Greater Central Philippine languages Puns

I'm not sure if it's called "labiodental" or "labiodental fricatives" or "voiced labiodental fricative", it seems to say that "f" is labiodental fricative, while "v" is voiced labiodental fricative.

I'm not a linguist, I am a hobby historian mostly interested in SEAsian history, my area of specialization is on the Philippines.

I don't know if anyone is familiar with PH family of languages or even the larger Austronesian family here that can help answer or point me to a resource.

The f and v sounds are obviously absent in the majority of modern main PH languages. I speak it natively and myself, despite speaking English here in America for most of my life, at times I still have issues sounding the f and v sounds from time to time.

I noticed through reading anthropological papers, researching dictionaries for terms, reading historical accounts and watching anthropological videos, that in some Filipino languages, usually those in the hinterlands (eg some Igorot groups of C. Luzon and some of the Lumad tribes in Mindanao as well as some Aeta groups) have the F's and V's sounds at least in part.

For example, "tooth"

In PH:

Tiruray: kifen

Blaan: kifan

Outside of PH:

Lundaye (Borneo): lifen

Chamorro: nifen

Seram Is (Indonesia): nife

Ponam island: life-k

Merina: nify

Malagasy: nife

https://abvd.shh.mpg.de/austronesian/word.php?v=31

And looking at this Bontok-English Dictionary, there's clearly a lot of words using F sounds (I checked other dictionaries too, and many, not all, of the "hinterlands" also have them).

https://books.google.com/books?id=ExcSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=fatek+igorot&source=bl&ots=mwOvfnhdM2&sig=ACfU3U0GVu5JNyLSlUzEDqur6RuXnprz3g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwihmIm4ydDpAhV4Ap0JHZ7HA1UQ6AEwDHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=fatek%20igorot&f=false

In reconstruction of Proto-Austronesian, doesn't seem to have labiodental sounds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Austronesian

Formosan languages, are mixed.

Thao has both https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thao_language

I apologize if this question is a too broad and speculative, but I found the thought interesting and hopefully someone else will too.

In this column from 1922, "What the World Will be Like In a Hundred Years", English author W.L.George makes some frighteningly accurate predictions, accompanied by others that were completely wrong; as one might expect from a prediction like that.

But what I found most interesting was his notion that for the average person, the improvements in technology during the last hundred years had been much more life-changing than what might be expected of the next hundred.

> The reader may conclude that I do not expect anything startling in the way of scientific discovery. That is not the case; I am convinced that in 2022 the advancement of science will be amazing, but it will be nothing like so amazing as is the present day in relation to a hundred years ago. A sight of the world today would surprise President Jefferson much more, I suspect, than the world of 2022 would surprise the little girl who sells candies at Grand Central Station. For Jefferson knew nothing of railroads, telegraphs, telephones, automobiles, aeroplanes, gramophones, movies, radium, &c.; he did not even know hot and cold bathrooms. The little girl at Grand Central is a blasé child; to her these things are commonplace; the year 2022 would have to produce something very startling to interest her ghost. The sad thing about discovery is that it works toward its own extinction, and that the more we discover the less there is left.

There have of course been amazing inventions no one could have foreseen a hundred years or even fifty years ago, the Internet probably being on top of the list; but when you compare the life of someone in 2022 to that of someone in 1922, and then someone from 1922 to 1822, in which time period has the change been greater? What technology has changed the way we live our lives the most?

I don't think a lot of Filipinos know of this phenomenon, so let's talk about it. Which words in Tagalog (or in your language if Tagalog isn't your mother tongue) are not of Spanish or English origin, but a product/result of Hispanization of English borrowings/Anglicization of Spanish borrowings?

E.g.

1. Talentado (T) - Talentoso/a (S) - Talented (E)
2. Materialistiko (T) - Materialista - Materialistic (E)
3. Bayolohiya (T) - Biologia (S) - Biology (E)
4. Sensitibo (T) - Sensible (S) - Sensitive (E)

https://www.spot.ph/newsfeatures/the-latest-news-features/70433/philippine-map-palau-a1507-20170612-lfrm3

TLDR: We claimed Sabah, Palau, Marianas Islands, Guam and the Caroline Islands

Im more interested in knowing HOW and WHY this became a commonly held ̶b̶e̶l̶i̶e̶f̶ idea and why it still persists. How hard is it to correct? Was there a point in history where we were taught that these were dialects and not fully-fledged languages?

My thoughts: Regardless if these variants are languages or not, for the average Filipino, another island's language isn't really too alien/foreign for them to call it another language, kahit na may distinct grammar and vocab. Our languages are all still closely related and have certain degrees intelligibility so using 'dialect' feels more inclusive.

The same Keynesian fraudsters who have led China to the verge of financial ruin now claim to want to support the "real economy." Meanwhile, the cascading defaults from the gargantuan property bubble they created with Money Printer Go BRRRRRR has set the stage for the world's next Great Financial Crisis.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/china-central-bank-vows-greater-113702049.html

China’s central bank pledged greater support for the real economy, and said it will make monetary policy more forward-looking and targeted.

There will be more “proactive” use of monetary policy tools, the People’s Bank of China said in a statement on Saturday. It added that there will be “good use” of the monetary policy tools’ quantitative and structural functions, referring to the adjustment of liquidity in the market and policies targeted at certain groups.

Cussing is a part of the lexicon of every widely spoken language, the words themselves serve a strong, emotive function that few other words in that language do.

I can see how using emotive language in a study or scientific white paper might distract from the purpose, but other academic disciplines should welcome the full use of language in its current form.

Edit: A word.

Conducting a poll for a project;

I’m trying to get a feel for how the Gaelic Language is viewed by the wider Scottish population outside of the Gàidhealtachd.

could I ask that respondents are currently resident in Scotland and do not speak Gaelic to a fluent level.

Tapadh leibh a charaidean!!

View Poll

I am genuinely curious as to what people from Greater London think of this? Does this bother you at all or do you agree that we are not Londoners?

Personally, I come from Bromley and I have always considered my hometown part of SE London. However, when I meet somebody who lives within Central London, I will tell them where I am from, and I almost instantly get hit with "that's not London, that's Kent".

I can't help but to get a little offended by it. Culturally, I've always identified as a Londoner, I'm closer and more connected to anywhere in Central London than anywhere notable in Kent (like Sevenoaks for example). I can literally see Canary Wharf from my bedroom window. I vote on the London mayoral election. Tfl/Metropolitan Police operate in my area. And also, parts of Bromley borough have an SE postcode.

So what makes me any less of a Londoner?

I fully understand that Greater London has pretty much only existed since 1965, so I expect some elder generations to still refer to these parts as from Kent, Surrey, Essex and Middlesex.

But in my lifetime, it's always been part of London. I've never once put Kent in my home address, and have always written Greater London.

Am I alone in thinking this or do others also get a bit offended?