Talk:magka-diabetes

Taglish

@Yivan000 As much as possible, let's avoid Taglish because this can be applied to any English word. Move this to magkadiyabetes instead. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 09:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Is there a policy/guideline that Taglish is discouraged to include in Wiktionary? Yes, I agree that this can be applied to any English word, and I'm pretty sure that's just fine.

I believe a separate category for them will suffice, under Category:Varieties of Tagalog (or perhaps under Category:Philippine English, so that words from other code-switching stuff like Bislish and Hokaglish can also be included, if there are any). — 🍕 Yivan000 ^view_talk 09:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Mar vin kaiser @TagaSanPedroAko @Mlgc1998, how do we handle Taglish words, there already some that exists: mag-resign, mag-like, mag-comment. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 09:45, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

If we adopt a Taglish policy, I suggest we should extend it (or more specifically, make it adaptable/replicable) to cover code-switching of all other Philippine languages with English (as all inevitably do).

Also, relevant discussions on the r/Tagalog subreddit (that may be used to draft up a policy):

• https://www.reddit.com/r/Tagalog/comments/p056uf/taglish_paano_ninyo_tinatype_yung_mga_foreign/ (this particularly can be a base for what the potential spelling policy could be)
• https://www.reddit.com/r/Tagalog/comments/1djit2p/magcoclose_na_kami_o_magcoclose_na_kami/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/Tagalog/comments/u4akrp/how_do_filipinos_feel_about_the_influx_of_english/

— 🍕 Yivan000 ^view_talk 10:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

@Yivan000 Technically the community can create language-specific rules: Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Language-specific issues but the Tagalog one isn't formalized yet. Closest one is this: Wiktionary:About_Tagalog#English_loanwords.

But for me I'm against if it, or else we're going to have entries like mag-Spanish, mag-German, mag-bench press, mag-selfie, i-conjugate UNLESS the English words are commonly used in Tagalog orthography (ex. magselpon, magkadiyabetes, magkompyuter) and still would need to abide with criteria for attestation. The basis would be Tagalog spelling usage, not the English one, and we shouldn't make Tagalog-ized spellings unless already being used by the community. magkoklows if ever that's attested but I think not?

Phrases are fine (ex. sana all) but not components of a word. For magka-diabetes, maybe can be said that this is sorta attested since people do speak Taglish but it's like the only Tagalog thign here is mag-, and that's not exactly a word. That's my judgment but others can have opinions as I am not the only Tagalog editor here, nor Tagalog Wiktionary is my ownership. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 10:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

@Yivan000 Say, we do allow code-switching for Tagalog but have it in certain categories, what words would you add to the table? 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 10:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Of course I agree that the words should still abide WT:CFI.

However, now that I think about it, adding such Taglish terms would clutter up established Wiktionary rules for Tagalog, including but not limited to orthography. (IMO it would also clutter Tagalog category pages, since it would then just be full of Taglish terms).

I'm throwing this out there, but what if we relegate all Taglish words into a separate Wiktionary-specific language altogether? This would require some work, but this I believe would solve our problems with including Taglish terms under Tagalog. Some thoughts on this:

• This could be inclusive of all code-switching Philippine languages + English, for example, the Ilocano-English "ag-market".
• This could be a future-proofing measure, as English will continue to evolve in conjunction with Philippine languages.
• Words such as "nag-highschool" could exist, and just be linked to it as a Taglish translation of "naghayskul".
• All existing templates (especially conjugations) can just be used, but maybe with an additional flag marking it as Taglish or something.

Others would have to weigh in this, of course. (I suggest the language code phi-en). — 🍕 Yivan000 ^view_talk 11:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

@Yivan000 That would just duplicate a lot of entries not needed. For future-proofing, is it that urgent? If people do start using them in Tagalog (like the spelling is different then it's not exactly the same word) or some community or even KWF determined a word to be Tagalog and not Taglish, that's when we add them here. People would be cringing when they see onlayn (which KWF declared as Tagalog anyway)

Can't we just add usage notes for the prefixes or some Appendix:Taglish? Also what's phi-en? Filipino- English? Will all ~200 gonna be in that category? Besides prefixed English (or even Japanese, Spanish or Chinese words) what else would it contain? Would an entry pinag-effort-an be useful upon looking up on the English dictionary besides pagsikapan?

mag-laptop, to use laptop

mag-mouse, to use mouse

mag-picture, to take picture

mag-effort, to do effort

i-turn off, to be turned off

i-sentence, to be turned into sentence form

anxiety-hin, to experience anxiety

idk mag-hay-iskul would have more use than mag-high school despite being the same in essence.

Will make bili also be in this Taglish language? Is Taglish a language?

Also adding a new language here isn't easy, you have to convince Wiktionary admins to create the language code, get number of votes from users who are convinced about this change (not just Ph editors), and then implement it.

"Early Modern Spanish" was just added recently even though some people were asking for it years ago lol

If you can create an Ilocano-English code switching dictionary, let's see how it goes (but not in Wiktionary).

I'm fine (neutral, not in favor) with a Taglish category for now though but not under Varieties of Tagalog, not sure where.

Just my opinion. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 21:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ No worries, I was just throwing the idea out there. I know it is a monumental & humungous move for a multitude of reasons, even more so than what you said.
Maybe what we can practically do are one of these options:

1. Disallow all Taglish entries.
   • Relagate all (like what you mentioned) to an Appendix:Taglish wherein we can explain how can such a Taglish term be created. There is existing literature on this, so we don't have to worry about this .
   • Maybe in each english term, in the "Descendants" section, we have a template that directs to Appendix:Taglish, perhaps in this form:

     ⇒ Tagalog: (Taglish) see Appendix:Taglish

   • Redirect new & existing Tagalog entries either to Appendix:Taglish or to their English counterpart or to their Tagalog counterpart.
2. Allow only common specific entries, others gets the above treatment.
   • PRO: This way, stuff like mag-subscribe can exist.
   • CON: The line on commonality gets really blurry, I'm not sure there will ever be an agreement on this.
3. Allow all Taglish entries.
4. Allow only words that KWF specifically confirmed can be used. (i.e. in https://kwfdiksiyonaryo.ph/)

What do you think?

— 🍕 Yivan000 ^view_talk 04:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Yivan000

Leaning toward #1/#4. English loans that aren't Taglish (or the English term is already transformed to Tagalog) can still be retained. But if a Spanish loan exists, that would be favored.

ex. magkadiyabetes preferred than magkadayabetis, ofc more than magka-diabetes.

Slangs are more freer like sana all so they can be retained as Tagalog. Or no category, just a link from {{Taglish}} (Tagalog-English code-switching (Taglish)) to Appendix:Taglish. For descendants of English entry, maybe no need. Just let the main entry explain. No redirections.

Although i-ref may become iref if ref can be argued as Tagalog since it's Philippine English.

For #2, those common specific entries would likely already have a Tagalog spelling anyway.

Time would tell if the Taglish words would just be Tagalog that people cant tell anymore that it was English. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 06:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Personally I'm in favor of #4, in that way we somewhat have a clear boundary while still allowing them.

I'm also waiting for the input of the users you had pinged. — 🍕 Yivan000 ^view_talk 08:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Yivan000 Ayt. Though KWF would never write slang or colloquial Taglish for now lol. They'd write English loaned roots then the conjugations would appear. (KWF Dictionary has mag-xerox/ i-xerox though). magka-diabetes isn't slang. Anyway, pinging again (ofc they may take maybe days to reply) @Mar vin kaiser @Mlgc1998 @TagaSanPedroAko 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 13:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Ysrael214 Now that you moved it, will you retain the magka-diabetes redirect? — 🍕 Yivan000 ^view_talk 14:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Ysrael214 @Yivan000 I think I agree with the above on #1 and #4, with #1 at least am alright with how {{Taglish}} in Tagalog i-ref was handled.

The current view on Taglish these days by Tagalophone society has some level of wide support in its ubiquitous colloquial to informal mainstream usage and popular trend in marketing ads, but today as of this writing from what I am aware of, Taglish speakers still think they are using two different languages that they just choose to conveniently codemix in with their conjugations, so there's a lot who still feel they have to point out this specific word or conjugated word in a phrase or sentence they use is specifically "Taglish" because they knowingly realize they are speaking another language into their base Tagalog, so in a sense, they are not full Tagalog yet or at least mainstream Tagalophone society has not accepted certain specific words they use in Taglish yet as real full Tagalog, but there exist some terms where it has been accepted and these are basically the legit loanwords we have recorded in our Tagalog entries here. For example some words, where there exist some Tagalog speakers who do not know they are loanwords and they just go about using it thinking it's normal Tagalog, rather than "Taglish".

I would be concerned with #4 tho in that https://kwfdiksiyonaryo.ph/ and https://diksiyonaryo.ph/ sometimes are not consistent with what they've added where one site has but the other doesn't or are ambiguous on the purpose of different terms they've added, or there is also the possibility, they add something in the future and then some time later, they backtrack and decide to remove it and we don't notice what they've done in the future. I think what can supercede in those cases is at least some best judgment discretion of how mainstream Tagalophone society generally sees the matter, since the government regulators are mainly doing their job via measuring as well how Tagalophone society perceives these words in general and which ones have more acceptance than others in terms of stable wide usage that will last decades or perhaps centuries later, cuz there might be cases sometimes where in some years or some specific sectors of Tagalophone society has some level of acceptance, but later on views on the matter could fluctuate and some amount of people would think a certain entry is ridiculous to have been added since they themselves do not accept nor see much usage of that term themselves, which could be controversial. In those cases, multiple well sourced published reliable attestations as per Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion can judge if those would stay in the future or at least much better if multiple Dictionaries or Dictionary websites are reporting that hey this word is legit indeed Tagalog already. This might mean some slang or vulgar words might be hard to record but it represents how formal Tagalophone society perceives the matter anyways. For those hard to find attestations or official records in online or printed dictionaries, someone can go publish in the future more books using colloquial slang language recording those usages for them to be reliably recorded. This is also how future historical record can show that those words existed before rather than relying on random person's memory in the future about it. For Taglish, I find it will be prone such cases as some words people randomly use today might not be used again decades later, so ideally recording what ages well years later or more so decades or centuries later are the ones best to have an entry here in wikt. and I suppose historical obsolete words that used to thrive before as well to bring better context to present studies by interested people on that topic. Mlgc1998 (talk) 00:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)