Filipinas and Filipino

[Paz B. Naylor]

Without going into the details that Jean-Paul asserts, I would like to say
that I consider Filipino the alter ego of Tagalog.  In my book, I argue that
the concept of Filipino is precisely what Tagalog has evolved into!

Furthermore, I consider "Filipino" a political concept  and Tagalog a
linguistic concept but the substance is virtually, if not altogether the
same.

Nonetheless, "Filipino" was made official in 1989.  The constitution had
nothing to do with this fact.  However, the fact was incorporated into the
new constitution.

It's nice to know that there is enough interest in these matters among
An-Langers.

Regards, Paz

Paz Buenaventura Naylor, Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor, Asian Languages and Cultures
Faculty Associate, Center for Southeast Asian Studies
Program Associate, Linguistics
The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI  48109
Home Address: 2032 Winsted Blvd., Ann Arbor MI 48103-6040
             Tel/Fax:  (734) 995-2371


----- Original Message -----
From: "potet" <POTETJP at wanadoo.fr>
To: " AUSTRONESIAN LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS" <AN-LANG at anu.edu.au>
Cc: "Ausronesian Languages" <AN-LANG at anu.edu.au>
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Filipinas and Filipino


> "Yes, the language is now officially spelled also with F -- although most
> Filipinos still believe that the politically correct spelling remains
> Pilipinas and Pilipino." Paz B. NAYLOR
>
> Don't you think they pronounce it / call it  that way because there is no
> /f/ in the majority of Philippine languages?
>
> "the book I am currently writing about Tagalog" Paz B. NAYLOR
>
> Why isn't it on Filipino?
>
> Besides, as regards this matter, I have the impression that, as a
linguist,
> I am being taken for a ride.
>
> When Tagalog is used as the official language of the Philippines it is
> called "Filipino".
>
> It is a well-known fact that the name of the official language of the
> Philippines is "Filipino" because the constitution of the Philippines is
> written in English, and English uses the Spanish term: Filipino.
>
> Once it was called "Filipino", because of the constitutionality of the
name,
> it had to be used in all the other languages of the Philippines, even
> those - the overwhelming majority - that have no /f/.
>
> The first official Filipino-Filipino dictionary has no word containing the
> letter F. Now some authors make it a point to write some loanwords,
> particularly English, with their original F - that the majority of readers
> will read  /p/ - to demonstrate that Filipino has F-words. I suppose that
in
> the future official Filipino-Filipino dictionaries and bilingual
> dictionaries will enter these words in their columns.
>
> Even with such loanwords, Filipino remains identical to Tagalog. For
> linguists, Filipino and Tagalog are not two different languages: Tagalog
> grammars, Pilipino grammars and Filipino grammars are one and the same. It
> would be extremely difficult to argue to the contrary. Asserting that
> Filipino and Tagalog are two different languages (Dr. RUBRICO) is not
enough
> for linguists. To prove that Filipino and Tagalog are two different
> languages, it would be necessary for you, Dr. RUBRICO, to demonstrate that
> their grammars are different. I am still waiting for such a demonstration.
>
> In practice, if Filipino were a different language from Tagalog, I
shouldn't
> be able to understand Dr. RUBRICO's on-site Filipino articles: Tagalog is
> the only Philippine language I learned. I read one of her articles, and -
to
> me - it was plain Tagalog simply with more English loanwords than usual
> Tagalog - and - consequently - in some passages - a learned variety of
> Taglish.
>
> In brief, I am quite willing to call Tagalog "Filipino", when it is used
as
> your national language, but, please, don't ask me to believe that Filipino
> is another language than Tagalog.
>
> Jean-Paul G. POTET. B. P?. 46. 92114 CLICHY CEDEX. FRANCE.
>
>