Talk:Filipino orthography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of Tambayan Philippines, the WikiProject and notice board for topics related to the Philippines. To participate, visit the Tambayan for more information.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Chinese character "Book" This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s importance scale.

[edit] Filipinized spelling

I pointed out in the links section the fact that there are many possible ways to Filipinize a foreign word using the 2001 rules (which is merely a green light for the use of letters not native to Tagalog). Examples are:

  • geography (if not heograpiya or heografiya): jiyografi, jiografi (if indeed intervocalic glottal stops would not anymore exist in Filipino);
  • scholar: skolar (we can’t just ignore the fact that many Metro Manileños can pronounce initial /s/-clusters), iskolar, eskolar, skalr, eskalr, iskalr;
  • Filipinized (if not Filipinisado): Filipinayzd, Filipinazd, Filipinozd;
  • trivia: trivya, triviya, trivia (see note on jiografi above), tribya;
  • social: sosyal, sowsyal, sowsyl, sosyl;
  • gigante: higante, hegante (as used in the blog), syigante, syegante;
  • extra: ekstra, ikstra, estra, istra;
  • Australia: Ostreliya, Ostrelya, Ostrelia (see note on jiografi above), Ostraya, Straya, (or even) Estraya, Istraya (and for Spanish) Awstralya, Australia (again, see note on jiografi).

And those are just some. Personally, I would just let foreign words assimilate themselves naturally into Filipino over time. After all, accents abound, and transcription (without regard to etymology) would result in either a multitude of spellings (as demonstrated above) or the unacceptable imposition (as opposed to gradual and consensual acceptance among the general populace) of a single set of pronunciation rules.

Looks like the "Komisyon" has codified Filipino/Tagalog orthography. [1]. Joemaza (talk) 08:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Checked out the link. The authors acknowledged toward the end of the document however that Filipino orthography has not been (re-)codified: "Sa puntong ito, kailangang linawin na walang ganap na bagong kalakaran at kumbensyon sa patnubay na ito. Ang marami rito ay dati nang mga kaalaman at tuntunin na naipahayag, naimungkahi o naiharap na sa nakaraan, subalit sa di malamang dahilan ay naiwaksi at nakalimutan. Sa ganang amin, ang muling pagpapahayag ng mga subok na at nakagawian nang tuntunin ay hindi masama kundi mabuting bagay." --Angelo (talk) 15:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Collation/Order

What is the order now? Does K still follow B, or has it now returned to following J? Joemaza 22:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The alphabet used since 1987 (I think) for Filipino, is 28 letters. So the same order as in English, with Ñ and the digraph NG. So yes, K is after J. --Chris S. 03:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
This is probably more of a consistency issue, but while the UP Filipino Dictionary (at least the 1st edition) lists the entries under Ñ and NG after those of N, within entries of the same letter the combination ‘ng’ almost always comes before ‘ny’.
I'd LOVE to get a copy of that dictionary. How do I go about getting it? According to the link, it hasn't been released yet.
But, return to the issues of order... When the letter begins with these letters it's, N, Ñ, NG... But, let's say within words... -na-, -ng-, -nga-, -ngg- , -ny-, -ñ- ?

Joemaza (talk) 23:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Macasáquit

Is it possible for someone to give the reference for this? Not only would it be useful (as the only given reference in the article doesn't include any of the names) but I'm interested in learning its origins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.7.241.89 (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)