I have scratched my head for many days wondering why some nouns - Page 2

Tagaluto, tagalaba, tagahugas exist in Tagalog. Luto, laba, hugas are verbs. But they become nouns when you use that affixNon-native speakers just make things more complicated by trying to find "English equivalents" instead of taking the language as it is.Usually, ma-adjectives can be replaced with ang + noun. Ganda is a noun. Of course, in Tagalog, one can "verb" a noun like bus, taxi, paa --NagBUS ako (I rode the bus), nagTAXI (I took a taxi) ako, nagPAA ako (I went barefooted)Ang ganda ng tawain and Maganda ang tanawin mean the same thing.Take the language as it is. To give a "reverse" example, it's like a Tagalog speaker complaning why English pluralization has too many "exceptions" or why -ough is not always "f" (through, rough) or why -llet is not always "ey" (fillet, ballet, wallet)

@Bituingmaykinang I know it exist. try analyzing what i have said. Like i told you Taga doesn't function as Verb Affix. It use as Noun/Adjective Affix for Agent Nouns & Place of Origin. Why you keep dragging Taga- Affix here... It's not even relevant & related to the topic. Furthermore "Ang ganda ng tawain and Maganda ang tanawin" isn't the same

Taga is not always a place affix. It is also used a verb affix. Tagaluto does not mean "a place to cook at". And luto is a VERB.It is relevant in a way that there are two uses of Taga- just like there are two uses of Ma- as in Matulog (go to sleep) and Maganda (beautiful)Learners will have to just accept that there are two ways to use Ma-, just as there are two ways of using taga-So wondering why Ma- for matulog and Ma-for maganda is like asking why is it Taga- for Tagamaynila and taga for tagaluto. One will just have to accept that one Ma- is "adjective" and the other ma- is infinitive just like accepting one taga- means native of, while the other taga- means "one who was assigned the verb"

@leinad maganda ang tanawin and ang ganda ng tawain pretty much mean the same. One is saying that the scenery is beautiful. Only that different grammatical structures are used. But it points to the same thing and meaning, there's no subtle differences in meaning

@Bituingmaykinang Huh? Tagaluto isnt verb. It is an agent noun. Same thing with agent nouns of english.. for ex. the agent noun of "read" is reader. Taga doesn't function as Verb Affix just because you use it in verb root. Are you familiar with the concept of nominalizer? If you don't, then there's no point of explaining these things to you

@leinad I said earlier that tagaluto is a noun, but LUTO is a verb. That you can "verb" a noun in Tagalog (Nagbus, Nageroplano), and you can "noun" a verb.But my point stands still. Learners should just accept there are two ways of using Ma- just like how there are two ways of using taga-. And ganda as a "stand alone" works more of a noun than a verb, but one can still verb it. Ang kanyang ganda - his/her beauty. Ganda ang puhunan niya. His/her beauty is her/his investment. Maganda siya - she/he is beautiful. Gaganda siya (she/he will be beautiful). But never "Maluto siya" unless you mean that person might be cooked.Trying to "rationalize" why Ma- for maganda and Ma- for matulog won't bring learners anywhere. It is for their benefit if they just accept that there are two uses of Ma- just like there are two uses of taga-If people won't accept the language as it is, then Tagalog or any Philippine language might not be for them to learn.

Not taking the language as it is is like English speakers agonizing for why is it "Me llamo Bituin" in Spanish - more literally "I call myself Butuin" which sounds a bit ridiculous in English but not in Spanish. After all, why not "Mi nombre es" which would be easier for Anglophones because it is word for word translation.That and the Spanish "reflexive verbs" (because they sound odd when translated literally to English...stuff like I bath myself, I wake myself...)

@Bituingmaykinang i already encountered this kind of sentiments. That's why this conversation ended up this way. This mentality is like teaching tagalog with tenses even though tagalog doesn't have.

And that is why learners, esp Anglophones should just take the grammar as it is, right? That there are two ways of using Ma- just like there are two ways of using taga-. If one accepts there are two ways of using taga-, then there should be no problem accepting that there's more than one way to use Ma-The problem is, too many learners, Anglophones in particular, are still hellbent in finding "English equivalents" for Tagalog grammatical concepts.It's just really like English learners accepting that not all past tense end in -ed, and that there are lots of irregular verbs in English and "irregular comparative adjectives" (good, better, best instead of gooder, goodest). It's just the way it is.

@Bituingmaykinang I'm a native speaker of Tagalog. Tenses doesn't exist in tagalog so it is hard for us to learn the concept of it when we studied english. Tenses is explained as it is in tagalog speaker even though the concept of it doesn't exist in our native language.. So why explaining the diff. of using ma-statives & ma-adjective is like a trivial thing to non-tagalog speaker?

Exactly why teaching tenses and "passive voice" doesn't work because there are no Tagalog equivalent. And that learners should accept that Tagalog has different focuses/triggers instead of passive/active voice (if you dig in previous threads, many learners insist that the -in- form is "passive) and that Ma- like taga- have more than one use. Like other languages, it takes time to get used to it. After all, like what others have said, language isn't a mathematical equation. While there are patters, many deviations occur. And these deviations don't really have "logical" explanation. It is what it is. After all there's no logical explanation behind good, better, best but pretty, prettier, prettiest. It is what it is.Trying to question why Ma-tutulog ako, but not Ma-gaganda ako won't really help learners. That's really like questioning why is it good, better, best instead of good, gooder, goodest unlike pretty, prettier, prettiest. It would be easier if they will get familiar with and when to use this kind of Ma- and that kind of Ma-Or like questioning why are there mag- verbs and -um- verbs that learners have to be familiar with. Why not just use mag- for all to make it "easier"? Well, whether they like it or not, mag- and -um- is how the language works. You adjust to language and not the language adjusting to you.Take the language rules as it is because questioning "irregularities" , and why unfamiliar concepts exist won't help learning.Why are there two uses ma-? Why are there two uses of taga-. Why not just change taga- + place to something not taga-?One can explain what stative verbs in Tagalog are for years. But in the end, learners will have to memorize and be familiar with Ma- + stative verb that are conjugation with affixes that aren't Ma- when conjugating for aspect and focus. In short, they have to accept which verbs are used as Ma- as in matulog ang ma- as in maganda. Just as much as accepting taga- is used for tagaprobinsya and taga- as tagaluto. Asking by both are "taga-" doesn't help with learning.

Some much bad / wrong information on this thread.😂

@PinoyTaj There's no wrong or bad info here. Try studying comprehensive tagalog grammar in linguistic way then you will have a hint on what we're talking about.

@leinad haha like I said there is tons of wrong information in the thread as in on this post , the OP is wrong as are a lot of the responses for example “luto” is not a verb it is a noun... Most of the people here posted inaccurate information....

@PinoyTaj noun like it can appear in "ang phrase" without consequences?