	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 Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Assessment

I assessed with low importance as it is merely a part of a language and not the language itself.--Lenticel ^(talk) 04:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

whoever had made this new article, he just cut it from the original cebuano language article of which he left with no copy and paste it here. that article was created through the contribution of several anonymous persons in the net. one of them is joseph walay hanaw (cel# +639204955402, +639232403657).

joseph regrets that the maker of this new article has deliberately erased the explanation joseph had made that ta (spelled here as 'ta, assuming it is a clipped version of kita which is not really the case) does not always mean you(nominative case) but would mean i(nominative case) when the object of the verb is you(gitagan-an case i.e. either ka, ikaw, mo, or kamo). this explanation is important because such form is common in the language and in fact one of the examples uses such form.

joseph appreciates the effort people tried in standardization of cebuano but advises those who are in this undertaking do things a little bit conservatively. i am reffering to the unnecessary addition of an apostrophe to short forms such as ko, ka, ta, mi, and mo. although most of this would appear as clipped form of the long form such spelling has no tradition and in the case of ta would only put unnecessary confusion.

moreover this deliberate editting without consideration of the output of the contributor only discourage future contributors to put more out put here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.54.153.40 (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also another point, Joseph says that gayod( more commonly known as jud) and gud are two different words. They would never mean the same. Any Cebuano speaker will know the difference between "ikaw jud" and "ikaw gud" and that Cebuano speaker know they do not mean the same...

"Ikaw gyud" or "Ikaw gayud"..Si lapu lapu (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)si lapu lapu[reply]

Hey fellers how about we change the translation for the word "sinehan" to cinema because sinehan is cinema, although "movies" is a reasonable translation it is not as accurate as "cinema" and can cause confusion. It is perfectly valid for an english speaker to say "We're going to the cinema.". Also I suggest changing the translation for "plasa" to "plaza" instead of "square" because likewise with sinehan, "plaza" is a better translation then "square". Translating "plasa" to "square" is a poor translation because like "movies" it can refer to other things. Dr Gwapo (talk) 12:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Representing the glottal stop

What is the the standard way of representing the glottal stop intervocalically or within the word. I've seen Tag-iya and Tag'iya. Which is more common? Whichever it might be, it needs to be implemented because the article looks inconsistent.

Joemaza (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Native terms

The terms kinsa, tag-iya, etc. makes the article less accessible to readers and can be replaced by equivalent English terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:JARGON#Foreign_terms

Joemaza (talk) 01:58, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cebuano grammar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Verb Conjugations in Negative Sentences

This article does not clearly explain when nasugdan or pasugdan verbs should be used with negative sentences. The article makes it appear as if only future tense (or pasugdan) verbs are correct for negative sentences using "wala," through its example sentences. It only uses a past tense (or nasugdan) verb conjugation for one negative sentence, "wala nako giinom ang tubig." This is inconsistent with the usage of future conjugations in every other example sentence. However, this is a correct sentence, and I know that Cebuano speakers use past tense (or nasugdan) verbs for many other negative sentences. For example, a Cebuano speaker would say, "wala ko nakabasa," or "wala ko nibasa," rather than "wala ko makabasa," or "wala ko mobasa." I am not sure if there is a rule for when future tense conjugations or imperative conjugations should be used (i.e. if it is only in formal writing, if it is technically the more correct way to speak, or if there is an underlying grammar rule) as opposed to past tense conjugations. Does anyone else have any insight to this issue? At the very least, this article needs to mention that not all Cebuano speakers will use future verb conjugations with negative sentences. Jacelyn nd (talk) 21:40, 18 March 2019 (UTC) @222.127.171.81:@73.35.201.205:@ElicioStrike:@TagaSanPedroAko:[reply]