comments

[Lawrence A. Reid]

Greetings,

Just a few additional minor comments on Daniel Kaufman's "minor corrections
and comparatively insignificant notes".

Kaufman states:

> First of all the observation that no Tagalog
> word ends
> in a vowel (from Jean-Paul's Nov.22 posting) is in fact an incorrect
> conclusion based on Bowen's orthography (if he was the first to
> suggest it)
> which attempts to solve a purely morphological phenomenon and does not
> reflect any phonological reality at all. This orthography, which was
> unfortunately adopted by many in the field, simplifies the
> derivation of the
> intervocalic _h_ which appears with suffixes /-in/ and /-an/ on
> stems which
> do not contain a final glottal stop in Philippine languages.

Regardless of the merits of Kaufman's claims (I happen to agree with him), I
am concerned with his statement:

"the intervocalic _h_ which appears with suffixes /-in/ and /-an/ on stems
which do not contain a final glottal stop in Philippine languages."

I am finding more and more often in recent literature on Tagalog the
assumption that this language is somehow typical of Philippine languages,
when in fact, Tagalog and many other Central Phiippine languages are in a
number of respects considerably different lexically, and syntactically from
their sisters in other Philippine subgroups, such as, for example, the
Cordilleran languages in northern Luzon, or the Manobo languages of
Mindanao.  In the Cordilleran languages, for example, no stems end in a
glottal stop (except those in which final voiceless stops have become
glottal stop, such as Ibanag); in these languages _h_ is not inserted before
otherwise vowel-final stems before suffixes which reflect *-en or *-an.

> For one last minor pedantic correction I will add that the name "kalinga"
> referring to an ethnic group of the Cordillera mountains, is not
> as Waruno
> mentioned, an example of a group adopting a name of a prestigious culture
> center but rather it is a name given to the ethnic group by a
> neighbouring
> tribe meaning "enemy" (/ka-/ reciprocal affix + /lingga/-"hatred").

According to Francisco Billiet (The Kalinga Ullalim, Baguio: Catholic School
Press, 1970, p. 8), the term Kalinga is "a misspelled official name given by
outsiders to the so-called Kalingas".  He states that the term means "enemy,
fighter or headhunter".  According to Felix Keesing (The Ethnohistory of
Northern Luzon, Stanford University Press 1962, p. 221-2) the term is from
Ibanag, and was widely used in Spanish times for any mountain peoples
adjacent to the lower and middle Cagayan valley. I have been unable to find
the term in available Ibanag lexicons, but it does occur in the fairly
closely related Northern Cordilleran language, Isneg (see Vanoverbergh's
Isneg-English Dictionary, UH Press 1972), but with only a velar nasal medial
consonant, magkal'inga (' = stress on following vowel), "to be enemies".  In
the Madukayan dialect of Kalinga, according to William Henry Scott (On The
Cordillera, Manila: MCS Enterprises, 1966, p. 63.) the term kalinga (with
single medial velar nasal consonant) means "enemy" and was applied to
non-Kalinga enemies such as the Gaddang.  They see no connection between
this term and the proper noun kalingga (with medial cluster).  I have never
seen the term _lingga_ "hatred", and wonder where this is cited.

Laurie Reid

____________

Lawrence A. Reid
Professor of Linguistics
Department of Linguistics
University of Hawai'i at Manoa
Moore Hall 569
1890 East-West Road
Honolulu, HI 96822-2318>