User talk:Mar vin kaiser

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search


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)

Topical categories[edit]

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)

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 (talkcontribs).
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)


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)


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)


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



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

suglaguman at suglamuman[edit]

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)

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, 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)
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)
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)


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)

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


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

@Tooironic seems fine to me. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Weird, it's appearing OK now. Never mind. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)


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)

Min Nan - same across dialects[edit]

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)


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


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)

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)
Oh, wait. Min Nan DOES use 曱甴. Well, at least Teochew does. Based on what I found here --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
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)
I've put some notes on both pages. What do you think? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:08, 28 June 2016 (UTC)


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


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

Senyas Baybayin[edit]

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

@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)
I thought, that other Tagalog-speaking users of the Wiktionary would be interested. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I am interested. Thanks for sharing. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)


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)

@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)
@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)

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)
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)
@Mar vin kaiser So, any Tagalog dictionaries I could use that have the accents? Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:32, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Is that a no? :D Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
@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)
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)


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)

@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)
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)


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

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)


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)


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)

Fixed. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
@Tooironic We generally don't use {{zh-compound}} unless {{zh-forms}} is insufficient. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Two things about Min Nan[edit]

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

(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)

Personally I think that the current display, where the region of the reading is not immediately visible, could be improved. —suzukaze (tc) 08:19, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
I actually prefer to split the collapsed display by region. i.e.
* Quanzhou: ge̍rh /gəʔ²⁴/ invalid IPA characters (g), replace g with ɡ {}, goa̍t /guat̚²⁴/ invalid IPA characters (g), replace g with ɡ {}
* Xiamen: <..> /../, <..> /../ (in a certain region order).
The split-by-poj approach is easier to implement, however. Wyang (talk) 22:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


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

I use 兩岸辭典, which Justinrleung suggests for Taiwan-Mainland differences. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

  1. ^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. ^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Min Nan readings for [edit]

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

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

帶勁, 起勁 and 幹勁[edit]

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

@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)
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)
@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)


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

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)
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 (tc) 05:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
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)


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

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)
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)


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)

Names from the Bible[edit]

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)

@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)
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)
I just took a look at 聖經 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)
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)
@Andrew Sheedy: yeah, that's probably a good idea. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
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)

X is used in Mainland in Min Nan pronunciation notes[edit]

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)

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)
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)

Hokkien phonology/rendering[edit]

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)

@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)


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)

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


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)

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


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

@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)
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)

Tagalog gay slang (Beki language)[edit]

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)

Context labels[edit]

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! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:59, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Philippine Hokkien[edit]

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)

@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)
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)
@Justinrleung: If you watch this Youtube video, 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)
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)
@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)
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)
@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)
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)
@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)
Alright, fixed for both Jinjiang and Philippine Hokkien. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 12:56, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Adding citations for surnames[edit]

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)


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)

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


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

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

Days of the week.[edit]

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

@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)
See our definition of proper noun. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


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)

@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)

boboloy, bukos[edit]

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

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

Min Nan 十五 (gǒ͘ / gō͘)[edit]

Could you check the POJ you added? —suzukaze (tc) 18:50, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

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

apa#Etymology 1[edit]

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

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


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


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)

@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)
  • 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. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
@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)
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. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:42, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
( :/suzukaze (tc) 00:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC))

Plural of some Malay entries[edit]

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)

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

Teochew pronunciation[edit]

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)

@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)
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)
@Justinrleung: I see now. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
@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)
That's the only one I've noticed so far. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 17:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

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)

@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 --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Ah, ok. I found a copy of it. Thanks! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


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)

@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)
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)

Changes to the Mainland Min Nan labels[edit]

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

Wiktionary:About Tagalog: What about verb roots and verb focuses?[edit]

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)

@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)
@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)
@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)
@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)

Vocabulario de la lengua tagala[edit]

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)

@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)

Other sources of Tagalog citations[edit]

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)

Kavalan ungray[edit]

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

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


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

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

Cantonese tone change[edit]

Hi, I noticed that when you make Chinese entries, you often leave out Cantonese tone changes, like for 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)

@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)
@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)
@Justinrleung: Yes, I noticed that too when I learned Cantonese. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:57, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Not a problem! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:05, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

spelling of Abinomn[edit]

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)

@Vorziblix: Oh, I'm sorry, I'll change it to "Abinomn". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:41, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
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)
@Chuck Entz: It's already fixed. I changed all spellings to "Abinomn". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
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)