Module talk:tl-pronunciation

Fix needed

I since redone the code based on the one used for Spanish, but I still see many problems with transcriptions such as:

• {{tl-IPA|ko}}
• IPA^(key): /ko/, [ko] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈko/
• {{tl-IPA|pasô}}
• IPA^(key): /paˈsoʔ/, [pɐˈsoʔ] -> should be IPA^(key): /pɐˈsoʔ/
• {{tl-IPA|halík}}
• IPA^(key): /haˈlik/, [hɐˈlik] -> should be IPA^(key): /hɐˈlik/
• {{tl-IPA|halíp}}
• IPA^(key): /haˈlip/, [hɐˈlip] -> should be IPA^(key): /hɐˈlip/
• {{tl-IPA|gising}}
• IPA^(key): /ˈɡisiŋ/, [ˈɡi.sɪŋ] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈɡisiŋ/
• {{tl-IPA|kuwarto}}
• IPA^(key): /kuˈaɾto/, [ˈkwaɾ.to] -> should be IPA^(key): /kuˈwarto/
• {{tl-IPA|langit}}
• IPA^(key): /ˈlaŋit/, [ˈla.ŋɪt] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈlaŋit/
• {{tl-IPA|banyera}}
• IPA^(key): /banˈjeɾa/, [bɐˈɲɛ.ɾɐ] -> should be IPA^(key): /bɐnˈjɛɾɐ/
• {{tl-IPA|kasya}}
• IPA^(key): /ˈkasja/, [ˈka.ʃɐ] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈkasja/
• {{tl-IPA|Nueva Ecíja}}
• IPA^(key): /nuˌeva ʔeˈsid͡ʒa/, [ˌnwɛ.vɐ ʔɛˈsi.d͡ʒɐ] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈnuɛbaɛˈsihɐ/
• {{tl-IPA|Guimaras}}
• IPA^(key): /ɡiˈmaɾas/, [ɡɪˈma.ɾɐs] -> should be IPA^(key): /ɡimɐˈɾas/
• {{tl-IPA|Dela Cruz}}
• IPA^(key): /ˌdela ˈkɾus/, [ˌdɛ.lɐ ˈkɾus] -> should be IPA^(key): /dɛˈlakɾuz/
• {{tl-IPA|Argüelles}}
• IPA^(key): /ʔaɾɡuˈeljes/, [ʔɐɾˈɡwɛl.jɛs] -> should be IPA^(key): /aɾˈgwɛljɛs/
• {{tl-IPA|Chavez}}
• IPA^(key): /ˈt͡ʃaves/, [ˈt͡ʃa.vɛs] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈt͡ʃabɛs/
• {{tl-IPA|Santo Niño}}
• IPA^(key): /ˌsanto ˈninjo/, [ˌsan.to ˈni.ɲo] -> should be IPA^(key): /ˈsantoˈniɲo/
• {{tl-IPA|Guillermo}}
• IPA^(key): /ɡilˈjeɾmo/, [ɡɪlˈjɛɾ.mo] -> should be IPA^(key): /ɡiˈʎɛɾmo/

Can someone fix these?--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

You should add these to the test cases. DTLHS (talk) 23:22, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

G?

I would like to ask why we use the voiced velar approximant ⟨ɰ⟩ in phonetic transcription on some sounds notably the G in some Spanish related word. or for example, saying "sige." I think it's more closer to the voiced velar fricative ⟨ɣ⟩. Also I would like to note that https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Template:es-IPA, does not use ⟨ɰ⟩ in the documentation.

Since I believe you did a lot of the code, I will tag @TagaSanPedroAko. Thank you. Ysrael214 (talk) 20:34, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: Done TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:07, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko

I also would like to have the /e/ sound replaced to /ɛ/ since that's more closer on how it's used, for most cases of the pronunciation. Though I'm not exactly sure /e/ is used. I think on Philippine English words sometimes, or when the word is originally an "ai" sound such as penge [ˈpe.ŋɛʔ] from pahingi, but I'm sure /ɛ/ is more used. Thanks!

Here's for comparison from Wikipedia.

/ɛ/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-mid_front_unrounded_vowel

/e/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-mid_front_unrounded_vowel Ysrael214 (talk) 02:59, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I think that's not much of an issue: it depends on the speaker. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:48, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko It really sounds weird, sounding like a European speaker instead of a native speaking Tagalog. While I agree that it depends on the speaker, perhaps /ɛ/ only appears for the phonetic transcription (brackets, not slash notation) where allophones are more specific? But if not, that's fine. Ysrael214 (talk) 09:37, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

/m/ becoming /n/

@TagaSanPedroAko Does /m/ really become /n/ before /d/? For /ŋ/, it becomes /n/ but I hard it find to believe "damdam"/"ramdam" is pronounced as "dandam"/"randam". I think it's more of a mishearing that /m/ becomes /n/ (like samgyupsal) than it becomes "n" naturally. Ysrael214 (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I just removed the M from the sounds that becomes N before a D, L, S or T

TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

F, V, and Z

@TagaSanPedroAko @Mar vin kaiser @Mlgc1998 @Houflings I'm proposing to have /f/, /v/, and /z/ but only on the phonemic transcription (the slash notation, the bracket or phonetic should still have /p/, /b/, and /s/). diksiyonaryo.ph uses these letters when trying to give the pronunciation especially for foreign words instead of p, b, and s. For example, Nueva Ecija is nu·wé·va e·sí·ha. The authors of UPDF/KWF obviously can put nu.we.ba but they didn't, unlike for example "circle" (sír·kel). Thoughts? Ysrael214 (talk) 21:49, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko @Mar vin kaiser @Mlgc1998 @Houflings Would be adding these tomorrow if no comments. I'm currently adding Filipino alphabet characters and F needs to sound /ef/. Ysrael214 (talk) 08:02, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: For me, it's conditional yes. The reason being that in Wiktionary, we try to portray how words are used in real life as much as possible. So the question is, in the Philippines, for the Tagalog language, do native Tagalog speakers use /f/, /v/, and /z/ in speaking? The answer is yes, but more of the urban centers like Manila. Even in Manila, it's still common for lower class to not be able to pronounce /f/, /v/, and /z/ and that makes sense because it wasn't originally part of the language. However, the middle and upper class now use these phonemes in Tagalog, so because of that, they are now phonemes in Tagalog, except that they are new. Given that, words like "Felipe" or "Ifugao", middle and upper class would tend to pronounce it as /f/, while the rest would still use /p/. I say, put both, with or without a comment on who uses what. Same goes with /v/ and /z/. However, I would do it case by case basis, because I'm simply aware of Diksiyonaryo/UPF sometimes imposing its own pronunciation on a word, I can't think of them now, but it happens, where I know this word is not pronounced that way even in English or French (I remember a French word in UPF), yet they gave that pronunciation, which was weird. Anyway, agree to putting it there, but not automatically. Please give room for editors to indicate, if possible, whether to put or not put /f/ or not, or both. Like /ʔipuˈɡaw/ and /ʔifuˈɡaw/. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser I'm only aiming to change /f/, /v/, and /z/ at the broad transcription. I was thinking to retain [p], [b], and [s] in the narrow transcription. So you mean, I should retain [f], [v], and [z] at the narrow transcription?

I think editors can just put {{tl-IPA|ipugaw}} and it would make it as /p/. Ysrael214 (talk) 08:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: What about backwards? Like I have to put {{tl-IPA|ifugaw}} for /f/ to come out, and /p/ will be the default. The reason being that /p/ is never wrong, it's the base of Tagalog and majority still don't say /f/. In other words, one will never be wrong by pronouncing any letter F that comes into Tagalog as /p/. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser Something like this would be the output:

/ʔifuˈɡaw/, [ʔɪ.pʊˈɣaʊ̯] Ysrael214 (talk) 08:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser or are you thinking something more of a

===Pronunciation===

• IPA: /ʔifuˈɡaw/, [ʔɪ.fʊˈɣaʊ̯]
• IPA: /ʔipuˈɡaw/, [ʔɪ.pʊˈɣaʊ̯]

Ysrael214 (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: Yes, the latter one, since they're different pronunciations from different sociolects. Like me, I won't ever naturally say [ʔɪ.pʊˈɣaʊ̯], but I know that the tendency of most Tagalog speakers in lower mid and lower class would not be able to pronounce the /f/ and say [ʔɪ.pʊˈɣaʊ̯]. So doesn't make sense to illustrate them as if they're the same pronunciation (as if by the same person). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Special Words, ng, mga

@TagaSanPedroAko @Mar vin kaiser @Houflings @Mlgc1998 I did this with the tl-bay sc module and has been very efficient so far. More often than not, when an entry has "ng" or "mga", we would put a parameter replacing the "ng" with "nang" or "manga". This could've been automatically changed to "nang" and "manga" in the module. The only time "ng" that would output /ŋ/ is only at the "Ng", "ng" letter entry. Do you agree that we should programmatically replace "ng" and "mga" so that we don't have to manually add a parameter for these? We can still add the character ŋ at the parameters if we still want to output only /ŋ/ (Well for mga, why would we want /mga/ though.). Ysrael214 (talk) 20:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: I'm thinking if in the future, there's a word like "samgay" or "tamga" spelled like this for whatever reason, the "mga" inside the word might not be able to be spelled unless we make that the exception, doing something like sam.gay. Would it matter in the middle of words even for "ng"? Or would it only matter if it's an isolated word "mga" or "ng"? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 01:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser Only isolated word. Can be done. Ysrael214 (talk) 01:58, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: Seems ok to me. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Fixes

I used the {{tl-pr}} for some entries I have previously edited or created, but there are still issues when there are multiple pronunciations involved or there are qualifiers. The integrated template works fine if there is just one pronunciation, but still not works for those that have multiple pronunciations. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko Example? Ysrael214 (talk) 07:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I tested this in baywang. I'm expecting IPA for both "baywáng" and "bewang" to appear, but only syllabification appears. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko

• (Standard Tagalog)
  • IPA^(key): /ˈtestiŋ/ [ˈtɛs.tɪŋ]
    • Rhymes: -estiŋ
  • IPA^(key): /tesˈtiŋ/ [tɛsˈtiŋ] (what do you mean just one pronunciation?)
    • Rhymes: -iŋ Ysrael214 (talk) 07:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ysrael214 I was expecting something like with the Spanish pronunciation section template, where the other pronunciations don't have to be placed under parameter IPA2, IPA3 and so on. Maybe have those handled with aliases as the default second unnamed parameter?TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:22, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko That is intended because for Spanish, the diacritics is one to one on how it would be read. In Tagalog, sometimes the hyphenation is different from the IPA considering as well we have Spanish loans, English loans, etc. Ysrael214 (talk) 07:24, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko So they have to be separated. Ysrael214 (talk) 07:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh I see now, tried it with named parameters for the second pronunciation and it now works. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko Nice. But yea hyphenations are needed, especially in cases like Batangas Ysrael214 (talk) 07:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ysrael214 I just expanded the documentation, but I'm noticing in usage examples for multiple-word entries I added, the rhymes are still shown. I think that should be automatically suppressed where multiple terms are detected. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko For example, hawa, where it could be hawa or hawà. Shouldn't both be detectable in case I'm finding for rhymes with lawà? Ysrael214 (talk) 07:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko Ahh nevermind, you mean multiple word? like a sentence? Ysrael214 (talk) 07:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I mean multiword terms as well as phrases and sentences. Those should not get rhyme (only individual words). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 08:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko I asked a Wiktionary admin, and rhymes for multiple words are still okay to include. So it could still be useful despite so. Ysrael214 (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Old Tagalog accent label

@TagaSanPedroAko @Mlgc1998 @Mar vin kaiser @Houflings What are your thoughts on replacing "Old Tagalog" label (See tadhana) to "Classical Tagalog"? All Vocabularios exist during Classical Tagalog don't they? Ysrael214 (talk) 02:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Or should this just have an "obsolete" label instead? Ysrael214 (talk) 02:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ysrael214: For me, we have to make sure whether the terms "Old Tagalog" and "Classical Tagalog" are actually used in academic literature and have defined time spans. For example, if the term "Classical Tagalog" is defined as the Tagalog during the Spanish colonial period, then the Vocabulario dictionaries would be of that period, and "Classical Tagalog" could fit that, which would be more specific than the term "obsolete". However, I don't think we have any record of Tagalog prior to Spanish colonization, so maybe the distinction isn't necessary, and the term "obsolete" may suffice. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 03:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ysrael214 just leave it as "obsolete" because sometimes it's confusing to exactly identify when exactly a term was already there long ago in the overall timeline. Old Tagalog is meant to be the Tagalog before the centuries of Spanish influence and latin letter writing came of Spanish colonial era that markedly affected Tagalog in certain ways, which basically represents Classical Tagalog. Then Modern Tagalog or "Filipino" is when the Americans came along with English in a mainstream sense and the post-colonial modern era. Old Tagalog is also that Tagalog that lived together, possibly codeswitching some Old Malay, Classical Sanskrit, Classical Arabic, Middle Tamil, Classical Persian, Old Javanese, and either Medieval Min Chinese and/or Late Middle Chinese, that were possibly being spoken back then and later became cemented as medieval loans by the time of Classical Tagalog that even people that argue about the difference of Filipino with Tagalog based on loanwords and purists do not usually realize anymore as really old loanwords. "Old Tagalog" is also the umbrella term for any older stages of Tagalog spoken very early on right before it split off of its closest kin in Central Philippine languages probably around a millennia ago or more. can check the academic literature on that, but for now, the exact pronunciation during the time of Old Tagalog and Classical Tagalog may not be clear yet these years, so what may simply be certain is that they are "obsolete" pronunciations no longer used in modern times until more specific dating can be known and more is certainly found in terms of Old Tagalog on prehispanic stuff. Mlgc1998 (talk) 11:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)