Probably too obscure to deserve a mention, but in the film star wars many of the phrases the Ewoks use are Tagalog... just visiting the article to see if anybody was geeky enough to spot that :p guess not :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.104.74 ( talk) 14:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC) reply

From my understanding, there was a time a long time ago when it was believed that there were four races; negroid, caucasoid, mongoloid and australoid. Anthropologist H. Otley Beyer worked in the Philippines and found that the four races did not really apply to most of the inhabitants of the Philippines, so he coined the term Malay.

Since then, the notion of four races has been rejected by anthropologists as well as the term Malay. In fact, the whole concept of race has been rejected in favor of ethnic groups.

In any case, Malay and Malayan suggests that the Filipinos came from Malaysia and Indonesia. This isn't the case. It's quite the opposite. The ancestors of the inhabitants of Filipinos, Malaysians, Indonesians, Malagasys, Hawaiians, etc. are the Austronesians. Southern China is widely accepted as the homeland of the Austronesians. They then migrated to Taiwan, the Philippines, then to Indonesia, Malaysia, Polynesia, etc.

It's better to say that Filipinos are Austronesians, rather than Malay due to all these ambiguities.

-- Chris 22:58, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC) austronesia-malay?

Just an idea. For the words of foreign origin, we should go easy on the English words. The role of English and Tagalog is still growing and time will tell if any of these words will remain within the next several decades. What we should aim for Tagalog words whose origins are not entirely obvious.

I mean, ukelele? Come on. That one is pretty much universal. Ditto for kiwi, sultan, Islam, ketchup, kung-fu, and majong.

Words like luwalhati and susi have origins that are obscure to most Filipinos. These are words that are more or less found only in Philippine languages (lumpia made its way to Dutch loempia, however). And thus I think these deserve being mentioned.

-- Chris 03:20, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Luwalhati is Malay "luar hati" from luar (move out) and hati (liver, seat of emotions). It's opposite in Malay is "dalam hati" from dalam "move in" and hati. It entered the Philippines during the islamization era and probably was quite a new word at the time the Spanish came. Susi is Chinese and is probably older than luar hati.

PS: And furthermore, the page says Tagalog words of foreign origin. It's not easy to define but a guideline is that a word that has an established history in Tagalog and that it has assimilated to Tagalog. The words I mentioned aboe have not met those criteria yet. I do think that each word should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. And that's what I did above and thus I feel they don't meet the aformentioned criteria. -- Chris

I'm a native Spanish speaker and was surprised by the Spanish-borrowed governmental terms in Tagalog, like "Rentas Internas" ("Internal Revenue"). Are there many bureaucracy-related terms that are directly borrowed from Spanish?

Another question, rather risqué: does the word "pinga" (a long rod used to steer horses by someone riding them, which eventually mutated into a slang word for "penis", particularly in Cuba and Puerto Rico) have its origins in Tagalog? Demf 01:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Just a heads up. Tagalog has been moved to Tagalog language in order to be consistent with the naming conventions for language. This has been done for other Philippine languages as well.

What needs to be done is to go to other pages and change the link accordingly. I'll try to do that as time goes on but I'm inviting you guys to help. In most cases it should be [[Tagalog language|Tagalog]]

Addendum: I've already fixed the links.

-- Chris 01:30, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

As we see on the sanskrit talk page, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (languages) says "Languages which share their names with some other thing should be suffixed with 'programming language' in the case of programming languages, or 'language' in the case of natural languages. If the language's name is unique, there is no need for any suffix." That seems like a better and simpler way to do it. So why don't we call it Tagalog straight up, assuming there isn't a sports car or a food, then it's obviously simpler and better. Obviously other filipine languages like Cebulano might reffer to a region or a group of people, but tagalog doesn't refer to a single thing I can think of other than the language. Anybody agree?

Nope. Because Tagalog also refers to the Tagalog people, Tagalog region, Tagalog literature, etc. -- Chris S. 06:16, 11 December 2005 (UTC) reply

This is years later that I'm writing this, but since Tagalog redirects to Tagalog language, you should not change links to [[Tagalog language|Tagalog]]. See Wikipedia:Redirect. Melchoir 20:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Why? It sounds better this way. -- Chris S. 00:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Because it's pointless and therefore not worth the effort, server load, and code obscurity introduced. Did you see the "Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken" section? Melchoir 01:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I see. But one day, I forsee [[Tagalog]] being used as a disambiguation page to differentiate since there is Tagalog people, Taglaog literature, etc. Being more specific and more direct saves more headache in the future. -- Chris S. 05:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

...And wouldn't you know it, that day is today! I didn't realize there was already an article named Tagalog people; I just assumed someone would have already made the disambig if that were the case, rather than a redirect. I'll get right on that. (But that doesn't mean it should include every phrase beginning with "Tagalog", just the ones that are commonly abbreviated. So Tagalog literature wouldn't go in.) Melchoir 05:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I totally renovated this page. I was going to edit the stuff one by one and essentially leave the "backbone" intact. However, I felt it better to just rewrite it. I wrote the article under the guidelines of the template at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Language_Template . I've also modeled the stuff in here on various other language articles. The infobox has been done pink since that's what they assigned Austronesian languages to.

So the next thing to do is working to improve this article.

-- Chris 04:42, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There seems to be more Spanish words in Cebuano and Ilonggo. How about Chabacano? For the word mirror, Visayan speakers say espeho (espejo) rather than salamin, etc.. For 'could not bear it', V. speakers say 'Di magwanta' (aguantar), not 'Hindi matitiis'. Jondel

Maybe we could ask a Filipino linguist. He/she could definitely give a conclusive answer. Also, Chavacano is not a native language, being a creole of Spanish. -- seav 21:08, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)

I'm heavily into Philippine languages and linguistics for many years now, but I'm not a professional (yet). The languages that are spoken by Catholic Filipinos generally have the most Spanish borrowings as opposed those spoken by Muslims, such as Tausug, or those like Ifugao or Tboli. Yes, you will come across Spanish words in Cebuano or Ilokano that are not normally found in Tagalog and also vice-versa. In the end, I think it all evens out. -- Chris 20:59, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

My personal experience shows that the reason Tagalog has 'less' Spanish words in it than other Filipino languages is due to the fact that with the expulsion of the of the Spanish and the later independance from the US, there came a new sense of identity and patriotism. This affected Tagalog more than any other language because it was the presumtive 'national language'. Teachers of Tagalog adopted texts that had been purged of as many traces of Spanish as possible. They also dropped non-native letters and letter combinations like c,j,ch,ñ,x,ll and replaced them with the native versions k,dy,ts,ny,eks,y. This is also evident in modern texts which mandate a 'purest' version such as the translations of The Bible and court texts. Other Filipinos which have 'less' Spanish are those mountain languages where the Spanish influence was virtually non-existant. -- Pr0f3550r 00:51, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Also, I should say that while Chavacano has its foreign roots, it also has its native roots too. I couldn't make it not native. Chavacano has been the native language of about a half million Zamboagueños, Caviteños, Ternateños, and Cotabateños for generations now. However, it definitely is not an Austronesian language, if that's what you may have meant. ;-) -- Chris 21:02, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This site Hispanismos lists the "hispanismos" of Tagalog, Cebuano, and Kapampangan. It might be a bit biased since I think the author is Cebuano but from my memory alone, being able to speak Tagalog and Cebuano, I get the feeling that there are lots more Spanish words in Cebuano like amigo/amiga (kaibigan in Tagalog), pobre (mahirap), guapa (maganda), abri (bukas), etc. Spanish words used in Tagalog not in Cebuano include almusal (pamahaw in Cebuano), benta (baligya), etc. The list on the web site is not very accurate, some words that are marked Tagalog are in common use among native Cebuano speakers like anomaliya, bisyo, etc. and a number of words should be marked Cebuano/Visaya only. --wng 04:00, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

On more 'hirit'-Cebu is the first and oldest City in the Philippines. Long before Manila fell into the hands of the Spanish Conquerors in the 16th century, Cebu was already an established trading and military post for the Spaniards. Cebuano should have more Spanish words.-- Jondel 23:55, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm learning Ilonggo (very slowly, mostly because I hear it often), and I agree that it has more Spanish vocabulary than Tagalog does. Gronky 15:37, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

---

There's a wikibook. Everyone is invited to contribute to the 'How to Speak Tagalog' e-book -- Jondel 00:22, 27 May 2004 (UTC) reply

I remember reading from somewhere that Tagalog has about 4000 word borrowings from Spanish while Cebuano has around 6000. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.233.77.96 ( talk) 09:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Some linguists believe the Tagalog word na came from the Portugese. Na is also used in Japanese.-- Jondel 02:45, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

That's highly unlikely and I question the methods these linguists used. Portuguese na is a contraction of the preposition em (in) and the feminine definite article a (the). Japanese na, while it does have some similarities with the way Tagalog's na is used particularly with adjectives, is pure coincidence. Tagalog's na is related to other Philippine languages' equivalents of it; be it nga, nak, ya, a, etc. The scope of which is greater than the Japanese one. Also, the origin of which is Proto-Austronesian *na, a genitive marker.

Furthermore, Chavacano does have na and roughly uses it in the same way Portuguese does. However, I think it's an innovation based on Spanish en and la. This applies to Zamboangueño, though I'm not sure if it applies to Caviteño. Chris 19:05, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

One of the arguments for the monogenetic theory of pidgins is the presence of some common elements in most of the pidgins of the world. na is one of them. So probably Chabacano took it from some "broken Portuguese". An Austronesian homophone would have helped of course. -- Error 01:27, 28 Feb 2005

But Chabacano doesn't have any direct Portuguese influence that I know of... -- Chris 00:59, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What would later become Chabacano first appeared in the Moluccan island of Ternate. See here for a dissertion on the history of Chabacano. Before the Spaniards arrived, Ternate was a Portuguese outpost. See here for details on the Ternateño dialect of Chabacano. So I guess na as used in Chabacano comes from its dreamtime in Ternate. As for Tagalog na, I agree with Chris that its use in Tagalog has nothing to do with Chabacano. Boreanesia 6 July 2005 06:28 (UTC)

• Palenque
• Tiangue-- Jondel 10:17, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I think we need to find a linguistics student or something. -- seav 17:30, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

According to this web site link Espanol en Filipinas, tiangue is a Latin American word used in the Philippines. Not sure if it is considered archaic in Castillian Spanish but continues to be used in Latin America or the word has a purely Latin American origin though. --wng 03:40, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Well, I stand corrected then. But I'm leaving the list above for those interested. I know that the Philippines wasn't directly represented in Spain but was governed from Mexico (New Spain). -- Jondel 11:36, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

See also: http://filipinokastila.tripod.com/chaba6.html[Palenque - Old Mexican Spanish (Philippines was directly under Mexico, no direct representation in Spain)],Others:[Pera - Old Spanish : Perra-coins][Kwarta - Old Spanish  : Cuarta (Also used in Northern Spain)]-- Jondel 07:35, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• Believe it or not, sabon and relos are Spanish words that reflect when Spanish was pronounced differently. In Modern Spanish they are respectively jabón and reloj. I believe the j was pronounced in the same way that the French, Portuguese, and Catalans pronounce it. Also, if you look at old Tagalog texts (17th century) names like Jesús and Juan were spelled Sesus and Suan. -- Chris 21:07, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Muchas gracias for this info.-- Jondel 00:09, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Confirmed. What is j used to be x, in Spanish and pronouced as the j ( jsh sound) in French. ->See 'The name' section in Mexico. Mexico should have been Mejico but due to Mexican nationalism, blocked this orthographical change.-- Jondel 04:01, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Depends. In Juan and Jesús it came from Latin Iohannes and Iesus, and I don't know how it was pronounced in early Spanish. In relox, xabón and México it would be pronounced as English sh. Later both colapsed in j.-- Error 01:31, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

-In the Visayan languages (Cebuano, Ilonggo, Waray), the Spanish terms are well preserved. Thus, instead of using the Tagalog relos and sabon, Visayans say relo and habon.

( http://filipinokastila.tripod.com/chaba6.html ) As early as the year 1450, a long time before there was any knowledge of the existence of Mexico, it was already used in Catalan as Palenc with the meaning of Palizade. Later on the 17th century it became common in the area of Colombia - Venezuela in South America. The original Catalan word now made American could have traveled on Galleon to Manila and later on with troops continued its way to Zam- boaga. In fact Palanque is more common in Tagalog than in Zamboangueno. There is still a better origin. In Sevilla and neighboring provinces Palenque means up to this day “the place wherein dry agriculture products are sold”. Sevilla in fact was the origin of the trips to America and than to Manila. The word has retained exclusively the sevillano meaning of market.-- Jondel 08:34, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Considering the burgeoning size, I would like to suggest a separate Tagalog Grammar. -- Jondel 03:44, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I just moved it to Tagalog grammar. As I was exploring other language pages recently, I noticed this trend and thought that Tagalog should be that way. I think I'll add a small summary about the grammar soon on this page. -- Chris 09:24, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Looks much better! It used to take so long to upload on my RAM deficient Celeron PC. Also makes it easy to switch to different sub-topics. -- Jondel 23:22, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I've had to interpret from Japanese to farmers in the very deep areas of the provinces of Laguna, Tayabas, etc. . Not even people in Manila know this due to their isolation. But they do use deep Tagalog. The Japanese Cooperative Agencies were trying to set up reforms and standardization of prices. The farmers for example would be willing to sell tomatoes at 25 centavos (Market price then was : 5 pesos ). The farmers , etc. don't have TV , or access to media, they don't even know or unfamiliar with local actresses and celebrities. In school(DLSU )we had social work and there are some actresses enrolled as students. They were surprised that they were unknown in those parts.-- Jondel 00:24, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Strangely enough using "deep" Tagalog (i.e. "not crippled" Tagalog) appears to be a mark of lack of education. We Pinoys here in the city barely speak our own language! We get used to substituting deep English words into shallow Tagalog sentences. Our language framework is Tagalog but a lot of the "meat" of the language comes from English. 203.131.167.26 02:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC) reply

Just a curiosity: Here (outside the Philippines), "malalim na tagalog" is the term for "advanced Tagalog" (i.e. words that a Filipino from a non-Tagalog region mightn't know). Nothing to do with being "deep" in the province. Gronky ( talk) 02:45, 30 August 2009 (UTC) reply

It is katutubong Tagalog or ethnic Tagalog. Tagalog evolved from ethnic words of the Agta or natives in the archipelago.I believe, tagalog was developed in urban communities who were exposed to foreign traders like arabs, hindus,chinese,japanese and other races fron east and west hemispheres, while the ethnic forms thrived well in isolated areas or dakong Tagnum retaining its original forms uncommon to modern forms of language like Modern Tagalog, and other Philippine dialects.

• Although it is a fad, it may become a part of the language. My Philippine literature professor mentioned this phenomena and said it should be considered worthy of study.-- Jondel 00:24, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Is the language simply Tagalog, as the article title suggests, or is it more properly Tagálog, as the opening sentence indicates? -- Dbenbenn 02:01, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

English only rarely tolerates accents even in names of languages, Provençal and Tupinambá are the exceptions I can think of. Tagalog itself does use the acute accent so Tagálog may well be the correct spelling in Tagálog and even Filipino, but probably not in English. — Hippietrail 11:44, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I decided to put Tagálog so that people know how it would be pronounced, rather than writing something such as Tagalog [ta'galog]. Non-Filipinos, particularly Americans, seem to always pronounce it on the first syllable.

The proper name is Tagalog in English and in Tagalog. In Tagalog, acute accents are used but rarely are they placed on the penultimate syllable.

-- Chris 16:01, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The unaccented form should, in my opinion, be used in the article, with a pronunciation guide in the beginning.

My 2c: "Tagalog" is correct in English because the accent is used in Tagalog to show stress but the accent doesn't have this meaning to an English speaker and is therefore useless (they'll stress the first syllable until they're told not to). Even for those that know the meaning of accents in Tagalog, the accent is pointless because they are likely to know that the penultimate syllable is the default place for word stress. Gronky 15:27, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

"Non-Filipinos, particularly Americans, seem to always pronounce it on the first syllable." Yeah - the whole "Taggle-og" versus "Tuh-GAHL-ug" debate.

• La palabra "balangay" no está en el Diccionario.
• Balangay is not used in Spanish but as a foreign term (meaning catamaran?)

Later I see that it is barangay in Philippine Spanish, but it is difficult to know how "genuine" it is. I suppose there are Philippine words in World Spanish (tagalo itself) but I don't remember them and don't know if they are from Tagalog or another language. -- Error 02:21, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I wish I didn't suggest this barrio word. I just wanted to discuss.. ..It seems that barangay and barrio/ burg have the same ARABIC root but very different paths. I believe the Spanish barrio and Tagalog barangay had no influence or relationship with each other. There are a number of wild coincidences in linguistics. The Japanese word for name is 'namae'.The Hebrew and Arabic words for you is Anta , in Japanese Anatawa. I believe these are coincidences and had no influence on each other. -- Jondel 02:51, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Barangay does officially exist in Spanish. In the DRAE , click on busque sin diacriticos.-- Jondel 07:03, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Barangay directly comes from the word Balangay. Balangays were big canoes containing families that migrated to the archiapelago. These family groups formed small societal units and became what we now know as barangays. ~~ Palabok

• Remove? Please be bold -- Jondel 09:20, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's worth a reference since it is more common in Tagalog than in most languages, but the list of words seems quite boring and non-informative and if you leave it there it will just grow and become increasingly boring. I'd suggest moving the list of words to a "List of common binaliktad in Tagalog" page. (Information should always stay in Wikipedia, so move rather than delete.) That's my opinion anyway. Gronky 15:08, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Took out census figures for Caviteno and Ternateno. Ethnologue reports only about 32,000 speakers total for both languages. Highly unlikely they increased to more than 200,000 speakers in 30 years time, considering they're not used as a lingua franca in their native region. Besides, better to report census figure for those languages in their own articles, not in the Tagalog language. -- Wng 02:13, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, seems reasonable. But I wonder why such the discrepancy. Did Ethnologue underestimate or did Filipinos who responded to the census overestimate? This is something to take into account for Chabacano article. I'll look into this more. -- Chris 04:16, 26 May 2005 (UTC) reply

I personally believe the recent 2000 census in the Philippines overestimated. There's confusion between "ethnic" and "language" group. I believe some people in Cavite identified themselves as Caviteño, even though they don't speak Caviteño. The 2000 census had problems which I documented in the Philippines article, especially with the Cebuano language. The census had different totals for Cebuano, Boholano, Bisaya/Binisaya, etc. when they're in fact the same language. There's also a marked increase in people identifying themselves as Butuanon, Surigaonon, and Davaoeño. People in Butuan City are identifying themselves as Butuanon in the census even if majority of the people there now speak Cebuano as their native language. Same problem with Caviteño and other minority languages. -- Wng 06:22, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that. I talked about it in my blog here. BTW, are the statistics available online? I recall they weren't. I have only the DOC file that the NSO sent me. -- Chris 13:48, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply

The statistics are available online at [1], but the site is pretty slow (at least for me). You are right, there are some glaring discrepancies in the census. I still can't believe that in a lot of Cebuano-speaking areas in Mindanao, the census will report something like the top three ethnic groups are Bisaya/Binisaya, followed by Cebuano, and then Boholano! They should be counted as one. In places like Cagayan de Oro City, census reports as many as 28% or 114,000 belong to other ethnic groups. What are these other ethnic groups? Are they mestizos or what? I believe there should be difference between "ethnicity" and "language" in the census. One can be ethnic Chinese or mestizo, but lots of them speak the native languages as their mother tongue already. As you mentioned in your blog, there's something wrong with the Tagalog compared to the Cebuano count. In the NCR, there is less than 1% Ilocano and less than 1% Bisaya/Binisaya speakers? I also find this suspicious. -- Wng 04:10, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

In the section titled Official status, user Gareon changed the date of the 1937 announcement from 31st to 30th, justifying this by commenting that Dec 30th is Rizal Day. A web search suggests Dec 31st is the correct date for the announcement. I haven't been able to find conclusive proof for either, can anyone else? Gronky 18:35, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)

Chris, banca is found in the DRAE, definition number 7. Also yoyo but it doesn't say that the origin is from the Philippines.-- Jondel 02:15, 15 August 2005 (UTC) reply

I had elsewhere expressed doubts about "yo-yo" being of Philippine origin. This may be a dead issue, and I'm still not convinced, but I just stumbled across the following info here: "... Defendants introduced the testimony of Dr. Henry Lee Smith, Jr., since 1956 Chairman of the Department of Anthropology and Linguistics and Professor of Linguistic English, State University of New York at Buffalo, who qualified as an expert linguist and etymologist, particularly in the Polynesian languages. No question was raised as to the qualifications or integrity of this witness. He testified that at the request of counsel for defendants, he made a special study of the word 'yo-yo,' and that in connection with that study he consulted, in addition to the documents introduced by plaintiff, major unabridged encyclopedias, current unabridged dictionaries, various bibliographical references, and with colleagues and children. As a result of his study, he expressed the definite opinion that the word 'yo-yo' is a Malayo-Polynesian word of Philippine origin; that the toy itself is of Oriental origin, and that the word 'yo-yo' was tied together with the toy in the Philippines and was introduced into the American language from that country. His testimony was buttressed by numerous documentary references, one of which was an article appearing in The Sunday Tribune Magazine of March 5, 1933, entitled, 'Is Yo-Yo from the Philippines,' which quotes the assistant director of the Philippine National Library as saying that the word 'yo-yo' is descriptive of the movement and sound of the toy and hence the toy is characteristically so called in Filipino languages. Further, the article states that 'Yo-Yo' is a game known throughout the entire archipelago, where it is consistently used in a generic sense." -- Boracay Bill ( talk) 02:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Check this out: tl:Wikang_Aleman. Do the words in the list near the bottom of the page really come from German?

Uh, no. It's a coincidence. Any claim to German is simply patent nonsense. -- Chris S. 19:39, 20 August 2005 (UTC) reply

How did the Germans influence the language? Please categorize under False cognates or False etymology. There are many coincidences in languages with no relationship. To drink in Tagalog is inum. In Japanese it is nomu. You in Japanese is anata. In Arabic it is anta. -- Jondel 02:31, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

A list of Tagalog words supposedly taken from French was laid out in the Tagalog version of the “French language” article. We’re inviting anyone to please check the list in that article to verify whether these words actually do come from French. Thanks.

No they did not come French. These are False cognates or False etymologys. -- Jondel 02:33, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Well, I always knew pwet came from French. Just kidding! :), btw, savon there I think should be javon(?)-- Jondel 03:02, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

The French do say savon. But Tagalog's sabon is definitely Spanish. Yes, they do say jabón now. However, at the time the Spanish used to pronounce the j sound as an "sh". So the Tagalogs pronounced this as /s/. And so in old books you might find that Jesú-Cristo written as Sesu-Cristo in Tagalog. -- Chris S. 03:38, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

I checked my dictionary . You're right. Were the French ever in the Philippines? Did the controversial name Sexmoan (pronounced sasmwan, in Pampangga)originate from them?-- Jondel 03:47, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

AFAIK, the name Sexmoan was given to Sasmuan by the Spaniards. There was no malicious intent. -- Chris S. 04:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Shouldn't the Laguna Copperplate Inscription be mentioned under History (a section which, incidentally, needs to be expanded)? -- 207.114.141.206 21:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Nope, because it's not written in Tagalog, but old Malay or something or other. --- Chris S. 05:11, 3 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Actually, yes it should, seeing as it had presented a slightly different vocabulary and grammatical rules to that of Old Malay (although admittantly being highly influenced by it) that have been followed in course by Tagalog (ngaran for "name" in LCI language (ngalan in Tagalog) vs Old Malay: nama etc, the use of ng in "masa ding jyotisa", "paskat ding ari", Old Malay would have used di (of) alone), welung LCI lang (wala modern Tagalog) vs Old Javanese and Old Malay Bukun (Bukan modern Malay)). Many non-Austronesian words differ from the modification of Sanskrit not used elsewhere ("Dang" denoting differing personage/status from Sang referenced in Old Javanese and Malay from Sanskrit Sangha). It is not an example of "pure" proto-Tagalog, but references must be made to Tagalog or "Tagalogesque" words and forms not found elsewhere that were included in the Inscription; from the evidence it is clearly a Philippine hybrid of both Old Malay, Old Tagalog, and Sanskrit, and no sane mind can deny that it sheds light on the course of the language at that time. Albeit its heavy Old Malay influence, the language of the South-Central Luzon at this time as evidenced by the LCI would denote a proto-Tagalog substratum, hence is all the more needed to be documented and referenced as including examples of old Tagalog; not chucked aside as nothing more than a "foreign language" artifact for lack of (the apparently "higher status") Hispanic references to the language, made at a relatively late stage in its development. Anak 1

It is a must. The language in the laguna copperplate inscriptions is considered as an archaic form of Modern Tagalog not Malay or Javanese! In fact, more than 80% of the ancient grammars have counterparts in Modern tagalog specifically in Southern tagalog Terms! For example; shuddhapatra ulih is "sunod sa patakaran sa pag sauli"/ bamgaram is bang ngalan/ bukah is bulaklak (one dialect of tagalog has the word bukan with the same meaning)/ dengan dang kaya siha is "dangan at may kaya siya"/pamegat is "pamagat" / cucu is "Iniukol" / sanak is "Mag anak"/ kresnapaksa is "Kinasulatan ng paksa"/hwa is "huwaran"/ kapawaris is "kapag alis or pinawi at inalis"/ etc. There is also Greek origin in ancient tagalog words like danio retained as danyo in modern tagalog meaning loan.Mataripis

I think sources or references are in order. To say that some words of Tagalog are Portugese and not Spanish goes against common and very ingrained knowledge. Although the word 'na' seems Portugese.-- Jondel 07:04, 19 October 2005 (UTC) reply

I see a discussion on na has already been started above.

I totally forgot about that earlier discussion.-- Jondel 16:02, 19 October 2005 (UTC) reply

I'm removing the part about Portuguese, Italian influence, etc. at the foreign loan words.-- Jondel 00:21, 20 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Since there are no written samples of Tagalog before the arrival of the Spanish in the 16th century, very little is known about the history of the language. (See #Baybayin, below) -- Removed this self-contradictory sentence, which implies that Tagalog was not a written language. -- Ancheta Wis 11:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply

It's not contradictory if you make it clear that there are no surviving pre-16th century literature. So I have made the necessary change. -- Chris S. 12:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Aren't there? There's 16th century literature in the spanish initial attempts to put bible versus or the hail mary into tagalog script- not using latin letters. I have seen pictures of the original tagalog alphabet carved into bamboo, isn't a picture enough of a surviving copy of writing? The sample I am talking about was originally a piece of accounting, not literature. But its' still a sample of their writing. We may not know a ton about their written language history, but we know the original tagalog alphabet, as is stated in the article.

I said pre-16th century. The Doctrina Cristiana was published during the 16th century. When was the bamboo allgedly made? -- Chris S. 06:16, 11 December 2005 (UTC) reply

The picture was probably a sample that was made just before it was photographed, now that I think about it. But it's probably important to make a distinction about why no writing samples survive. Just reading the article as it is, I assumed that they were gone because the spanish burned them. This link suggests that they are gone because they were written on perishable materials. http://www.mts.net/~pmorrow/bayeng1.htm#literature Also, I've heard a lot about Tagalogs' closeness to sanskrit. Could Indian trading routs in the ancient world be a part of at least a speculative history of the language? Lotusduck 19:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply

There's a list of Sanskrit words in Tagalog in the Hinduism in the Philippines article. I'm very curious about the word Sabon which is supposed to have come from Spanish jabón but a Hindi(Sanskrit?) word Sabun also exists.-- Jondel 01:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply

From my understanding, many Sanskrit words came to Tagalog indirectly; they came via Malay. Tagalog is not "close" to Sanskrit at all because they are both from different language families. As for sabon it is undoubtedly from Spanish - as jabón reflects an earlier pronunciation. Juan was pronounced "Shwan" but it was written Suan. In Baybayin, Jesús is "sesu." The Hindi word, if I remember correctly, comes from Portuguese sabão. Both of these words come from Latin sapo. -- Chris S. 03:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Yes.Like jugar->sugal,reloj->relos. The Portuguese were also in Goa, India. It is crazy, to find words that should'nt be there, in very distant places. Anta is you in Arabic. Anata means the same in Japanese. Occur is Spanish for occur(English) and in Japanese there is okuru which means the same thing. There is a word tuu in Nepali which means you , I think this word is also Hindi. You of course know what tu means in Spanish. Very bizarre.-- Jondel 04:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Nepali and Hindi are both Indo-European languages, so it makes sense that it's cognate with Spanish tú and other Indo-European languages like English thou, French tu, German du, Czech ty, Icelandic þú, Persian تو (to), etc. -- Chris S. 04:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply

R is pronounced by many Anglophone Filipinos as in American English, even after gaining native-speaker fluency in Tagalog. They simply can not help it. This does not apply to all Anglophones though, the vast majority of whom (even while struggling to communicate in their Tagalog) pronounce the R perfectly well as the rest of the population. Perhaps this tidbit of info should be incorporated under the Phonology section.

Tagalog used to redirect to Tagalog language; I have just made it a dab page instead. I'd also support reverting to the old redirect if it were combined with a {{ otheruses4}} tag here, if it's judged that "Tagalog" almost always means the language. Melchoir 05:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I have checked Ethnologue.com and surely Cebuano is larger than Tagalog by about 6 million. Is there another criterion that this article subscribes to? Elektrik Blue 82 08:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I used the census figures. Strangely enough, that is what Ethnologue claims to use. The 1995 census lists 20,044,487 Tagalog speakers and 14,486,196 Cebuano ones. Furthermore, the 2000 Census lists 21,485,927 Tagalog speakers, however for Cebuano, there are 10,030,667. This is obviously an undercount since 5,778,435 Cebuanos and other Visayans put their language as Bisaya/Binisaya - in reality, there are between 18 million-20 million speakers. You can read about the census discrepancies in my blog at http://salitablog.blogspot.com/2004/07/eight-major-languages-no-more.html -- Chris S. 16:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

PS: Looking at census percentages, Cebuano had the most speakers until 1970 when both Tagalog & Cebuano speakers constituted 24% of the population. Tagalog surpassed Cebuano in 1980. -- Chris S. 16:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Ah I see. I knew there is a controversy regarding the Bisaya/Cebuano and the Filipino/Tagalog languages. It's too hot to handle for me. As I remember back in my undergrad days in UP Dept. of Linguistics, Cebuano is spoken by more people than Tagalog, but it seems they have obsolete data. Ughh, good thing I'm not specializing in language planning/policy and sociolinguistics. Elektrik Blue 82 18:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Currently, the most populated region in the country is the southern tagalog region, adding the population of the national capital region, Tagalog will be the biggest. RebSkii 18:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Tagalog is solid and has one comprehensible standard of grammars than the bisayas.Bisayans have larger numbers but due to their dialectal differences, bisayan forms are not considered as one standard form of language.Therefore, tagalog is still considered more developed as a language and also the largest ethnic language in the whole archipelago.

I'm currently working on a script intended to create short articles on political parties on a variety of wikipedias simultaneously. However, in order for the technique to work I need help with translations to various languages. If you know any of the languages listed at User:Soman/Lang-Help, then please help by filling in the blanks. For example I need help with Tagalog. Thanks, -- Soman 15:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC) reply

That's one sub-topic I'd like to see here. Tagalog has these polite markers like "po" that are embedded in sentences to make them sound polite. The elderly and those of higher status are adresssed in the second person plural form 'kayo' instead of the second person singular 'ikaw.' Can anyone organize these ideas? 202.78.102.196 06:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC) reply

I don't have the energy now to edit the article but here's a rundown. Respect is always necessary when talking to a senior or person of authority, through use of the "po" article (and the also-respectful particle "ho"). If you use "kayo" but not "po" in a sentence you are referring to multiple people. Likewise "po" cannot be used with the second-person singular forms "ka" or "ikaw" ("ikaw" at the beginning of a sentence or standing alone, "ka" as part of a sentence). 203.131.167.26 02:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC) reply

There is information about po and ho in Tagalog grammar. -- Chris S. 06:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC) reply

The consonants section has a few problems with inconsistancies.

The IPA symbols in the palatal fricatives and affricates sections are not for palatal consonant, but for post-alveolar.

The IPA symbol for the dental/alveolar flap is incorrect.

The palatal nasal/lateral consonants do not have IPA symbols.

I would change these, but I do not know tagalog, so I might correct the problems the wrong way. Thanks

A lot has been said about the use of the Baybayin and other early scripts, presumably influenced by those of south India, before the arrival of the Spaniards. Given the fact that Manila was established as a Muslim enclave in the 15th or 16th century, is there any evidence that the Jawi (Malayo-Arabic) script was used to write Tagalog? I can't find any references to attest to this (although I haven't reached beyond the Internet to research this) and I'd be interested to know the status of Jawi as a medium for written Tagalog, if it ever had such a status.

There's no evidence, afaik. However, "sulat sug" was used in Tausug. -- Chris S. 23:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC) reply

So, as far as we know, it (Jawi) just went as far as the present-day Muslim groups in the Philippines, and Tagalog (and I suppose the other central and northern languages) went straight from using the Indic scripts to Latin? I don't suppose this might be something worth researching if it hasn't already, would it?

From what I’ve only recently begun to notice, it seems that the letter o is more often pronounced as an open vowel, just as e is. It certainly sounds different from the [o] heard in Italian and especially Spanish.

On closer inspection, it looks as if open e and o are used more frequently when communicating with people lower status (perceived or actual), while the closed versions are used when talking to superiors to convey submissiveness, or to loved ones when one is, uh, making lambing. Either way, both seem, at least to me, contrived, considering that when communicating with people of more or less equal status no conscious effort is made to pronounce e and o in a certain way or another.

to me the letter 'o' is like the 'o' in portuguese in soe words and the o in english and the o in spanish... maybe it just depends on where the word comes from Australian Jezza 02:03, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

It seems to me that some people pronounce the Tagalog K as a voiceless uvular plosive when followed by an A. If this is correct, I think it might be worth noting in the Phonology section of this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kinoko ( talk • contribs) 01:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC). reply

I haven't heard it as uvular - it's usually velar. -- Chris S. 01:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

It seems like it would be more useful to have Samoan in addition to or in place of Hawaiian in the comparison chart, since the consonants are more similar. Anybody know enough to fill it in? KarlM 07:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC) reply

This article has an image captioned, "Predominantly Tagalog-speaking regions in the Philippines.". The image actually depicts predominantly Tagalog-speaking regions in a small portion of the the Philippines . I suggest that this image be replaced with an image which shows the entire country. -- Boracay Bill 06:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The current image, depicting predominantly Tagalog-speaking regions in a small portion of the the Philippines (but with a caption saying that it depicts something else), is the top one of the two at the left.

I was browsing Philippine maps in Category:Maps_of_the_Philippines, and came across the one on the right, which shows the geographic areas where the major languages are predominately spoken. I propose that this image at the right be edited to just highlight the Tagalog-speaking areas vs. areas having a non-Tagalog major language, and the result, which would show predominantly Tagalog-speaking regions in the entire Philippines, be used to replace the current map. I'm not very good at photoshop-type work, but if nobody else wants to tackle this I can do it. Comments? -- Boracay Bill 07:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• NOTE: [[Image:Ph tagalog.jpg|left|thumb|250px|Predominately Tagalog-speaking regions in the Philippines.]] was removed at this point

I have uploaded an edited version of the image; it is (no longer) shown at the left. Barring objection, I plan to replace the current image in the article with this edited version of the Distribution of major languages in the Philippines image. Objections? Comments? -- Boracay Bill 02:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Bill, I object to the image. I don't think it's necessary to show the whole Philippines - such a waste of space, I think. Also, this one has the provincial boundaries, to clearly show where in Luzon it is spoken. I made images on other Philippine languages the same way - with that in mind. If there is consensus to replace them, then I will go ahead and make the changes (I'd prefer using the original map I used).

Another alternative would be to use two maps. One which shows both in relation to other languages (which can be used in Languages of the Philippines) but the colored one right now is not really accurate. -- Chris S. 03:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Chris. Objection noted. Regarding wastage of space, the amount of space used relates to the size chosen for the image thumbnail, of course. I sized mine a bit larger than the current map, but a smaller size could be chosen and/or the map trimmed a bit at the edges (especially the top edge -- to get a rough idea of that, look here). As you might have gathered from my earlier remarks, my primary objection to the current map is that I don't think that it shows what its caption says it shows, and showing an image which matches the caption gives a very different impression of the information presented -- what parts of the Phils have Tagalog as a predominate language. Not being an expert in this area, I started with an existing wiki image which purported include what the current-image caption describes, and edited that image to highlight the relevant content. I'm not an expert on language distributition in the Phils (which I understand is one of your areas of expertise). Perhaps Image:Phillanguages.jpg is due for updating. Actually, I'm not thrilled by my new image myself, and I consider its current rendition to be a draft for purposes of discussion and subject to revision. I would have preferred to start with a map of the Philippines with provincial boundaries shown, but couldn't find one on commons. Regarding your other maps, I looked at the language articles mentioned at Languages of the Philippines#Philippine_Languages_Comparison_Chart, and only found two pages with maps -- this Tagalog page and the Cebuano page. My objection to the map on this Tagalog page also applies to the map on the Cebuano page -- I think that it would be much more useful to put the info into the context of a map showing the entire country. -- Boracay Bill 05:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I see from another look at the Phillanguages.jpg image that it shows several flavors of tagalog, and I only showed one of these. I have uploaded a new version of my draft replacement image which shows the several Tagalog flavors. -- Boracay Bill 09:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Bill, I've gone ahead and made the necessary changes - you convinced me. The four language maps that I have so far are the ones for Tagalog, Cebuano, Visayan languages, and Kapampangan language. I plan on making more, and when I do I'll go ahead and include the whole Philippines. -- Chris S. 00:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Chris. Big improvement, IMHO. If I can suggest another work item for your plate, Image:Phillanguages.jpg is used by several articles, and it conflicts with your images. That image probably ought to be updated. AFAICT, that update would combine your Tagalog and Kampangan maps with your Visayan Languages map and would add mappings for regional languages in north and west Luzon, in Bicol, in a few areas on Mindanao, and in ARMM. Also, as you are an administrator, can you easily delete Image:Ph-tagalog.jpg which I uploaded to commons and which is now not needed or, alternatively, should I submit an image deletion request on that? -- Boracay Bill 01:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes, working on a comprehensive map of Philippine languages is on my "to-do" list. There are some issues that are stumping me - as you pointed out with the conflicts (I assume you are referring to Cebuano) because of some areas with high rates of bilingualism. I am thinking that perhaps a map on the major Philippine languages would probably be more helpful, but I don't know. But yes, I am envisioning something better than Image:Phillanguages.jpg. I have the sources here at home to do it. But I am trying to find a way of getting these cds which will help me greatly with making more detailed maps. So far no response from the NSO.

As for Image:Ph-tagalog.jpg - I've deleted it on Wikipedia but not on Wikimedia commons (where free images go). I don't have administration powers on Wikimedia so I am unable to delete it myself. -- Chris S. 01:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

OK. Thanks, Chris. I have deactivated the reference to the image from this talk page. I will work at getting the image deleted from commons. -- Boracay Bill 02:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Could someone who knows the subject please reformulate the following? It is very unclear to me what it means.-- 199.243.252.196 20:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Tagalog, as its de facto standardized counterpart, Filipino, is the principal language of the national media in the Philippines.

I've removed the note about the Simlish language. Until there are references, it is just heresay.

Unless it has been promoted, my Filipino teacher has always been strict in saying the Tagalog is just a dialect and that it constitutes the bigger part of the language that is Filipino.

Likewise in the info box on the right, it says: Official language of: Philippines (in the form of Filipino). No, it isn't the official language of the Philippines and has never been coterminous with Filipino. They are not the same. Tagalog is a dialect. Filipino is a language that is constituted by the local dialects like Tagalog, Cebuano, etc.

Has there been any changes since I graduated high school? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rrdouble ( talk • contribs)

Your teacher had it backwards. Filipino is a dialect of a bigger language called Tagalog. Tagalog has existed as its own language for centuries. Filipino came into existence in 1987, as a standardized variant of the Tagalog spoken in Metro Manila. How can one "demote" Tagalog to the status of a dialect after many years as a living, vibrant language? You are right in saying that they are not the same; Filipino is Tagalog but Tagalog is not necessarily Filipino (it could be Marinduqueño, Bulaqueño, Manileño, or Filipino whatever.).

It should be noted that in 1992, Filipino was defined as the language of Metro Manila. In June of 2007, the Chair of the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino Ricardo Nolasco stated that "that Filipino was simply Tagalog in syntax and grammar, with no grammatical element or lexicon coming from Iloko, Sinebwano, Ilonggo and other major Philippine languages."

So there you have it. -- Chris S. 06:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Can you please redirect me to the source of Mr. Nolasco's statement or anything that contains an extended version of his statement? For the longest time, I've maintained that Filipino, being the Philippine's national language, is a sort of, loosely saying, a "combination" of all the local dialects in the Philippines (Cebuano, Ilonggo, etc.) but is undeniably largely Tagalog. This is, from what I remember, to answer the objections of the regional groups who do not want their local dialects downplayed. Now it surprised me to read such statement from the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino's chair himself.

Another thing is, I think I'm misinformed with the definition of a language and of a dialect. From what I know, a dialect is that of the regional groups (e.g. Ilonggo, Ilokano) and language is a larger group generally used to call the tongue spoken by a larger region or, in this case, by the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.193.186 ( talk • contribs)

Hi, my source is Filipino language, which has this Asian journal article as a source. So basically, the intentention is that Filipino is to be based upon other Philippine languages like Cebuano, Ilokano, etc. but the reality is that Filipino is simply Tagalog.

So while we have the political considerations outlined, there are also the scientific (i.e., linguistic) considerations to take into account. The Summer Institute of Linguistics, for example, places Filipino as an offshot of Tagalog. See [2].

The popular definition of a dialect in the Philippines means basically an unimportant regional tongue. However, in reality, dialect is a regional variant of a particular language. This means that Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Ilokano, Bikol, Tagalog, Waray-Waray, Pangasinan, Kapampangan, and the rest are all languages. See regional language. They have their own vocabulary, phonological system, and grammar. Outside of Wikipedia, I have written an essay about the Philippines' language and dialect situation, you may read it here. -- Chris S. 14:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I've reverted this change, which challenged (on the article page) the assertion there that Spanish numbers are used in Tagalog above 10.

I have very low confidence that the challenged assertion to which I have reverted it is correct, or that the assertion in the challenge ("I've asked a native speaker, and they say this is wrong. They use the native words, or English mostly now.") is correct.

What the heck does this article assert "Tagalog" to be, anyhow? Tagalog according to some published standard? (I doubt that)

"Tagalog" as it might be spoken now (this week, anyhow) in some part of the Philippines (Makati, perhaps)?

Incidentally, the English-Tagalog dictionary I use (Fr. English) translates "Eleven" as "n. Onse (Sp.). Labing-isá". When I asked my wife (a native Ilocano speaker who counts Tagalog among her languages) "How do you say 'eleven' in Tagalog?", she said "Labing-isá" -- Boracay Bill 10:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Your mileage may vary on the numbers, basically. The usual rule of thumb I've seen floating around is use Spanish over 15. Basically, the higher you go, the more Spanish is likely to be used. They have 3 choices (add English to the mix), and so it's practically up to the speaker to decide. -- Chris S. 14:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC) reply

The excessive lists and otherwise trivial content in the "Examples" and "Learning resources" sections do not really seem necessary. However, it would be a rather sweeping change to remove all of them, so I am looking for thoughts as to what parts are useful and which should be removed. Thanks, Kakofonous ( talk) 22:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC) reply

I opine that lists which flout WP:V should be removed. -- Boracay Bill ( talk) 00:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC) reply

If you don't object, I think I'll remove "The Lord's Prayer (Ama Namin)", "Common phrases", "Proverbs", and "Learning Resources". They don't really seem useful. -- Kakofonous ( talk) 00:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC) reply

I changed the Gaddang link as the actual gaddang page is listed as Gaddang_Language, all of the other links refer to pages with a small l. I fixed the link to point to the correct page by changing the capitalization, but perhaps the Gaddang_Language page should be changed to Gaddang_language? I was hesitant to make that change due to all of the other links that might be effected and I'll leave that for an expert...

) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.77.149.60 ( talk) 15:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC) reply

In 1939, Manuel L. Quezon named the national language "Wikang Pambansa" ("National Language").[4] Twenty years later, in 1959, it was renamed by the Secretary of Education, Jose Romero, as Pilipino to give it a national rather than ethnic label and connotation. The changing of the name did not, however, result in acceptance at the conscious level among non-Tagalogs, especially Cebuanos who had not accepted the selection.[5].

In 1971, the language issue was revived once more, and a compromise solution was worked out—a "universalist" approach to the national language, to be called Filipino rather than Pilipino. When a new constitution was drawn up in 1987, it named Filipino as the national language.[5] The constitution specified that as that Filipino language evolves, it shall be further developed and enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other languages.

-- Filipinayzd ( talk) 09:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC) reply

The article section involved is "Tagalog:History". All of that fits, IMHO. -- Boracay Bill ( talk) 11:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC) reply

many speakers i notice replace tʃ for ts example is pizza is pronounced as pitʃa instead of pitsa Kasumi-genx ( talk) 15:28, 30 July 2008 (UTC) reply

That's because, in Tagalog, there is no distinction between the two phonemes. -- Pare Mo ( talk) 06:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC) reply

That sounds more like phonology (sounds) than orthography (writing).

Nevertheless, I must attest to hearing the same. Joemaza ( talk) 22:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC) reply

tagalog post alveolars do exist,but tagalog postalveolars are normally alveolo palatal not like english which are domed,rounded and partially palatalized. proof: http://felipeaira.i.ph/blogs/felipeaira/2008/06/26/ipa-chart-for-tagalog\ for me \ty\ digraph makes sense in tagalog orthography instead of \ts\ because soft g which is the voiced counterpart is written as \dy\ in tagalog orthography,tagalog tʃ is actually tɕ and dʒ is actually dʑ in tagalog,tagalog post alveolars.

What i notice is that native alveolo palatals occur on demonstratives frequently dijan> dʑan(dem.) and tijan>tɕan(dem.) and they sometimes dissapear in stress added syllables on loan words like junction which is sometimes pronounced as dijaŋɕon or dzaŋɕon and diego is normally pronounced as dʑego in tagalog.

Some posh people pronounce the soft g sound as ʑ especially Kris Aquino-/korek ka ʑan/

Kasumi-genx (
talk) 14:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
reply

Correct me if I happen to be wrong.

I can understand your first hand evidence, however, Wikipedia would have us refrain from writing "research"; that's what I would call this because I haven't come across anything similar to this. If you find literature to support it, add to the article.

One comment on conventions - '//' forward slashes/virgulas are commonly used when transliterating phonemes and '[]' square brakets are used when transliterating actual phonetics, or their actuall realization. Compare /botl/ with [bɑʔl] (in some English dialects) for bottle. So, I hope I get this right.

According to your experience: /d(i)jan/ -> [dʑan]

Joemaza ( talk) 23:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I agree with the first poster; a lot of the information is not inaccurate but could be enriched since it seems to capture the pronunciation habits of certain dialects. I find that urban speakers are more likely to pronounce true [tʃ] and [dʒ] (as in the words "tsa" /tʃa/, Eng. "tea" and "diyan" /dijan/, Eng. "there"—the sequences /dj/, /dij/ etc. seem to be in free variation with /dʒ/) but I have heard both urban speakers and most rural speakers (in my experience, that is) pronounce [tɕ] and [dʑ]. I would actually argue that [tɕ] and [dʑ] are more common from my experience.

Also, the sound [ʃ], which seems to an allophone in free variation of /sij/ (as in "siya" /sija/, Eng. "he/she"), is closer to [ɕ] in my opinion, especially in rural speakers' speech. I think it is worth including both, as in the case above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.121.74 ( talk) 04:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I've read (can't remember where) that Tagalog a is more of an [ə] or [ɐ] than an [a], so that it may be one of very few languages without an open vowel phoneme. Can anyone confirm? kwami ( talk) 09:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply

it really depends on the position of the word but some dialects do contrast it and ə is used on unstressed /a/ part of the word in most dialects. for example baka /baka/ and baka /bəka/(maybe) Kasumi-genx ( talk) 03:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply

For dialects which do not contrast it, is a [a] or [ə] in stressed position? kwami ( talk) 04:07, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply

/a/ is pronounced as an open vowel regardless if it's a back ,mid or front but it is [ə] or [ɐ] in medial stressed positions some of the dialects that split [ə] from /a/ merged [ə] with /i/ that is why masaya has a synonym/variant masiya>masaya,some nasalize their /a/ on some positions which is stereotyped on gay people. Kasumi-genx ( talk)

Okay, thanks! So, if I'm following you, a medial stressed /a/ is pronounced [ə], but it's still [a] in other positions, right? I'm just wondering if there's any language or dialect in the world that doesn't have an [a]. kwami ( talk) 06:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Kwami,in ubykh the /a/ has many allophones,it is only [a] on certain environments,in tagalog in non stressed medial position it is [a] but there is some accent. Kasumi-genx ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC). reply

it says that most philippine languages came from one root. http://language.psy.auckland.ac.nz/austronesian/research.php . Kasumi-genx ( talk) 19:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Horrible horrible and tacky. Stick to Tagalog when speaking please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.190.62 ( talk) 23:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Why has that been deleted (recently - I won't search the History for exactly how)? - Keinstein ( talk) 13:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

It looks like it was vandalized and removed in the forst two of three vandalizing edits on 11 March by an anon at IP 121.1.11.164. The third edit trashed the Code switching section. (see [3], [4], [5]). ip2location locates that IP in Makati. I'm not really into tracking down vandals, but the contribution list from that IP might give some clue. -- Boracay Bill ( talk) 23:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Just for clarification, the Philippines (and most ASEAN countries) use Dynamic IPs as well as "public generic IPs" that can be used by any ISPs. --- Laibcoms ( talk | Contribs) 08:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Thank you for doing what I hadn't time to. I've cut-and-pasted the sections back. - Keinstein ( talk) 09:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Why there is a template of <Languages of Alaska>? Are there people speaking Tagalog in Alaska? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.166.197.244 ( talk) 11:03, 7 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm wondering if anyone can tell me the Tagalog words for these kin terms:

co-wife, co-father-in-law, co-brother-in-law, etc. (Spanish coesposa, consuegro, concuñado; also if there are junior/senior distinctions)

I found an old dictionary with baisan, balay for consuegro/a, but don't know if there's a difference between those two words; also bilas for concuñados, but nothing for coesposa.

Thanks, kwami ( talk) 06:38, 24 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Don't know if you'll find a word for co-wife. The culture of most Tagalog speakers is not polygamous, so they may not have a word for that. However, the Muslims in the South are also Tagalog speakers. Maybe they allow polygamous relationships - but the word they use might be a word tied to the Muslim religion as opposed to a general word. Not every word in every language has a corresponding word in every other language.

I just checked my Vicassan's Pilipino-English Dictionary, Abridged Edition, and there's no entry for baisan or balay. "bilas" is there alright, "The husband of one's sister-in-law".

The Tagalog equivalent of English's "co-" is "ka", so maybe "kaasawa" is co-wife. Gronky ( talk) 21:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC) reply

I mean, if I used the word "ka-asawa" in a sentence without explanation, the person I was talking to would probably ask what I'm talking about, but, if I was talking to someone in English and they used the word "co-wife", I'd ask them what they're talking about (especially if the person I was talking to was a non-native English speaker), even though the word is actually correct. Gronky ( talk) 11:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Well, I don't want to make words up, so if Tagalog doesn't have a word, then so be it. The consuegro terms might be obsolete, or maybe just too obscure for an abridged dictionary. I wonder if bilas is actually masculine, or if that's just an error in translation. kwami ( talk) 14:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Ka is just the equivalent -ian or -ese in philippine languages it's synonyms are I-(Northern Philippine),Taga and -Non —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasumi-genx ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC) reply

I was thinking if Tagalog can be divided into two languages since the Bikol group was reclassified to many languages from one based on the current gauge of classification of Philippine languages.-- Kasumi-genx ( talk)

Is this question still related to the improvement of the article Tagalog language on Wikipedia?-- JL 09  _{^q? c} 14:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Yes,because there is no studies regarding that...—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasumi-genx ( talk • contribs) 11:04, January 3, 2010