Tagalog-15

[potet]

Now I can see some light in this obfuscated issue. Thanks a lot, Dr.
RUBRICO, for your rich answer.

""the 1987 Constitution: Art IV Sec 6. "The national language of the
Philippines is Filipino. As it evolves, it shall be
further developed and enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other
languages. "
How can Tagalog be Filipino in the context of the  above provison? Will
Tagalog + Sebuano + Hiligaynon, English, Spanish, Arabic, etc. be Tagalog
still?" Jessie Grace RUBRICO

Tagalog or Filipino may borrow as many words as necessary, they will still
remain the same language(s).
Every French person knows the Languedoc/Provençal term _mas_ (local
pronunciation [mas], often pronounced [ma:] in the rest of France) < Latin
_mansum_ cf. Tag. "tíráhan". This term has the same origin as the French
word _maison_ "house" < Latin _mansio_ "tíráhan", but refers to a little
farmhouse in the South-East of France (low roof, Roman tiles etc.).  The
inclusion of  _mas_ and other provincial terms into French enriches it, but
does not change it into another language.

"How do the two differ?
 1. alphabet: 28 [letters] for Filipino; 20 for Tagalog
2. syllable construction,consonant clusters, phonotactics --
3. orthography/spelling
4. vocabulary
5. grammatical construction -- very minimal reduplication (Fil) - verbal
affixation: simplification/ mag- preferred
--poster at the lobby of UP AS Hall: Bawal magsigarilyo (Fil) vs. Bawal
maninigiralyo (Tag)
Ayaw niyang magpunta vs. Ayaw niyang pumunta" Jessie Grace RUBRICO

You certainly have many points here particularly when you deal with
phonology. I wonder however if the grammatical changes you mention were not
already present in Tagalog.

I also noticed that Visayans found it easier to use _mag-_ verbal forms
because these leave the stem untouched, hence clear. _Mang- / pang-_ forms
with their harmonisation of _-ng_ with the initial of the stem, and its
absortion when it is weak (mainly unvoiced), makes them somehow difficult to
handle for a non-native speaker of Tagalog, hence _mang- + sigarílyo >
manigarílyo_ replaced by _mag-sigarílyo_.  _ -Um-_ verbal forms, too - but
to a lesser extent -  seem to be replaced by _mag-_ forms, e.g.
mag-teléponó_ instead of _teléponó + -um- > tumelépunó_ "to telephone" . In
brief, simple prefixation is preferred to complexe prefixation and
infixation.

Besides, I have noticed that Tagalog has been evolving into an analytical
language.

For instance _maki- / paki-_ verbal formals of request are now replaced by
_pakiúsap_ "request" (+ linker) followed by simple forms.

Similarly, _maka-_ verbs of  ability are replaced by _pwéde _ "can/ could <
Spanish puede" + linker + simple form , or - less common and always
negative - _(hin)dî káya_ "unable" + nang + performer + ang + verb, e.g.
Hindî káya nang huwés ang pumások sa kaniyáng opísina. = The judge was
unable to enter his office.".

I have the impression _ika-_ causative verbal verbs - and I mean causative
not factitive - have almost disappeared from spoken Tagalog.
Doesn't e.g. "Lubháng ikinalungkót kó ang kaniyáng pagpapakamatáy. = His
suicide saddened me very much." sounds academic, and wouldn't the person in
the street rather say "Malungkót na malungkót akó dáhil sa kaniyáng
pagpapakamatáy. = I am very sad because of his suicide."

By the same token relatives the antecedent of which is a word for "cause" no
longer involve _ika-_ causative verbs.
For instance I don't think e.g. "Iyán ang dahiláng ikinalungkót kó. = This
is the reason why I got sad." would be used in the press. Instead I think
they would write: "Iyán ang dahilán kung bákit nalungkót akó. = ditto."

Even factitives verbs seem to be on their way out. For example I think
people will say "Inórder / inútos ni Carlos na itayô yung bágong gusálì. =
Carlos ordered that this new building be built." instead of "Ipinagpatayô ni
Carlos ang bágong gusálìng iyón. = Carlos had this new buiding built."

This evolution may be due to the combined influence of Spanish and English,
but, somehow, I suspect that Tagalog was bound to shed part of its more
complex structures according to the basic principle of linguistic economy:
the simpler and the more analytical a construction, the more chances it
stands to supersede the corresponding complex synthetical one.

[Please correct my examples where they are wrong.]

"Syntax: according to the studies of Dr. Ernesto Constantino, syntax of
Philippine languages are basically the same (universal)." Jessie Grace
RUBRICO

This holds true for the languages that belong to the same group, but when
they differ, the syntaxes are rather different. For instance Cebuano Visayan
is close enough to Tagalog, but Ilocano is not.

Thanks a lot, Dr. RUBRICO, for your list of scientific books. I can see that
Filipino is now developing its scientific branches for good. I'll try and
get some of them as soon as possible. Then I'll able to have a serious
opinion about Filipino in sciences. Congratulations and keep the good work
going.

Best

Jean-Paul G. POTET. B. P. 46. 92114 CLICHY CEDEX. FRANCE.