is that the western part of Kyushu is the nearest to Korea, so there are several Korean words in the Hichiku dialect. By the way, my main interest in Wiktionary isn't Japanese, but it would be a good idea to make standard terms for specific dialects so that the labels for the dialectal Japanese entries would be uniform.--Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC) --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Very interesting, thank you! Agreed re: labeling terminology for Japanese dialects. I am uncertain how best to proceed. Perhaps a thread at WT:BP, pinging JA editors such as Suzukaze-c, Takasugi Shinji, any others active at the moment that escape me? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: I'm actually not sure who else edits Japanese entries, but that's a good idea. There are plenty of resources for Japanese dialects. I can discuss there some issues I noticed with including Japanese dialects. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm just wondering where you got Meixian for this. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Lonely planet China phrasebook. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:46, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I see. The pronunciation in that book is so inaccurate lol... I guess it's okay if we're not relying on it for pronunciation. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:24, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung Speaking of Hakkanese, I made a personal subpage for that. --Apisite (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I would like to ask you to help out with creating these. You seem to have the resources to do so, so it'd be more convenient if you could create these rather than listing all the synonyms out on the entries and copying them over and over. Let me know if you have any questions. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:00, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Just curious what resources you use for this. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:51, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Most of them are listed here. I could fill things in if there's any source that you don't have access to. What I intended with my message is that we should hold the information in modules rather than on the entries themselves. I don't think I've seen you create a module for dialectal synonyms before, so that's why I'm seeing if you know how to do so. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:48, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Ok, I can make dialectal synonyms module. Though I add a lot of synonyms, some entries have only one or two, some have 10 or more, would you say that I make one only if the synonyms already become a long list? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry about length. Just create the table if you know a word in any dialect other than standard Mandarin. The rest of us can go and fill in what we know after you create it. The dog2 (talk) 01:57, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'd agree with The dog2 as a general rule. Of course, a long list would definitely more urgently merit a module. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:44, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

It seems like you're copying the template from older entries (since some of the dialects are missing). The easier way to create the tables is by adding {{zh-dial}} to a page with the appropriate parameter filled in, which would give you a message "The dial-syn page 「...」 does not yet exist. Create the data page and the map!" if the module is missing. Clicking on "Create the data page" will give you an empty template (based on Module:zh/data/dial-syn) and clicking on "the map" will bring you to a new map page.

For Beijing, I've put all my sources in here. They're not that complete, but at least there's something to work with. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, just wondering what source(s) you use for Longyan. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: If I remember correctly, it was one of the 市志, but let me check. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Forgot to reply to this. Yeah, it was the 市志 for Longyan. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Okay, thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:04, 19 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Please be careful when adding dates: [see here] ---> Tooironic (talk) 06:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic: Thanks. If you mean that it ends on 220 CE, but I wrote 220 BCE, but the 206 BCE was in the Wikipedia entry three years ago when I made the edit. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

No worries. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Special:Contributions/49.180.102.30 says that you have been making mistakes, in case you didn't notice. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 22:32, 20 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Suzukaze: Yup, I know, I just realized last night that I haven't been differentiating "aan" and "an". That means I have to return to all my Wu Chinese edits, for every "an" pronunciation and see if it's correct. Thanks though for pointing it out. I find it weird though that the person making the corrections isn't logged in. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Suzukaze: Funny though. I thought I'd make the corrections without anyone noticing. But turns out someone immediately did lol. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's very likely because they were here before but left. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, your edit on the Wu pronunciation of 流星 (liúxīng) seems to be causing an error. RcAlex36 (talk) 13:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

@RcAlex36: Yes, thanks, I wasn't done there. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:05, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I just wanted to let you know about this template if you haven't known about it already. It really helps with formatting and would usually minimize errors, like wrong simplified forms or wrong pronunciations. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

I know you might have some hesitations with using it (e.g. not familiar with the formatting), but it will really help in the long run to learn how it use it. I'm also telling you this because as you might be aware, a lot of headword templates are being changed to {{head|zh|part of speech}}, but it seems like your new entries are still using the templates that are to be deprecated. The {{zh-new}} template has already switched over to the new format, which helps a lot (for myself, at least). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Was that a typo, or does something else need to be fixed? Chuck Entz (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz: Fixed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:45, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi (again), just wondering where you get your info for Shishi from. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Sometimes, I add the word in Shishi because Shishi used to be part of Jinjiang, and was only separated a few decades ago, so some of the people I know come from Shishi, and they speak almost the same way as people from Jinjiang do. Any differences are perhaps noticeable only to experts. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: So are these people from Shishi currently in the Philippines? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:50, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yeah. Recent immigrants. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

I see. So does that mean they got to the Philippines before or after the establishment of Shishi as a city separate from Jinjiang? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hmm...not sure but I have a close friend in his 20's, his family's from Shishi, and they go back for a while every year. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Okay, interesting. That's good enough then, I guess. (I feel like I've been asking a little too much, but I hope it's okay :D) — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Happy Thanksgiving, I have a question: where did you find all the Maguindanao words that you added? --Apisite (talk) 17:26, 19 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Apisite: Hi. I got them from "Vocabulary: Magindanawn-Pilipino-English; Pilipino-English-Magindanawn; English-Pilipino-Magindanawn" published by SIL. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Haven't you received the ping on WT:Etymology scriptorium#‎Various words at Category:Cebuano terms derived from English about the etymologies of various Cebuano loanwords currently suspiciously marked as English despite historical context and pronunciation/spelling clues? I also pinged the admins involved in talk:takilya?--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 05:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Just found this on Conversational Tagalog by Rufino Alejandro a possible standard grouping of Tagalog verb conjugations, which is:

• Group I um- and -um-
• Group II: na-, mag- and mang- (with 3 conjugations, the first mostly basic forms, second mostly of causative and instrumental mood, and the third seldom-used conjugations)
• Group III: mapa- and mapasa- (the book lists pa- and pasa-, but the actual infinitive conjugation has ma-)
• Group IV: [-]in- and ni- (with 2 conjugations, the first including -an, -in, i-, and the second being causative mood/trigger)

This can be useful info to add into verb headwords (we currently handle trigger/voice/focus), but is this fine? Other possible sources? I'm planning also to expand and modify our existing verb appendix. --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 05:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Oh, you wanna know about good sources for Tagalog grammar? "Tagalog Reference Grammar" by Schachter and Otanes is the go-to. Jean-Paul Potet also released a new grammar book. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi Marvin, I just added a "checker" that will help with getting the Hakka romanization right. The module should give you an error when you have something that doesn't look right. The most important rule that you seem to miss a lot is the rule with y- (which is kind of arbitrary, but we'll have to stick with it to be consistent). See Pinfa#Finals for details. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:52, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Thanks! Yeah, I try to get it accurate, but then I become overconfident lol. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Haha, yeah, with the y- cases, it's hard to check otherwise because the IPA output is right. In other cases, I think it's always helpful to double check if the IPA comes out as expected. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Just curious, what are these resources you mentioned in an edit summary on MOD:zh/data/dial-syn/晚飯? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:17, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Various lol. I was trying out this Sixian Hakka program in the Glossika website, where I encountered "夜餐", and when I googled the term, I saw a Hailu source that also uses that word, and also a Meixian Hakka tutorial that uses it (sourced from 客家话200句). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:19, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ah, nice, thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, actually, if you're talking about this, this might be for Sixian Hakka, not Meixian, based on the romanization and some of the terms they use like 恁仔细. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:27, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, it seems to be from this. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yeah, looks right. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:07, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Could you check this IP's edits? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for taking a look. Does the 唵唵 edit look okay to you? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:44, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I think this should be bak5 lan2 dei5* instead of bak5 lan2 di5* because of the diphthongization in Taicheng (which is not present in Stephen Li's Taishanese). In general, we are using the "innovative" diphthongized form of this vowel, so see this for some general rules of this sound change. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Yup, I'm aware of this issue, but the link was quite insightful. I didn't know that the change was recent and still ongoing. In that case, wouldn't it be better to show both pronunciations? Since the link you sent me says that it's a bit variable. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 03:25, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

No, I don't think we should have both pronunciations. It's kind of like we don't have both n/l initials in Cantonese. We are using the innovative form for this vowel in Taishanese because it's used in Deng Jun's dictionary, which is probably one of the better sources on Taishanese. It's also not as easy for people to figure out whether it's [ei] or [i] because it's a split rather than a merger. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Just wondering, why is it that we don't show 懶音? I don't think I've asked this before lol. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

I guess we're trying to only show phonemes. That said, it would be nice to show it in the IPA, but it would have to be implemented later. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, what's the real meaning of "usually course" in this module? Could you help me translate this into Chinese? I've searched a lot and found 硯瓦 maybe made of 瓦, but this is dialect, so the meaning maybe different. EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 15:56, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I think it should be "coarse". — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:07, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Curious where you ran across this, and whether you might have any more detail? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 23:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: Well, there are several resources for the Tsugaru dialect, but this one you can find here: https://kuroishi.or.jp/tsugaruben/tuga_mono.htm. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Mar! (Hoping that's correct as your given name?) I've expanded the entry with what I could find. I'm still baffled where the water sense came from, and the overlap with pickle is quite strange too. Ah, well. That's language for you -- nothing if not irregular.  :) Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 00:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I noticed you left a hidden comment about not finding anything to show that it means lychee. That entry dates back to before I realized how unreliable Wikipedias are as a source for words. I've also learned to not make entries in languages I don't speak unless I know enough to be aware of where I could go wrong and have a good reference, so I haven't created a Tagalog entry in quite some time. I'm just pointing that out in case my name being in the edit history had any part in your deciding not to rfv this. If it didn't, never mind- you know a lot more than I do. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 14:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz: Thanks for clarifying. Nah, I was just reviewing all Tagalog entries, and came across this entry. There's only one dictionary I found that has this word, and it's an old Tagalog word that's defined as a "sweet fruit that is very desirable", which is vague as heck. So I'll continue looking for better sources for this. I'm gonna leave it like that for now. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:55, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser:(I accidentally edited the article) Theres an entry in the dictionary i mentioned earlier about alpay, and also alipay which apparent is its alternative form; The list says its Nephelium glabrum which is a synonym for Nephelium lappaceum... which is rambutan! and also Nephelium longana(synonym of Dimocarpus longan subsp. longan) which is longan... (this definition is under alipay and alupag)... we should also find "alipay", "alupag" or "alpay" in "Flora de Filipinas"(or similar books mentioned in the dictionary) if its there.. my internet is so slow i cant get the book to load. Houflings (talk) 17:22, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

see this name compilation it lists "alupag-amo" and "halupag" [1] Houflings (talk) 17:32, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

See Nephelium glabrum Noronha. : [2]

Nephelium longana Cambess. : [3] Houflings (talk) 17:51, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi Marvin, I have a question about the Chinese synonyms for 車子. Do you know why this term isn't included in Module:zh/data/dial-syn/汽車, and conversely why that synonyms box isn't on the 車子 page? Is there some difference between the two that would make it inappropriate? I ask because I know for sure that 車子 means "car" in Shanghainese, and I believe it's also a generic synonym in Mandarin, so I was surprised by the fact. I'm not sure if there's a more appropriate discussion place for this (if so please let me know), so I figured I'd just ask you since you edited the page before. ChromeGames923 (talk) 08:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@ChromeGames923: Hi, I don't see why it shouldn't be added, if it refers to a motor vehicle. Maybe @Jusintrleung has something to say on this. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

(Marvin, I didn't get the ping because you spelt my username wrong 😅)

@ChromeGames923: 車子 is a more general term that refers to most vehicles on land (including buses, trucks, bikes, wagons, carts, etc.), but I think colloquially, it could often be used for cars specifically. I think it could be added if we know the particular dialects where this might be used to mean "car". — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: I see, so 車子 isn't exactly a synonym because it can be broader, and that's why it's grouped with 車輛 and 車 instead. Although at least in my mind 車子 leans more towards car than 車輛 does, so it makes sense to me as well that it could be a synonym in some dialects, I'll look more into that. ChromeGames923 (talk) 05:43, 3 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey man thanks for the edit You a cebuano? HariSaKapakyasan (talk) 09:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey man can you fix my cebuano contribution on bords and batsi? My formattings shit HariSaKapakyasan (talk) 09:11, 15 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

A) Please don't remove the text from a page when nominating it for speedy deletion. B) We don't even have a Tagalog entry at batang, so I can't judge whether it is SOP. Speedy deletion is for the most blatant cases, and anything else should be RFD'd. Ultimateria (talk) 23:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Ok, I'll do that next time, thanks. To explain, the word "batang" is an "inflected" form of bata. "-ng" attaches when together with an adjective. All Tagalog words (verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, etc.) can have the "-ng" attached if it ends with a vowel, so that's why we don't create a non-lemma entry for inflected words with "-ng". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:07, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Recently, by the way, I also had aming deleted, because the entire entry was just about it being an inflected form of amin. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

As I understand it, "ng" is a particle that goes at the end of anything that modifies something else, somewhat along the same lines as English "'s" or Latin suffixed conjunctions- and anything with those is always deleted. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I'm satisfied with that explanation. Ultimateria (talk) 04:49, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure 五香 is pronounced ngó͘-hiang in Penang? — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 11:20, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Fredrick Campbell: All Penang pronunciations I enter in Wiktionary come from https://www.penang-traveltips.com/dictionary/index.htm. What's in this online dictionary is 五香粉 which is ngó͘-hiang-hún in the website, so I got ngó͘-hiang from there. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:28, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: Within my family, it has been pronounced ngó͘-hiong-hún. My mom from south of the peninsula says gó͘-hiong-hún. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Frederick Campbell: I see, so you're from Penang? If you are, and you're confident that people in Penang say ngó͘-hiong and ngó͘-hiong-hún, please change the Penang part. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:17, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser: Ok. Thanks. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 13:28, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Fredrick Campbell The hiang pronunciation should be kept (at least on 五香粉) because Timothy Tye has that pronunciation. It’s possible that your family has another pronunciation, and both may be used in Penang. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:40, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Noted. Thanks. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 13:43, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I deleted the entry back in 2014 because it was created solely to link to a really awful entry the same IP had just created at あかがみ. That entry consisted of a list of kanji redlinks that the IP was convinced refered to "A red god" and a separate sense for "Red hair; a redhead". This was an idiot who insisted on creating Japanese entries based on anime fansites and Google Translate, and was such a problem for so many years that we had to create an abuse filter to stop editing in Japanese entries by IPs from their internet service provider in England. They even created a "Cantonese" entry with Mandarin pinyin!

At any rate, don't worry about the deletion- it had nothing to do with any aspect of your entry. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:45, 25 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

It might be interesting to work with Tagalog pseudo-Anglicisms as well. So far, what I can consider as such that can found in the KWF Diksiyonaryo is minus one (“recorded music without voice or voice tracks”) and sideline (“part-time job or informal job”). By the way, I already added some of those, e.g. motel (“love hotel”), trip (“something liked”) (synonym of kursonada). Other one I think of be possible pseudo-Anglicisms rather than true Philippine English are bold (“pornographic”),manyak (“pervert”), and slang/islang ("speaking English in a foreign accent"). Any further ideas or examples? --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 19:27, 9 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

1. @TagaSanPedroAko: I'm not sure why you call them "pseudo-Anglicisms", or where you got the term, but they are legit Anglicisms (words that were borrowed from English). Just because the meanings changed doesn't mean it's a fake Anglicism. Also, some of these are Philippine English definitions, like motel and bold, but I do agree in some sense they do qualify as Tagalog words, due to widespread usage. As an example, I already edited raket and bosing, but to be honest, I prefer to concentrate on the huge corpus of Tagalog that isn't yet in Wiktionary. But when I encounter them, and judge them to be within the criteria of inclusion at least in Tagalog, I put them in. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 03:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

See w:Pseudo-Anglicism. Also similar to it are some English-sound ing words you may find in Korean and Japanese, called w:Konglish and w:Wasei-eigo. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:14, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yeah, I get that. But there's a huge difference there too. The problem here is that we speak English in the Philippines, and the definition of a pseudo-Anglicism requires that it not be an English word with the same meaning, but we have these words in Philippine English. In languages like Japanese or Korean, it's quite obvious they're not used in English, and they're legit local Japanese and Korean words derived from English components, but in the Philippines, our local English words derived from the history of English being spoken here, thus are part of Philippine English. So that's why I said we should be very selective on what to include. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 04:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

To me, I would ever doubt things minus one, sideline (in the sense of part-time or informal job) slang (in the sense of having a foreign accent) and bold (in the sense of pornographic) are ever used in straight English material, and I’m more inclined to say these are pseudo-Anglicisms unless proven otherwise. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:21, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Hmmm....well for "minus one" and "sideline", I definitely hear that used in Philippine English. For "bold", less often, but still used. You can find English articles online that use these words. For "slang", I think I agree with you there, in the sense of having a foreign accent, it's not used in English really, so I guess that qualifies more with the definition of a pseudo-Anglicism. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 04:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just to add to the previous examples, you might look also at w:Denglish (German pseudo-Anglicisms, e.g. Handy (“cell phone”) and others in Category:German pseudo-anglicisms) and w:Franglais (French pseudo-Anglicisms, e.g. those in Category:French pseudo-anglicisms). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here's another suspect: bringhouse and haggard (also hagad). We Tagalog speakers don't use these, but they also look like pseudo-anglicisms in Cebuano or Bisaya. Skylab, another name for habalhabal generally used in Mindanao, also looks like one, but we can leave it out, the word having came to being from the modified motorbike's similarity to the eponymous space station. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Another addition to the list: "service". Example sentence is "Parating na yung service ko", which I can roughly translate "Someone would come to fetch me". I can't think of a gloss for it, but I can say it's another possible pseudo-anglicism. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 05:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Again, what about "service", as in "Parating na ang service ko?". I would think it's one. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:09, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Restarting this, I do find a word claimed to be PhE (especially within our wiki community), but in reality most likely to be pseudo-Anglicism or a term only used in Taglish, our common word for what an American would call “sneaker” or a Brit would call “trainer”, “rubber shoe”. User:Austronesier on the talk page of w:Philippine English vocabulary agrees with it being not English due to the lack of attestations in English-language media. This also extends to some other terms claimed to be PhE but is hardly used outside of spoken language or code-switching, and so we should have their English entries removed or moved to Tagalog (or even Cebuano) where they are used. Any thoughts? Cebuano already have some pseudo-Anglicisms such listed under that header, not under English (e.g. bringhouse). The fact we also speak English as a second language doesn't take away the possibility our native languages also has pseudo-Anglicisms. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 01:49, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I find it mostly a Wikimedia phenomenon the words “rubber shoe", "slang" and “bold” (the latter two in their aforementioned senses in question) are treated as legit English used in the Philippines or by Filipinos. Note the use-mention distinction when proving they're English. In the cases of “minus one” and “sideline”, can you provide any example of usage in straight English under the definitions in question (“recorded music without vocals” and “informal job” respectively)? The bar between legit PhE and pseudo-Anglicism should be set higher. I repeat, just because we have English as a second language doesn't remove the possibility of pseudo-Anglicisms in our native languages such as Tagalog or Cebuano/Bisaya. So far, we readily replace them with words native English speakers would readily use and understand when we write or speak in straight English, so any claim the aforementioned words are ever English should be easily discounted, e.g. sneakers for “rubber shoes”, lewd/pornographic for “bold”, side job for “sideline”. —-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 02:17, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko Thank you for bringing me into this very interesting discussion. I have to admit that I largely agree with Mar vin kaiser's arguments here. I also believe there is very little potential for the emergence of pseudo-Anglicisms in the sociolinguistic reality of the Philippines because of the omnipresence of English. My point about "rubber shoes" being hardly attested in English texts is not to say that they are pseudo-Anglicisms in Tagalog or mixed Tagalog/English registers (or dito for all other native Philippine languages), but that it belongs to a register of Philippine English that hardly appears in writing. There are many settings where people speak all-English without code-mixing/switching, and nevertheless you will hear "rubber shoes", "sideline", "minus one", "slang (with the distinct Philippine meaning)" etc. in these settings. Usually, people are aware of these "Philippinisms" and avoid them in writing, and also in rather formal spoken contexts where you need to "prove" your untinged English skills in order to be accepted. I think we need to introduce register distinctions for PhE that include things like "colloquial", "informal" or even "regional".

The comparison with Korea, Japan, France and Germany doesn't work because English still is essentially a foreign language there. People, especially youngsters, tend to integrate English words in their speech ad nauseam, but they rarely hold conversations, job interviews, classroom instructions in English when among themselves. In this context, pseudo-Anglicisms never make into any register of functional spoken English. –Austronesier (talk) 10:15, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko:, @Austronesier: I still think though that we're just not looking hard enough. For example, for "rubber shoes" I can clearly see in the SM Store website, shoes being sold online and labelled as "rubber shoes". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, when I said "hardly" I didn't mean we can't beat the three-attestations threshold. Commercial sites are a very good place to look for at least some of these words. –Austronesier (talk) 10:53, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Austronesier Yes, I see, but my thoughts is they would largely fail CFI if their presence in durably archived media that is required to prove they're ever would be little than mere mentions, given they're kind of stigmatized in formal writing and not readily understandable to native English speakers. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:57, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I think the answer there is usage of informal contexts, like Facebook posts, informal blogs in English, etc. They're more likely to use these local English words. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:00, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Austronesier I can agree with the tagging of registers, since we also got something like regional vocab that appear in formal sources using "straight" English on one end (e.g. artist (for a TV or film actor), inhibit, import (in the context of sports), and person deprived of liberty/PDL (for a convicted prisoner)), and informal terms that tend to only appear in the other end of the spectrum of PhE (usually in code-switching with native languages) such as the terms in question. The formal ones don't face much of the stigma associated with informal terms like the ones I brought up, but will still be not readily understandable to native speakers.

The next problem however is with language of sources. Let's take for example some book that features lines of conversation in Tagalog where the English word in question is sandwiched in it. Should we list the word in question both in English as well as Tagalog? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:30, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: That's why I said above, "we should be very selective on what to include", because Taglish is common in the Philippines. It's a very gray line between what's Tagalog and what's English, a spectrum even. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:39, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

We really need robust attestations of robust usage. If the witness text shows clear code-mixing (especially ad hoc introduction of English words with commonly used native Tagalog equivalents), then we should avoid it. Detecting specifically Philippine English words is probably not really a big problem, both colloquial terms like "minus one" and loans from Tagalog that have made their way into formal English writing (like palay). I think it will be harder to judge whether an English word in a Tagalog text represents an established loanword, or ad-hoc code-mixing. Then there's also the gap between deep and Metropolitan speech. The same English word can be an instance of code-mixing for speakers from deep Tagalog areas, but an established loanword for Metropolitan speakers. So we also have to rely on our editorial judgement to establish the right interpretation of an attestation of a word in a text. –Austronesier (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Austronesier I can second to that, Taglish being mostly an urban Filipino phenomenon, though this somewhat becoming the norm in deep Tagalog-speaking provinces as they're increasingly becoming urbanized. Next issue however is the (somewhat purist) tendency here to use the older abakada alphabet and orthography in spelling Tagalog entry names (except perhaps most proper nouns), but I have no problem creating an entry for some of these PhE colloquialisms, especially the ones that are exactly spelled the same in Tagalog phonetic spelling (e.g. bold), as well as some other English borrowings, focusing on those with already-existing phonetic spellings (e.g. basketbol, disk, kompyuter, kostumer/kustomer, rekord, rekober/rekover). For things like “minus one” and “sideline”, I have no problem creating them under Tagalog, just tag them as unassimilated borrowings, being non-conforming to the generally phonetic spelling of Tagalog, but again, we should take in account how code-switching affects where languages these words can be listed in. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 01:22, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Austronesier To follow my reply, just note that any Tagalog equivalent need not to be based on Austronesian roots, but it can be an already-established loanword, generally spelled in the phonetic orthography. In the case of “sideline”, it also has its “native” equivalent, which is raket (from English “racket”, but respelled and underwent semantic drift). For “bold” (in its Philippines-specific sense of “lewd; pornographic”), there are also some already existing equivalents such as “mahalay” or “malaswa”, but it can be still be listed as Tagalog, but as an informal term, coexisting with two other tending to appear in media where “deeper” Tagalog is expected such as news reports. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 01:32, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I find it problematic that we have a lot of entries, especially in Cebuano, that is falsely claimed to be just "Hispanized" English where from an educated and historical perspective, they're from Spanish. I'm continuing this from the late-2020 WT:ES discussions that has since been archived. I would agree there is a distinction from legit Hispanisms from pseudo-Hispanisms (or "siyokoy"), unfortunately, some Filipinos conflate this, resulting in the misconception many modern Spanish borrowings are just "Hispanized" English (let's say for example, bampira, beterano, demokrasya, distribusyon, pensyon/pensiyon, poste, sindikato, tensiyon), ignoring the fact Spanish survived during American colonialism and remained a major source of borrowings (much like how Dutch remains a source of many Indonesian borrowings even after the Dutch left Indonesia post-WWII), and we have a established rule on recent Spanish loanwords used to translate English terms where there is no native equivalent (i.e. translate the English to Spanish, then borrow the Spanish and respell it). I just managed to fix several Cebuano entries that contain the false claims, most recently pasista and pensyon, and there's still a lot of them (looks like "Carl Francis", now inactive, hasn't learned his lesson at talk:takilya, and I already have the guts to fix all those false etymologies). --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 19:13, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just another thing I found with a lot of Cebuano/Bisaya entries is they don't contain some accent marks, just to provide the pronunciation. Good old Carl Francis didn't bother to add them (and would revert any attempt to provide one), despite what dictionaries do, and this hides how many Cebuano words are pronounced if no IPA is provided. His insistence on not adding accents to the headwords, for me, seems to relate to his claimed etymologies that are plain wrong (e.g. koneksyon, which is pronounced ko-nek-SHON, just as we Tagalog speakers do, and the Spanish derivation is clear). So far, I would consider many of the -syon words as clearly Spanish borrowings from their standard pronunciation; one word that I would agree to be from English is aborsyon, which is so far, pronounced nearly the same as in English as a-BOR-shon (a Spanish borrowing with the same meaning would have been "aborto"). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 08:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just swept through multiple Cebuano entries with false English derivation. I think we should put an end to these false etymologies, especially with words with "-syon". Even the pronunciation itself provides clues they're from Spanish, unless it can be seen as "siyokoy" (e.g. demostrasyon is legit; demonstrasyon is a pseudo-Hispanism, as the Spanish is demostración). Down with the myth recent Hispanisms are just altered English! TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 08:52, 31 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

It has been two months, but can you look into this matter? I just found another false etymology, which is for motor (“motor; engine”). There are still some remaining terms under Category:Cebuano terms derived from English where there's something fishy with the etymology. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yup, Cebuano entries need cleaning up, but I'm concentrating on Tagalog. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:22, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just caught one of the most puzzling false etymologies of obvious Spanish loan: marinero. Good ole Carl claims this and a few others with a similar English is just merely the English plus final o. Thoughts? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Just edit as you see fit, as long as it exists in modern Spanish, then there's no question. I think Carl Francis just doesn't know about the term learned borrowing. He insists that these words were borrowed from English because in the 20th century only a few people spoke Spanish so there was no language contact possible for borrowing. But a learned borrowing is still a borrowing, for example English writers borrowing from Latin, they don't need to speak Latin to borrow from it. Same with Spanish. We borrow from Spanish because it has been traditionally a language we borrow from. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

That's a good point, but learned borrowing technically applies to words borrowed not through normal language contact, usually involving a classical language such as Latin, Ancient Greek or Sanskrit (see {{learned borrowing}}). Spanish and the Philippine languages have been in contact due to colonization and usage by educated Filipinos after the Spaniards left, so borrowings from Spanish, whether it be conscious or unconscious ones, are not learned borrowings in the strict sense.- TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 09:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't claim any knowledge on what can be strictly defined as a learned borrowing or not, but my only point here was that even if the Filipinos in the 20th century didn't speak Spanish as Carl Francis claims, the words were obviously intended to either sound Spanish or to be phonetically the same as the Spanish word, therefore, it's still from Spanish, even if the Filipinos then didn't speak Spanish (but they did though, the educated). In conclusion, speaking the language is not necessary to borrow a word from that language. That's the argument against Carl Francis' claims. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've been noticing back in his active days Carl is equating Spanish with the Spanish of Europe (a.k.a. Castillian or Kastila), so, for him, something borrowed from Spanish should refer to something that existed in European Spanish. But no, Spanish is also spoken and most spoken outside of Spain, in its former colonies, and there's also borrowings from Latin American Spanish varieties, most notably Mexican Spanish. That tendency is obvious is his arguments against a Spanish derivation of telebisyon (TV isn't introduced to Spain until the 50s, but it perhaps already existed in Latin America) TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Opened new thread on WT:ATL talk regarding another case of Spanish-sounding words: English borrowings where some morphemes have been altered for standardization. Look at the examples of several English borrowings in Indonesian which look like being from Dutch or Latin, but is actually a product of adaptation of certain English morphemes (e.g. -ation/-tion being changed to -asi/-si, as in populasi from population; -asi/-si typically being an indicator of Dutch provenance). The proposed addition would give partial credence to good ole Carl's claims of standardization of English borrowings, but that doesn't change the fact in both Tagalog and Cebuano that when an English term has a similar-sounding Spanish equivalent of the same sense, the Spanish is borrowed. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

What do you think about the Kawi script being added to the Unicode blocks? I look forward to that. Couldn't founding the Philippine Kawi Script Foundation (菲律賓卡維文基金會), or Society, be exciting? --Apisite (talk) 10:15, 14 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Have you heard of like "tsing-a" in PH Hokkien, referring to doorbell? like 揤__ (tshi̍h tsing-a). Could it be 鐘仔?--Mlgc1998 (talk) 03:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: Yes, I know "tshi̍h tsing-a", but I've never heard it in isolation. I've never heard someone just say "tsing-a". Usually I say "tshi̍h-tsing". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:24, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: As for the character use, yes 鐘 is correct. It's the same with khà-tsing, when the bell rings at the end of school, that's 敲鐘, khà-cheng. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:27, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: Do you even have an instance of tsing-á meaning "doorbell" said without the word "tshi̍h"? For example, how would you say in Hokkien, "where is the doorbell" or "do they have a doorbell"? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:38, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser I asked people in the groupchat and in my family before I made that entry to get a feel how it's used like that. It's not exactly a "doorbell", but just the "bell" part with (door) just being the frequent implication. That's why I just said in the entry, "bell, such as a doorbell" as an example. It could also be "bell, especially a doorbell" for the PH context at least in PH Hokkien. The people in the gc, at least the millennials and gen Z frequently only recognized it as a "doorbell" because that's what they frequently heard, but the gen X would think sort of the same too but recommended that specifying a "doorbell" exactly as a noun would use 門鐘 as the compound for that. Mlgc1998 (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Oh I just asked my boomer dad now your questions "where is the doorbell" or "do they have a doorbell"? His answer is (without me first telling him about 鐘仔): "鐘仔佇佗落?" and "汝有鐘仔無?" And, he's not talking about clocks here.Mlgc1998 (talk) 22:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Another boomer from our chat recommends 門鈴(mn̂g-lêng) for doorbell and 敲鐘 for school bell. Mlgc1998 (talk) 23:53, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: Interesting. About the boomer dad. I guess that's a good enough attestation. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:59, 28 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Continuing from the discussion on Tagalog pseudo-Anglicisms, which turned into one about PhE vocab, I am thinking about when we can consider a English word (including those within colloquial forms of PhE) in a mostly Tagalog sentence or text a borrowing. Excluding technical terms, we can agree most English function words or basic vocab (which practically mostly have Tagalog equivalents) listed in Diksiyonaryo would fail, but it's still an open question for other recent English terms that you'll often see or hear in Tagalog and has no existing Tagalog equivalent (for all or some senses) or phonetic spelling (even where it's becoming more commonly spelled in their original English form). Recent English borrowings in Tagalog that come to mind and we haven't incorporated yet here, mostly dealing with tech and modern life, are: bag, basket, blog, chat, deliver (“delivery; act of delivering” as in delivering food or things bought online; verb forms: magdeliver, ideliver), fishball, folder, gadget, hotdog, Internet, laptop, mall, modem, online, order (as in ordering food in a restaurant or items online), tablet, tsunami, vlog, and website. We already have a few of these kinds, usually ones where the English spelling matches pronunciation, e.g. post (as in things you put in soc-med) and trip (in the slang sense). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 05:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: To be honest, I'm more inclined to include those only with Tagalized spellings, for example, in a news article this sentence can be found, “Hindi nagdeliber ang kanilang kumpanya ng damaged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) supplies sa gobyerno.” Notice "nagdeliber" spelled this way. For words like "mall" for example, I've got to admit that for all intents and purposes, "mall" is technically already a Tagalog word, used by people from the poorest communities to the richest, but then again, I'm reluctant to add it due to its non-Tagalog spelling, but if it's a Tagalog word, then there should be a Tagalog entry for it. No one spells it like "mol", so it would be a useless, artificial spelling. Perhaps you could create a category for all Tagalog entries that are not spelled phonetically in its main entry (except Proper nouns of course). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:55, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

We have a template for such cases: {{unadapted borrowing}}. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 03:11, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Interesting....that seems a good fit. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 03:16, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

My thoughts on the spelling on deliver is to use the V spelling per present usage. I find that spelling more commonly used than the one spelled the old Abakada way, deliber, plus V spellings are permitted in the 2014 orthography, especially recent borrowings (the same can also be said of the letters F and J). This somewhat contrasts with the case of rekober (from English recover); KWF recommends rekover, but practically no one seems to use it.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk)

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yeah, as I said before, I don't really agree with the orthography created by KWF under Almario, but that's me. If it were me, I'd choose the adapted spelling version (unless impractical) since it's more convenient and practical with affixes, like "idineliber" compared to "idin-eliver?", or "madidisaynan" compared to "madi-desisgn-an?"/"madi-designan?". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I still stand for using "deliver" as the main entry, reflecting current usage and not just as a KWF recommendation. For me, we should move from that strong inclination to prefer Abakada spellings on entries excluding proper nouns or the occasional genericized trademark. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 20:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Ok, I understand. But for you how would we affix "deliver"? For "madeliberan", would it be "ma-deliver-an" or "ma-deliveran"? Or for "dineliber", would it be "d-in-eliver" or just "dineliver"? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

From a superficial search in the web, I can see that people usually do not separate infixes, suffixes and the reduplicated syllable with a hyphen, and keep the English spelling, as in dedesignan or dineliveran. I have also tried nag(-)deliber and nag(-)deliver in Google News; the hyphenated spellings are more common than the non-hyphenated ones, and deliver is on par with deliber when hyphenated (each 164 hits), but more common in the non-hyphenated attestations (nag-deliver: 39; nag-deliber: 6). –Austronesier (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Austronesier: Yes, people in general write whatever they want, but KWF, the supposed language authority, does prescribe a certain spelling, which people in general don't actually follow except for books that KWF publishes. My criticism of the KWF orthography basically is that even if it says that it will fully adopt the original English spelling of English loanwords, it hasn't fully accounted for how these loanwords have been affixed in Tagalog, and how they might be spelled. Usually they just say "add a dash in front of prefixes", but I've never heard them address the issue of infixes and suffixes, and it does look really awkward to attach infixes and suffixes into original English spellings of English loanwords, with or without a dash. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

In terms of the spelling of the affixed form of "deliver", I see no problem as the spelling is readily phonetic, but for the case of "design" (in original spelling rather than "desayn"), that where it becomes awkward. With “mag-" or "pag-" is all fine, but with "-in-" (e.g. "idinesign"), it doesn't go well. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

In those cases where KWF provides concrete examples of how to spell a word (including prefixed, infixed, suffixed and reduplicated forms), we can follow KWF. But if for a given English-derived loanword these KWF rules only apply in theory, but are not explicitly documented for this specific root, the KWF-style spellings are unattested as long nobody uses them. i-d-in-isayn and i-dinisayn are unattested in Google, phonetic idinisayn occurs once, hyphenated i-dinesign gets a small handful of results. The rest is all idinesign. –Austronesier (talk) 10:51, 19 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just added a bunch of these loanwords (van, video, virus, and even COVID-19). Well, back on topic, being a native Tagalog speaker, I can say there's a tendency to write most English loanwords in Tagalog text without respelling them to conform with the phonetic orthography, including the affixed forms. Basically, modern Tagalog seems to be more welcoming of unassimilated English loanwords, whether that be just English words or constructions that can be translated being inserted into a Tagalog sentence ("Taglish") or full-fledged loanwords (such as those I listed, plus things like "mall") that have become part of the standard Tagalog (Filipino) corpus. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:28, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yeah, I saw your new additions. As I said, my problem is that KWF gives no recommendation as to how to put infixes into these unassimilated loanwords. For "video", do we write it as "vinivideo"? Or "v-iniv-ideo"? Remember that the KWF recommendation for unassimilated loanwords is to always add a "dash" whenever adding an affix, and that sorta ruins the entire word if the affix is an infix or a suffix. This difficulty aside though, I think you should put all these entries under "Unadapted borrowing". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:33, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

That's what I've been doing. Also doing the same with some Cebuano (e.g. mall, that already being listed there just before we did). That said, there are some English loanwords that are already phonetic in spelling in its unassimilated form (e.g. bar, bartender, deliver, folder, order), that can be handled as ordinary borrowings. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Continuing, I added this one: billboard. KWF recommends "bilbord", but the predominant spelling, even for older sources, follow the unassimilated spelling. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 12:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: By the way, it seems to me like you're switching back and forth on the guideline you're following. At first, I understood that you want that we follow what the KWF prescribes, and now you want to use the predominant spelling? In that case, we have to revert back to "aksyon" and the more predominant spellings, against what KWF is prescribing. In other words, we have to stick to one or the other, or basically have an agreed-upon guideline to follow. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

We can resort to use aksiyon as lemma (most other dictionaries save for KWF Diksiyonaryo observe that), but yes, there's still lots of uses of aksyon, generally it's easier to write. Such spelling is officially superseded by KWF, but we can stay with aksiyon as long it's attested. Let's face it, Tagalog spelling is kind of messy, but we should try to follow some standard in terms of spelling for entries. Otherwise, it's based on judgment or common sense. English loanwords are one kind of worst offender in Tagalog spelling. A lot of these have attested phonetic spellings (e.g. nars, which I can find on the lyrics of "Walang Natira" by Gloc9), but now, I see unassimilated nurse more often even in news. But we'll try to stick with Tagalized spelling when it exists. The KWF 2014 orthography is not an unbreakable guideline, but we should try to follow their standards for most words. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:00, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: For me, these are my thoughts, or what I feel is correct. For words that are not English loanwords, I'd follow the recommended KWF spelling as the main entry, unless the situation is talking about variant forms (each spelling having a different pronunciation in the real world), in that case, I'd use common sense, which one's more useful for users. For English loanwords (if we're sure they're already borrowed into Tagalog), if the assimilated spelling exists in older dictionaries, I'd use that as the main entry. If it doesn't, my opinion is (you can disagree with me on this) that if an assimilated spelling exists out there in the real world, whether in published material or in social media, I'd use that as the main entry simply because it's open to affixation. If not, then it would be an unadapated borrowing. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:14, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agree with that. I can revise the section on spelling on WT:ATL to reflect this. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: By the way, in that case, "virus" and "video" would be "bayrus" and "bidyo", they can be found in published sources. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:34, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

For bayrus and bidyo, these can be treated as variants. But I'll be more inclined to use the unassimilated spelling per current usage we'll try to reflect. Another thing that comes to mind is kompyuter for computer; it exists, but appears to have become dated, and KWF doesn't list it. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: As I said, as for me, I'm more inclined to the opinion that if the assimilated spelling (bayrus and bidyo) exists out there in the real world, I think it should be the main entry, simply because it's open to affixation. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:42, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I see cases of the affixed form mabidyuhan back then, but I'll stick to video for the word itself (plus mavideohan seems to be current usage). For virus, use the unassimilated spelling. English loanwords are a pain; there's no consistent spelling, or they're increasingly being spelled in original when they used to be spelled phonetically (as in the case of nars I just mentioned). Practicality, or prevailing colonial mentality among us Filipinos? We can't force all entering English loanwords to be respelled for various reasons (unless we'll going to adopt Baybayin and abandon Latin script for Tagalog), but we should strive for standardization.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:56, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Actually, if you look at ABS-CBN news articles in Tagalog, and videos in Tagalog, ABS-CBN seems pretty consistent with using "bidyo" instead of "video". Aside from that, they also had a news segment called "Bidyo ng Kamatayan". To be honest, this really is a tricky question, and there are arguments in favor of using the English spelling, and the main reason why I would side with the Tagalog spelling is due to affixation. To your point though, I'm not saying we "respell" all the English loanwords. I'm saying that, if the respelled form exists out there, I think that should be the main entry. I think both should exist (the other one existing is an alternative spelling), because both do exist. As an example, the word "bidyoke", that spelling is pretty common, though technically "videoke" is also pretty common, because of the English origin. But for me, I'd put the main entry under "bidyoke". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I can second to it, but I can't wrap my head around it, especially we're all exposed to Taglish, from the streets to the news. Personally, I practically see only "video" on news headlines. So is "nurse" instead of "nars". Very lamentable. So is wholesale borrowing of English phrases and constructions. In the time of COVID, why don't use "protokol pangkalusugan" for "health protocol", "kuwarantin/kuwarantena" for "quarantine"? There comes the question of practicality or hidden colonial mentality on language use. We're taught standard Filipino in school, but we can't apply outside of the school system. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 14:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yeah, I get that, but then again we're also here to describe what is actually used and written, including even those prescribed, everything that is useful for people. That's a good point though, that if the English spelling is more common, maybe that should be the main entry, but the counter-argument to that is that there's so much Taglish out there that it's a gray area of whether it's Taglish or really the English spelling used in Tagalog. Maybe we can get a third-party opinion here, editors who don't speak Tagalog, I think they may have useful opinions on this. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:26, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Adding to above, I can't help looking into the example of Indonesian. It does have a lot of loanwords, mostly from Dutch and most recently, English, but had good job on standardizing the way they're spelled upon entering the language, keeping letters representing "foreign" sounds rather than forcing them to be changed to match "native" phonology, and attempting to translate most others (coinage or calque) rather than borrow. That's in stark contrast to our Tagalog/Filipino. We're too exposed to English usages, and again, we can't stop inserting English constructions into our sentences. Again, like those things related to COVID. We use "pandemya" to refer to the pandemic, but we use English for the rest of things (either as Taglish or legit borrowing), or switch between "straight" Tagalog and Taglish (e.g. "kaso ng COVID"<->"COVID case"). We do translate some other English terms by way of Spanish in our mind, borrowing the result and writing it the Tagalog way, but we sometimes make mistakes that create "siyokoy"; some would claim we just "Tagalized" the English. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 14:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just edited the section on spelling for WT:ATL, adding considerations for English loanwords following this discussion. What I can agree on is to prefer to use phonetic spelling as lemma, but it's otherwise based on individual judgment (especially recent loans). I agree there's a too thin line between legit borrowing and Tagalog-English code-switching, but we should let more recent English borrowings that are been part of the Tagalog corpus.

Sorry for my tl;dr politicking regarding Taglish here and on my previous posts, but I'm leaning toward language nationalism on dealing with it (i.e. continue borrowing from English, but prefer translate, calque or borrowing similar Spanish equivalent when possible). But again, we're writing a descriptive work, and we need to work with the present status quo on Tagalog, specifically English loans: Taglish in ordinary speech and increasingly mass media (I expect the latter should attempt to use the standard), the current tendency to keep English borrowings in original form when it's possible to respell and its reverse of using original English spelling when attested phonetic equivalent is available (e.g. nars vs. nurse), and the position of English as primary language of gov't and most other fields. Just read the online copy of Pagpaplanong Wika at Filipino, as well as the 1998 Journal on Multilingual and Multicultural Development paper on languages of the Philippines, and those are enlightening. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Not sure why would have to "check" English unadapted borrowings in Tagalog. "Mall", "van" or even "COVID-19" should be fine (again, we should no longer require this kind of loans to be entered as Tagalog under an Abakada spelling, especially when a respelling would only create problem). "Virus" should be fine; "video" is the big question, because yes, it does appears as "bidyo" in affixed forms (any notes on most current usage)? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I might like to say there's going to be no definitive solution on handling of Tagalog loans from English. First, there's the Taglish problem, and the current trend to keep most English borrowings (both old and new) in original spelling. For a third-party opinion on this, maybe ping in editors who speak Indian languages (Hindi/Urdu, Marathi, Bengali, Tamil)? They do also have these code-switching thing as well (e.g. Hindi-English), and can provide insight on how English borrowings are to be handled, but the problem is they are mostly written in non-Latin script. Tagalog is primarily written in Latin, while Indian languages are mostly written in alphasyllabic scripts; loanwords from English are usually transcribed into those. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that you added other 5 readings in 於. But I cannot find the reading îr in the dictionaries I have. Can you give me the references? --TongcyDai (talk) 19:53, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TongCyDai: The source is 闽南方言大词典. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! --TongcyDai (talk) 13:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've been mapping out in a table the initial consonants used in Ph Hokkien, while comparing them to the initial consonants mapped for other Hokkien dialects, and I'm not sure if I can find much examples where we say /t͡ɕi/, /tɕʰi/, /ɕi/ instead of /t͡si/, /t͡sʰi/, /si/. Whenever there's Chinese terms listed with a (Hokkien: Philippines) listed in the Pronunciation table, the "IPA (Philippines):" always displays /t͡ɕi/, /tɕʰi/, /ɕi/ for terms spelled "chi", "chhi", "si" in POJ, but this doesn't always seem accurate when reading the IPA for Philippine Hokkien. I believe I remember reading somewhere in this Philippine Hokkien Instagram page about this too, where they mentioned that we don't seem to usually use /ɕ/ for those before /i/, but it seems they probably read that here in Wiktionary (basing on the info they talk about) that the "IPA (Philippines):" showed that, so felt obligated to show or comment about it. Anyways, shouldn't the "IPA (Philippines):" display /t͡si/, /t͡sʰi/, /si/ instead? --Mlgc1998 (talk) 20:34, 26 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

{@Mlgc1998: I pronounce /t͡ɕi/, /tɕʰi/, and /ɕi/. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

1. @Mar vin kaiser As in like 生(siⁿ) is /ɕĩ/, as in the /ɕ/ here: IPA Chart that's kinda close to like the English "sh"? For the /t͡ɕi/ & /tɕʰi/ when I first saw it here long ago, I thought, maybe sure, it might be like that or someone here is like that, but when I plug them in IPA readers and charts to test out the different terms I find, there's always a stretch to think about it, like sometimes, I imagine some terms it's plausible some people might say it either or both like /t͡si/, /t͡sʰi/, /si/ and /t͡ɕi/, /tɕʰi/, but it's always a stretch to consider for other terms. I mean afaik I almost never hear it as /t͡ɕi/, /tɕʰi/, /ɕi/ and the Hokkien speakers I've always met always try to correct themselves for it to be /t͡si/, /t͡sʰi/, /si/, where if I heard someone say /t͡ɕi/, /tɕʰi/, /ɕi/, it will seem like someone with a strong pronunciation. Mlgc1998 (talk) 04:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: Go to moedict.tw, type "生", click audio. That's /ɕĩ/. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:18, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: Oh sorry, moedict.tw only gives the audio for the "senn" recording. You can hear 時 audio for /ɕĩ/. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:47, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser it's kinda close here: 時 - 臺語萌典 (moedict.tw), but for here: 時 - 鬥拍字 (ithuan.tw), you can clearly hear the sound is half way from [s] to [sh] /ʃ/, which for speakers, at least the ones around me, aren't like that. Even for Mandarin Pinyin, the [j] /t͡ɕ/, [q] /t͡ɕʰ/, [x] /ɕ/, is somewhat understood by many like it were almost the same as [z] /t͡s/, [c] /t͡sʰ/, [s] /s/, until someone tries to correct them on that. Similarly in Hokkien, the frequent implication understanding for many with [ch/ts], [chh/tsh], [s] is that, shouldn't it be consistent with the sound, regardless of the next vowel, rather than with the idea here that it's going to have /ɕ/ when it's before [i]. I mean if Philippine Hokkien has Philippine perceptions, this is a current Philippine perception that people display in their speech, regardless if it was not originally meant to be like that. If originally, the pronunciation and perception about it was not like that, then it just shows its origins. Mlgc1998 (talk) 15:43, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mlgc1998: To be honest, I'm doubtful as to how you hear the sounds, but I do agree with you that perhaps among younger Filipino-Chinese, there is a tendency to not pronounce /ɕ/. To be honest, my pronunciation varies from /ɕ/ and /s/, or sometimes in the middle, the difference of which is the placement of the tip of the tongue. Anyway, this begs the question of "which pronunciation should be represented here", and I would say the people that speak it the best, aka the older people still living here, and I would say they pronounce /ɕ/. Similar to how Cantonese pronunciation in Wiktionary doesn't track the supposed "lazy sounds" (you can read more about it in Proper Cantonese Pronunciation). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:42, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser When I saw that IPA before, I was wondering if that was the sort of thing you heard, so I thought sure, I'll trust you on that, but over time, whenever I keep hearing some recording overseas representing that /ɕ/ sound and when that Philippine Hokkien IG page mentioned it before (which I suspect is kamkamkamuti's page), it bugged me too that at the very least afaik that's also not how my parents or grandparents say it, or maybe some specific terms it somewhat varies somewhere in between /ɕ/ and /s/ where [s] is the implicit ideal they're always going after, I mean it's usually them speaking Hokkien daily to us and my parents are basically equivalent to 2nd gen and the remaining living grandma I have is also 2nd gen since they either grew up or were born somewhere here in ph then their later decades of their adult life was here in metro manila for most of their lives and learned their Hokkien only from their own parents and probably around Binondo or the elderlies in church or those elderlies in the quanzhou jinjiang association dinner events. My siblings around ur age also grew up there before being preteens, so at the very least I often compare the supposed native Hokkien you put up from yours to my atsi who also claims to have it as her first native language, besides my parents and grandparents.

I wouldn't know myself if it would be any different in the schools and churches you've been. The only people I know from your school before never used hokkien with me, besides tagalog, english, and bits of mandarin, tho they look like the type to have families that would be no different to my classmates at my school before, so I assumed, it would be exactly the same if say, I imagine my atsi or mom to speak hokkien. Anyways, this phenomena sounds like something that needs to be a result of a big research with actual amounts of multiple recordings from different families to definitively confirm. The only sound I know from hokkien that's close to like [sh] is from English and Tagalog renderings of hokkien loanwords like Shoti/Siyoti, Shobe/Siyobe, Siomai/Siyomay, Siopao/Siyopaw, but when speaking Hokkien, tbh at least in my family if there's some sort of spectrum, we always have this implicit idea to heavily lean on or at least my parents try to correct themselves to lean more on [s] when it's before [i] or any vowel, and afaik, my siblings just follow them. The thinking only goes that it's ok to make it like [sh] either accidentally from a strong accent or cuz we're knowingly using the English/Tagalog term, like 貨色 is really he-siak for us, not he-shak, 俗 is really siok for us, not shok. we only say 小妹 as Shobe if we're knowingly using the ph english term that's popular with many younger generations in other filchi families, but when my guama and mom says it, is the sio-be with [s] pronunciation, like if we heard it leaning to [sh], the implicit idea tends to usually be, like hmmm slightly stronger accent but ok then, but then the one we treat as the supposed best authentic hokkien is the one closest to [s] for the sake of the idea that it's gonna be [s] regardless of the next vowel to be consistent. Those youtube videos some gen X filchi parents like mish and tomdavid made sometimes seem like they're sorta saying those [si-] like [sh-], but if I asked my grandparents and parents on those differences tho, they'd likely be confused and see little difference on which one should be and just think it's all the same, but then they'll continue how they always say it like, then if I asked my atsi what she thought of that, she'd perceive it like in her words "番仔腔(huan-á-khiuⁿ)" and tell me not to be like that in an effort to imitate our parents and grandparents, and few years ago, she was the one who confidently told me her first language is supposed to be "chinese", of course referring to hokkien cuz she knows little mandarin these days. These past months after telling her about other families not agreeing to these perspectives tho or supposedly exhibiting something else and letting her hear other hokkien dialects overseas, she gets weirded out and become unsure of herself tho, but before that, she'd call such instances that isn't like our family as either "野腔(iá khiuⁿ)" (if it's an elder to boomer person with an unfamiliar accent) or "番仔腔(huan-á-khiuⁿ)" (if it's a gen X to Z person, usually assumed to be improperly speaking, from her perspective at least), and this is a perspective she likely got from imitating my ama and guama, cuz she grew up in binondo as a kid before very close to my ama, as in sleeping in the same bed and room as her as a kid with my ama who's a monolingual hokkien speaker (like you cannot speak tagalog or english to her unless u want to confuse her) originally from 水頭，南安, which is just over a river next to 晉江, and of course, stuff we hear from our guama who was born in northern samar but had parents and later grew up as a kid in 晉江 around the mid 20th century, but later then moved back here in metro manila again in her young adult years to old age. I knew these because I was a baby or toddler in another room watching them lol or always at a distance from them. The only reason I myself didn't get the native sense of it as opposed to my siblings was because I didn't actively attempt to regularly speak it myself cuz I didn't need to or was pressured like them to need to, but I've heard enough of it almost daily to know what I heard all the time, so whatever hearing perception I have is a reflection of their understanding they likewise passed on as well.

Anyways, we have a big enough country with a scattered enough community with a long enough history, even if we have common enough origins, I'm sure future research on this will increasingly shed light what's going on in the phonology or at least the direction it's taking or facing if it's a widespread enough of an implicit thinking. At least, this is another phenomena to list as future potential research. I'm thinking research on this ideally would have many recordings from many families to be the sort of things that can shed light on that, otherwise research papers like those from that 2017 paper from Taiwan written in mandarin may have findings on the phonology and tones, then there's maybe those youtube videos and others available online like this, tho for that video (idk if it's the voice masking effect), she does say some parts that seem off from how my family would say it besides some bits. The parts that seem like she might do /ɕ/ are the ones we'd find off and probably describe as "野腔(iá khiuⁿ)", tho in this respect, if hers is Ph Hokkien too, and yours and ours is Ph Hokkien too, then another slightly different one is too, then I wouldn't be confident that the elderlies of each person's family would be any exactly the same, and it would be kinda limiting to say that there's only one sort of Philippine Hokkien if it varies like this, but it doesn't seem to be something that can be pinpointed separately by place, since families could differ and be similar in different places, so who "the people that speak it the best" for this unstandardized scattered dialect is often very subjective. The only thing we're always sure of at least is the general commonalities our speech has brought about by our most common origins. I guess maybe in the future the most common features would be the best to represent it, especially exhibiting a current living widespread dialect of Hokkien in the Philippines. I'm not sure if it's specifically a good idea to specifically only get from elderlies (idk whose elderlies around here in ph, idk if need citizenship or progeny with citizenship or at least decades of living in ph for it to be authentic), since who is "speaking the best" at least characteristically "Philippine Hokkien" is a very subjective matter, but at least, the most common speakers throughout the country would be a good start to represent such a dialect called "Philippine Hokkien", who naturally would probably skew towards mostly elderly and baby boomer speakers anyways, since of course these days, they're the ones who speak it the most, and is what the community usually unanimously considers or confidently claims as 咱人話, so naturally, the most common would often decide it. Especially in some cases, some speakers speaking Hokkien wouldn't necessarily be speaking characteristically the "best" sort of "Philppine Hokkien" cuz for all you know, this specific elderly or baby boomer sort of person is still just speaking a carbon copy of the stereotypical "best" from some hometown in southern Fujian that's uncommon among many other families in the community. If a particular speech pattern is not common enough, regardless if we think it should be the proper one, it would not describe "Philippine Hokkien" as it currently lives and breathes. It would just be an idealized prescriptive version. For cases like that, that's more of something people can freely decide to offer to teach others themselves, but not so much suggestively report that this is the current "Philippine Hokkien". Idk if in the future the variance would make it come down to filchi associations or schools that would gather that sort of information about their community to decide something like this because of it varying like that. I mean none of us in which part of the country would want someone but our own to decide that, especially if our own families were excluded from such considerations. If that happened, any such result would alienate those not included and what is publicly shown would have no value for those excluded. If it doesn't cover enough people in the community, the point of it being publicly shown like this loses meaning.

So yeah, "people that speak it the best" , which "older people still living here", who "pronounces /ɕ/", which is "supposed "lazy sounds"", and if that even matters that it is or not some sort of lazy tendency, are all going to be subjective. In the end, some sort of research survey will be needed to ideally show what really is the current commonly occurring "Philippine Hokkien", even if it's not in the form we ideally expect or would try to make it to be. Mlgc1998 (talk) 19:59, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Discussion moved to Talk:Marites.

Any reason why to "check" some recent Tagalog slang terms, especially those not following conventional spelling e.g. fam, bes? These are far in regular usage especially in popular media (movies, TV, radio), and should be fine. Just haven't heard of these? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I don't get what you're trying to say. Tagalog slang can be entered as long as it satisfies the entry criteria. That's why I'm partly skeptical in having the slang definition in hatdog. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm talking about the "words to check" in your to-do list, especially those that don't conform with the phonetic spelling. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: All the words I list there has some aspect with which I feel like needs checking. I put words there on a gut feel basis, if I feel like there's something more to be edited there. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I see now. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Any idea about "service" as used in "Parating na yung service ko?" I find this kind of usage to be never used in proper English and consider this somewhat pseudo-English. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you look into this? Its usage very of intriguing, so is those I previously brought up (e.g. "sideline"). I don't think we ever have a colloquial or basilect form of PhE, let alone a pidgin. We've been long refashioning some English terms within Tagalog context but why say things like "service" in its unusual usage (so is "sideline" in sense of informal job) is still English when it's almost never used outside a Tagalog sentence? When we'll take on "straight" English, we'll usually readily replace those (with exceptions) with terms readily understandable to native speakers. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: First of all, you have to understand that regardless of language, the word "service" used to mean like a "shuttle service" or "pickup" is an informal usage, in of itself. So don't expect to see it in formal text. Secondly, yes it is used in informal Philippine English. I can definitely imagine it in the corporate sector in the Philippines where people who aren't "Inglesero" are forced to speak English in a corporate setting, and the word "service" would be used in this case, so an example of Philippine English. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Good answer. I'm in the train of thought we usually don't speak straight English in informal situation unless you want to show off status or someone want to test your English skills. The presence of reappropriated English like "service" or "sideline" in informal Tagalog still intrigues me, but yes, someone not very good in English or isn't "Inglesero/a" might readily use such terms when they'll be forced to speak English, as in dealing with native speakers or speaking in corporate setting. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

hi, did you see this: https://kwfdiksiyonaryo.ph/ — Houflings (talk) 07:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Houflings: Yes, they opened this site I think two months ago, and it's a digital copy of the dictionary printed in the 80's I think. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have been archiving this for at least a month now. You can see its past Word of the day and fact of the day. --Likhasik (talk) 06:38, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Mar vin kaiser:. I want to know where do you get the meanings and synonyms of various Tagalog and Cebuano words? As well as other languages you have entered like Brooke's Point Palawano ang Limos Kalinga and Bahasa Tausug and etc. I am fascinated by your work and I hope I can help you and other Filipino WIktioners(?) in improving this site. Thank you sir --Likhasik (talk) 06:36, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Likhasik: A lot of it are available online, online dictionaries for various Philippine languages, or other online sources. Before, I could go to libraries for published resources, but now I use published dictionaries I have, like for Tagalog. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:05, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you please enumerate the names and titles of each? Thank you --Likhasik (talk) 07:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Likhasik: For Tagalog, it's mainly Leo English's Tagalog-English Dictionary, Panganiban's Pilipino-English Dictionary, Vicassan's Pilipino-English Dictionary, also sometimes using UP Diksiyonaryong Filipino, or the online Diksiyonaryo.ph, but also using the old dictionaries like Vocabulario de la lengua tagala and other old sources for obsolete senses and attestation. There are more supplementary resources but those are for specific topics not usually found in dictionaries, like the Tagalog Slang Dictionary. For other languages, you can Google name of language and the word "dictionary" and you can find them. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:45, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do you also use Gabby's Dictionary? And Tagaloglang.com? I'd say these are the top best resources in the Internet for TL dictionary. Have you used them before?

Another question. What are also the dictionaries you use for other languages other than Tagalog? I have seen you entries for Dabaweno, Palawano, Kalinga, Cebuano, Aklanon and etc. which is not common on the Internet. Where do you get their entries?

Again, thank you for answering. I just want to learn and soon expand more entries here. Likhasik (talk) 11:34, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sometimes I use Tagaloglang to see their take on colloquial terms. Gabby's no I don't use that. For the other Philippine languages, as I said, Google it, it will come up. A lot are from the SIL website. Free resources. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do you have any way to verify these? I've opened discussions at WT:RFVCJK#食啉𨑨 and WT:RFVCJK#食跋𨑨. Thanks. AjaxSmack (talk) 02:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

(Regarding diff:) For pings to work in edit summaries, you have to write [[User:AceKiddo00]] with square brackets; the @ is not necessary. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 14:23, 14 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Sorry to message you here for something not on Wiktionary, but some of us are trying to write an article on Overseas Chinese cuisine on Wikivoyage, and I wonder if you would be able to help to write the section on Filipino-Chinese food, since you're a Filipino-Chinese and I'm not familiar with it. What would certainly be helpful is if there could be a description on the unique Filipino twists to Filipino-Chinese food that makes it distinct from the Chinese food in China. The dog2 (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: I'm not an expert but I can add what's available here. There's sort of a gray line also with what can be considered as local Chinese food, as there are also some Filipino dishes that are inspired from Chinese food, made from noodles, tofu, etc. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sure. All those will be good to mention. And you don't have to be an expert. It's aimed at travellers, so it's more about what kind of Chinese food a visitor can expect in the Philippines, and how it's different from the versions in China. Like maybe some local Filipino ingredients and flavours that have been incorporated into Filipino-Chinese food. The dog2 (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello and good day! I would like to consult you about this edit in the article/word salig https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=salig&type=revision&diff=65817730&oldid=64151877

What is your source? I was actually surprised it is now added but since then, it has no mention in most cases. What is your reference to get the meaning of salig and its synonyms? Thank you and happy Easter! :) --Likhasik (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Likhasik: It's the same sources I told you about in your last question. Happy Easter! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)--Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Good day sir. I just want to ask what is the source for "multo"? Are there any specific books that can attest to this? Not only this but others as well. If you do have an online copy of it, please share it with me. I am thirsty for knowledge. Thank you and sorry again for the disturbance. --Likhasik (talk) 19:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

for talisuyo and alituntunin, would we add entries for these fossilized affixes? See also Appendix:Tagalog *kali/qali words

Words that start with

ali- ala- alu- hali- hala- halu Houflings (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Houflings: I'm not really sure. There's reasons for and against. For example, fossilized elements in English words don't necessarily have an entry of its own, because those elements aren't "a lemma" in the English language. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Good day @Mar vin kaiser. Concerning your recent addition of putukan, are those really 'dialectical' conjugations? I assume you have at least a source to back those up. Or are those automatic computer-generated entries? This also applies to pretty much every entries with dialectical inferences. Just clearing up some information--Likhasik (talk) 13:43, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Likhasik: They're template-generated. I didn't make them. Though I'm pretty sure of the imperative form, which is still used in Batangas and Marinduque. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

>still used in Batangas and Marinduque

Okay I will be needing a source for this... Are you living in those places by the way? Thanks for the swift answer. I appreciate it --Likhasik (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

There are sources online for Marinduque Tagalog and Batangas Tagalog, but there are Facebook groups also of young speakers promoting their dialect, and they still use the Tagalog imperative. You can ask them straight too. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Likhasik: This is a nice source for Marinduque Tagalog (see pp. 70-78 for the basic conjugation pattern, including the Bikol/Bisaya-like a-prefix where Manila Tagalog and other northern Tagalog varieties have reduplication). –Austronesier (talk) 19:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Austronesier Thanks for the source. I might be adding this in the future in the reference for the template just in case someone like me tries to investigate this. May I also note that this source has only been saved once (by me), can you also please send me more sources which I can also save in Wayback machine just in case some might be taken down.

@Mar vin kaiser I will look forward on those FB groups and inquire them. I would also like to request an overhaul on the page Appendix:Tagalog affixes. It lacks a lot of conjugational patterns and information. Some of my examples are "pinapa- + -in", "nakakapag-","nagsipag-", etc.. Likhasik (talk) 00:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you set up an archive for older threads? Your talk page is getting too long and filled with old conversations. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 20:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Sure. Part of my to do list. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you better increase monitoring of Cebuano entries? I just tried to fix badly written entries from an IP that since created their own account. I'm also working with Cebuano, importing entries, definitions and derived terms from the out-of-copyright dictionary by Wolff. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 20:36, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I don't really speak Cebuano, and I'm concentrating on Tagalog, which has a lot to improve still. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:55, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Just came upon this term, "hyperforeignism" (see also in Appendix:Glossary#hyperforeign. Should we treat obvious English borrowings in Tagalog that are pronounced as if they're from Spanish as normal English borrowings, but with a note the pronunciation is a hyperforeignism due to some influence (which in this case, application of Spanish stress pattern found in real Spanish borrowings). Same can be said for "dolyar" (<English "dollar"), "gorilya" (<English "gorilla"), "lebel" (<English "level"), and other similar cases. "Dolyar" looks more of a hyperforeignism; it's basically English "dollar", but with the double L pronounced as in Spanish and stress shifted to the final syllable. This would likely limit the use of pseudo-Hispanism to these kind of words by ettymology (mostly have to do with morphology):

• English-Spanish hybrids: English borrowings with part morphologically altered to look like Spanish (e.g. "prayoridad", "dayalogo")
• Coinages from Spanish elements within Tagalog. The word looks like it's a Spanish loan, but it doesn't exist in Spanish or have a very different meaning (e.g. "basurero/a", "garbage collector" in Tagalog, but "garbage dump" in Spanish)
• Purely wrong Spanish (e.g. "aspeto", created under assumption this is the Spanish for English "aspect" by analogy with the actual loans "respeto" and "distrito", which are semi-learned borrowings from Latin in Old Spanish and inherited to modern Spanish. Actual Spanish for "aspect" is "aspecto"; "aspeto” existed in Old Spanish as a semi-learned borrowing from Latin "aspectus", but a C has been added to it from the beginning of modern Spanish.) TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 08:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I’m just on a spree addition of Chavacano terms after I have just created its Swadesh list, but the problem is whether to use accents as in Spanish proper. As for the entry spelling, I'm observing those in Zamboanga City: spelling based on etymology. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:56, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: As far as I know, Chavacano official orthography as used by the government of Zamboanga, and I think ADZU, doesn't use accents. Though with Chavacano official orthography, note that it's not as simple as following the original Spanish spelling. There are some issues that were decided on specific to the language. Do you have a copy of the spelling rules? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:18, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't have the actual rules, but the thing here is Spanish-derived terms should generally match the original; loans from Philippine languages are spelled according to their native spelling. Those spellings are said to be also used in MLE materials for teaching Chavacano from K to grade 3. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 20:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Not exactly that, afaik, for example Spanish words originally ending in "-ado" afaik are spelled as "-ao" in official Chavacano spelling, like pesao (pesado), pescao (pescado). Also, note that under the label Chavacano, Ternateño and Caviteño is also covered. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:43, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

But yes, that's what I've been already observing, see pesao from Spanish pesado. Though, I find some exceptions like abusado. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser @TagaSanPedroAko

If you do not mind me joining this topic, I'd like to give some clearances from what I have at least learned via the Internet.

The "-ao" suffix usually added at the end of the words are from Portuguese borrowings, or should I say Portuguese style. They have adopted them originally from Ternate, an island region in Indonesia, which was conquered by the Portuguese, hence the style of having "-ao". Other dialects however uses "-ado", notably in Davao. What I think Mar vin Kaiser meant to say is Zamboangueño and Ternateño. Though there is Caviteño, it is basically Ternateño since it is the primary city/region which speaks Chavacano in Cavite.

Regarding the spellings and standardization of Chavacano, diacritics (or accent marks) are rarely used. According to the Chavacano Orthography by Zamboanga City dated 2016 (the first standardization effort regarding Chavacano), there has been no mention of the use of diacritics. Although I have found that it was used once in their introductory pages.

Fuera el maga comentario del modulo ta sale na maga periódico o magazine.

I would like to address that this language is immensely understudied as such prone to mistakes or undue conclusions if added here in Wiktionary. Some are okay but still the quality is possibly problematic. I agree with Mar vin Kaiser to instead pour the effort on cleaning and revamping Tagalog entries first. We can't divide ourselves in multiples, or else quality drastically goes down.

I do have multiple materials regarding Chavacano though, you can chat with me or tag me. As for now, I discourage adding more Chavacano entries here in Wiktionary --Likhasik (talk) 08:41, 16 July 2022 (UTC).Reply

But the -ao in "pescao" is obviously from some regional Spanish pronunciation that drops the D between A and O. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 08:47, 16 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko Yes it is, somehow. However let us not forget there are some which uses Portuguese style of dropping the "d" from "-ado". We cannot even know how much or which words are without the "d", although my guess would be the verbs(?). There are different theories in play, which we cannot accurately procure.

Chavacano, due to its unwritten form, became corrupted via sounds or what the people usually hear. Overtime, it became what it is "usually" is, with "usually" being agreed upon the speakers, excluding those of other regions or towns. Even speakers themselves would use varying and different/inconsistent spellings or variations of words and punctuation. It would be of high risk to start a huge dump of Chavacano terminologies here in Wiktionary, especially since we are not experts nor linguists. Or even worse, inaccurate entries with dwindling qualities overall. --Likhasik (talk) 09:09, 16 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Further input is needed here. I can't get how is the "-ao" is Portuguese influence (I don't think there's any Portuguese borrowings in Chavacano, or if any, they're rare); it's more of the influence of some Latin American Spanish accents that drop the D in "-ado", but that can't be discounted especially in Bahra or Ternate Chavacano due to the origin of some its residents from the island in today's Indonesia. But the thing here is most Chavacano words should match the original Spanish at least for nouns, with the exceptions like those spelled with "-ado" in Spanish and verbs, that are usually the infinitive minus the R. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:32, 16 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko There are actually a handful Portuguese borrowings in Chavacano, especially Ternateño. It is not rare per se. I have not encountered yet any documents or articles stating that it is Latin American influence, although it is possible, highly doubtful for "-ado". I have found out that perhaps Andalusian Spanish of Southern Spain influenced Chavacano, with its notable dropping of "d". However, there are words in Chavacano which also has "-ao" but not from the dropping of "d", just originally "-ao" which are largely from Portuguese. Again, the "-ao" suffix is exposed to a lot of theories as to where it came from, some of which are thought to be from Latin America, Andalusian/Southern Spain, Portuguese, native corruption, etc.

"Chavacano nouns which matches original Spanish spellings" is again a very risky assumption. For example, "abusao" which can be a noun pertaining to a person who is abusive ends in "-ao". The original Spanish to which it is close is "abusador". Though "abusador" is also used in Chavacano, "abusao" tends to be used more often. --Likhasik (talk) 07:46, 17 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Gua Ai Di. This is Philippine Hokkien for "I love you." However, the Pe̍h-ōe-jī for characters 我愛你 is góa ài lí. Would you know what made the lí to dí in the Philippines? As far as I know, Tagalog sound shifts only d > r > l not the other way around. Just asking. Or is there another character in Hokkien that reads dí but also means "you"? Thanks. Ysrael214 (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Even in Hokkien spoken in Mainland China and Taiwan, the character 你 (lí) is allophonic, as it isn't just /li/ but also /ɾi/ or /di/. Not specifically that character but the /l/ before /i/. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you look into the entries created by Mayon V? I find it a waste of time to have their place name entries rewritten to use {{place}} template, especially ones of highly urbanized city (HUC), which they had a penchant for using in entries, which should be easily replaced with independent city; using such mostly administrative terminology would make the entries unfamiliar to the wider readership here, and it's also not recognized by the template. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 00:40, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Not sure what you mean. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Just a heads up, I just have completed testing a new version of the module powering {{tl-IPA}} and will soon be deploying the template newer module version. Some changes are needed to thousands of entries containing a final glottal stop as the newer version will now require explicitly marking final glottal stops. Other changes are:

• Syllabification now shown in phonetic.
• Diphthongs will show vowel+j and vowel+w in phonemic (following recommendations by Austronesier)
• Better support for double RR, such in the surname Serrano. Can also be used in some Spanish loanwords where the original uses RR.

TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: So why did you make it like that? Explicitly marking final glottal stops? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: You just made all the uncorrected entries inaccurate. Instead, I suggest you keep both options possible in the module. And retire the old one only after editing everything. Doing this immediately makes so many Tagalog entries inaccurate.--Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I know it will be a hell of a parse, but can't we feed the module both with classic tuldik or explicit glottal marking, so that e.g. both 《a7》 and 《à》 will give /aʔ/ –Austronesier (talk) 14:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

You mean like a transitional version of the module so to allow both? Yes, Maybe the latest version caused a lot of disruption, but it's possible to use coding much closer to the old version, instead of an all new one that drops support for the other two "tuldik". TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 17:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yes, please, a transitional version. Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I backed down on it. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 17:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: But you still removed the underscore symbol between words, right? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, the module take care of spaces, and that is what the Spanish IPA module already do. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: So have you finished removing all the underscore symbols in all the entries? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:17, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I just found lutong makaw which still had the underscore symbol. Maybe you could still include the underscore symbol as equivalent to a space, as a transitional version. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:12, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think we’ll need that. We can just remove the underscore from the remainder that do. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 17:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's necessary cuz I bet we'll miss some. And look, the username Mahagaja edited some of them, and messed up a bit. I think the transitional version is best. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 23:54, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

On a related note, paroko and saab need to be fixed. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:06, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I just noticed now. There's a problem with the grave accent (talà). In the previous module, the penultimate symbol would still have a stress marker. But in the current module, the stress marker has disappeared. I've edited probably thousands of entries putting just one diacritic. Please put it back. Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Update on this? All the Tagalog words with the grave accent currently have wrong pronunciations. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's because this what happens now (e.g. batà, at the stage the diacritics are changed to their accent, gives this /baʔta/ before it gets corrected. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 16:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko Hi. I just noticed this thread. Is it possible to systematically add categories here in the module? These categories can be subcategories of "Tagalog words with IPA Pronunciation". My proposed categories are:

• Tagalog words with unstressed ultimate syllable
• Tagalog words with stressed non-ultimate syllable
• Tagalog words with unstressed ultimate syllable with glottal stop
• Tagalog words with stressed ultimate syllable with glottal stop

With these, maybe it will help see which words may need fixing faster.

Also for compound words, shouldn't it parse per word? In kabuoang-katawan, I get this IPA:

/kabuʔoˈʔaŋ kataˈwan/, [kɐ.bʊ.ʔoˌʔaŋ kɐ.tɐˈwan]

but shouldn't the stress markers be:

/kabuʔoˈʔaŋ kataˈwan/, [kɐ.bʊ.ʔoˈʔaŋ kɐ.tɐˈwan]

Thanks! Ysrael214 (talk) 19:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: I've never seen any precedent so to make such a change. If there is any categorization that could be done automatically, this could be the number of syllables, but this seems to be done by a utility module (see for example, Module:es-common). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko Can't we just assess the final syllable of a word? or maybe no need to break down into syllables. Scan the word from left to right (not sure if it can be done here), each time it finds a new vowel, the decision for the "category" updates. or better just start from the right, just need to see the term "a7" as one though.

Thanks though. Ysrael214 (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: I really have no idea about what you are proposing. Also, there isn't anything wrong with having the phonetic transcription showing the syllabic breakdown (which is an improvement to the previous module), esp. to complement the syllabification shown before the pronunciation. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I don't think you understood what I meant lol. Look at the tala entry. The stress marker in the IPA is missing. In the past module, it would appear if I put "talà", but now I have to put "tálà" for the stress marker to appear. The problem is, hundreds, if not thousands, of entries are like this. So I'm saying I think it's best if you put it back. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I got an idea here: recompose vowel with accent and change it to vowel+glottal stop after accentuation. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 16:57, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: Yeah, I know that's what will work in the current module. My point is that hundreds, if not thousands of entries, need to be edited in the meantime, and we shouldn't leave those entries with the wrong IPA, so ideally there should be a transition module. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have noticed many people from the Philippines have said this in English as one compound word. Is there a particular reason for this? (I have also seen eatwell) PseudoSkull (talk) 18:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@PseudoSkull: How can you know that it's a compound word if people just said it? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:15, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I mean typed. PseudoSkull (talk) 14:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@PseudoSkull: It seems really new for starters, and it's not so common since I'm not aware of it despite living in the Philippines, so I don't think it would satisfy the attestation criteria of Wiktionary. Maybe it's influenced by the brand Sleepwell, sleeping pills. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:35, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello and blessed day! You created the root word entry denggoy back in 2021. I would like to know what is the source of this word? Every other searches I see are vague and are of questionable sources. Perhaps you could clarify the reference for this. Thank you --Likhasik (talk) 05:36, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Likhasik: I created the root word denggoy from the previously existing entry denggoyin created by @TagaSanPedroAko. I believe it's a colloquial word, found in several publications, and of course, used in colloquial speech. Feel free to search for it in Google Books. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:49, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I didn't know esmeril in Tagalog had stress on the penultimate syllable instead of the last one, I thought Spanish borrowings in Tagalog generally preserved the original stressed syllable. Rodrigo5260 (talk) 13:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Rodrigo5260: No problem. Generally yes, but not always. Another good example of this is dekada (penultimate stress), compared to década (antepenultimate stress). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:17, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Hey, I got word from a Wiktionary admin (User:Vininn126) that the Tagalog pronunciation order is wrong. It should be similar to here:

• Template:pl-pronunciation
• See here for his change > tabla

So instead, of [hyphenation, IPA, rhymes, audio], the order in Wiktionary should be [IPA, Audio, Rhymes, Syllabification] Also syllabification is distinct from hyphenation according to Wiktionary:Pronunciation

Basically for hyphenation he said you just need to make it as so: {{hyph|tl|<syllables here>|caption=Syllabification}}

I'm requesting them for a bot or something on what can be done here because there's a lot to change. Maybe a new module will help simplify everything. Ysrael214 (talk) 13:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

If y'all want a new module you should probably take it to the grease pit. Vininn126 (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: Thanks for this. I'm all on board in following Wiktionary guidelines, but may I ask though where it is written that the syllabification should be under the IPA? Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:45, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

As Ysrael214 mentioned in WT:Pronunciation, it should be in the order presented in the table of contents. Vininn126 (talk) 13:47, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: I see. So audio files should be at the endmost portion of the Pronunciation section as well? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Weirdly these are the one exception - those should be directly under the IPA. However, if you all make a module it can automatically put things in this order for you. Vininn126 (talk) 13:56, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 I find it really weird that there's an exception. I would love it if there was a template provided similar to what we have in the Entry layout page, if we're all gonna follow a specific order. Or else, I kinda feel like this is open to interpretation, which makes me think the order we have right now in Tagalog entries is valid too. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

We can perhaps take this to the beer parlour or something. As it stands this is how 99% of Wiktionary orders its pronunciation sections. Vininn126 (talk) 14:07, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: Yeah, I guess we could do that. So that we can get clarity on this issue lol. I'll start the discussion and then ping you. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Just so you know, I just started a discussion on the Beer parlour about this topic here [4]. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:25, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Also other PH languages are also on the wrong order, maybe you can also bring that up too Ysrael214 (talk) 12:54, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Maybe I would call it a "different order" for now rather than a "wrong order". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser @Houflings @TagaSanPedroAko @Mlgc1998 Related to this. By the way, Vininn126 and Surjection said that we shouldn't do a "Pronunciation 1/2/3/4", and we should split them to separate etymologies if needed. If there are multiple pronunciation in one etymology, best merge them to one pron header and just add context to which pron goes to which definition. And alt forms go to the same level with "derived terms", "related terms" etc. if only restricted to a specific meaning.

Here's the following words that need fixing, Surjection made a bot awhile ago

Ysrael214 (talk) 15:08, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: and @Surjection:, hi, did you guys say anything about not putting headers of "Pronunciation 1", and "Pronunciation 2"? Why though? I think we also use them in Chinese entries. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Let's discuss this first. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:22, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

"Pronunciation 1" and "Pronunciation 2" are not allowed. Any entries using them should be converted to doing it properly, i.e. splitting by etymology. — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 15:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Surjection: Was this decision made through a vote somewhere? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:24, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

WT:EL has never allowed numbered pronunciation sections. If you want a vote, there is Wiktionary:Votes/2016-02/Multiple pronunciation sections for one. — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 15:25, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Surjection: I can't help but notice that this was mentioned in the decision of the vote: "multiple pronunciation sections are not explicitly forbidden". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:29, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Anything not in EL is forbidden by default, unless there are well-founded and well-documented reasons to have exceptions. WT:ATL has no provision to allow multiple pronunciations for Tagalog entries, and any such provision would need to have valid justifications for it that aren't just "we couldn't be bothered to split these correctly by etymology". — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 15:31, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Surjection: I think you have to first understand why Tagalog entries have several pronunciations, even when Tagalog orthography is pretty phonetic. The reason is stress. A word can have definitions with ultimate stress, some definitions with penultimate stress. And also glottal stops at the end or not. These differences often have different etymologies, which we can account for, which there is one specific type which is hard to split by etymology, which is stress variation by word type. You see, Tagalog words often vary stress to differentiate noun and verb. For example, hangarin has an ultimate stress for a verb, and a penultimate stress for a noun. That difference is easily differentiated here. But sometimes, both pronunciations can have an adjective definition, despite all these pronunciations technically having the same etymology. The stress is really just used to differentiate slight nuances in meaning, like the ultimate stress indicating a completed aspect in the adjective, while a penultimate stress not having a completed aspect in the adjective. So it's kinda hard to split by etymology in these cases. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:37, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

IMO I'd identify whichever of these variants is the original and put other variants under their own etymologies that mostly just point back to the original one. But if Tagalog editors can't find a clean solution and thinks having numbered pronunciation sections is (by far) the cleanest solution, it can be allowed (but it must be documented somewhere, including with reasoning). — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 16:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Why are you against using qq= or double pipes in {{alt}}? Vininn126 (talk) 09:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: Not really against, it's just that we started with that, so most entries already use qualifiers, so just to make it uniform for Tagalog entries. If you had a bot that would switch all entries in one go, that'd be great. But I just think the uniformity is good. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree that uniformity is nice. I do not have a bot but we might be able to ask someone. @Benwing2 or Maybe @JeffDoozan, a lot of Tagolog entries have {{q}} next to {{alt}}, could we get those switched to maybe qq=? Vininn126 (talk) 11:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello! For the sense "100", are you aware of an etymology for these? I'm forgetting where now, but in the North Halmahera literature, I've seen them compared with Ternate cala (“1000”), Loloda calana (“1000”), etc., with a possible NH reconstruction being *calan. I suspect it's ultimately a late Austronesian borrowing. Alexlin01 (talk) 22:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Alexlin01: Sorry, I'm not aware. Maybe @Ysrael214 or @Austronesier has something to say about this. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Alexlin01 probably saw it here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/30027583

Also none from me for the hundred sense. Etymologies I know for hundred or thousand are Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *ʀatus and Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *ʀibu. Tagalog daan and Kapampangan dalan also meant "path" or "way". Possibly they're also from Proto-Austronesian *zalan but hundred is a figurative sense (maybe due to ancient texts or superstition that relates a hundred, with a path) but this is just mere speculation and may not be the case.

Bergano's Vocabulario de la lengua pampangan grouped the hundred and path in the same dalan entry though. Ysrael214 (talk) 08:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Oh that's exactly where I'd seen it, thanks! And no worries, but if you do happen to determine an etymology, please keep me in mind! (: Alexlin01 (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Looks like good ole Carl is back; I hope he should have grown up from what he was 4-5 years ago. —-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 22:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Doesn't hold true, he'd made insinuations and insults on edit summary for words like pungkopungko. He's the most active editor for his mother tongue, but I'm taken aback by all his tirades against editors, as if he's entitled. I speak a few Cebuano mostly as heritage language from mother side and have access to the Cebuano dictionary by Wolff primarily for pronunciations, stress pattern and missing words, which he repeatedly question. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi - I think changes like this aren't very helpful: "to fuck" is a much more accurate gloss that conveys a better sense of tone and vulgarity than "to have sexual intercourse with". Theknightwho (talk) 05:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Translations should "feel" the same as the original word. So if it's a dirty or slang word, "fuck" is good. If it's a biological science word, "fuck" is wrong. (Scientist will say "the penis enters the vagina"; slangy kid will say "he put his wang in her pussy". etc) Equinox ◑ 06:03, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Should we be listing noun definition for some adjectives such as mayaman, which in case, can mean "rich person". Raising this again in light to content dispute with kuwartahan/kwartahan, where one editor is insisting on keeping the noun definitions. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I'm thinking if it's just a nominalized adjective, it's not necessary. We can do that with all adjectives in Tagalog. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:55, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser I didn't write this. Ysrael214 (talk) 12:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Sorry! I'm just so used to tagging you lol. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is this some sort of idiom or set phrase? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:00, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I don't understand your question. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm asking if this expression ngunit, subalit, datapwat is either set phrase or idiomatic expression. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 18:07, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko: I've never heard those words said together like that. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser @TagaSanPedroAko I think this is a movie line. An edgy way of saying "but, but, but". Not a common thing said. Ysrael214 (talk) 02:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214 eh, I have heard this one somewhere on It's Showtime Saturday or so. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 02:51, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko, Ysrael214: As for inclusion, if enough attestations can be found of it, I guess we can include it. As for whether it's an idiom or set phrase, it's not an idiom because there's no figurative meaning to it. Not a phrase (because it's not a phrase). For me, a conjunction. I found an attestation here: https://www.google.com.ph/books/edition/Malefica_Ang_Unang_Engkanto/FAB7EAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22ngunit,+subalit,+datapwat%22&pg=PT126&printsec=frontcover --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@TagaSanPedroAko It's just an exaggeration. Something like.. "Umuwi ako ngunit, subalit, datapwat, may nakita ako." "I went home, but, but... BUT! I saw something." Ysrael214 (talk) 02:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: I agree with you that it's an exaggeration. Though if it's an exaggeration that's used in several occasions, it would already be a lemma, like a set thing to say, so would theoretically be include-able. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 03:02, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Hi, can you help me clean up {{head}} templates in Tagalog. I already reduced it from 1.8k entries to now less than 400. Most of them are proper nouns remaining. But don't touch the letter entries (a-z) yet, I'd probably do something in tl-headword first before changing to {{tl-head|pos=letter}}.

Here is the link for that. Thanks. https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?limit=1000&offset=0&profile=default&search=insource%3A%2Fhead%5C%7Ctl%5C%7C%2F&title=Special:Search&ns0=1 Ysrael214 (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that you said you used CC-Canto for Hong Kong Cantonese in zh-dial tables. I don't think that's a good idea because as far as I can remember, CC-Canto also includes 書面語. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Ok, I'll check another source for Hong Kong. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Mar vin kaiser, is there an etymology behind the word "Talalibithan" as the native equivalent of "Lebitiko" or "Levitico" for Leviticus? TheBMG Playz (talk) 11:57, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that you've been including an empty parameter in {{lb}} when listing, e.g., {{lb|zh|Xiamen||Zhangzhou|&|Taiwan Hokkien}}. That is not necessary; it should just be {{lb|zh|Xiamen|Zhangzhou|&|Taiwan Hokkien}}. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:34, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Oh, I didn't know. Thanks for this. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please ensure that your edits are correct.

I have raised this issue regarding incorrect Northern Wu (in particular Shanghainese) entries to you and to the Wiktionary Discord already. I have just made back-to-back edits of your Shanghainese edits with incorrect information and formatting. Please read WT:AZH/Wu regarding the formatting of Northern Wu entries and I hope to not have to fix your handiwork again. Thank you.

Pages in question: 伊朗 (¹i-laon) (yi is the pronominal pronunciation), 味精 (⁶vi-cin) (without the sh: header it interprets it as wikt, which does not have a sixth tone. Now that I've said this I'm slightly worried that you might have slipped in a few 5's without noticing...) — nd381 (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@ND381: Thanks for your corrections and sorry for the inconvenience. I'll look at your edits and ask questions if I don't understand something. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Which dictionary did you get the reading of "cong2" for 常 in Meixian Hakka?
A lot of the younger generation are indeed mispronouncing it as "cong2" but it should still be recorded as "song2" in dictionaries.

Refering to page: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%99%82%E5%B8%B8#Chinese

Tomascus (talk) 08:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Tomascus: It's the info found in 梅縣方言詞典. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

The one authored by 黃耀寶?

On Page 18 it is shown as 長時 and remarks that 常 is "song2", not "cong2", so I don't think it's appropriate to have the Wiktionary article with 常 read as "cong2". Tomascus (talk) 12:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Tomascus: Ah does it? I'm actually using 现代汉语方言大词典. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I was wondering if we should move our entries with chiâu/châu to 齊. 褿 seems to be very rare outside of dictionaries, and certain words don't have attestation with the character 褿 as far as I can tell, like 褿備. Currently, the single-character entry is at 齊. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: If we're gonna base it on attestation, I guess 齊 is the way to go, I guess. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I've made the relevant changes. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser I want to add Tagalog entry "materyoso/a". However, no Spanish word materioso/a, nor materiozo/a exists. The word isn't based on an English word either since materious is a different term and likely never heard by Filipinos. How would you write the etymology for this? Ysrael214 (talk) 09:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Following up thanks! Ysrael214 (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Looks like a psuedo-Hispanism attached with an "-oso" suffix based on the English word "material" as a root. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser How would you define ni as in "Ni piso, hindi ako humingi." and what would be the difference on ni ultimo "Ni ultimo piso, hindi ako humingi.", I mean how would you write ni ultimo? 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 14:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: Do you think ni ultimo deserves an entry and not just SOP of ni and ultimo? For ni, maybe something like "not even" as an adverb. Same as Spanish. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser They're usually together but maybe it could be a collocation instead idk 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser "Ni ultimo nga magsalita sa kanila ay hindi ko ginawa", I don't think ultimo here means "last". For "even", ni already meant "not even" so maybe an entry is okay? 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 06:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mar vin kaiser Do you also use it like "Di ultimo nakita mong ganoon ay totoo na.", it feels synonymous with "porket." 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ysrael214: I don't know that usage. I know the "not even" usage. I feel like if "ni ultimo" means that, it can be an entry. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that you have added Hokkien pronunciations to the entry 重男輕女, but the pronunciations of the character "男" for Quanzhou, Zhangzhou, Xiamen, Taipei and Kaohsiung are all marked with the 陰上 tone. I would like to confirm if this is correct. Additionally, both the 臺日大辭典 and the 台華線頂辭典 list the pronunciation of "輕" as kheng in this term, but you have provided khin. Could you please clarify the sources for these pronunciations? TongcyDai (talk) 06:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@TongcyDai: Hi! Thanks for spotting this. I'm currently not at home so I can't check my references, but the 男 there is definitely wrong, so I changed it. Will check more closely when I get home. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that you created this entry in 2020 with a Jin pronunciation, but the pronunciation you supplied is that of 肉月旁, and the source I have also shows only 肉月旁 and not 月肉旁. Was this page created in error? --kc_kennylau (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau: Yes, it seems to be a typo. I have made corrections. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

What is the source for the pronunciation jj:hǒ͘-mang-仔/ta:hō͘-mng-仔? The module does not accept mang as a valid syllable and is throwing an error. --kc_kennylau (talk) 00:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau: Yep, I purposefully did that. Respectively from 晋江市-方言志 and 同安县志. There's no issue with "mng". For "mang", that is a syllable within the Quanzhou family of dialects that still isn't in the module, and I don't know how to put it in. We also use this syllable in Philippine Hokkien. Could you help? Making it valid for both Jinjiang and Philippine Hokkien? I recently added the vowel "iai" in Tong'an Hokkien so the module currently isn't perfect yet. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for citing the sources. I did confirm the mang pronunciation in 晋江市方言志. However, there is also something interesting going on in that source where in the phonetic analysis they repeated the dictum that /b/ is only paired with non-nasalised finals and /m/ is only paired with nasalised finals. In the list of syllables they also didn't list /maŋ/ as a valid syllable. --kc_kennylau (talk) 01:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Kckennylau: Well, for me, on p. 92, they romanized 蠓 as "baŋ⁵⁵" so romanizing 濛 as "maŋ³³" means that /m/ is really the intention. Yeah, I know it's contradictory to the phonetic analysis they gave. I think it's basing it on the analysis made in the Quanzhou dialect, when "maŋ" is a licit syllable in Jinjiang also, at least based on my experience in the Philippines and Jinjiang. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I have looked up 現代漢語方言大詞典 and 新编北京方言词典, but I cannot find sense 2 "someone from northeastern China". And one friend told me that it is only used to refer to people of certain style, not specifically people from a certain area. Could you please provide the source of the sense? TongcyDai (talk) 00:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@TongcyDai: I'm not sure which source I exactly used 4 years ago, but upon looking at my sources for the Beijing dialect, in 北京方言词典 by 陈刚编, it says 1.) 土豆 2.) <旧蔑> 关外人. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much! TongcyDai (talk) 01:31, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply