User talk:Acer Cyle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello. I have few questions for you.

In the Chavacano article, you still changed the English word in the table from "common" to "comon". Now my question is: is there such an English word as "comon"? That table (which I created) is a table for an article written in English. So, why change to "comon"?

Kanon was again changed to "canon". Kanon, obviously, came from Tagalog/Cebuano "kanin"; there is no Spanish word as "canon" but "morisqueta". When the origin of a Chavacano word is local, why use Spanish orthography or Spanish spelling? Is there such word in Spanish as "canon" referring to rice?

The common/familiar Chavacano for rain is no doubt the local word "ulan" but you keep changing it to aguacero (which is the formal word). I don't know why you cannot accept "ulan" when most Zamboangeños say "ulan" in ordinary conversation. The same thing with comida. We say comida referring to food and we ordinarily say "ulam" for dish. You keep changing it to comida. Lolo and lola have become part of Chavacano in recent years that is is very common nowadays to call our grandparents as lolo and lola.

I suggest you read Ben Saavedra's speech at UP where he clearly illustrated the "evolving" character of Chavacano. --Weekeejames (talk) 05:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rspuesto

i didnt change the english commom to comon! bt anyway, if i did... im sory...maybe i havnt notice it..

know what there are a lot of articles regarding the correct spelling, rules, grammar and etc... Canon is actually accepted... i, myself spell it as canon.. even my Defunta Tia-Abuela, mis Padres, tio y tia ancina ta escribi...

for ulam, i only heard it from estranijero, who speak Zamboangueño

bt me, myself used comida versus ulam

canon or mrisqueta vesus kanin o kanon...

there are books and article that i've read.. saying, vocabulary are purely from spanish even the spelling....

we only used the spelling of certain into filipino if that word/s came from filipino word/s like kame.kamo, sila, kanila and etc...

and take note we the alphabet from spanish such as ñ,LL,q,a,e,h,j,g and some from filipino like "k"

q for que ll for llma, lleno, llanta, llega etc...

g for gente

j for junto

h for hora

ñ for mañana, daños, engaña/o etc..

and all origin of spanish words, we spelled it as it is spelled in spanish...

sad to say that some or almost all zamobangueños doesnt knw how to write the correct spelling or even to read the correct pronunciation...

but again,, despensa mucho amigo!



"there are books and article that i've read.. saying, vocabulary are purely from spanish even the spelling....
we only used the spelling of certain into filipino if that word/s came from filipino word/s like kame.kamo, sila, kanila and etc..."
That was actually my contention and I do agree with señor Bernardino Camins in his dictionary that when a Chavacano word has its origin from local languages - like kanin, then it has to follow local spelling, hence kanon. And when a Chavacano word has its origin from Spanish, it has to follow Spanish spelling. While I am certainly not an "estranijero" (my grandfather's family from my father's side originally were from Cavite--who probably spoke Caviteño Chabacano--who migrated to Zamboanga at the turn of the 20th century and my grandmother's family from my father's side - the Fernandezes of Sta. Catalina; my mom's families are Zamboangueños - the Falcasantos of Tetuan, Tugbungan, Tungawan, Licomo, and the Lunas of Mercedes, and incidentally, my great great Luna grandfather, incidentally, was a Mexican from the Spanish Galleon who migrated to Zamboanga), I did hear in my families say "ulam" when we refer to vianda. Of course, my older relatives still say vianda. I mean, let's face it...the Chavacano of mid 1900 to the present is no longer the same as the Chavacano of the 1800-mid 1900's. Ben Saavedra clearly pointed that out in his speech. I think we have to accept the evolving character of Chavacano because if it didnt evolve in the first place, there would be no Chavacano. Let's face it, Chavacano does borrow words from other local languages (not only pronouns) hence, "ulam" or "ulan" are part of conversational Chavacano and can be classified as within common or familiar mode. The best thing about Chavacano is that it does not possess any "rigid" rules and it is very fluid in orthography, grammar, and vocabulary, and I agree with Ben Saavedra, Bernardino Camins and Prof. Juan Gaspar de los Reyes of Ateneo Graduate School. For example, while "Hende" is the correct spelling. we cannot rule out "Hinde" or while there is "Maga", there is also "Mana"--that's the fluidity of the language especially when words are borrowed from local Philippine languages. But this fluidity is just a character, not a rule. Hence, Manok cannot be "manoc" the same way kanon from kanin cannot be "canon" because there has to be a rule: when words are local in origin, they have to follow local spelling and when words are Spanish in origin, they have to follow Spanish spelling. Anyway, I myself do commit mistakes in my spellings and I do certainly admit that. I have contributed much to this Chavacano article in the English wikipedia and the Chavacano wikipedia, and I hope to be able to contribute more. But we have to face reality and be flexible. Well actually flexibilty is one character of Chavacano. You see, Cha-v-acano is not the same old Cha-b-acano. Even the original word spelled in Spanish with a "b" has turned into Chavacano with a "v", but then again there is no letter /V/ in Tagalog or in Visayan languages so it's still Spanish in character. I myself also commit spelling mistakes, but when I believe I am in the correct track, I try to give out my arguments to support my contentions. Despensa tambien comigo especialmente con el maga cuantos error yo ta comiti. I do appreciate your help in editing here and in the Chavacano wikipedia and it feels like I am in a team with you. Gracias. --Weekeejames (talk) 08:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)