Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Harvey Fiji - Waray Again

Expand Messages
  • Chris S.
    Hi Harvey, I hope you don t mind my seemingly endless questions about Waray. Could I get translations again? I will explain later. I am doing comparisons with
    Message 1 of 22 , Jul 23, 2004
      Hi Harvey,

      I hope you don't mind my seemingly endless questions about Waray.

      Could I get translations again? I will explain later. I am doing
      comparisons with Maripipi Waray.

      Hindi ko alam kung ano ang gagawin niya bukas.
      Ano ito?
      Ano ang kinakain mo?

      --Chris
    • sumuroy1998
      ... No. I don t mind. Glad to be of help. ... The Tagalog gawa is either hímò or búhat in Waray. So literally this would be: Diri ak[o] maaram kon
      Message 2 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
        --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Chris S." <bq109@s...>
        wrote:
        > Hi Harvey,
        >
        > I hope you don't mind my seemingly endless questions about Waray.

        No. I don't mind. Glad to be of help.

        > Could I get translations again? I will explain later. I am doing
        > comparisons with Maripipi Waray.
        >
        > Hindi ko alam kung ano ang gagawin niya bukas.

        The Tagalog "gawa" is either "hímò" or "búhat" in Waray. So
        literally this would be:

        Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it hihimo-on niya buwas.

        OR

        Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it bubuhaton niya buwas.

        OR

        Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it iya bubuhaton buwas.

        OR

        Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it iya hihimo-on buwas.


        But I prefer to use the following construction:

        Diri ak[o] maaram kon mag-aano hiya buwas.

        > Ano ito?

        Ano ini?

        > Ano ang kinakain mo?
        >

        Ano it kinaka-on nim[o]?

        OR

        Ano it ginkaka-on nim[o]?

        OR

        Ano it im[o] kinaka-on?

        (The bracketed letters indicate what is to be dropped off, whenever
        a speaker wishes to abbreviate).

        --Harvey
      • Chris S.
        ... Thanks. Ok, so my my friend Kalani s cousin, Kathy, is the native informant who speaks Maripipi Waray. Kalani relays messages back and forth between Kathy
        Message 3 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
          --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "sumuroy1998"
          <sumuroy1998@y...> wrote:
          > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it hihimo-on niya buwas.
          > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it bubuhaton niya buwas.
          > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it iya bubuhaton buwas.
          > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it iya hihimo-on buwas.
          > Diri ak[o] maaram kon mag-aano hiya buwas.
          > Ano ini?
          > Ano it kinaka-on nim[o]?
          > Ano it ginkaka-on nim[o]?
          > Ano it im[o] kinaka-on?

          Thanks.

          Ok, so my my friend Kalani's cousin, Kathy, is the native informant
          who speaks Maripipi Waray. Kalani relays messages back and forth
          between Kathy & me via e-mail.

          Based on her translations, we determined that the Maripipi dialect is
          an S-dialect, unlike the Tacloban standard. On a side note, Abuyog in
          Leyte is S-dialect and that's south of Tacloban. So I think the H-
          dialect thing is an innovation limited to the central part of the
          Waray homeland.

          In any case, I had her translate the stuff I had you translate above.
          And she came up with:

          Naman ine
          Naman ang imong kinakaun
          Waray gad ako kalibutan kug unsa man an iya hitabu buwas

          I found the use of NAMAN rather odd. Furthermore, she switched to
          UNSA MAN in mid sentence. Have you ever encountered NAMAN as the word
          for WHAT?

          Here are more translations:

          Makadto c tomas s balay ng iya eroy.
          (Pupunta si Tomas sa bahay ng nanay niya).

          Magtutuon sera san manok n gekan s tindahan san lagas n babaye
          (Magluluto sila ng manok na galing sa tindahan ng matandang babae).

          So from your point of view, what do you make of these translations?

          Salamat uli.

          --Chris
        • Dante Ferry
          ... This question is for Harvey - What is the difference between it & an in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an) im(o) kinaka-on? - Dante ...
          Message 4 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
            --- sumuroy1998 <sumuroy1998@...> wrote:
            > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Chris S."
            > <bq109@s...>
            > wrote:
            > > Hi Harvey,
            > >
            > > I hope you don't mind my seemingly endless
            > questions about Waray.
            >
            > No. I don't mind. Glad to be of help.
            >
            > > Could I get translations again? I will explain
            > later. I am doing
            > > comparisons with Maripipi Waray.
            > >
            > > Hindi ko alam kung ano ang gagawin niya bukas.
            >
            > The Tagalog "gawa" is either "h�m�" or "b�hat" in
            > Waray. So
            > literally this would be:
            >
            > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it hihimo-on niya buwas.
            >
            > OR
            >
            > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it bubuhaton niya buwas.
            >
            > OR
            >
            > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it iya bubuhaton buwas.
            >
            > OR
            >
            > Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it iya hihimo-on buwas.
            >
            >
            > But I prefer to use the following construction:
            >
            > Diri ak[o] maaram kon mag-aano hiya buwas.
            >
            > > Ano ito?
            >
            > Ano ini?
            >
            > > Ano ang kinakain mo?
            > >
            >
            > Ano it kinaka-on nim[o]?
            >
            > OR
            >
            > Ano it ginkaka-on nim[o]?
            >
            > OR
            >
            > Ano it im[o] kinaka-on?
            >
            > (The bracketed letters indicate what is to be
            > dropped off, whenever
            > a speaker wishes to abbreviate).
            >
            > --Harvey

            This question is for Harvey - What is the difference
            between "it" & "an" in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an) im(o)
            kinaka-on? - Dante
            >
            >





            __________________________________
            Do you Yahoo!?
            New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
            http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
          • sumuroy1998
            Chris S. wrote: Thanks. Ok, so my my friend Kalani s cousin, Kathy, is the native informant who speaks Maripipi Waray. Kalani relays messages
            Message 5 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004


              "Chris S." <bq109@...> wrote:

              Thanks.

              Ok, so my my friend Kalani's cousin, Kathy, is the native informant who speaks Maripipi Waray. Kalani relays messages back and forth between Kathy & me via e-mail.

              Based on her translations, we determined that the Maripipi dialect is an S-dialect, unlike the Tacloban standard. On a side note, Abuyog in Leyte is S-dialect and that's south of Tacloban. So I think the H-
              dialect thing is an innovation limited to the central part of the Waray homeland.

              Abuyog is a border town (located on the boundary between Cebuano and Waray speaking territory), about 1 hour drive from Tacloban (some 40-50 kilometers).  Due west, the next town is Mahaplag which is also a border town, but due south, (if there should be a road going south, which isn't the case for the present) the next town is Silago, Southern Leyte a Cebuano-speaking town.  So it wouldn't surprise me.  But I've observed that many from Abuyog are bi-dialectal, switching to the H standard when they go to Tacloban.

              In any case, I had her translate the stuff I had you translate above.
              And she came up with:

              Naman ine
              Naman ang imong kinakaun
              Waray gad ako kalibutan kug unsa man an iya hitabu buwas

              I found the use of NAMAN rather odd. Furthermore, she switched to
              UNSA MAN in mid sentence. Have you ever encountered NAMAN as the word
              for WHAT?

              Not that I can recall, although I have encountered "Nano" for "what" but this was used by those who come from the northern part of Samar.  Although there is "ano naman" (which in rapid speech sometimes is heard as "an'naman") and "ano man".  We do use "naman" in Tacloban in asking questions, but it is usually coupled with "ano" or another question word, not a stand-in for "ano" or 'what'.  "Naman" could be a rapid-speech variant of either "ano naman" or "ano man" where the beginning, rather than the ending is dropped.

              "Imong kinakaon" appears to be either Cebuano influenced or a local usage.  In the Waray I use, "ng" appended to "imo" is unnecessary, "imo kinakaon" is sufficient.  Although I've heard speakers use "imo nga kinakaon".  (appending "ng" at the end of a word is not regular in Waray).  "ang imong" appears to a local form or Cebuano influenced since in Tacloban we use "an imo". 

              "Waray ak kalibutan" is an idiomatic expression which could mean, depending on the context,  "I don't know", "I haven't a clue", "I have no idea" or "I don't care".  "Gad" is one of those Waray particles which I can't translate into English, Tagalog or even Cebuano, although some of its uses include expressing regret, being apologetic, or desire.

              "Kug" appears to be a typo.  It could be either "kon" or "kung" (although attaching "ng" to the end of a word in Waray is not common in the Waray I use).

              "unsa man ang iya hitabu buwas" appears to mean literally "what is his happening tomorrow" (what's he going to do, what's he planning to do).  "Unsa" is generally Cebuano, this appears to be codeswitching.

              "hitabu" in the Waray I use literally means "happening/s" or "occurence" or "event". "Iya hitabu" literally means "his events" (idiomatic for "what he's going to do" or "what's going to happen to him").

              The Waray translations are different, but they're not really unfamiliar and mutual intelligibility is not a problem.  It could be that its the speaker's choice of phrasing that's different.

              Here are more translations:

              Makadto c tomas s balay ng iya eroy.
              (Pupunta si Tomas sa bahay ng nanay niya).

              Magtutuon sera san manok n gekan s tindahan san lagas n babaye
              (Magluluto sila ng manok na galing sa tindahan ng matandang babae).

              So from your point of view, what do you make of these translations? 

              The first appears to include a codeswitching into Tagalog or should it be the imperial subdialect? The use of "Ng" indicating possession appears to me to be either Tagalog or the imperial subdialect, rather than a native form of construction.

              The literal meaning of "magtutuon" in the Waray we use in Tacloban is limited to cooking rice.  (The root is "t�on" meaning to "cook/boil rice" not "tu�n" which means "to learn/study") It could be that "magtutuon" as used in your informant's sentence is idiomatic for "cooking a meal".

              Here are the ways I would translate the first sentence. 

              Makadto hi Tomas ha balay han iya iroy.
              Makadto hi Tomas ha balay han iroy niya.
              Makadto hi Tomas ha balay han iya nanay.
              Makadto hi Tomas ha balay han nanay niya.

              The other sentence appears to be codeswitching into Cebuano (the use of "gikan") but "gikan" has been adopted into Waray and I've heard many speakers use it instead of "tikang".  ("Gik�n" accented on the last syllable, BTW means to start from a place while "g�kan" with the stress on the first syllable would mean the same as "t�kang", namely "from")

              Here's how I would translate the last sentence.

              Magluluto hira han manok nga tikang ha tindahan han lagas nga babaye.

              (It's common to use "nga" instead of "na" but I've heard speakers even in Tacloban who use "na" instead of "nga")

              Overall, I'd say the Waray of Maripipi is influenced by Cebuano vocabularywise but the structure and grammar is still recognizeable as Waray and it's mutually intelligible with Standard Waray.  As far as border towns are concerned I'm not sure though whether Cebuano influence made Waray revert to the original S consonant or whether the Waray in Maripipi retained the original S consonant which was innovated into H in Standard Waray.

              --Harvey

              __________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              http://mail.yahoo.com

            • Chris S.
              ... I know it s for Harvey, I wanna offer my two cents. Tagalog has the absolutive and ergative articles ANG & NG, respectively. Waray has three absolutive
              Message 6 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                > This question is for Harvey - What is the difference
                > between "it" & "an" in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an) im(o)
                > kinaka-on? - Dante

                I know it's for Harvey, I wanna offer my two cents. Tagalog has the
                absolutive and ergative articles ANG & NG, respectively.

                Waray has three absolutive ones: IN, AN, & IT. - all correspond to
                Tagalog ANG
                And three ergative ones: HIN, HAN, & HIT. (or SIN, SAN, & SIT) - all
                corresponding to Tagalog NG

                Dr. Zorc, in his dissertation from the 70's, puts the three into
                indefinite (in) & definite (an & it) categories. I agree with that so
                far. But he further puts the definite ones into temporal categories;
                AN for past and IT for non-past which doesn't seem consistent to me.
                I mean AN in non-past circumstances and IT in past situations.

                I've been reading Waray texts and I've gotten a vague feeling on its
                used. IN is rightly indefinite, but it doesn't seem to be used as
                much as AN and IT; but its ergative counterpart, HIN, is used much
                more. IT appears to refer to something really specific.. While AN is
                somewhere in between. Kind of general, I guess. I think the
                difference between AN and IT is something like the difference between
                Tagalog ANG & YUNG. But, again, not entirely sure.

                So, anyway.. I'm familiarizing myself with Waray... Its grammar is
                kind of mysterious to me in a way. But its vocabulary are more
                recognizable than Cebuanos, from my Tagalog perspective. And Harvey's
                been of great help in helping me understand Waray more.

                --Chris
              • Ish Fabicon
                here s my asi translations again. reading some posts in waray, i am trying to connect certain words and phrases which i found very interesting although i have
                Message 7 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                  here's my asi translations again. reading some posts in waray, i am trying to connect certain words and phrases which i found very interesting although i have vague impressions on their origins (?)  asi and waray seem to "interconnect (?)"   i am no linguist and i hope that jason lobel (who wrote a paper on the three languages of romblon)  or chris can comment.  asi/bantoanon is spoken in romblon by less than 70,000 souls! tagalog it appears to me has made such inroads to its (asi)usage and grammar?  this is scary :-(
                   
                  > Hindi ko alam kung ano ang gagawin niya bukas.
                   
                  asi: inde nako ayam kung ni-o ka ida ahimu-on/buhaton insulip

                  The Tagalog "gawa" is either "hímò" or "búhat" in Waray.  So
                  literally this would be:

                  Diri ak[o] maaram kon ano it hihimo-on niya buwas.
                   
                  buwas is romblomanon too.

                  > Ano ito?

                  Ano ini?
                   
                  asi: Ni-o kali?

                  > Ano ang kinakain mo?
                  asi: ni-o kag imo ging kaon? 

                  Ano it kinaka-on nim[o]?
                   
                  asi: ni-o kag imo kina-on?
                   
                  trivia: what's " i love you" in waray?
                   
                  in asi: it's  "namomuot ako sa imo."
                  i understand it's also bicol?
                   
                  btw, are any lister/listers in the L.A area week of July 30 to Agusut 1?
                  I am booked at the grand beverly holiday inn (near universal studios) those days.
                  i will be honored if i can meet anyone of you for cocktails and exchanges on languages. waya siguro tuba o lambanog roto :-)
                   
                  doc simp 

                • Ish Fabicon
                  ... asi: inde nako ayam kung ni-o ka ida ahimu-on/abuhaton insulip Or: buko nako ayam....... asi and waray appears similar (in meaning) on himo and buhat
                  Message 8 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                    pahabol:
                     
                    > Hindi ko alam kung ano ang gagawin niya bukas.
                     
                    asi: inde nako ayam kung ni-o ka ida ahimu-on/abuhaton insulip
                     
                    Or: buko nako ayam.......
                     
                    asi and waray appears similar (in meaning) on "himo" and "buhat"
                     
                    buhat in asi depending on usage also means, "to lift" a certain object/thing
                     
                     
                    ish
                     
                     
                  • Chris S.
                    ... Jason, in his Romblon language paper, has put Asi in its own subgroup in the Visayan family of languages. And rightly so. Asi is extremely unique among
                    Message 9 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                      --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Ish Fabicon" <fabicon@m...>
                      wrote:
                      > here's my asi translations again. reading some posts in waray, i am
                      > trying to connect certain words and phrases which i found very
                      > interesting although i have vague impressions on their origins (?)
                      > asi and waray seem to "interconnect (?)"

                      Jason, in his Romblon language paper, has put Asi in its own subgroup
                      in the Visayan family of languages. And rightly so. Asi is extremely
                      unique among Visayan languages. It does have a Visayan flavor, but it
                      can't be immediately linked to any of the Visayan languages. In this
                      respect, it reminds me a lot like Kapampangan.

                      I'd really love to learn a lot more Asi some day. I'm looking forward
                      to that dictionary. And I think Jason will do a more in-depth grammar
                      of it.

                      >>trivia: what's " i love you" in waray?
                      >> in asi: it's "namomuot ako sa imo."
                      > i understand it's also bicol?

                      Correct, in Bikol it's Namomoot ako saimo. Or you can say Namomo-tan
                      taka.

                      I have "HINIHIGUGMA KO IKAW" as "I love you" in Waray-Waray.

                      --Chris
                    • Dante Ferry
                      ... Yes, Chris, in trying to get an exact translation of the prayers, Bikol s use of an & su ; nin & kan came into the limelight (even my Bikol
                      Message 10 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                        --- "Chris S." <bq109@...> wrote:
                        > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                        >
                        > <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                        > > This question is for Harvey - What is the
                        > difference
                        > > between "it" & "an" in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an)
                        > im(o)
                        > > kinaka-on? - Dante
                        >
                        > I know it's for Harvey, I wanna offer my two cents.
                        > Tagalog has the
                        > absolutive and ergative articles ANG & NG,
                        > respectively.
                        >
                        > Waray has three absolutive ones: IN, AN, & IT. - all
                        > correspond to
                        > Tagalog ANG
                        > And three ergative ones: HIN, HAN, & HIT. (or SIN,
                        > SAN, & SIT) - all
                        > corresponding to Tagalog NG
                        >
                        > Dr. Zorc, in his dissertation from the 70's, puts
                        > the three into
                        > indefinite (in) & definite (an & it) categories. I
                        > agree with that so
                        > far. But he further puts the definite ones into
                        > temporal categories;
                        > AN for past and IT for non-past which doesn't seem
                        > consistent to me.
                        > I mean AN in non-past circumstances and IT in past
                        > situations.
                        >
                        > I've been reading Waray texts and I've gotten a
                        > vague feeling on its
                        > used. IN is rightly indefinite, but it doesn't seem
                        > to be used as
                        > much as AN and IT; but its ergative counterpart,
                        > HIN, is used much
                        > more. IT appears to refer to something really
                        > specific.. While AN is
                        > somewhere in between. Kind of general, I guess. I
                        > think the
                        > difference between AN and IT is something like the
                        > difference between
                        > Tagalog ANG & YUNG. But, again, not entirely sure.
                        >
                        > So, anyway.. I'm familiarizing myself with Waray...
                        > Its grammar is
                        > kind of mysterious to me in a way. But its
                        > vocabulary are more
                        > recognizable than Cebuanos, from my Tagalog
                        > perspective. And Harvey's
                        > been of great help in helping me understand Waray
                        > more.
                        >
                        > --Chris

                        Yes, Chris, in trying to get an exact translation of
                        the prayers, Bikol's use of "an" & "su"; "nin" & "kan"
                        came into the limelight (even my Bikol informants do
                        not know the difference). Tagalog's "ang" & "(i)yong"
                        seem to be interchangeable in their uses, but NOT
                        everytime! In my analysis, "ang" is indefinite &
                        "(i)yong is definite: Ang mabait mong ama vs. Iyong
                        mabait mong ama. The 2nd one seems awkward. Or, we
                        may say "Your kind father. vs That kind father of
                        yours." - Dante
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >




                        __________________________________
                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
                        http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
                      • Chris S.
                        ... Jason Lobel & Dr. Malcolm Mintz have talked about the difference in their papers. To sum it up, you use SI & KAN when you have already refered to the items
                        Message 11 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                          --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                          <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                          > Yes, Chris, in trying to get an exact translation of
                          > the prayers, Bikol's use of "an" & "su"; "nin" & "kan"
                          > came into the limelight (even my Bikol informants do
                          > not know the difference).

                          Jason Lobel & Dr. Malcolm Mintz have talked about the difference in
                          their papers. To sum it up, you use SI & KAN when you have already
                          refered to the items in question, implying that the person knows what
                          you're refering to.

                          In Naga the articles are: AN/SI & NIN/KAN
                          In Legazpi, they're : AN/SU & NIN/KI

                          And in the Bikol mailing list I'm the administrator of, I've seen
                          people who come from between central-Bikol speaking areas between
                          Naga & Legazpi mix the two. Like they use SI but not KAN, they prefer
                          KI.. or they use SU and KAN together.

                          When I first started learning Bikol from Mintz's, I found it kinda
                          funny that one of the sentences was "IYO INI SI LAPIS KO."

                          "SI LAPIS KO?" It reminded me of a person who looks like a pencil.
                          hehe.

                          --Chris
                        • Dante Ferry
                          ... Chris, I beg to disagree - that is why I am having a hard time with the translations! The very first item in my compilation, The Sign of the Holy Cross
                          Message 12 of 22 , Jul 24, 2004
                            --- "Chris S." <bq109@...> wrote:
                            > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                            >
                            > <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                            > > Yes, Chris, in trying to get an exact translation
                            > of
                            > > the prayers, Bikol's use of "an" & "su"; "nin" &
                            > "kan"
                            > > came into the limelight (even my Bikol informants
                            > do
                            > > not know the difference).
                            >
                            > Jason Lobel & Dr. Malcolm Mintz have talked about
                            > the difference in
                            > their papers. To sum it up, you use SI & KAN when
                            > you have already
                            > refered to the items in question, implying that the
                            > person knows what
                            > you're refering to.

                            Chris, I beg to disagree - that is why I am having a
                            hard time with the translations! The very first item
                            in my compilation, "The Sign of the Holy Cross" is
                            already translated as "An Tanda KAN Banal na Krus"
                            (not "An Tanda NIN Banal na Krus") in Naga Bikol, & in
                            the OFFICIAL translation approved by the Church. So, I
                            guess, this matter is still in "limbo". - Dante
                            >
                            > In Naga the articles are: AN/SI & NIN/KAN
                            > In Legazpi, they're : AN/SU & NIN/KI
                            >
                            > And in the Bikol mailing list I'm the administrator
                            > of, I've seen
                            > people who come from between central-Bikol speaking
                            > areas between
                            > Naga & Legazpi mix the two. Like they use SI but not
                            > KAN, they prefer
                            > KI.. or they use SU and KAN together.
                            >
                            > When I first started learning Bikol from Mintz's, I
                            > found it kinda
                            > funny that one of the sentences was "IYO INI SI
                            > LAPIS KO."
                            >
                            > "SI LAPIS KO?" It reminded me of a person who looks
                            > like a pencil.
                            > hehe.
                            >
                            > --Chris
                            >
                            >




                            __________________________________
                            Do you Yahoo!?
                            Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
                            http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
                          • Chris S.
                            ... But the An Tanda KAN Banal na Krus confirms what I said above - we know WHICH Holy Cross. Even if it s not been mentioned in one particular conversation,
                            Message 13 of 22 , Jul 25, 2004
                              --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                              <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                              > > Jason Lobel & Dr. Malcolm Mintz have talked about
                              > > the difference in
                              > > their papers. To sum it up, you use SI & KAN when
                              > > you have already
                              > > refered to the items in question, implying that the
                              > > person knows what
                              > > you're refering to.
                              >
                              > Chris, I beg to disagree - that is why I am having a
                              > hard time with the translations! The very first item
                              > in my compilation, "The Sign of the Holy Cross" is
                              > already translated as "An Tanda KAN Banal na Krus"
                              > (not "An Tanda NIN Banal na Krus") in Naga Bikol, & in
                              > the OFFICIAL translation approved by the Church. So, I
                              > guess, this matter is still in "limbo". - Dante

                              But the "An Tanda KAN Banal na Krus" confirms what I said above - we
                              know WHICH Holy Cross. Even if it's not been mentioned in one
                              particular conversation, it is assumed that the reader knows what
                              cross they're talking above. Y'see?

                              --Chris
                            • sumuroy1998
                              ... the ... all ... so ... categories; ... me. ... its ... is ... between ... Harvey s ... Chris guesses about the 3 articles in Waray grammar is more or less
                              Message 14 of 22 , Jul 27, 2004
                                --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Chris S." <bq109@s...>
                                wrote:
                                > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                                > <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                                > > This question is for Harvey - What is the difference
                                > > between "it" & "an" in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an) im(o)
                                > > kinaka-on? - Dante
                                >
                                > I know it's for Harvey, I wanna offer my two cents. Tagalog has
                                the
                                > absolutive and ergative articles ANG & NG, respectively.
                                >
                                > Waray has three absolutive ones: IN, AN, & IT. - all correspond to
                                > Tagalog ANG
                                > And three ergative ones: HIN, HAN, & HIT. (or SIN, SAN, & SIT) -
                                all
                                > corresponding to Tagalog NG
                                >
                                > Dr. Zorc, in his dissertation from the 70's, puts the three into
                                > indefinite (in) & definite (an & it) categories. I agree with that
                                so
                                > far. But he further puts the definite ones into temporal
                                categories;
                                > AN for past and IT for non-past which doesn't seem consistent to
                                me.
                                > I mean AN in non-past circumstances and IT in past situations.
                                >
                                > I've been reading Waray texts and I've gotten a vague feeling on
                                its
                                > used. IN is rightly indefinite, but it doesn't seem to be used as
                                > much as AN and IT; but its ergative counterpart, HIN, is used much
                                > more. IT appears to refer to something really specific.. While AN
                                is
                                > somewhere in between. Kind of general, I guess. I think the
                                > difference between AN and IT is something like the difference
                                between
                                > Tagalog ANG & YUNG. But, again, not entirely sure.
                                >
                                > So, anyway.. I'm familiarizing myself with Waray... Its grammar is
                                > kind of mysterious to me in a way. But its vocabulary are more
                                > recognizable than Cebuanos, from my Tagalog perspective. And
                                Harvey's
                                > been of great help in helping me understand Waray more.
                                >
                                > --Chris

                                Chris' guesses about the 3 articles in Waray grammar is more or less
                                accurate. If there are any inaccuracies I haven't caught it. This
                                summary about the definite/indefinite articles on Waray is so far
                                the shortest concise explanation given so far. While I'm a native
                                speaker even I have trouble explaining our usage to non-Warays.
                                That's why for now, unless someone else has a better explanation,
                                I'd more or less defer to Chris' explanation for now. As a native
                                speaker I can only sense what "sounds right" and "what sounds
                                wrong".

                                While on this subject, I came across an excerpt of Norberto
                                Romualdez Sr.'s 1908 "Bisayan Grammar" (a grammar of Waray-Waray to
                                be exact) which by a happy coincidence deals a little bit on this
                                subject. Interestingly Romualdez only lists 2 articles: IN as the
                                indefinite article and AN for the definite article. No mention of
                                IT was given, but I'm guessing he considered it an abbreviation of
                                ITON--Tagalog YUN or English THAT instead of a separate definite
                                article. Another possibility is that AN was the original definite
                                article and IT was a latter development. Personally though I'm
                                inclined to agree with the latter linguists like Zorc who classify
                                IT as a definite article, since IT's usage is better described as a
                                definite article rather than an abbreviated pronoun. (It's true
                                though that ITON can be abbreviated as IT).

                                Regarding the less frequent use of IN, it may be because alternate
                                constructions are used for nouns prefaced with indefinite articles.
                                Or maybe because it is more frequent to refer to definite nouns.
                                But IN is not quite obsolete though. A sentence like "Adi in bata"
                                (Here's a child) is still quite common.

                                One more thing though about something that Chris brought up, namely
                                the so-called temporal classifications. As a native speaker I'm not
                                consciously aware of making a distinction between non-past and past
                                when using IT in the place of AN. But I can think of the following
                                examples where I can guess Dr. Zorc came up with these
                                classifications.

                                Didto AN tawo (The man WAS over there)
                                Didto IT tawo (The man IS over there)

                                I wish I could give something more concrete than this, but alas, the
                                only concrete rule I can give is the same one that Mario Pei gave
                                (although he was referring to another language) "The native speaker
                                will know instinctively which one to use".

                                --Harvey
                              • sumuroy1998
                                ... object/thing ... In Waray, the word buhat , when stressed on the last syllable (i.e., buhát) could also mean to lift a certain object/thing or even to
                                Message 15 of 22 , Jul 27, 2004
                                  --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Ish Fabicon"
                                  <fabicon@m...> wrote:
                                  > pahabol:
                                  >
                                  > > Hindi ko alam kung ano ang gagawin niya bukas.
                                  >
                                  > asi: inde nako ayam kung ni-o ka ida ahimu-on/abuhaton insulip
                                  >
                                  > Or: buko nako ayam.......
                                  >
                                  > asi and waray appears similar (in meaning) on "himo" and "buhat"
                                  >
                                  > buhat in asi depending on usage also means, "to lift" a certain
                                  object/thing
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > ish

                                  In Waray, the word "buhat", when stressed on the last syllable
                                  (i.e., buhát) could also mean "to lift" a certain object/thing or
                                  even "to get up" (synonymous with "bangon")

                                  --Harvey
                                • sumuroy1998
                                  ... The more common word though for to lift is the Spanish loan word alsa . --Harvey
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Jul 27, 2004
                                    --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com,
                                    "Ish Fabicon" writes:
                                    > >
                                    > > asi and waray appears similar (in meaning) on "himo" and "buhat"
                                    > >
                                    > > buhat in asi depending on usage also means, "to lift" a certain
                                    > object/thing
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > ish
                                    >
                                    I wrote:
                                    > In Waray, the word "buhat", when stressed on the last syllable
                                    > (i.e., buhát) could also mean "to lift" a certain object/thing or
                                    > even "to get up" (synonymous with "bangon")
                                    >


                                    The more common word though for "to lift" is the Spanish loan
                                    word "alsa".

                                    --Harvey
                                  • Dante Ferry
                                    ... Harvey - Yes, as I have told Chris, this same thing happens with the Bikol dialects. The Bicolanos themselves don t know the difference. Anyway, I guess
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Jul 27, 2004
                                      --- sumuroy1998 <sumuroy1998@...> wrote:

                                      > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Chris S."
                                      > <bq109@s...>
                                      > wrote:
                                      > > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante
                                      > Ferry
                                      > > <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                                      > > > This question is for Harvey - What is the
                                      > difference
                                      > > > between "it" & "an" in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an)
                                      > im(o)
                                      > > > kinaka-on? - Dante
                                      > >
                                      > > I know it's for Harvey, I wanna offer my two
                                      > cents. Tagalog has
                                      > the
                                      > > absolutive and ergative articles ANG & NG,
                                      > respectively.
                                      > >
                                      > > Waray has three absolutive ones: IN, AN, & IT. -
                                      > all correspond to
                                      > > Tagalog ANG
                                      > > And three ergative ones: HIN, HAN, & HIT. (or SIN,
                                      > SAN, & SIT) -
                                      > all
                                      > > corresponding to Tagalog NG
                                      > >
                                      > > Dr. Zorc, in his dissertation from the 70's, puts
                                      > the three into
                                      > > indefinite (in) & definite (an & it) categories. I
                                      > agree with that
                                      > so
                                      > > far. But he further puts the definite ones into
                                      > temporal
                                      > categories;
                                      > > AN for past and IT for non-past which doesn't seem
                                      > consistent to
                                      > me.
                                      > > I mean AN in non-past circumstances and IT in past
                                      > situations.
                                      > >
                                      > > I've been reading Waray texts and I've gotten a
                                      > vague feeling on
                                      > its
                                      > > used. IN is rightly indefinite, but it doesn't
                                      > seem to be used as
                                      > > much as AN and IT; but its ergative counterpart,
                                      > HIN, is used much
                                      > > more. IT appears to refer to something really
                                      > specific.. While AN
                                      > is
                                      > > somewhere in between. Kind of general, I guess. I
                                      > think the
                                      > > difference between AN and IT is something like the
                                      > difference
                                      > between
                                      > > Tagalog ANG & YUNG. But, again, not entirely sure.
                                      > >
                                      > > So, anyway.. I'm familiarizing myself with
                                      > Waray... Its grammar is
                                      > > kind of mysterious to me in a way. But its
                                      > vocabulary are more
                                      > > recognizable than Cebuanos, from my Tagalog
                                      > perspective. And
                                      > Harvey's
                                      > > been of great help in helping me understand Waray
                                      > more.
                                      > >
                                      > > --Chris
                                      >
                                      > Chris' guesses about the 3 articles in Waray grammar
                                      > is more or less
                                      > accurate. If there are any inaccuracies I haven't
                                      > caught it. This
                                      > summary about the definite/indefinite articles on
                                      > Waray is so far
                                      > the shortest concise explanation given so far.
                                      > While I'm a native
                                      > speaker even I have trouble explaining our usage to
                                      > non-Warays.
                                      > That's why for now, unless someone else has a better
                                      > explanation,
                                      > I'd more or less defer to Chris' explanation for
                                      > now. As a native
                                      > speaker I can only sense what "sounds right" and
                                      > "what sounds
                                      > wrong".
                                      >
                                      > While on this subject, I came across an excerpt of
                                      > Norberto
                                      > Romualdez Sr.'s 1908 "Bisayan Grammar" (a grammar of
                                      > Waray-Waray to
                                      > be exact) which by a happy coincidence deals a
                                      > little bit on this
                                      > subject. Interestingly Romualdez only lists 2
                                      > articles: IN as the
                                      > indefinite article and AN for the definite article.
                                      > No mention of
                                      > IT was given, but I'm guessing he considered it an
                                      > abbreviation of
                                      > ITON--Tagalog YUN or English THAT instead of a
                                      > separate definite
                                      > article. Another possibility is that AN was the
                                      > original definite
                                      > article and IT was a latter development. Personally
                                      > though I'm
                                      > inclined to agree with the latter linguists like
                                      > Zorc who classify
                                      > IT as a definite article, since IT's usage is better
                                      > described as a
                                      > definite article rather than an abbreviated pronoun.
                                      > (It's true
                                      > though that ITON can be abbreviated as IT).
                                      >
                                      > Regarding the less frequent use of IN, it may be
                                      > because alternate
                                      > constructions are used for nouns prefaced with
                                      > indefinite articles.
                                      > Or maybe because it is more frequent to refer to
                                      > definite nouns.
                                      > But IN is not quite obsolete though. A sentence
                                      > like "Adi in bata"
                                      > (Here's a child) is still quite common.
                                      >
                                      > One more thing though about something that Chris
                                      > brought up, namely
                                      > the so-called temporal classifications. As a native
                                      > speaker I'm not
                                      > consciously aware of making a distinction between
                                      > non-past and past
                                      > when using IT in the place of AN. But I can think
                                      > of the following
                                      > examples where I can guess Dr. Zorc came up with
                                      > these
                                      > classifications.
                                      >
                                      > Didto AN tawo (The man WAS over there)
                                      > Didto IT tawo (The man IS over there)
                                      >
                                      > I wish I could give something more concrete than
                                      > this, but alas, the
                                      > only concrete rule I can give is the same one that
                                      > Mario Pei gave
                                      > (although he was referring to another language) "The
                                      > native speaker
                                      > will know instinctively which one to use".
                                      >
                                      > --Harvey

                                      Harvey - Yes, as I have told Chris, this same thing
                                      happens with the Bikol dialects. The Bicolanos
                                      themselves don't know the difference. Anyway, I guess
                                      it's safe to use AN, HAN, HIN in the prayers? - Dante
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >





                                      __________________________________
                                      Do you Yahoo!?
                                      New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
                                      http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
                                    • sumuroy1998
                                      ... That s because generally few, if any of us native speakers know how to explain the rules of our language. We instinctively sense when something sounds
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Jul 28, 2004
                                        --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante Ferry
                                        <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > --- sumuroy1998 <sumuroy1998@y...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "Chris S."
                                        > > <bq109@s...>
                                        > > wrote:
                                        > > > --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, Dante
                                        > > Ferry
                                        > > > <danteferry@y...> wrote:
                                        > > > > This question is for Harvey - What is the
                                        > > difference
                                        > > > > between "it" & "an" in Waray? Ex.: Ano (it/an)
                                        > > im(o)
                                        > > > > kinaka-on? - Dante
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I know it's for Harvey, I wanna offer my two
                                        > > cents. Tagalog has
                                        > > the
                                        > > > absolutive and ergative articles ANG & NG,
                                        > > respectively.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Waray has three absolutive ones: IN, AN, & IT. -
                                        > > all correspond to
                                        > > > Tagalog ANG
                                        > > > And three ergative ones: HIN, HAN, & HIT. (or SIN,
                                        > > SAN, & SIT) -
                                        > > all
                                        > > > corresponding to Tagalog NG
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Dr. Zorc, in his dissertation from the 70's, puts
                                        > > the three into
                                        > > > indefinite (in) & definite (an & it) categories. I
                                        > > agree with that
                                        > > so
                                        > > > far. But he further puts the definite ones into
                                        > > temporal
                                        > > categories;
                                        > > > AN for past and IT for non-past which doesn't seem
                                        > > consistent to
                                        > > me.
                                        > > > I mean AN in non-past circumstances and IT in past
                                        > > situations.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I've been reading Waray texts and I've gotten a
                                        > > vague feeling on
                                        > > its
                                        > > > used. IN is rightly indefinite, but it doesn't
                                        > > seem to be used as
                                        > > > much as AN and IT; but its ergative counterpart,
                                        > > HIN, is used much
                                        > > > more. IT appears to refer to something really
                                        > > specific.. While AN
                                        > > is
                                        > > > somewhere in between. Kind of general, I guess. I
                                        > > think the
                                        > > > difference between AN and IT is something like the
                                        > > difference
                                        > > between
                                        > > > Tagalog ANG & YUNG. But, again, not entirely sure.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > So, anyway.. I'm familiarizing myself with
                                        > > Waray... Its grammar is
                                        > > > kind of mysterious to me in a way. But its
                                        > > vocabulary are more
                                        > > > recognizable than Cebuanos, from my Tagalog
                                        > > perspective. And
                                        > > Harvey's
                                        > > > been of great help in helping me understand Waray
                                        > > more.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --Chris
                                        > >
                                        > > Chris' guesses about the 3 articles in Waray grammar
                                        > > is more or less
                                        > > accurate. If there are any inaccuracies I haven't
                                        > > caught it. This
                                        > > summary about the definite/indefinite articles on
                                        > > Waray is so far
                                        > > the shortest concise explanation given so far.
                                        > > While I'm a native
                                        > > speaker even I have trouble explaining our usage to
                                        > > non-Warays.
                                        > > That's why for now, unless someone else has a better
                                        > > explanation,
                                        > > I'd more or less defer to Chris' explanation for
                                        > > now. As a native
                                        > > speaker I can only sense what "sounds right" and
                                        > > "what sounds
                                        > > wrong".
                                        > >
                                        > > While on this subject, I came across an excerpt of
                                        > > Norberto
                                        > > Romualdez Sr.'s 1908 "Bisayan Grammar" (a grammar of
                                        > > Waray-Waray to
                                        > > be exact) which by a happy coincidence deals a
                                        > > little bit on this
                                        > > subject. Interestingly Romualdez only lists 2
                                        > > articles: IN as the
                                        > > indefinite article and AN for the definite article.
                                        > > No mention of
                                        > > IT was given, but I'm guessing he considered it an
                                        > > abbreviation of
                                        > > ITON--Tagalog YUN or English THAT instead of a
                                        > > separate definite
                                        > > article. Another possibility is that AN was the
                                        > > original definite
                                        > > article and IT was a latter development. Personally
                                        > > though I'm
                                        > > inclined to agree with the latter linguists like
                                        > > Zorc who classify
                                        > > IT as a definite article, since IT's usage is better
                                        > > described as a
                                        > > definite article rather than an abbreviated pronoun.
                                        > > (It's true
                                        > > though that ITON can be abbreviated as IT).
                                        > >
                                        > > Regarding the less frequent use of IN, it may be
                                        > > because alternate
                                        > > constructions are used for nouns prefaced with
                                        > > indefinite articles.
                                        > > Or maybe because it is more frequent to refer to
                                        > > definite nouns.
                                        > > But IN is not quite obsolete though. A sentence
                                        > > like "Adi in bata"
                                        > > (Here's a child) is still quite common.
                                        > >
                                        > > One more thing though about something that Chris
                                        > > brought up, namely
                                        > > the so-called temporal classifications. As a native
                                        > > speaker I'm not
                                        > > consciously aware of making a distinction between
                                        > > non-past and past
                                        > > when using IT in the place of AN. But I can think
                                        > > of the following
                                        > > examples where I can guess Dr. Zorc came up with
                                        > > these
                                        > > classifications.
                                        > >
                                        > > Didto AN tawo (The man WAS over there)
                                        > > Didto IT tawo (The man IS over there)
                                        > >
                                        > > I wish I could give something more concrete than
                                        > > this, but alas, the
                                        > > only concrete rule I can give is the same one that
                                        > > Mario Pei gave
                                        > > (although he was referring to another language) "The
                                        > > native speaker
                                        > > will know instinctively which one to use".
                                        > >
                                        > > --Harvey
                                        >
                                        > Harvey - Yes, as I have told Chris, this same thing
                                        > happens with the Bikol dialects. The Bicolanos
                                        > themselves don't know the difference. Anyway, I guess
                                        > it's safe to use AN, HAN, HIN in the prayers? - Dante
                                        > >

                                        That's because generally few, if any of us native speakers know how
                                        to explain the rules of our language. We instinctively sense when
                                        something "sounds right" but while we are willing to explain it to
                                        outsiders, we have difficulty explaining the grammar.

                                        Yes, AN, HAN, HIN, as well as IN, IT, and HIT are perfectly
                                        acceptable in the prayers. There are slight nuances that are
                                        perceptible to native speakers but it's difficult to explain them to
                                        non-native speakers. Although Chris' summary more or less gives a
                                        rough sketch of the different nuances in the different articles. IT
                                        is the most precise, AN is a definite article but slightly less
                                        precise (and occasionally used in temporal classifications) while IN
                                        is the indefinite article (the English equivalents of IN are "a, an")

                                        So "Ano it iya kinaka-on" and "Ano an iya kinaka-on" are similar in
                                        meaning but there is only a slight nuance that makes them distinct.
                                        The closest equivalent I can think of is the difference
                                        between "that thing" and "the thing"

                                        --Harvey
                                      • Chris S.
                                        ... Harvey, I have figured out Waray s system of article. There was a huge misunderstanding on my part. A couple of things contributed to this. One was
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Jul 28, 2004
                                          --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, "sumuroy1998"
                                          <sumuroy1998@y...> wrote:

                                          > the shortest concise explanation given so far. While I'm a native
                                          > speaker even I have trouble explaining our usage to non-Warays.
                                          > That's why for now, unless someone else has a better explanation,
                                          > I'd more or less defer to Chris' explanation for now. As a native
                                          > speaker I can only sense what "sounds right" and "what sounds
                                          > wrong".

                                          Harvey,

                                          I have figured out Waray's system of article. There was a huge
                                          misunderstanding on my part. A couple of things contributed to this.
                                          One was translation texts - I have a Jehovah's Witness magazine in
                                          Waray-Waray and they rarely, if not never, use the article IT and IN.
                                          Then there were native speaker texts that did not even use the
                                          articles the way I had seen. There is also a textbook used by
                                          Christian missionaries at Divine Word that lacks the IT article and
                                          teach only AN and IN.

                                          The dictionary by Tramp shed some light on the subject. And I had to
                                          compare with the translations you gave me.

                                          Another problem on my part - and I usually berate (kindly, I hope)
                                          others for this so I am having quite the chore of living this down
                                          (LOL!) - was imposing foreign grammar on Tagalog & Waray-Waray, in
                                          this case English.

                                          One of the examples I had you translate was BAKIT UMIIYAK ANG BATA
                                          (Why is the child crying).
                                          The translations you gave me were:

                                          Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata?
                                          Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata?

                                          I was extremely puzzled by this and came to the conclusion that there
                                          were different kinds of emphasis.

                                          But then it hit me. I was unconsciously interpreting UMIIYAK and
                                          NAGTITINUOK as PRESENT TENSE!!! That's where I messed up. True, they
                                          are usually used in the present tense, but they are more accurately
                                          the PROGRESSIVE ASPECT! And the progressive aspect is used in the
                                          present and in the PAST!

                                          So, Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata is "Why WAS the child crying?".
                                          And "Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata" is "Why IS the child crying?".

                                          Furthermore, I was reading the descriptions in Tramp's dictionary as
                                          well as rereading (which I haven't done in a long time) Dr. Zorc's
                                          explanation of the Waray article system.

                                          AN is also used to express something that is "anaphorically" known
                                          without regards to time.

                                          So there is some ambiguity... Here are the differences..

                                          "Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata" Why is/was the child crying? (You know
                                          this child, he is probably your nephew or son or your friend's child
                                          or something).

                                          "Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata?" Why is the child crying? (I don't know
                                          whose kid this is, but he's crying and I don't know why. Where's his
                                          mother? Oh there she is looking for purses in that section of the
                                          store!)

                                          IN, of course is the indefinite article and used whenever in time.
                                          It is also used interchangeably with IT in such constructions as PIRA
                                          IT/IN MANOK?

                                          In short, I am EXTREMELY relieved that I finally got over this. Now I
                                          can concentrate on other things in Waray like its verbs. I've not
                                          given the same treatment to Waray that I have given to Ilokano,
                                          Bikol, Cebuano, etc. So I'll be playing a lot of catch-up. I plan on
                                          writing a short article about Waray grammar in the future, when I
                                          have a more profound understanding of its grammar. ("Short" article?
                                          That's what I said about Tausug and look what happened!)

                                          --Chris
                                        • sumuroy1998
                                          Chris S. wrote: Harvey, I have figured out Waray s system of article. There was a huge misunderstanding on my part. A couple of things
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Jul 28, 2004
                                            "Chris S." <bq109@...> wrote:

                                            Harvey,

                                            I have figured out Waray's system of article. There was a huge misunderstanding on my part. A couple of things contributed to this. One was translation texts - I have a Jehovah's Witness magazine in Waray-Waray and they rarely, if not never, use the article IT and IN.
                                            Then there were native speaker texts that did not even use the articles the way I had seen. There is also a textbook used by Christian missionaries at Divine Word that lacks the IT article and teach only AN and IN.

                                            The dictionary by Tramp shed some light on the subject. And I had to compare with the translations you gave me.

                                            Another problem on my part - and I usually berate (kindly, I hope) others for this so I am having quite the chore of living this down (LOL!) - was imposing foreign grammar on Tagalog & Waray-Waray, in this case English.

                                            One of the examples I had you translate was BAKIT UMIIYAK ANG BATA (Why is the child crying).
                                            The translations you gave me were:

                                            Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata?
                                            Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata?

                                            I was extremely puzzled by this and came to the conclusion that there were different kinds of emphasis.

                                            But then it hit me. I was unconsciously interpreting UMIIYAK and NAGTITINUOK as PRESENT TENSE!!!  That's where I messed up. True, they are usually used in the present tense, but they are more accurately the PROGRESSIVE ASPECT!  And the progressive aspect is used in the present and in the PAST!

                                            So, Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata is "Why WAS the child crying?". And "Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata" is "Why IS the child crying?".

                                            Furthermore, I was reading the descriptions in Tramp's dictionary as well as rereading (which I haven't done in a long time) Dr. Zorc's explanation of the Waray article system.

                                            AN is also used to express something that is "anaphorically" known without regards to time.

                                            So there is some ambiguity... Here are the differences..

                                            "Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata" Why is/was the child crying? (You know this child, he is probably your nephew or son or your friend's child or something).

                                            "Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata?" Why is the child crying? (I don't know whose kid this is, but he's crying and I don't know why. Where's his mother? Oh there she is looking for purses in that section of the store!)

                                            IN, of course is the indefinite article and used whenever in time.  It is also used interchangeably with IT in such constructions as PIRA IT/IN MANOK?

                                            In short, I am EXTREMELY relieved that I finally got over this. Now I can concentrate on other things in Waray like its verbs. I've not given the same treatment to Waray that I have given to Ilokano, Bikol, Cebuano, etc. So I'll be playing a lot of catch-up. I plan on writing a short article about Waray grammar in the future, when I
                                            have a more profound understanding of its grammar. ("Short" article? That's what I said about Tausug and look what happened!)

                                            Chris,

                                            Interesting you mention a textbook from Divine Word.  Could you give me more details about it?  The only textbook I've come across so far for Waray-Waray is the 3 or 4 volume "Beginning Waray-Waray" by John and Ida Wolff.

                                            If by any chance you are referring to Divine Word University (DWU) of Tacloban City (or rather, what used to be the Divine Word University of Tacloban City) I'm guessing it was among the publications from their Leyte-Samar Studies Center or something of that name.  (DWU during its time, had an institution for Leyte-Samar studies, somewhat similar to the Cebuano Studies Center of the University of San Carlos). 

                                            Too bad DWU had to close in 1994 due to a dispute between unions and the SVD fathers.  (To this day, few really know what happened, some blame the SVD fathers, others blame the unions--even in Tacloban it was impossible to find out the whole truth about the entire affair) The closure of the university was a heavy blow to Tacloban, both for Tacloban's economy as well as for students.  (As for their Leyte-Samar Studies Center, I don't know what happened).  I last heard that DWU alumni were trying to get the university reopened but I've lost track of what happened.  It would be good if they had succeeded but no news about that.

                                            Anyway, going back to the textbook you mentioned, I'm guessing they never used IT most likely because it retains to some extent the system used in the Norberto Romualdez grammar of 1908.  Romualdez didn't think that IT was an article (he only mentions IN and AN) but then, he was following the old practice of imposing Indo-European grammar on the Austronesian Waray-Waray.  (In the excerpt I have from his grammar he uses terms like "declension" & "nominative").

                                            It's good you figured out the system of articles in Waray.  I'm a native speaker and even I couldn't do that--explain the grammar of my language.

                                            --Harvey

                                            __________________________________________________
                                            Do You Yahoo!?
                                            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                                            http://mail.yahoo.com

                                          • sumuroy1998
                                            Chris S. wrote: Harvey, I have figured out Waray s system of article. There was a huge misunderstanding on my part. A couple of things
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Jul 28, 2004
                                              "Chris S." <bq109@...> wrote:

                                              Harvey,

                                              I have figured out Waray's system of article. There was a huge misunderstanding on my part. A couple of things contributed to this. One was translation texts - I have a Jehovah's Witness magazine in Waray-Waray and they rarely, if not never, use the article IT and IN.
                                              Then there were native speaker texts that did not even use the articles the way I had seen. There is also a textbook used by Christian missionaries at Divine Word that lacks the IT article and teach only AN and IN.

                                              The dictionary by Tramp shed some light on the subject. And I had to compare with the translations you gave me.

                                              Another problem on my part - and I usually berate (kindly, I hope) others for this so I am having quite the chore of living this down (LOL!) - was imposing foreign grammar on Tagalog & Waray-Waray, in this case English.

                                              One of the examples I had you translate was BAKIT UMIIYAK ANG BATA (Why is the child crying).
                                              The translations you gave me were:

                                              Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata?
                                              Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata?

                                              I was extremely puzzled by this and came to the conclusion that there were different kinds of emphasis.

                                              But then it hit me. I was unconsciously interpreting UMIIYAK and NAGTITINUOK as PRESENT TENSE!!!  That's where I messed up. True, they are usually used in the present tense, but they are more accurately the PROGRESSIVE ASPECT!  And the progressive aspect is used in the present and in the PAST!

                                              So, Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata is "Why WAS the child crying?". And "Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata" is "Why IS the child crying?".

                                              Furthermore, I was reading the descriptions in Tramp's dictionary as well as rereading (which I haven't done in a long time) Dr. Zorc's explanation of the Waray article system.

                                              AN is also used to express something that is "anaphorically" known without regards to time.

                                              So there is some ambiguity... Here are the differences..

                                              "Kay-ano nagtitinuok an bata" Why is/was the child crying? (You know this child, he is probably your nephew or son or your friend's child or something).

                                              "Kay-ano nagtitinuok it bata?" Why is the child crying? (I don't know whose kid this is, but he's crying and I don't know why. Where's his mother? Oh there she is looking for purses in that section of the store!)

                                              IN, of course is the indefinite article and used whenever in time.  It is also used interchangeably with IT in such constructions as PIRA IT/IN MANOK?

                                              In short, I am EXTREMELY relieved that I finally got over this. Now I can concentrate on other things in Waray like its verbs. I've not given the same treatment to Waray that I have given to Ilokano, Bikol, Cebuano, etc. So I'll be playing a lot of catch-up. I plan on writing a short article about Waray grammar in the future, when I
                                              have a more profound understanding of its grammar. ("Short" article? That's what I said about Tausug and look what happened!)

                                              Chris,

                                              Interesting you mention a textbook from Divine Word.  Could you give me more details about it?  The only textbook I've come across so far for Waray-Waray is the 3 or 4 volume "Beginning Waray-Waray" by John and Ida Wolff.

                                              If by any chance you are referring to Divine Word University (DWU) of Tacloban City (or rather, what used to be the Divine Word University of Tacloban City) I'm guessing it was among the publications from their Leyte-Samar Studies Center or something of that name.  (DWU during its time, had an institution for Leyte-Samar studies, somewhat similar to the Cebuano Studies Center of the University of San Carlos). 

                                              Too bad DWU had to close in 1994 due to a dispute between unions and the SVD fathers.  (To this day, few really know what happened, some blame the SVD fathers, others blame the unions--even in Tacloban it was impossible to find out the whole truth about the entire affair) The closure of the university was a heavy blow to Tacloban, both for Tacloban's economy as well as for students.  (As for their Leyte-Samar Studies Center, I don't know what happened).  I last heard that DWU alumni were trying to get the university reopened but I've lost track of what happened.  It would be good if they had succeeded but no news about that.

                                              Anyway, going back to the textbook you mentioned, I'm guessing they never used IT most likely because it retains to some extent the system used in the Norberto Romualdez grammar of 1908.  Romualdez didn't think that IT was an article (he only mentions IN and AN) but then, he was following the old practice of imposing Indo-European grammar on the Austronesian Waray-Waray.  (In the excerpt I have from his grammar he uses terms like "declension" & "nominative").

                                              It's good you figured out the system of articles in Waray.  I'm a native speaker and even I couldn't do that--explain the grammar of my language.

                                              --Harvey

                                              __________________________________________________
                                              Do You Yahoo!?
                                              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                                              http://mail.yahoo.com

                                            • Chris S.
                                              ... My mistake. I thought it was from Divine Word, but the person who e- mailed me about it says it was from a missionary. He didn t specify with. The Tramp
                                              Message 22 of 22 , Jul 28, 2004
                                                --- In DILA-philippines@yahoogroups.com, sumuroy1998
                                                <sumuroy1998@y...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > Interesting you mention a textbook from Divine Word. Could you
                                                > give me more details about it? The only textbook I've come across

                                                My mistake. I thought it was from Divine Word, but the person who e-
                                                mailed me about it says it was from a missionary. He didn't specify
                                                with. The Tramp dictionary had help from Divine Word, though.

                                                The text from the missionary is at:
                                                http://www.livingincebu.com/waray.htm

                                                I've just found out about it a few weeks ago from an American who
                                                goes back and forth to Leyte.

                                                > so far for Waray-Waray is the 3 or 4 volume "Beginning Waray-Waray"
                                                > by John and Ida Wolff.

                                                Did you encounter that in a library?

                                                > Anyway, going back to the textbook you mentioned, I'm guessing they
                                                > never used IT most likely because it retains to some extent the
                                                > system used in the Norberto Romualdez grammar of 1908. Romualdez
                                                > didn't think that IT was an article (he only mentions IN and AN)

                                                That's rather odd. IT is used as an article in other Visayan
                                                languages. Particularly in languages like Kinaray-a or Asi. But
                                                they're used differently.

                                                > It's good you figured out the system of articles in Waray. I'm a
                                                > native speaker and even I couldn't do that--explain the grammar of
                                                > my language.

                                                As a native speaker, you have a bigger advantage of me. You know what
                                                feels right and what feels wrong. From there you make a list of the
                                                instances where a particular word "feels right" and draw conclusions
                                                from there, share it with other people and see what happens.

                                                A big mistake many Filipinos and virtually any layperson make in
                                                describing their language is that if something is not used formally,
                                                it's assumed to be ungrammatical. That's a mistake. For example,
                                                English-speakers view the word AIN'T as ungrammatical, but it really
                                                isn't it's just used in informal contexts.

                                                And plus, there seems to be a misconception among non-Tagalogs who
                                                believe that they are not masters of their languages because they had
                                                no formal education in it. Far from it. In school you learn how to
                                                write formally. But the language of the street is the true language.
                                                The term you use - imperial subdialect with no native speakers - is
                                                reflective of that. The imperial subdialect aka the formal written
                                                language (Filipino, Standard American English, Standard British
                                                English, Standard French, etc.) is used in schools, but the real
                                                language is the one used by people in the streets, at the store, at
                                                home, on TV, etc.

                                                --Chris
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.