Seminar – The Philippine English Symposium

Dear PCU-Dasma students, especially the English majors,

At the request of Dr. Eunice Mercado, I am posting my notes from the Philippine English Symposium from my other blog here. (You may also want to read my notes from the Komperensya ng Wikang pambansa here.) I hope this will give you insights for your Sociolinguistics course and more knowledge about World Englishes (yes, there are many "Englishes") and especially the variety of English we have here in the country, Philippine English.

Sir G

Dr. Shirley Dita and Dr. Danica Salazar, organizers of the Philippine English Symposium. (Photo from Shirley Dita on Facebook.)

Last September 14, 2013, a Saturday, I attended the first Philippine English Symposium (PES) at the Henry Sy, Sr. Hall, De La Salle University – Manila. It was sponsored by the Oxford University, De La Salle University (DLSU), and the Linguistic Society of the Philippines (LSP).

I happened upon the PES when I was browsing on Facebook. Dr. Shirley Dita of DLSU, one of the organizers, he just posted it as an event and I was among the first to confirm my attendance. I think it was originally planned for an attendance of 150 (based on the number of kits prepared). But interest in the symposium swelled; reaching up to 500.

"Selfie" is not a Philippine English word. But maybe "we-fie" will. 

The participants were all welcomed by Dr. Dita and Dr. Danica Salazar of Oxford University the co-organizer of the symposium. Dr. Dita herself gave the first talk, which was about the unique grammatical features of Philippine English (henceforth referred to as “PhE”). Among these were:

• PhE tends to use based from and results to instead of the standard based on and results in. 
• PhE tends to say such + 0 noun (without the articles a, an, and the) instead of such a/an/the (thing). 
• PhE tends to use the word to assure with only the indirect object and without the direct object; i.e., The president assured the flood victims (of what? More typhoons to come?). 
• PhE tends to use the simple aspect (past and present) instead of the more complex forms such as the perfect aspect (had/has/have + past participle) and the progressive (forms of to be + -ing form of the verb; e.g., They lived in Manila vs. They had lived in Manila… and They are living in Manila. 
• PhE tends to use the “zero majority” as in Majority of the student instead of the standard A majority of students. 
• PhE also tends to use the singular form of the noun in expressions such as one of the student instead of one of the students. 
• PhE is fond of repeating intensifiers, such as the famous “major, major”. 
• PhE is fond of using disjuncts as “discourse fillers” such as Actually, okay, as a matter of fact, & c. 

Dr. Ariane Borlongan, also of DLSU, discussed the diachronic (‘across time’) features of PhE. He compares the Phil-Brown corpus with the International Corpus of English – Philippine corpus (ICE-PHI). He demonstrated the PhE tends to use quasi-modals (going to, have to, able to) just like in American English; while British English tends to use full modals (will, must, can). Also, Filipinos tend to see indefinite pronouns ending with –body (everybody, somebody, nobody) more “elegant” than those ending with 

Dr. Aileen Salonga began her talk on “the politics of PE” by showing Kachru’s “concentric circles” illustrating World Englishes (yes, the plural for “English”): The inner circle are countries which are native speakers (US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada); the outer circle includes countries where English is a second language (Philippines, India, Singapore, & c.); and the “expanding circle” includes the rest of the world (e.g., the rest of Europe and Asia). "Access to different varieties of English is not really equal," she says. "Philippine English is not really equal with the other varieties... They are judged asymmetrically." She talked about the use of English used by Filipino call center agents and their difficulties in communicating with foreigners who use other varieties of English.

Dr. Alejandro Bernardo presented an “endonormative pedagogical model” in teaching English; that is, that the norms of teaching English should be that based in the Philippines instead of those from other countries like the US (“exonormative”). He advocates a “pluricentric model” where both PhE and “standard” American English are taught. He also said that students should not be penalized if they use PhE syntax and accent when they are using English in the local context.

Dr. Danica Salazar talked about “Philippine English on the cutting edge of lexicography”. She shared her work at Oxford University and at the Oxford English Dictionary. The OED is now sponsoring a project to create a dictionary of Philippine English words (such as bananacue and carnapping). She also shared an online project to compile a “Pinoy English Community Dictionary”.

Dr. Danilo Dayag of DLSU, former chair of the Department of English and Applied Linguistics (DEAL) and former president of the LSP, presented the status of Philippine English. He cited the need for a connection between linguistic research and educational practice: "Research should NOT be done for research sake." He echoed Dr. Borlongan that students should not be penalized for the use of PhE because they can be understood in the country anyway. Nor should students waste their time and effort in correcting student’s pronunciation and grammar when they can be understood anyway.

The seminar ended with a round-table discussion with all the speakers of the seminar plus Jessica Zafra, a popular writer, Reynaldo Binuya from La Consolacion College, Kriza Kamille Santos from the Divine Mercy College Foundation, and Freddie Sale, a BSE-English student at DLSU. Ms. Zafra quipped, “I don't like Facebook but I can't fight progress.”

Seminar - Komperensyang Pangwika 2013 at UA&P

Dear PCU-Dasma students, especially the English majors: 

Here are some of my notes when I attended a conference at the University of Asia and the Pacific in celebration to the Buwan ng Wika. I hope that this will give you insights on the some of the current issues regarding the Filipino language.

Sir G

Last August 14 (Wednesday), I attended a seminar sponsored by the Linguistic Society of the Philippines (LSP) and the University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P) called “Komperensyang Pangwika”. It has the theme “Wika ng Nakaraan, Wika ng Kasalukuyan: Mga Isyu at Diskursong Pangwika”. It was organized by UA&P’s College of Arts and Sciences in Celebration of the Buwan ng Wikang Pambansa 2013.

Dr. Dungo (left, standing) responding to the presentation of Dr. Salonga (seated, back to camera)

I missed the first lecture, that by Dr. Aileen Salonga; but from what I have heard from her from other seminars in the past, the topic was about Filipinos serving as call center agents. I arrived as Dr. Nanette Dungo of UA&P was giving her response to Dr. Salonga's presentation. Dr. Dungo  valiantly tried to deliver her talk in Filipino--I later found out that she is an English professor.

Dr. Vibar speaking on historical linguistics. Pretty heavy stuff.

The next lecturer was Dr. Arwin Vibar, also from the UA&P and a board member of the LSP. His topic was about the description of 17^th century Tagalog according to the Arte y Reglas de la Lengua Tagala, the first published grammar of Tagalog, written by a Spanish priest, Blancas de San Jose in 1610. It’s a very complicated topic, involving 17^th century Tagalog and Spanish (he even showed pictures of the ancient manuscript)—which is pretty hard going for non-linguists. 

I met Dr. Vibar during an LSP two years ago when he gave a presentation on "missionary linguistics" using the same material. That time I asked him a question about the new translation of the Roman Missal.) 

During a break in the seminar, Dr. Vibar and I talked about a point in Tagalog grammar called “case grammar” which Father San Jose amazingly was able to detect. (Case grammar is a paper in itself. Let’s just say it’s the difference between forms of Tagalog verb; for example, nagbigay, binigyan, ibinigay, etc.—all of which can be rendered ‘gave’ in English, depending on the noun. We Filipinos know when to use each form without knowing the terms agentive, causative, locative, etc. There are as much as twenty-one cases!)

After the break, Dr. Leodivico C. Lacsamana (who also talked with me briefly during the break) of the UA&P gave a response to Dr. Vibar’s lecture. He talked about a few points on Tagalog grammar that Father San Jose missed in his scholarly tome.

Prof. Talegon, who spoke on J3j3m0n, is also the seminar director.

The final topic was about “Jejemon”, the convoluted texting style of Filipino youth today, by Vivencio Talegon, Jr. of UA&P. When he asked the audience if anybody knows about 1337 (pronounced “Leet”)  I answered that is a way of typing used in within the hacking community. The lecture was responded by Moreal Camba, also of UA&P, who said that Jejemon is a form of resistance and solidarity of young people.

Prof. Camba responding to the presentation of Prof. Talegon.

At the last open forum, I raised a question on the lecture of Dr. Vibar and “missionary linguistics”. Since MTB-MLE (Mother Tongue-Based Multilinguial Education) is upon us, children will be taught in their “mother tongue” until they’re in Grade 3, when Filipino and English will be introduced. (That is another paper in itself. All I can say now is that MTB-MLE is a Good Thing.) Since we are just beginning in this venture, I reasoned that writing materials in other Philippine languages is a “missionary” effort. Dr. Lacsamana answered that even as we speak, a group of “experts” are ensconced a hotel in Manila (he won’t say which) who are writing textbooks for other Philippine languages.

I went away from the seminar with a handsome certificate and richer in the knowledge of our National Language.