one more point re KILA

[Paz B. Naylor]

Great Carl!  Now we've got something!  You, too, have a nice weekend!
Manang Paz
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Carl Rubino 
  To: Paz B. Naylor 
  Cc: AUSTRONESIAN LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS ; anthony paul Grant 
  Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 10:59 PM
  Subject: Re: one more point re KILA


  Manang Paz,
  No, kila is not Chinese or Ilocano - it is Tagalog and fits in the paradigm quite well. Maybe the purist in question didn't accept it as a real form -- I also mentioned that that same person uses the "l" forms in his speech and gave an example.

  The etymology is:

  kay + *=la (*=da)
  OBL. personal noun   3p (Kapampangan =la, Ilocano =da, Pangasinan =(i)ra)

  (note that the *la is still present in the plural oblique kani-la; singular form kani-ya, where ya is the pronoun still used in Kapampangan, but only used with the article si- in Tagalog siya).

    So Panganiban calls kila a provincial variant? What provinces? Vicassan calls it a colloquial variant which is probably a better description.
    For people that are not familiar with the paradigms you give, we should also point out that the first two words in the A column (what I call the "l" forms) - sila and nila are also the nominative and genitive pronouns, respectively. Kila is not used as an oblique pronoun, just a plural personal noun marker, so I added column C to point this out:

  Third person plural nominal markers and pronouns
                                               (A)          (B)            Pronouns (C)

           nominative                  SILA        SINA        SILA
           genitive                       NILA        NINA       NILA
           dative/locative            KILA        KINA        KANILA

    Have a nice weekend,
    Carl


    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Paz B. Naylor 
    To: Carl Rubino 
    Cc: AUSTRONESIAN LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS ; anthony paul Grant 
    Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 8:49 PM
    Subject: one more point re KILA


    Carl,

    You mentioned towards the end of your email that someone told you that KILA is not Tagalog.  Who said so?  It is not Cebuano nor is it Hiligaynon (I speak both).  Is it Ilocano?  Is it Chinese?  It's certainly not Spanish (I speak that too) - WHAT IS IT? 

     It is most certainly Tagalog!  I just checked it - it is listed in Panganiban as "prov. var. of kiná, q.v." (?!)  I find this surprising and hard to believe as an old Manileña.   So much for "pure" and "good" Tagalog being from the provinces - like Bulacan!  Seriously though, we know nothing of the history - I don't mean etymology - of the KILA variant.  In any case,  KILA is recognized as Tagalog and from what Panganiban says and what my sources and I (as well as others) give witness to,  SINA and KILA have been in use in Manila Tagalog.

    Examining the 2 forms of the analytic case paradigm I pointed out earlier, note that the first syllable of each case form that encodes the case contrast (and parallels the personal-name case-markers SI, NI, KAY) is identical in A and B.  The difference is in the noncontrastive second syllable:

                                                 (A)          (B)

             nominative                  SILA        SINA
             genitive                       NILA        NINA
             dative/locative            KILA        KINA

    I hope this informs the issue at hand.   Paz

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/an-lang/attachments/20010713/5e83b27f/attachment.htm>