Problems and Solutions in Documenting

Local Plant Names in the Philippines

Domingo
Local Plant
A. Madulid
Names
National Museum, Philippines
The Philippines is a mine of information on local plant names (represented by
more than 8,000 species of flowering plants and 7,000 species of lower plants and
fungi) as spoken in more than 100 ethnolinguistic groups in the country. Local plant
names have many uses and applications such as in scientific studies (e.g. plant
taxonomy, ethnobotany, phytogeography, anthropology, biology, pharmacology, etc.)
and in the fields of linguistics, education, culture and historical studies (Madulid 1991).
Other applications of vernacular names are the following: (1) Use in floristic and
ecological studies, and identification of plants (Merrill 192326); (2) Use in
etymological studies of plants (Bartlett 1939; van Steenis 1950); (3) Use in tracing
origin of cultivated crops such as corn (Berket-Smith 1943), coconut (Merrill 1936),
pandans (Stone 1963), and other crops (Quisumbing 1965; Heiser 1969; Haskell 1963);
(4) Use in explaining cultural links between peoples during early civilization (Merrill
1946); (5) Use in understanding the relationship of native peoples and their natural
environment (e.g. Fox 1953; Jocano 1973; Conklin 1954; Quisumbing 1951); (5) Use in
tracing origin and history of place names (Roces 1976; Chamberlain 1959; Gruezo
1999); (6) Use in tracing migration route of people and prehistoric influences of foreign
cultures in a country (Chowning 1963); (7) Use in documenting disappearing languages
(Handricourt 1963; Camel 1701); (8) Use in understanding or reconstructing the system
of plant classification of indigenous people (Williams 1990); and many other uses
(Martin 1995; Schopf 1976; Strother 1977).
Given the many uses of vernacular plant names they should be given due
recognition as an important information resource (Madulid 1991). Lexicographers,
ethnobotanists and other researchers involved or interested in recording local plant
names and their scientific equivalents can get information from many sources:
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

Botanists, agriculturists, horticulturists, foresters, and other plant scientists.

Plant hobbyists, nursery men, and garden shop owners.
Local farmers, villagers, forest products gatherers, herbolarios, etc.
Indigenous people Many of these people, especially the forest dwellers
or those who gather forest products often have extensive knowledge of
the plants around them and are therefore rich source of data for local
plant names.
Publications, reports, thesis, manuscripts, etc. Books and scientific
articles dealing with taxonomy, floristics, ethnobotany, ethnopharmacology, and related fields in the Philippines contain many local names
and scientific names of plants. Thesis and research reports are also rich
source of plant names.

2005. Hsiu-chuan Liao and Carl R. Galvez

261Rubino, eds. Current issues in Philippine
linguistics and anthropology: Parangal kay Lawrence A. Reid. Manila: LSP and SIL. pp. 261-265.

Madulid
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:59:50 PM

262

DOMINGO A. MADULID

6.
7.
8.

9.

Dictionaries and lexicons on plant names. Examples are: Madulids

(2001) A Dictionary of Philippine Plant Names, Salvosas (1963) Lexicon of
Philippine Trees, and Rojos (1999) Revised Lexicon of Philippine Trees.
Herbarium specimens Labels from herbarium specimens usually
contain information about the plants including its scientific names, local
names and the dialects where the names originate.
Questionnaires, survey sheets, etc. Researchers may distribute
questionnaires or survey sheets to resource persons to record local plant
names of a particular locality. Students and researchers in ethnobotany,
ethnopharmacology, pharmacy, etc. usually do this kind of inquiry.
Computerized database through the internet Local plant names are
now compiled in electronic databases and made available to interested
users around the world through the internet. Examples of these databases
are NAPRALERT (for medicinal plants around the world), Southeast Asia
Botanical Collections Information Network (for plants in the Malesian
region), and ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (for
some plants in Southeast Asia). The Philippine National Herbarium,
through its website (http://www.pnh.com.ph), will soon make available
in the internet the local names of Philippine plants.

Whether the local plant names are derived from primary or secondary sources of
information, it is important for researchers to exercise caution to minimize committing
errors in the recording, transcription and documentation processes (Steiner 1975).
Among the common sources of error are the following:
1.

2.

3.

4.

Lack of taxonomic knowledge of plants Persons recording local plant

names are usually not taxonomists and identification of the plants can
become a problem. A good practice is to prepare voucher specimens of
the plants whose local names are being recorded so these can be
identified or verified by taxonomists.
Unfamiliarity with the dialects and languages of the locality In some cases
the persons recording local plant names are not native to the locality.
Because of unfamiliarity with the language, the recorder can make mistakes
especially in the spelling of the local plant names. This was particularly true
during the early colonial period in the Philippines when several Spanish and
American botanists and lexicographers tried to record the economic plants
of the archipelago. Fr. Manuel Blancos (1837) Flora de Filipinas, and Merrills
A Dictionary of the Native Plant Names of the Philippine Island (1903) and An
Enumeration of Philippine Flowering Plants (192326) contained several
misspelled plant names and some words that are not actually plant names
mainly due to the recorders unfamiliarity to the local languages.
Unreliability of resource persons In some cases, informants from the
locality, when asked about local plant names, tend to invent or coin local
names for plants that are not familiar to them in order to create a good
impression or to avoid reprimand. Invented names or coined names may
not be easy to detect and can be recorded in publications. Local
informants should, therefore, be asked to be honest and admit if they do
not know the names of the plants.
Failure in verifying authenticity of plant names In some cases, different
informants give different names for the same species of plant and

2005. Hsiu-chuan Liao and Carl R. Galvez Rubino, eds. Current issues in Philippine
linguistics and anthropology: Parangal kay Lawrence A. Reid. Manila: LSP and SIL. pp. 261-265.

Madulid
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:59:50 PM

LOCAL PLANT NAMES

5.

263

recorders of plant names should be able to detect this early and apply
remedial measures. A good practice in ethnobotanical survey is to ask two
or more informants and compare and analyze the names they provide.
Varying names for a particular plant species should be regarded as
unreliable and subject to verification.
Unfamiliarity with phonetic symbols of plant names recorded in reports,
herbarium labels, etc. Herbarium labels of some local plant names are
written with phonetic symbols. This is the practice of some linguists and
anthropologists who are particularly interested in the way words are spoken
by the local people. Many of Harold Conklins herbarium labels from Mindoro
(Conklin 1954) and Robert Foxs plants from Zambales (Fox 1953) for
example, are written with phonetic symbols. These names can be wrongly
transcribed by recorders who are not familiar with phonetic symbols.

To avoid erroneous recording of plant names, the following are recommended:

1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Familiarize yourself with the plants being studied by referring to

publications, herbarium specimens, guidebooks, etc. (Martin 1995)
Familiarize yourself with the language of the place where the plant names
are being recorded. A researcher will be able to get more reliable data if
he is knowledgeable with the language that the people speak in the area
(Barbosa 1995).
Get reliable resource persons. As much as possible one should get honest
and reliable resource persons or informants in the locality. Ask the head
or officials of the village, barangay or municipality to help recommend
people who could be relied upon as informants for local plant names. To
verify the authenticity of local plant names, it is recommended that
several persons from the locality are interviewed.
Knowledge of phonetic symbols Plant names taken from labels of
herbarium specimens must be transcribed with caution as they may be
written with phonetic symbols which are not easily understood by the
laymen. These phonetic symbols serve the purposes of linguists but these
should be modified to conform to the standard spellings of common names.
Consult lexicons or dictionaries of local plant names. Several references
provide comprehensive data on local plant names (see above discussion)
and these should be consulted by researchers for accuracy and
verification of both local and scientific names of plants.
Compile local names in computerized database. It is now a common
practice of lexicographers and dictionary makers to record plant names in
computerized databases. This method of data entry provides easy
checking of errors in spelling of botanical and local plant names and
provides a more systematic organization of data.

It is clear from the above that local plant names provide many uses and is a rich
information resource. Nevertheless, one should be very careful in recording these
names as there could be many sources of errors. My experience in compiling A
Dictionary of Philippine Plant Names for more than twenty five years has made me realize
the need for a keen eye for spotting erroneous plant names derived from primary and
secondary sources and the ability to detect authentic versus invented local plant names
provided by informants from various places in the country.

2005. Hsiu-chuan Liao and Carl R. Galvez Rubino, eds. Current issues in Philippine
linguistics and anthropology: Parangal kay Lawrence A. Reid. Manila: LSP and SIL. pp. 261-265.

Madulid
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:59:50 PM

264

DOMINGO A. MADULID

References
Barbosa, Artemio C. 1995. Conducting research on ethnobotany in the Philippines: A guide.
ASEAN-NZ Inter-Institutional Linkages Program. Manila: National Library.
Bartlett, Hartley Harris. 1939. The geographic distribution, migration and dialectic
mutation of certain plant names in the Philippines and Netherlands. Proceedings of
the 6th Pacific Science Congress 4:48109.
Berket-Smith, K. 1943. The origin of maize cultivation. K. Vldensk. Selsk 29:159.
Blanco, Manuel. 1837. Flora de Filipinas (Segun el Systema Sexual de Linneo). Manila:
Imprenta de Santo Tomas.
Camel, Joseph George. 1701. Descriptiones Fruticum & Arboreum Luzonis a Revdo. Pater
Georgio Josepho Camello, S.J. ad Jacobum Petiverum: Pharmac. Londinens.
Missae Anno 1701. London.
Chamberlain, A. P. 1959. Place names derived from plant names. Notes on the
Philippines from the American Antiquarium. Philippine Studies Journal of East
Asiatic Studies 8(34):5457.
Chowning, A. 1963. Proto-Melanesian plant names. Plant and migrations of Pacific
peoples. Proceedings of the 10th Pacific Science Congress.
Conklin, Harold C. 1954. The relation of Hanunoo culture to the plant world.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, New Haven.
Fox, Robert. 1953. The Pinatubo Negritos: Their useful plant and material culture.
Philippine Journal of Science 81(34):123144.
Gruezo, William Smith. 1999. Of Philippine plants and places: An ethnobioloigcal
memoir. Asia Life Sciences 8(1):1548.
Handricourt, A. G. 1963. Vernacular plant names in Melanesia, some examples from
northern Caledonia. Plants and migrations of Pacific peoples, A symposium, ed. by
Jacques Barrau. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.
Haskell, G. 1963. New light on the origins of horticultural plants. Vistas in botany, Vol.
2, ed. by William B. Turrill. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Heiser, Charles B. 1969. Systematics and the origin of cultivated plants. Taxon
18:3645.
Jocano, Felipe Landa. 1973. Folk medicine in a Philippine municipality: An analysis of two
systems of folk healing in Bay, Laguna and its implication for the introduction of modern
medicine. Manila: National Museum.
Madulid, Domingo A. 1991. On the significance of local plant names. Association of
Systematic Biologists of the Philippines Communication 3:4856.
Madulid, Domingo A. 2001. A dictionary of Philippine plant names. 2 vols. Manila:
Bookmark, Inc.
Martin, Gary J. 1995. Ethnobotany: A methods manual. London: Chapman & Hall.

2005. Hsiu-chuan Liao and Carl R. Galvez Rubino, eds. Current issues in Philippine
linguistics and anthropology: Parangal kay Lawrence A. Reid. Manila: LSP and SIL. pp. 261-265.

Madulid
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:59:50 PM

LOCAL PLANT NAMES

265

Merrill, Elmer D. 1903. A dictionary of the native plant names of the Philippines. Manila:
Bureau of Printing.
Merrill, Elmer D. 192326. An enumeration of Philippine flowering plants. 4 vols. Manila:
Bureau of Printing.
Merrill, Elmer D. 1936. Scuttling and Mu. The American Scholar 9:142146.
Merrill, Elmer D. 1946. Plant life of the Pacific world. New York: MacMillan Co.
Quisumbing, Eduardo. 1951. Medicinal plants of the Philippines. Manila: Bureau of
Printing.
Quisumbing, Eduardo. 1965. Peoples of the Philippines: Plants introduced by them.
Araneta Journal of Agriculture 12(1):4777.
Roces, Alejandro. 1976. Blancos flora: A vellum splendor. Orientation 1:2437.
Rojo, Justo P. 1999. A revised lexicon of Philippine trees. Laguna: Forest Products
Research and Development Institute.
Salvosa, Felipe M. 1963. Lexicon of Philippine trees. Forest Products Research Institute
Bulletin, No. 1. Laguna: Forest Products Research Institute.
Schopf, J. M. 1976. Dual usage of scientific names. Taxon 25 (3):562.
Steiner, Mona Lisa. 1975. The problem of vernacular plants in the Pacific and its
solution. Proceedings of the 9th Pacific Science Congress 4:1820.
Stone, Benjamin. 1963. The role of Pandanus in the culture of the Marshall Islands.
Plants and migrations of Pacific peoples, A symposium, ed. by Jacques Barrau.
Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.
Strother, John L. 1977. Dual usage of scientific names. Taxon 26 (4):398.
van Steenis, Cornelius G.G.J.S. 1950. The etymological use of vernacular names for
Malaysian plants. Flora Malesiana I. Bogor: Noordhoff-Kolfe N.V.
Williams, D. E. 1990. A review of sources for the study of Nahuatl plant classification.
Advances in Economic Botany 8:249270.

2005. Hsiu-chuan Liao and Carl R. Galvez Rubino, eds. Current issues in Philippine
linguistics and anthropology: Parangal kay Lawrence A. Reid. Manila: LSP and SIL. pp. 261-265.

Madulid
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:59:50 PM