Filipino to Ukrainian: distinguish a named addressee from a named subject
A name can identify the listener without naming the actor
The Filipino handbook illustrates Aling Nene, nasaan po si Elena?, asking Nene about Elena’s whereabouts. Nene is being addressed, while Elena is the person whose location is requested. NIU separately describes si as a marker before a personal name in its ang-marked role. Those features help identify the two relationships, but the names themselves do not acquire Ukrainian-style case endings in the Filipino example.
A Ukrainian translation must preserve the distinction between talking to Nene and talking about Elena. If both names are treated as ordinary subjects merely because they occur near the beginning, the question can become a different inquiry. The addressee does not become the missing person, and the person being sought does not become the person expected to answer.
The Ukrainian UD case description identifies the vocative as a form used for direct address. Its short example Що думаєш, Олю? asks Olya what she thinks, with the name in the vocative. This is an independently attested Ukrainian address example, not a translation of the Filipino question. It demonstrates that identifying the listener can require a different form from simply naming a person as a subject. The same documentation contrasts nominative мама with vocative мамо for mother. The relationship need not change when the form changes: a person being addressed directly is not thereby a different family member.
A source personal-name marker is not a target vocative ending
Filipino si can help identify a personal name in a sentence, but it does not mean call this person. In NIU’s naming example Ito si Noel, the speaker identifies Noel. There is no reason to turn Noel into a Ukrainian vocative solely because the source places a personal-name marker before it. Identification and direct address are different communicative acts.
Conversely, when a Filipino opening actually addresses somebody, the absence of a changed name ending does not justify leaving the Ukrainian address construction untreated. The translation needs the target form appropriate to the name and construction. A courtesy title can contribute to how the listener is addressed, while the grammatical role of the other named person still belongs to the question itself.
This distinction is useful in messages that begin with a person’s name and then mention someone else. A request to Olya to locate Elena should not become a report about Olya locating Elena unless the source says that. Retain who should answer, who is being discussed and what information is requested before selecting Ukrainian name forms. The source may express these roles through title, marker, order and context, while Ukrainian also uses case. Preserving the interaction is more important than keeping both names in identical dictionary forms or mechanically replacing Filipino si with an address ending.
Language references