St.

Paul University
Quezon, City

“A Critique of Filipinism / Philippine English”

A paper in Eng01
In partial fulfillment of the requirement in the course Eng01

Presented to:
Ms. Mary Jane L. Ybañez
Instructor, Educator and Language Department

Presented by:
Frances Marie De Guzman
Joren Mariano
Arielle Felice Ante

November 2015
 Abstract

Attacks on Philippine literature in English have come from left-wing intellectuals,

who see the English language as a tool of American neo-colonialism, and literary
historians, who see the 80-year-old literature as insignificant in the context of five
centuries of Philippine writing in various vernacular languages. Despite these attacks,
Filipino creative writers have continued to write in the English language, even during the
last 20 years when the nationalist campaign against English was at its height. Ironically,
even those who strongly advocate the sole use of Tagalog (or Tagalog-based Pilipino)
and, therefore, the rejection of a foreign language, as a medium of creative expression
have written extensively in English. Several major Filipino writers today write in both
English and Tagalog. Some write in both English and other vernacular languages.
These bilingual writers belong to a long line of Filipinos who wrote in both their first and
their second languages. Because of the large number of individual literary pieces that
can be said to shed light on the phenomenon of bilingualism in creative writing, it is not
possible at this time to do a comprehensive survey of writing done by bilingual or
multilingual writers. It is more manageable to focus on the poetry of representative
writers. Three modern Filipino writers who have published books of poetry in both
English and Tagalog can be taken as representative: Cirilo F. Bautista, Edgar B.
Maranan and Epifanio San Juan, Jr. Established methods of literary criticism reveal that
Filipino writers use English for two main reasons: to capture certain realities not within
the lexical capabilities of Tagalog, and to exploit the musical qualities of the foreign
language. On the other hand, they use Tagalog primarily to capture nationalist realities.
In broad terms, it may be said that English is used primarily to enhance form and
Tagalog to enhance content. Because of the international character of English, poetry in
English tends to import not only the words of the language, but also literary trends
identified with the language. In a sense, then, poetry in English is more ‘Western’ than
poetry in Tagalog. On the other hand, because of the ability of Tagalog to express
nuances of meaning, especially in the areas of Filipino philosophy, psychology and
sociology, poetry in Tagalog tends to be more homologous to Philippine society.
 Introduction:

What could be less unforeseen than those countries whose political autonomy
has been accomplished just as of late and whose restless battle for monetary freedom
proceeds with ought to coordinate the same energies toward a bigger social
separatism? Both pride and interest force an individuals, too since quite a while ago
measured against another person's models, to recoup their very own past and
arrangement for a future in light of new textures. Yet it is important that this
development – in which Filipinism has an one of a kind part in Asia – take the type of an
examination, as opposed to abrupt purification, of premises unadulterated and
straightforward. Generally self-recuperation can crumble into self-suffocation. This point
is not our decision of concentrate, but rather we are grateful generally on the grounds
that as we experience our discoveries, this subject is field with fascinating
considerations and informations.

Receptiveness will be most unmistakably flagged when the inquiry, "What is

Filipino about Philippines writing in English?" can be viewed as genuine, rather that
explanatory; can be followed with the same earnestness now being given the inquiry:
"What is Filipino about writing in Ilokos, Hiligaynon, Cebuano and different
vernaculars?" Perhaps it was the fast approaching danger of regardless of literary
works' in effect thoughtlessly cleared, similar to such a variety of marble chips from a
national landmark, which has coordinated insightful consideration – especially these
previous 10 years – to the tremendous intercycling of word and world, in the Philippines.

Demeanors toward the correct relationship in the middle of writing and society,
so since quite a while ago communicated in opinionated or wistful molds similarly firm,
appear to be currently to require in any event legitimization, methods of compromise or
possibly of resilience of pluralistic points of view possibly may develop. An altogether
diverse arrangement of Filipino essayists may be described by their resistance to an
affirmed social responsibility which, in its controlled instruction, is belittling and
reductive. Social sympathy toward these others holds up less in belief systems (content)
than in individuals (composition) - or, all the more precisely, in persons separated
without divisiveness. Its procedures depend, along these lines, not on sayings masked
in figurative account but rather on 'conditional authenticity - on particularization.
 Outside of the Philippines, your English will be evaluated according to
International English standards. Each “error” in International English adds to the
potential for confusion and reduces your score. This also means that students studying
with Filipino teachers may be creating a cap on their own achievement. Even if they are
able to match their teacher’s proficiency, they limit their own top score to the highest
score their teacher can also achieve. With the Philippines’ top English educators
making mistakes 25% of the time or more, it’s safe to assume that lower level teachers
are teaching error-ridden English far more often than that. That could have a dramatic
effect on test-takers scores’.

Most importantly, endeavors can continue to recognize the dead hand of tradition
from a living Philippine convention, now that criteria, for example, Salangsang's are
accessible and subject to elucidation and capability. Inquiries ascend with such wealth
and precipitation that they can barely all be enrolled, a great deal less be probably
replied. What are the irreducibles of Philippine culture, the obvious center of social
constants inescapable (and alluring?) in any acquiring procedure? On the off chance
that they are so irreducible as to be instinctual, is guideline in them important? In the
event that solidarity is one of those constants, why even in vernacular writing is
gathering (tayo) portrayal so uncommon a mode and single account focus'so regular?

Are not the offensives against, and guards of, local literary works pieces of
information to a more prominent heterogeneity than human science's common
speculations may permit? Are independence, ethnic character, provincialism, patriotism,
and internationalism good? In what extents? With what appointed needs? Is the Filipino
satisfied through political affiliation alone? On the off chance that writing partakes in
society, and society reacts at any rate to a limited extent to physical changes, does the
increment in quantities of Filipinos and in urbanization and even in grain creation and
leaseholdings change the essential way of the Filipino by any means?''

Is the charged center o'f irreducible~ an arrangement of accomplished facts, or of

dynamic beliefs? In the event that the last, would they say they are not proportional to
objectives; and is not change inferred, in the longing to approach/surmised such
objectives? Is the thought of progress and the development of a typical endeavor to
coordinate that change not one type of bayanihan; does it not negate that type of bahala
na which contends: whatever was, is; and whatever is, is correct? Are there not, in
reality, numerous such essential counter-strains in Philippine society, some of them
indications of a solid, on the grounds that different and in this way possibly adaptable,
pluralism? Is not target, trained grant, at present so productive, itself a power conveying
to adjust the sentimentalism and faithfulness prompting bias recognizable in "the Filipino
way.

Findings:

Both the language and the cultural differences between the two types of English
cause problems in business and formal communication.

First, in terms of the language alone, as the task becomes more complex, the
disparity between Filipino English and International English becomes more problematic.
It is far easier to understand a short sentence with one error than it is to understand a
long, complex sentence with several errors. The cumulative effect of a number of small
differences in grammar, word use, idioms and pronunciation can cause real
communication problems during complex tasks like negotiation, relationship building,
and problem solving.

However for business people and other professionals using English in their work,
the impact of the cultural differences between Filipino English and International English
is even greater than the linguistic differences and is even more likely to cause a lost
sale or to end a business relationship. For example, in American business culture, we
strive to project neutrality regarding age, gender, race and religious affiliations. There
are good reasons for this. Discriminating according to these criteria is illegal in the
United States. Therefore, in formal business communication we generally avoid
mentioning our own age, gender, race or religious affiliation. In contrast, Conversations
Direct’s research identified several Filipino examples of formal business communication
with religious overtones. This is just one example of a cultural difference in business
communication styles. There are many others. Unfortunately, the result is that Filipino
business communication can sometimes make a bad impression on the reader or
listener. Given the choice between several roughly equal options, International English
speakers will choose better communicators most of the time.

That the creator's ability at documentation now and then surpasses the
experiential nature of his fiction is horrendously apparent in Watch in the Night (1953),
yet the inverse is valid in the updated release of To Be Free. This recent novel's
Filipinism is clear in the enduring importance of its subject - a large portion of a century
of complex country Nueva Vizcayan life; and its topics - as traditions are tested with the
progression of time, how does one sort out routine qualities from those bona fide
ceremonies whose protection needs championing; what natural, communitarian
relationship is reasonable, now, between non-Christian minority and the staggering
Christian mass, between ex-slave/inhabitant and expert/landowner? The constant
problems made by the need to recognize autonomy between countries, from the
degrees of flexibility essential or attractive inside of one's own country are very much
shown by the Alcantara siblings' involvement with social popular government, and with
leniency inside of their crew. On the off chance that one can imagine a writing important
due to the inquiries it raises and in any event as "helpful," thusly, as a writing of
resolutions, Tiempo's novel must be regarded for the exchanges it contains, as well as
additional for the examinations it incites.

Conclusion

We therefore conclude that Philippine English is fit as a fiddle, notwithstanding

prior endeavors by instructive establishments to defame it and in spite of later
endeavors by outsourcers to underestimate it. Bautista and Bolton have done the
scholastic world an incredible administration by uniting a portion of the main Philippine
dialect and writing researchers to add to this volume. Fundamental to anybody genuine
about comprehension the Philippines and its kin.

The Philippines is a standout amongst the most critical and most fascinating
English-utilizing social orders as a part of Asia, where there has been a general
mindfulness and acknowledgment of a limited assortment of English portrayed by its
own particular vocabulary, accent, and varieties in sentence structure. The peculiarity of
Philippine English as a phonetic assortment has additionally been paralleled by the
abstract imagination of its authors, short story essayists, and artists, who have created
– and keep on delivering – a significant collection of writing in English, pointed at
residential perusers as well as at the universal gathering of people for world writing in
English.

The investigation of English in the Philippines is not just about the investigation of
an Asian assortment of the English dialect, additionally gives experiences into issues,
for example, provincial and postcolonial dialects and writings, dialects in contact, dialect
and instruction, intercultural correspondence, and English writing around the world.
 Closing Pharagraph

“Philippine English is not American English”

The Philippines is a standout amongst the most huge and most fascinating English-
utilizing social orders as a part of Asia, where there has been a general mindfulness
and acknowledgment of a confined assortment of English portrayed by its own particular
unmistakable dictionary, accent, and varieties in language structure. The peculiarity of
Philippine English as an etymological assortment has additionally been paralleled by the
abstract imagination of its authors, short story essayists, and artists, who have created
– and keep on delivering – a considerable group of writing in English, pointed at
household perusers as well as at the global gathering of people for world writing in
English.
 APA

"The Critic of Philippine Literature as Provocateur." in Philippine Studies: hesent

Knowledge and Research Dends, ed. Donn Hart (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University,
19741, pp. 71-94.

"Directions for Philippine Literary Criticism," Budhi Papers: Essays in Literature 1

(1977): 2&21.

Donn Hart, Cbmpadrinazgo: Ritual Kinship in the Philippines (DeKalb: Northern IlIinois
University, 1977).

Benedict J. Kerkvliet's The Huk Rebellion: A Study of Peasant Revolt in the Philippines
(Berkeley: University of California, 1977); see also John A. Larkin, The Pampizngons:
Coloninl Society in 4 Philippine Province (Berkeley: University of California, 1972).