[NOTE: Within the part of the 2001 Revisyon ng Alfabeto at Patnubay sa Ispeling ng Wikang Filipino that's written in Filipino, I took the liberty of highlighting words which I recognized as borrowed from English or Spanish for emphasis (I could have missed some). The words in red are either loaned "as is", or derived, from English. Those in blue are loaned "as is", or derived, from Spanish.
It is interesting to note that there’s a preponderance of borrowed words from English which are “transformed” into Spanish (which is to say Spanish borrowed them from English) and then adopted "as is" or re-spelled in Filipino in accordance with the guidelines. For example:
English………………Spanish…………………Filipino
plan………………………….plano…………………………….plano
rent………………………… renta…………………………….renta
system…………………….sistema………………………...sistema
revision…………………..revisión………………………...revisyon
recommendation…….recomendación………….....rekomendasyon
codification…………….codificación…………………..kodifikasyon
What's perplexing is that decades have passed since Spanish [as a required course] was taken out of the Philippine educational curricula and yet Filipinos continue to "transform" certain English words into Spanish in the same manner as above and adopt the result in their daily discourse. In "Filipino ng mga Filipino", Virgilio S. Almario, National Artist of the Year for Literature in 2003, explains:
"...Mas malapit sa ating wika ang bigkas sa mga salitang Espanyol. Sa gayon, malimit na isa-Espanyol ng mga akademista ang mga hiram nila sa Ingles..."
Take the English word "codification" in the example above. In the Spanish "codificación" the 'a' is pronounced just like your /a/ (as in katawan) in the Filipino alphabet. The Filipino "kodifikasyon" is pronounced exactly the same as the Spanish "codificación".
This English-to-Spanish-to-Filipino process, however, has spawned a phenomenon that Almario calls "siyokoy". Paul Morrow, an Irish-Canadian, described it best in "Mga Salitang Siyokoy":
"Tulad ng halimaw ni Dr. Frankenstein sa kuwento, na kaniyang ginawa mula sa mga bahagi ng katawan ng iba’t ibang tao, ang mga naturang salita ay binubuo ng iba’t ibang wikang banyaga ngunit hindi naman kinikilala ang mga ito saanman sa daigdig. Mga salitang siyokoy ang tawag dito ng manunulat at makatang si Virgilio S. Almario, mula sa kathang isip na taong-dagat na anyong lalaki ang katawan na may kaliskis at tila isda ang ulo. Ang tawag dito sa Ingles ay merman o kung babae ay mermaid."
Almario wrote:
"...Ngunit dito mas lumilitaw ang kanilang [mga akademista] kabobuhan. Dahil hindi bihasa sa Espanyol, nakalilikha sila ng mga salitang siyokoy – hindi Ingles, hindi Espanyol (gaya ng “aspeto”… na hindi aspect ng Ingles at hindi rin aspecto ng Espanyol)."
(See Morrow's article for his collection of the so-called "siyokoys".)
Of course, the current guidelines allow the “Filipinizing” of certain English words without the intermediate Spanish influence as in “awtor” [author], “ispeling” [spelling], “awtput” [output], “varayti” [variety], “literasi” [literacy], "intertransleytabiliti" [intertranslatability], etc.--adaptations which--to the uninitiated--could pose some recognizability problems. In effect, the goal of standardization, uniformity and consistency is compromized because the spelling guidelines allow multiple ways to spell certain borrowed words--for instance: community, komyuniti, or komunidad--all of which appear in the 2001 Revisyon on page 62 and page 11, respectively. One’s personal recommendation [and this is proposed by Rodie Marte Metin] is to stick to the original spelling in English and avoid the added problem of re-learning the re-spelled Filipino adaptations or eliminate any concern about intertranslatability.
Retaining the original spelling for English words adopted in Filipino is clearly the preferred method (called code-switching) in everyday conversation, in certain blogs by Filipinos [with a few of the coño flavor], in various Filipino-hosted 'Net chatrooms and forums, in “Standard Pinglish for Filipinos” [by Rodie Marte Metin]—an unabashed proposal that “Lahat ng foreign words—English, French, Italian, German, Japanese, Chinese, Russian, etc.—kapag puwedeng gamitin at ginagamit na sa kapamaraanang Tagalog ay kabilang na sa Pinglish vocabulary…”
[A peek into YouTube.com (now a Google subsidiary) can give you an idea of how extensive the code-switching is on a popular television show in the Philippines. Try searching for "Philippine Idol" and play any of the videos that come up.]
This code-switching is allowed under the spelling guidelines for words containing any or a combination of the 8 letters, C, F, J, Ñ, Q, V, X, Z [added to the old ABAKADA]. One of the rules says the letter, and by extension, the word is maintained if the word is borrowed wholly in its original form. Well, the lexical dam broke and this specific spelling guideline has become an equal opportunity proposition for practically all borrowed words.
In fairness, the code-switching phenomenon is not a by-product of the 2001 Revisyon, although it legitimized it in more formal levels of discourse. We've used code-switching in informal discourse for as long as I can remember. We entered school and the medium of instruction was and still is English. When there was an English word which did not have an equivalent translation in the vernacular that we used, it was simply convenient to use the English word. Well now, we code-switch even if we do have an equivalent vernacular term for the English word.
In Language Planning and Intellectualisation, Andrew Gonzales observes "that tertiary level subject matter in the Philippines is taught in a code-switching variety of Filipino and English. Code-switching is used because of the difficulty for the teachers of explaining some concepts and difficulties for the students in comprehending these concepts when they are taught solely in English... This is especially true in many large universities which cater to lower middle and middle income students, although it has been found even in more expensive and prestigious universities. The increasing use of code-switching rather than English might lead to the evolution of a more formal and consistent variety of standardised Filipino as a medium of instruction. In this case... the intellectualised variety of Filipino might well turn out to be a better codified and improved variety consisting of the results of this massive code-switching. What may happen is a gradual devolution from a formal type of Filipino initially used in schools to a colloquial mixture of Filipino and English, after a period of code-switching, which may lead to the development of a mixed language which is likely to become the intellectualised variety of Filipino in everyday academic teaching. Whether this mixed language will spread into academic writing in publications and dissertations remains a question, however, as the more conservative forces eschew and even condemn such code-switching."
Whew!
Well, please read on. You probably have your own view of the whole national language issue. Thank you for leaving your comments. -- JP]
---
2001 Revisyon
ng
Alfabeto at Patnubay
sa Ispeling ng Wikang Filipino
Paunang Salita
Ang 2001 Revisyon ng Alfabeto at Patnubay sa Ispeling ng Wikang Filipino ay kumakatawan sa ikalawang bahagi ng final na awtput ng proyektong “Tungo sa Istandardisasyon ng Sistema ng Pagsulat sa Filipino: Mga Batas at Tuntunin na Nauukol sa Walong Dagdag na Letra ng Alfabetong Filipino: ng Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino. Ginagawang malinaw ng mga tuntuning pang-ispeling ang batayang konseptwal sa pagdidisenyo ng sistema ng pagsulat. Lalo pang ipinaliliwanag ang mga konseptong ito sa format na tanong at sagot sa Primersa 2001 Mga Tiyak na Tuntunin sa Gamit ng Walong Dagdag na Letra.
Mapapansing ang revisyong ito ay nakafocus sa gamit ng walong (8) dagdag na letra na hiniram at nakapaloob sa kasalukuyang 28-letrang Alfabetong Filipino. Ang iba pang tuntunin sa ispeling ay pinanatili gaya ng nakasaad sa 1987 Patnubay sa Ispeling at/o hinango mula sa orihinal na sistema ng pagbaybay na ginagamit sa iba’t ibang institusyong pang-akademya at pampublikasyon.
Ang mga binanggit sa itaas ang bumuo ng orihinal na datos na naging basehan ng komparatibong analisis at siya namang naging batayan ng final na mga rekomendasyon. Pinananatili ang mga tuntunin sa ispeling na labas sa saklaw ng proyektong pag-aaral kaya hindi ganap na binabago ang sistema ng ispeling. Samakatwid, and mungkahing tuluyang reforma sa ispeling ay magiging kumulatibong proseso na tutulong sa pagpapatibay ng buong sistemang ortografiko. Binibigyang-diin din and pangangailangang masagawa ng seryosong siyentifikong riserts sa bawat problematikong detalye ng sistema sa pagbaybay bago magsagawa ng anumang ofisyal na revisyon o modifikasyon.
Inaasahan, samakatwid, na magsasagawa ng isang seryosong pagkilos ang mga gumagamit ng alfabeto sa pamamagitan ng implementasyon ng 2001 Revisyon ng Alfabeto at Patnubay sa Ispeling ng Wikang Filipino.
