Talk:Philippine languages

This article is written in Philippine English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, realize, center, travelled) and some terms that are used in it (including jeepney and cyberlibel) may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tambayan Philippines High‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Comments

our race/tribe/ethnicity, the Zamboangueño Latino People with our Language are also belong to the Philippine Languages!!!

what is this? discrimination?

our rcae/tribe/ethnicity born here in the Ciudad de Zamboanga (formerly: Republica de Zamboanga... this is ridiculous! this is absurb!

no wonder, we the Zamboangueño Latino People (Los Chavacanos) wants to bring back our lost Soverenidad el "REPUBLICA DE ZAMBOANGA" donde el de nuestros amable idioma amo el de nuestro Lengua Oficial!!!!!! Zamboangueño Chavacano Zamboangueño Chavacano Zamboangueño Chavacano Zamboangueño Chavacano Zamboangueño Chavacano Zamboangueño Chavacano

Chavacano is not a Philippine language, but it is a language of the Philippines. This is because the Philippine languages constitute a language branch, which has nothing to do with national identity or geography. Nevertheless Chavacano is also fully "Filipino" in its own right. — Stevey7788 (talk) 08:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hahahaha... it is a Philippine Language or one of the Filipino Languages. by disregarding us, it is the same way as discrimination on it's own people. "language is culture & indentity" no wonder the Philippines never prosper due to lack of knowledge on it's people. not only that, even the Philippine History is so bias. manipulated et.al.

Towards clarification of the English

Where should the phrase, "1991 proposal by Robert Blust that all the languages of the Philippines and northern Sulawesi—except Sama–Bajaw (languages of the "Sea Gypsies") and a few languages of Palawan," go? I will let you keep it, but it has to go elsewhere. Yours, dsnow75 50.46.224.142 (talk) 22:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rollbacks

My error, sorry! Bearian (talk) 20:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Needed

"Proto-austonesian" is un-recorded and hypothetical. Asterisks are needed in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.237.127 (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ABVD gaps

Philippine languages not yet covered in by the ABVD. http://language.psy.auckland.ac.nz/austronesian/classification.php

All Mindoro / Mangyan languages except for Hanuno'o (Barbian 1977)
Camiguin Manobo (no publications)
Bagobo (no publications)
Iwaak (no publications), Karao (in PL B-110)
Isinai
Manide, Inagta
Agutaynen (online dictionary)
Davawenyo, Mandaya, Kamayo, Karaga

— Stevey7788 (talk) 11:40, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 August 2020

Philippine languages (language subgroup) → Philippine languages – With the recent page move, "Philippine languages" has become a redirect to this page. But if "Philippine languages" redirects here, it means that this page still covers the primary topic, so the disambiguation in the title is redundant. Austronesier (talk) 09:14, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Rreagan007 (talk) 22:01, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Revert undiscussed move. Per WP:BOLD, the due course of action is to revert the bold move and start an RM if the first mover still insists on the rename. I'm disabling the RM template and filing a technical move request. Nardog (talk) 11:35, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nardog: Thanks a lot for initiating the simple solution. –Austronesier (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]