"Pinoy" English: Language, Imagination, and Philippine Literature Author(s) : R. Kwan Laurel

"Pinoy" English: Language, Imagination, and Philippine Literature
Author(s): R. Kwan Laurel

Source: Philippine Studies, Vol. 53, No. 4, Identity/Politics (2005), pp. 532-562
Published by: Ateneo de Manila University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42633852 .
Accessed: 28/06/2014 17:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Ateneo de Manila University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philippine
Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Pinoy English: Language, Imagination,
and Philippine Literature
R. Kwan Laurel
Englishhasbeenin thePhilippinesfora hundred years,yetsomeofthe

bestFilipino
writersin Englishexpress ambivalenceas towhatshould
be donewithit. Thisambivalence is a productlargelyofa particular
typeofnationalist
rhetoric
thatchallengestheuseofEnglish in thePhil-
Thepaperargues
ippines. fortheneedtounderstand English as a global
languageand toclaim PhilippineEnglishas our own language. Rather
thanprotractthelanguage debate,theneedis togenerate a Philippine
inEnglish,
literature oranylanguage
Filipino, thatcansparktheimagi-
nationofFilipinos
andpromote a widerreadership.
KEYWORDS : Englishes,
PhilippineEnglish, Philippineliterature, Fili-
pinowriters
Just a year before the Márcoses would be booted out of power by

the People Power uprisingof 1986, the nationalistdiscourseon the lan-
guage issue was reachingone of its peaks. Some of the leading Fili-
pino intellectuals,writers,and scholarswho were workingin Tagalog
and Pilipino- recognizedtodayas some of the best in the land- were
declaringthat English would soon enough be a dead language in the
Philippines.It was said thatEnglishwould not even outlivethe twenti-
eth century.Pilipino was to be the language to express Filipino senti-
mentsand politicalloyalty.Some even went so faras to say thatFilipino
scholars and writerswho wrote in English had to apologize for it.
Today,our policymakersand politiciansand intellectuals, insteadof
definingthemselvesand the world for us, remaincaughtin the quag-
PHILIPPINE 53, no.4 (2005):532-62

STUDIES

KWAN /PINOY
LAUREL ANDLITERATURE
ENGLISH 533
mire of tryingto decide which language our children should use in

schools. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo,as president,in 2004 talkedto writ-
ers who writein Tagalog and Filipino about supportingFilipino as a
national language, yet in the same week announced that all public
schools should pursue English as the mediumof instruction. This flip-
is
flop symbolic of the difficult we
relationship have with the issue of
language.
One great fictionfor the failureof the Philippines to take off is
that it is hampered by language and that its development will come
only when the countryhas become, to a great extent,monolingual.
There may be plenty of concessions given to the promotion of
Hiligaynonand Cebuano, or even French and German, but for some
of the key intellectuals of this countryFilipino is the only way to
development.
Pagod na rin ako sa kakukulitsa mga may kapangyarihan na sun-

din ang utos ng atingsaligangbatas na gamitinang Filipinobilang
pangunahing wika ng pagturo.Ngayongmalapitna akongmagretiro
bilangguro iskolar,kita ko na- tulad ng nangyarisa napakara-
at
ming mga pantas mula pa sa panahon ni Socrates- na walang
kabuluhanang lahat ng aking pagsikap. Patuloy na mananatiling
mangmang,kunghindiang nakararaming kabataan,ay ang kanilang
at
mga magulang,guro opisyal. At dahil ang lahat ng kabataan,sa
loob lamangng iilangtaon, ay magigingmagulang,guro,at opisyal
din,patuloyna iiralsa mundo ang tinatawagni Balagtasna kalihu-
han, ni Rizal na kamangmangan,at ni Marx at ng mga Marxista
na gahum ng naghaharinguri, lahi, bansa, at wika. (Cruz 2005a,
126-27)
Language is said to be the main culpritof our problems.Hardlyis

anythingsaid about bad teachers,or bad writing,or poor nutrition,or
corruption.At the same time,thereis no way we can separatethe is-
sue of the use of English in Philippine literaturefrom the broader
canvas of Philippinelife:its economy,its entanglementswithglobaliza-
tion (which should implyimperialism),its poverty,its class contradic-
tions,and its hopes (which should implypotential).

534 PHILIPPINE
STUDIES
53,no.4 (2005)
No doubt, English is the language of the elite. It made possible

theirentryto the United States with ease, the power that eventually
became the sphere of theirpoliticalloyalty.But the country'scriminal
elite,which time and again has been exposed to be corrupt,will not
have been differentif we did not have English. From the very start
of Philippineformationas a nation,it alreadyhad threecenturiesof
colonialmanagementand mismanagement. Long beforeU.S. imperialism
thought of the Philippines, long before a language of a colonizer
foundwide use in the Philippines,problemswiththe overdevelopment
of underdevelopment,corruption,lack of self-esteem,ignorance,and
looking toward the West for intellectual affirmationhad already
plagued us. To argue thatEnglish is what imprisonsus is a disservice
to the cause of liberation.
No Room for English in Philippine Literature?
Clearly,our educationalsystem,in usingEnglishas mediumof in-

struction,cannot develop among our younga genuineinterestin
reading,forthe languagein which theyare forcedto read failsto
engagethe cultureof theyoungreader.The truthin thiscontention
is obvious enough,but our educatorshave been entrappedby the
systeminto insistingon a pedagogicalpracticethatis self-defeating.
Unlessthegovernment findsthewillto replaceEnglishwithFilipino
as mediumof instruction, we will continueto be plagued by the
problem of young readers resistingthe enticementsof reading.
(Lumbera2000, 119)
Bienvenido Lumbera (ibid., 108) asserts: "Sa pamamagitanng Ingles,

natutuhannilangtingnanang ibang daigdigna iyonmula sa pananaw ng
mga Amerikano."
I cannot resistbelaboringthe point of how usefulEnglish has been
forus by quotingLumbera about the stateof translationin the Philip-
pines: "Namumukod ang tagasaling si Mario Miclat sa kanyang
ispesyalisasyonsa isang wikangAsyano.Isinalinniyamula sa orihinalna
Mandarinang isang dula ng dakilangmodernongdramatistang Tsino na
si Ts'ao Yu" (ibid., 114). However,authoritieson issues of translation

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 535
fromMandarinto Filipino,such as CarolineS. Hau, are of the opinion

that Miclaťs translationwas "mediated" by English; the claim that
Miclaťs translationcomes directlyfromChinese is erroneous.I belabor
thispoint because it is indicativeof the problemwitha certainkind of
nationalismthatvalorizeswhat is not thereand devalorizeswhat is. For
example,in the extractbelow, one findsan uncriticaluse of the word
), as if historywere a simple monolithicnarrative.I
history(,kasaysayan
am not arguingfor some postmoderntheory,but only wish to point
out thatto call on historyto legitimizea position on languagewill re-
quire a scholarto take into considerationthe complexitiesof our diver-
sityand geography.
Ang kailangangpasiglahinay ang pagsasalinmula sa iba pang wika

bukod sa Ingles. Napabayaan sa Pilipinasang ganitongpagsasalin
dahilpinapaniwalatayong atingsistemang edukasyonna sa wikang
Inglesnatingaganapinang pakikipag-ugnayan sa ibangkultura.Nga-
yongang daloy mismo ng kasaysayan ang nagpapamalasng magaga-
nap na paglayang mga Filipinosa bilangguan
ng Ingles,kailangan
nang
sa
harapinang paghahandapara panahon ng paglaya.(Ibid., 114)
The nationalistdiscourse that came with the activismof the 1970s

broughtalong the notionof abolishingEnglish.One consequenceis the
almost complete disappearance of Philippine proletariatliteraturein
English, which began with writerslike Manuel Arguilla and Carlos
Bulosan. Coincidingwiththe anti-Marcosmovementin the earlyseven-
ties was the rise in the numberof entriesin Pilipino that outstripped
the numberof entriesin English in the Palanca competition(Lapeña-
Bonifacio 2002, 483).
Below I quote at lengthfroma reportthatappeared on the Ateneo
de Manila University's website on a recentlectureby Lumbera:
Dr. BienvenidoLumbera,the multi-awarded critic,teacher,poet, and

delivered
literature-aficionado, his IrwinChairlecturetided"Bending
English for the Filipino Stage" on 27 September 2005 at the
NatividadGalang Fajardo ConferenceRoom, De la Costa Building,
Ateneo de Manila University, Loyola campus. . . . Over the years,
the influenceof our Westerncolonizershas seeped throughour art

536 PHILIPPINE 53,no.4 (2005)
STUDIES
and culture,as a resultof which,many of our local writersand

playwrights use Englishas theirlanguagemedium.Needless to say,
we cannot deny that the English language has alreadybecome a
partof our everyday lives.Despite his strongstandon writing plays
in the vernacular,Dr. Lumberarecognizesthatit is difficult to take
the Englishlanguagecompletelyout of Philippinetheater.He says
thatto a generalaudiencein Manila,forexample,Filipinomightbe
a betteroption.But on certainlevels,to make a playbelievable,the
use of Englishmayactuallybe necessary. For example,when depict-
ing characters in a middle class Metro Manila setting,the use of
English could be more convincing.However,Filipinoshave a par-
ticularway of speaking the language. There are now different
formsof Englishthatmake thisAmericaninheritance uniquelyFili-
pino. Local forms of an of
Englishplay importantpart Philippine
theater,such as theyayasway of tryingto speak to the amo'schild
in English,and thatof a probinsyano'sEnglishwitha regionalaccent,
and even a University student'swayof speaking"educated"English.
This is whatDr. Lumberapointsout as "bendingEnglish,"a term
coined by Christina[sic] Pantoja-Hidalgowhen she discussed the
PhilippineNovel in Englishin the 21st century. This "bending"of
the Englishlanguagewill create a new dialectthatis stillFilipino
despitebeing foreignin origin.(Taylor2005)
I suppose wishfulthinkingon the part of some Ateneo studentsand

facultysomehow found its way to the craftingof this report.I note
how differentthe reportis fromthe actual lecture.
Let me startby quoting from the English department'semail an-
nouncingthe Lumbera lecture:
The Henry Lee Irwin Chair is a project of ADMU Class 54.

It has helped the EnglishDepartmentover the yearsto recognize
and honor more publiclythe expertiseand talentsof creativewrit-
ers who are also giftedwith teachingskillsto be able to facilitate
the enhancementof our students'creativeabilitiesusing English
as a writingmedium.The Irwin Chair recipientteaches a 3-unit
CreativeWritingCourse in the EnglishDepartment.This semester,
the Departmentis honoredto have Dr. BienvenidoLumberas the
IrwinChairholder.He is teachingPlaywriting.

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 537
In the actual lecture,which I attended,Lumbera talked about the re-

quirementfor his English class in playwriting as a play writtenin Fili-
pino, in spite of the objections of his students who enrolled in a
playwritingclass that was offered by the English department and
meant to enhance the "students' creativeabilitiesusing English as a
writingmedium."Lumberaacknowledgedhis students'strongresistance
to thisrequirement. But his lecturemade veryclearthatEnglishis not fit
forPhilippinetheater.A largepart of the lecture,in fact,gave samples
of hilariouslines fromdifferent plays thattriedto translatethe Filipino
idiom into English, such as "Why do you wear a funeral on your
face?,""You mightas well writethatpromiseon water,"and "When I
was makinglove with your motherI was givingher mani and balut."
In the open forumLumbera admittedthatNick Joaquin's"Portrait
of an Artistas Filipino" succeeded in connectingwithits Filipinoaudi-
ence. However, he also pointed out thatthe Filipino translationmade
the playmore successfuland made it accessibleto the Filipinoaudience.
The answer he gave for the abilityof this play to defythe seemingly
insurmountable issue of languagewas the "vision" of its author.Even-
tually some names were also given of those who wrote plays in En-
glishthatsucceededin connectingwiththe Filipinoaudience:Marcelino
Agana ("New Yorkerin Tondo"), Amelia Lapeña Bonifacio ("Walking
Canes and Fans"), and Rolando Tinio ("Life in the Slums").
It was strangethat Lumbera was willingto acknowledge that for
some Filipinosa play in Ilonggo or Waraymay be appropriate,but he
was unwillingto acknowledge or give way to some of his students'
beliefthatEnglishis a good and legitimatelanguageto communicateto
a Filipino audience. One of his students stood up to say thatyaya
English is used by caregivers,and it is only naturalto have a play in
such a languagewhen the charactersare caregivers.Lumbera answered
thatan entireplay could not be in yayaEnglish. His response begged
the question: why not, when whole books in creole are being pub-
lished, translatedand distributedworldwide to great acclaim?1 His
position is indicativeof the kind of nationalismthat killed Philippine
proletariat in English,and eventuallyFilipinoplaysin English.
literature
The anecdote about the Lumbera lectureis also emblematicof the
need for fascismif Filipino as a naturallanguageis to succeed fullyin

538 PHILIPPINE
STUDIES
53,no.4 (2005)
the country. It must be forced and coerced by a certain kind of

nationalism.Dipesh Chakrabartyprovides a good view in his critique
of subaltern studies. He writes about the violence it took to make
Frenchmenout of the peasantsin France. Relatingit to India, he ques-
tions the idea of progress,about how "beginnings,however ugly,do
not matter,"for what matters in the end is the story of progress
(Chakrabarty 2000, 271). The same can be said also of Thailand where
Chinese surnames had to be changed to make them blend with the
majority.Benedict Anderson has thoroughlyanalyzed the strategyof
manipulating print-languagesto suit the vision of the statefora unitary
nationalconsciousness,eliminating linguisticdifferences in formingthe
modernnation (2003, 45-46). Althoughstatessucceeded withit in the
past, this strategyrequiresrethinkingin this age of globalizationand
diaspora.
Akin to Lumbera, some of those who should be the strongestad-
vocates of the use of English as a part of Philippinelife also have an
ambivalentrelationshipwith the language.Let us examinewhat two of
them say about the use of the language.
The Ukhaan fictioneditorof 1996 stressed:ifWasits languageat least
competent(but betterbrilliant!)in termsof handlingusage and gram-
mar?Did it do somethingnew for my understanding of how language
works,beyondgrammatical correctness?"(Dalisay 1997, 83). The fiction
editorof the Ukhaan anthologyof 1997 counseled,"Alwayswe begin
with the reminderthatEnglish,is, for us, a borrowedlanguage,a lan-
guage learnedlate. We have been speakingand writingit for less than
a century"(Hidalgo 1999, 91).
Simplyput,thisis the problem:To affirmthe positionof Englishin
the Philippinesis seen as a negation of Philippineculture.To affirm
Filipinoas thelanguageforthe Philippinesis to affirmPhilippineculture
and history.
American English: Forever the

Touchstone of Philippine English?
Amid globalizationand the worldwidespread of English, it has been

observed that standardvarietiesof BritishEnglish and AmericanEn-

KWAN /PiNOY
ENGLISH 539
glish are touchstonesfor all othervarietiesand all learnersof English

worldwide:
The standardvarietiesof Britishand AmericanEnglishare touch-

stones forall othervarietiesand all learnersof Englishworldwide;
in termsof pronunciation,spelling,grammar,vocabulary,usage,
slang,and idiom theyare the referencenorms,and seem likelyto
remain so for the foreseeablefuture.However, comparison and
contrastare difficult
matters,as people throughout the worldknow
when they seek to follow one or other norm consistently, or at
least to knowwhat it is. Indeed, the Americansand the Britishare
not themselvesclear on just wherethe dividinglines run:in some
partsof the worldblends have grownup, traditionally forexample
in Canada and more recentlyin the mainlandcountriesof the Eu-
ropean Union. (McArthur2002, 245)
In the Philippinesthe bone of contentionis thatwe will alwayslook to

the UnitedStatesas the touchstoneof a "foreign"languagethatwe use.
The same insecurity, however,cannotbe foundin literary anthologies
that come fromIndia, theirEnglish certainlyverydifferentfromthat
of the British,certainlyclassifiedas a varietyof English, which also
uses an imperialcountryas its touchstonefor "correctness."Their lit-
eraturehas traveledfar fromthe days of Tagore, Raja Rao, and R. K.
Narayan. India, however, also has plentyof languages competingfor
nationalprominence,but the confidencewiththe ownershipof English
is worthyof study.2One importantreason for this confidenceis that
theirwriters,based inside and outsideIndia, have made greatstridesin
imaginingtheirnation for the Indian people and for the world. Even
if thereare many debates in and outside India as to how theirlitera-
turemust speak forits people, theyknow thatthe English languageis
a part of theirhistoryand has come to be a part of theirlives.
Certainpossibilitiesare presentedbefore us, and we are obliged to
these possibilities.Traditionis reallywhat we cannot escape. We belong
to tradition,as much as traditionbelongs to us (Gadamer 1999, 258).
Traditionis not a thingthatis concreteand can be held by the hands
or diagramed,it is a realitythatcomes to lifewhen we engageit,which
shapes us and we shape it.

STUDIES
The practiceof manyFilipinousers of English has only heightened

the nationalistsense of linguisticinsecurity.Many of our writersand
scholars,in theireffortto make it in the West,to win thatFulbrightto
attendsome Ivy League school, to get publishedin some New York-
based magazine,are only too willingto sell the countryshort.In this
context,understandably, PantayongPananaw (PP) has gained a follow-
ing. It has been described,and rightlyso, as being the most compre-
hensivetheoreticalpositiondeveloped in the Philippinesto explainthe
intellectualcurrentsin the country,providinga rigorouscritiqueof the
pitfallsof a scholarshipthatis not primarily
alignedwiththe Filipino.Its
originator,Zeur Salazar, has argued for a distinctiveway of studying
the Philippinesthat can be differentiated fromthe Western-basedap-
proach to Philippinestudies:
Implicitly, Pilipinolohiya'sconcernis to reportand explain about

Pilipinas Filipinosin theirown termsand witha view of streng-
to
theningFilipinonationality, to pursuingFilipinonationalgoals and
ideals (pambansang adhikain It is in thissense thatPilipino-
at mithiin).
lohiyaconstitutes thebasis forknowingor studying (andunderstanding)
othernationalitiesand culturesin the world within"area studies"
whichthe University of the Philippinesis just beginningto develop.
In contrast,PhilippineStudiesis preciselyan "area studies"forthe

nationalitiesand culturesstudyingthe Philippinesfromtheirown
viewpoints(whichPilipinolohiyadoes not disputefromthembut
also claimsforPilipinas).In otherwords,Pilipinasis "the Other"for
othersbut is not and cannotbe foritself!Pilipinohiyathus studies
Pilipinasas the FilipinocollectivenationalSelf,an endeavorwhich
othernationalitiescarryout implicitlyforthemselves, with
generally
the supportof various"area studies"forthe understanding of the
worldaroundthem.
As "the Other,"Pilipinasis not and cannot be the vantagepoint,

muchless the primaryfocus,of PhilippineStudies.PhilippineStud-
ies has variedvantagepoints,since it startsfromthe needs,images
and problemsand ways of seeing thingsof a wide varietyof cul-
tures,mainlywestern.Pilipinas just happens to be the meeting

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 541
groundof severalnational-cultural "consciousnesses"(if such a plu-

ral exists),each withits own world-view,understanding and agenda,
whichtheterm"PhilippineStudies"moreor less summarizes. In that
sense and in contrast,Pilipinohiyais concerned(happily)only and
primarily withPilipinas!(Salazar 1998, 314)
Interestingly,this Otheringis a tendencyfound in some of those

who have the interestof the Philippinesin theirwork.They tryto find
the authenticFilipinoby Otheringthe Chinese,the Chinese-Filipino, and
the Chinese mestizo.3It is not an issue of language,forit can be found
in those who write in Filipino, like Amado Hernandez in Mga Ibong
Mandaragit , Edgardo Reyes in Sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag, and Malou
LevisteJacob in AnatomiyangKorupsyon . It can also be found in those
who write in English, like Antonio Enriquez's Subanons, Leoncio
Deriada's short story"Dragonseed," and TimothyMontes' short story
"The Great Darkness."4 F. Sionil Jose is notorious for Othering the
Chinese in his novels (see Treefor example) and essays to advance a
simplisticexplanationfor our manyproblems:
These taipanscame to the Philippinesverypoor as all immigrants

fromChina were.Throughtheirindustry, cunningand exploitation
of elitepolitics,theybuiltprofitableconglomerates,
thenremitbil-
lions made in thiscountryto China,billionsthatshouldhave stayed
here to build industriesso our women don't have to go abroad as
housemaidsand prostitutes. (Jose2005, g-2)
Nor is thisa questionof nationality, as the book 'Power

andIntimacy
in the
Christian of Fenella Cannell shows us, where the Chinese ex-
Philippines
ploit the innocent Filipino;in fictionthereis JamesHamilton-Patterson's
GhostofManila, where the criminalsyndicatesare run and controlledby
Chinese. These works are drivenby the desireto explainhow the Fili-
pino is corrupted,or manipulated,or exploitedby the foreign.5
Although prejudice can be writtenin any language, advocates of
PantayongPananaw,in reactingagainst English, are emphaticthat its
scholarship must be writtenin Filipino. Ramon Guillermo (2003)
explains:

542 PHILIPPINE
STUDIES
53,no.4 (2005)
It is thussuggestedthatPP be explicitly
reformulated
along the fol-
lowinglines:
First,the principleof using the nationallanguage as the primary

means of communication in Philippinesocial sciencesshould serve
as the principaland broadestbasis of unityand fruitful discursive
exchange.The "pantayo"as a categoryof social scientificpractice
should thus cover a much broader,if less defined,group of prac-
titioners.
Second, communication and translation

protocolsshould be devel-
oped to a
facilitate more productiveintellectual
interactionbetween
Filipinoand Englishlanguagetraditions in Philippinesocial science.
Discourses of incommensurability and mutual incomprehension
shouldbe deflectedintodiscoursesof approximation wherepossible.
PP's determination and principledpositionof strength in regardto
its use of the nationallanguageshould allow it to be more expan-
sive and accommodating to scholarswithdifferent linguisticprefer-
ences.
Third,the "pananaw"in PP shouldnot be consideredas pertaining

to a coherentWeltanschauung but only as a broadlynationalistand
criticalviewpointtowardsthe developmentof an autonomousdy-
namic forthe developmentof Philippinesocial sciencescloselyar-
ticulatedwiththe aspirationsof the Filipinopeople.
Fourth,effortsto developappropriate and effectivemediatingstruc-

turesbetweenPhilippinesocialscienceand theFilipinopeople,which
PP has alreadybegun, should be continuallypursued and experi-
mentedupon as essentialsteps towardsthe radicalrestructuring of
Philippine social sciences. However,progressiveproponents of PP
should emphasizethatany such attemptsat developingnew meth-
ods of social and politicalinteractionshould neverbe idealistically
understoodin abstractionfromthe wider contextof politicaland
economic dominationand exploitation.The whole point of these
effortsis, afterall, the liberationof the Filipinopeople.
At the same time,in spite of the prescriptionin the extractabove

for a more "productiveintellectualinteractionbetween Filipino and

KWAN
LAUREL
/PINOY ANDLITERATURE
ENGLISH 543
English language traditionsin Philippine social science," Guillermo

(2003) exhibitsambivalenceabout the use of English in this passage:
The privileging of hybridityas the alternativeto the construction of

nationallanguages,as proposedby post-colonialtheorists who point
to the liberativeappropriation by the "formercolonies" of the ad-
vantageously"evolved" (Roxas-Tope 1998) English language,just
completelyfudgesthe issue. Paraphrasing Marx,we could even say
thatthat"all we wantto do awaywithis the miserablecharacterof
this appropriation
, underwhich the 'native'lives merelyto increase
the Englishesof the world." PP thereforedoes not emphasizelin-
guisticin-betweenness but ratherthe commitment of the scholarto
the strengthening and consistentembraceof the nationaldiscursive
domain(orpook)in the nationallanguage.Furthermore, if the social
sciences are understoodas formsof liberativeself-understanding
ratherthanas alienatedand alienating sciencesof manipulation, their
resultsshould fromthe beginningbe open as muchas possibleto the
perusal,critique,and intervention of theirpurportedobject (e.g.,the
Filipinos as a "people") before it "for a wideraudience"
translating
is considereda priority. The activeuse and developmentof a na-
tionallanguageis crucialin the attemptto mitigatethe extremely
alienatedand undeniablyelitiststatusof the social sciencesin the
Philippines.6
Guillermo's(2003) caricatureof PhilippineEnglish above characterizes

it as if it were a mere echo of AmericanEnglish,which would render
it, in his terms,as an "unqualifiedPlatonism."7
McArthur's(2002) point cited earlierabout American and British
English as touchstonesof world Englishesraises the stakesagainstthe
use of Englishin the Philippines.The pointis constandyraised that,in
countrieslike the Philippineswhere Filipino linguistsare insistingthat
thereis a legitimatevarietyof PhilippineEnglish, the linguiststhem-
selves are usingAmericanEnglishin theirown writings, not Philippine
English.DifferentFilipinowriterscontinueto grapplein different ways
withthe questionof what is "correct"English.Nationalistscholarsand
writersresist the veryidea that we must meet American and British
standards,when proof can and will oftenbe cited thatwe cannot beat

STUDIES
them at theirown game and, if we do, we lose somethingimportant,

which is our Filipino self.
One writerhas analyzedthe situationin these terms:
I greadysuspect,though,thatFilipinonovelistsin Englishveryof-
ten writeabout Philippinesocietyand being Filipino,even to the
point of preachingabout these concerns,in orderto be more rel-
evant to the rest of the nation.Their novels, afterall, are written
in a languagenot verymanyFilipinosread as literature. It is com-
mon knowledgethatthe best sellingliterary worksamongFilipinos,
hereand abroad,are written - novels,shortstories,songs,
in Filipino
comicbooks,radioand televisionplays,and featurefilms.And inter-
estinglyenough,all the novelsthispaper deals withcall attentionto
the matterof language.(Brion 2000, 40)
Calling attentionto the matterof language is due, accordingto Rofel

Brion (ibid.,40), to the factthatthe "novels incorporatemyths,legends,
and other tales . . . told originally,and more commonly,in Tagalog,
Filipinoand otherPhilippinelanguages."
names in manynovels that

There,too, are the Filipino/Filipinized
do not make much sense in Englishbut are nevertheless
important
to the novel's meaning: Adrian Banyaga in State of War, Pucha
Gonzaga in Dogeaters,Kilat and Buhawiin TheGreatPhilippine
Jungle
,
Cafe Alapaap, Matanglawin, Salamat,Madagundong, and Tarik in
Firewalkers.
(Ibid.,41)
The paper of Brion has no appreciationof PhilippineEnglishin this

example of hypercorrection:
Timein a WarmPlace,"killedthe lights,"whichcomes from

In Killing
the novel'snarrator,becomes a glaringexampleof FilipinoEnglish
especiallysince the rest of his prose is almost alwaysin flawless
AmericanEnglish.In an essay on writing, Dalisay himselfpresents
the languageproblemthisway:
If you plan to write in English, master the language. No
amountof insightwill excuse atrociousgrammarand graceless
usage.We don'thave to be embarrassedby thisto beginwith,

KWAN
LAUREL
ENGLISH 545
becausewhateverwe say,it isn'tour language,especiallyin the

literarymode. But if you writeprofessionally in it, they(sic)
you'llhave to learnit as well as doctorsand carpentersknow
theirtrades.
His novel,in fact,shows how English"isn'tour language"through

its occasional use of Tagalong words,even if theyare somehow
translatedinto Englishwithinthe same paragraph.(Ibid., 43)
Not only is "killed the lights"part of Americanusage, but the use

of PhilippineEnglish or the use of Filipino names is given as proof
thatEnglish- as if therewere only one and only one kind- can never
be ours.Thus, the Filipinowriterin Englishis said alwaysto be writing
about the nationbecause he mustdefendhis use of English,which can
never be his to use because he and his materialare unavoidablypro-
grammedas Filipino.But all the studiesof the Filipinonovel in any of
its many languages point to the fact that nation is a major theme of
most Filipinonovels.This is the crux of the problem:what is Filipino
is confined to and said to be expressible only in a "native" and
"homegrown"language.My own view,however,is thatthe continuing
search for the nativeis disruptingthe intellectualgrowthand liberative
possibilitiesof nation,which,despite attackscoming fromvarious per-
suasions,may yet be the best protectionof the weak and dispossessed
in this trulyglobalizingworld dominatedby transnationalcapital.
In Singapore Singlishhas a vibrantlife,yet the Singapore govern-
mentis resistingthe veryidea (McCrum,Cran,and Macneil 1993, 333).
It boils down to the point of McArthur (2002). There is a schizo-
phrenic relationshipwith the core language, to use Braj B. Kachru's
circles.(The core is comprisedof Britain,the United States,Australia,
Canada, and New Zealand. With the exception of New Zealand and
Canada, we can read the core as countrieswhere rightnow the ethos
of imperialismdominates foreignpolicy).8There are many effortsto
be independentof the so-called metropolitancountries,yet thereis an
inescapableuse of the imperialcenteras the standard.The factthatthe
UnitedStatesand Britainhave remainedimperialists makes the issue still
contentiousin spite of the language'slong and vibrantlifein countries
likethe Philippines.

STUDIES
But the realityis that,as much as thereis talk about French,Ger-

man,Latin,Spanishhavinghad theirday as global languages,thereis no
languagethathas had the reach of English,ever,in history.This phe-
nomenon of a trulyglobal languageis somethingnew. There is, there-
fore,a need to approach this complex issue in a trulymultidisciplinary
manner,as history,or linguistics,or anthropologycannot do it alone.9
Philippine English as Our Own

The challenge to the Filipino writerin English is to respond to the
observationmade by San Juan (1996, 56):
In generalI would contendthatthe "English"practitioners have as

a group never representedthe nation in process of emergence,
much less the people constitutedas the victimsof U.S. conquest
and rule;and thatthe authenticorganicintellectualswho soughtto
organizethe spontaneousnational-popular energiesand infusethem
withconscienticizingpurpose rooted in the notion of justicein an
egalitariancommunity are the vernacular writerssuch as Amado
Hernandez,MagdalenaJalandoni,the anonymousartificersof the
abil),committednovelistand dramatists
Moro epics (parangs in Cebu,
llocos, Pampanga,and otherregions; the collaboratorsof Hulagpos
(1980); and the contributorsto Mga Tula ng Rebolusyong Filipino
10
(1982).
A critiqueof the Centennialnovels in English bears out the conten-

tion thatmanyFilipinowritersin English have avoided the issues that
plague Philippinesociety.The grandprize winner,Eric Gamalinda,even
goes as far as degradingthe Filipino. Althoughtherehas yet to be a
studycomparingthe English and Filipinonovels thatwon the Centen-
nial prizes, Gamalinda simplyexoticizes the Philippines in the most
offensivemannerpossible (Kwan Laurel 2003), thusaddingammunition
againstthe use of English. The pitfallsof Gamalinda's novel,My Sad
, serveas a warning:includingelementsof revolutionand nation
Republic
do not automaticallymake forliberatingliterature;neitherdoes winning
the CentennialLiteraryContest.

KWAN
LAUREL
/PINOY
ENGLISH
ANDLITERATURE 547
As much as Gèmino Abad (throughhis monumentalanthologiesof

Philippinepoetry)has shown that English has become a language we
own, we are in danger of losing the great strides of writersranging
fromAmador Daguio to Gregorio Brillantes,fromManuel Arguillato
Mila Aguilar. Contraryto the notion that we need more readers,my
contentionis our writersin English are in dangerof losing a country.
Those whose political and geographicalallegiancesremain to be with
the Philippinesmustpush to produce literature thatis relevantto Filipi-
nos. Going by Rizal's famousessay,"The Philippinesa CenturyHence,"
degradingthe Filipinois irrelevant, is veryharmfulto the Filipino,and
literature a
produced by Filipino that is harmfulto the Filipinois ulti-
matelyalso bad for the languageused. Certainlyit does not help for a
writerlike NinotchkaRosea to migrateto the United States and say in
an interviewto the SundayInquirerMagazine: "I don't know if I can
settleback in a countrythat allows the likes of Imelda to flourish.I'd
probablybe angryall the time" (Azarcon-delaCruz 2004, 6). It is pre-
cisely essentialistargumentssuch as this that eitherdegrades what is
supposed to be native,or glorifyit no end.
F. SionilJose,in fact,has been an advocate of English as a language
of power for Filipinos,askingin his column "Hindsight":can FPJ and
Noli de Castro argue in English? His answer: "If theycan't then they
have no business runningfor president"(Jose 2003, g-1). Jose displays
an elite formof nativismthatwould exclude everyonewho does not
speak English,which will only add to the nationalistattackthatwe are
making somethingout of nothing,a borrowed language that is not
naturalto us.
But- it may have been given to us, we may have been bamboozled
to acquire it, it may have been somethingwe would have bought if it
meant social mobility - thereis no doubt: it is ours already.What,after
all, is "native"? If challenged, a linguistcan trace many of what we
considerto be nativelanguagesas importsfromsome otherplace that
will be considered foreign.
The long and short of it is that Philippine English, which draws
fromAmericanEnglish, is our very own. There is no use in denying
thatAmericanEnglish is the touchstoneof PhilippineEnglish, and it

548 PHILIPPINE
STUDIES
53,no.4 (2005)
will be so in the foreseeablefuture.The point is thatwhat we do with

the languageis what will determineif we will foreverremaina colony,
or we will strikeout on our own. South Africanliterature in Englishis
alive,vibrant,and leadingthe postcolonialliterature's
surgetowardways
of imagining a world independent of the colonizer, not by using
Afrikaans(a languagecertainly developed,evolved,and stillwidelyused
in South Africa),but by using English.Chinua Achebe (Nigerian)11 and
Nadine Gordimer (South African)12have a lot to tell us about this
subject.
Amos Tutuola is very instructivefor the Filipino writer.He is a
writerof verylimitededucation and means, a messengerin a govern-
mentagency,yethe is able to capturethe postcolonialand anticapitalist
spiritin his pathbreakingnovel, ThePalm-wine
Drinkard.
Tutuola'slanguageis not so muchWestAfricanPidginEnglish,which

has its own syntaxand structure,as the writingof an inspiredpu-
pil whose exuberance has his commandof basic grammar.
overtaken
Nor is it exacdythe "rottenEnglish"thatKen Saro-Wiwaused in
So^abqy(1985). Close to automaticwriting - if the firstdraftof
The Palm-Wine Drinkardspilledout of the authorin two days- no
wonderit oftenseemsuncorrected and unpolished.And thereinlies
much of the joy of his novel. The images are freshand original
at odds withEuropean models);both the storyitself
(and definitely
and the languageare filledwithhyperbole,unfathomable exaggera-
tion,even surrealism(when the Drinkardpasses throughthe door
of the FaithfulMother'stree,he doesn't entera delineatedspace
but an entirenew world). (Larson 2001, 11)
Chinua Achebe (1990, 100) has praised Tutuola's novel, yet he also
points out its contentiousnessas a work of art even among those who
side with the Third World:
A youngNigerianwoman doinga higherdegreein Americasaid to

me when I taughttherein the 1970s, "I hear you teach Tutuola."
It was not a simple statement;her accent was heavywith accusa-
tion.We discussedthe matterfora whileand it became quite clear
that she consideredThe Palm-WineDrinkardto be childishand

KWAN
LAUREL
ENGLISH 549
crudeand certainly
not the kindof thinga patrioticNigerianshould
be exportingto America.
"Relevance"is a word bandied aroundverymuch in contemporary

expression,but it stillhas validitynonetheless.In The Palm-Wine
Drinkard,Tutuola is weavingmore thana tall,devilishstory.He is
speakingstrongly and direcdyto our times.For whatcould be more
relevantthana celebrationof work todayforthe benefitof a gen-
erationand a people whose heroes are no longermakersof things
and ideas but spectacularand insatiableconsumers?(Ibid., 112)
We have the traditionof writingfor the Filipinoin NVM Gonzalez,

and many otherwriterslike Manuel Arguilla,Carlos Bulosan, Estrella
Alfon,Kerima Polotan,Nick Joaquin,GregorioBrillantes,Mila Aguilar,
and Edel Garcellano.This is not to say thatour writers"being Filipino
cannot help their own nature, no matter from what language they
speak" (Abad 1989, 21). On the contrary, divergentapproachesby Fili-
pino writersin English can be discerned.There is theJose Garcia Villa
road,which Eric Gamalindahas taken;but thereis the NVM Gonzalez
road (pioneered by many,Manuel Arguillabeing certainlyone of the
trailblazers),which Estrella Alfon and Kerima Polotan and Gèmino
Abad and Edel Garcellano have taken.The formerhave decided to be
somethingelse other than Filipino, and in the process have become
while the latterhave consciouslydecided to carve out new
anti-Filipino;
terrainin English on the batdefieldof and forthe Filipinoimagination.
In the introduction to Manuel Arguilla'scollectionof shortstoriesin
1940 is found the interesting view of American editor A. V. H.
Hartendorp(1940, 9):
Of all the notableschool of Filipinowritersin English,the develop-

mentof whichis trulyamazingto thesewho have not,like myself,
seen it come into being,Manuel E. Arguillahas remainedamong
the most forthrightiy Filipino,using English almostas if it were a
-
Philippinedialect so adequatehe findsit forhis purpose.His work
affordsnew proof of the singularadaptability of thatgreatworld-
language, which the Filipino writersare further enrichingby new
humanas well as new philologicalelements.

STUDIES
Hartendorp'sobservation,writtentwenty-nine yearsbeforeTeodoro A.
Llamzon coined the termFilipino English,is a strongsupportfor the
argumentthatFilipinowritershave colonized the colonizer'slanguage.
As Abad (1997, 170) announced in a forum:
This means,forme, thatif I'm asked, "Do you writecorrectEn-

glish?,"I would say,"Of course,it's correct.I'm the one writingit.
it. It is correct."In otherwords,we have
You're not the one writing
-
our own I sense thisall the time - we have our own way of think-
ing. We have our own way of feeling,by whichwe then use this
languagecalled English.So thatEnglishis ours.We have colonized
it too.
In the end, when we talk about American English being the

touchstone of Philippine English, we are talking about grammar,
idioms, syntax. What makes a language powerful are not these
mechanical issues, it is how we portrayourselves in literature,and
how we choose to appropriate what the language offersus (Kwan
Laurel 2004, 276).
What then is correct English for the Filipino?
I don't know. But consider the two views representedin these pas-
sages. In 1984 a work on the "new Englishes" argued that
The creólesthemselvesor speechclose to themat the basilectalend

of the speech continuumcannotbe consideredas New Englishes.
They did not develop throughthe education systembut from
pidgins.They are, in themselves, speech varieties.(Piatt,
interesting
Weber,and Ho 1984, 8)
By 2003 a SoutheastAsian perspectivecould assert
This sectionon "Which English?"- global, giocai or international

varieties- is premised on the notion that the "nativization" of
Englishis takingplace in all the threeKachruviancircles,although
more rapidlyin the Outer Circle than in the Expanding Circle.

KWAN
ENGLISH
/PINOY 551
More than once, therehas been the suggestionthatwe view the

Kachruvianconcentriccircle as overlappingones- with constant
intersectionsat pointsof arcs on all threecircles.At theseintersec-
tions, the users of English as a global language,of English as a
giocai languageor as an international languagecrisscrosspaths and
pre-determine patternsof value and use to the kinds of English.
(Pakir 2003, 76)
Althoughthe second quotationdoes not deal with creole languages,

the contrastin the confidenceof how to classifyvarietiesof Englishis
apparent.The gap of eighteenyears in the publication of these two
works is short,but it is a gap that seems like foreverin the studyof
languages. There is somethinghappening to English as a global lan-
guage,and linguistsare themselvesnot yetsurewherethisis going.The
accelerationof the process of English going global is a phenomenon
thathas never been experiencedbeforeby the world,and it is forcing
a redefinition
of manymeanings,Kachru's concentriccirclesbeing only
one of them.13
now thatthereis acknowledgment
Creoles have gained respectability
thattheyhave theirown systemsand rules.What used to be something
not worthyof studyhas now become chic for doctoraldissertations in
linguistics.
Withoutdoubt, creóles are the more interestinglanguages to study
because theyare so differentfromthe so-called varietiesof English.
The legitimacycreóles have gained (such as Talk Pisin in Papua New
Guinea) is dramatic. There is now an official acceptance of some
creóles as nationallanguagesin countrieswhere these have arisen.
Creoles have been gainingprestigealso preciselybecause theycannot
easily be classifiedas having emerged fromEnglish. Creoles are not
usuallyplaced by linguistsin the concentriccirclesof Kachru precisely
because, emergingas contactlanguages,creóles mustbe shown to have
come froma different base thatis not used by the imperialist,
and that
theirhistoriesare unique and importantin the strugglesof peoples
fromthe margins.As such,creole languagesare seen as independentof
the metropolis,and thereforehave a very respectable history.Some
countriesnow takingpridein creole languageswere once imperialslave

STUDIES
economies.Analogously,the desire for autonomyis one of the reasons

for the drivefor the language Filipino.
Kachru's framework is verysimple,thusveryusefulat the timeof its
conception. It shows the historyand evolution of English as a global
language.But it does not show the complexityof the global situation,
which we are able to appreciatemore and more as linguisticsalso be-
comes more and more sophisticatedin its appreciationof independent
movementswithinthe varietiesof English,and people using different
languageswho are resistingthe onslaughtof Britishand U.S. imperial-
ism. The shiftfromprescriptivelinguisticsto descriptivelinguisticsis
one clear acknowledgmentthatlanguageis not somethingwe can leg-
islate or control.The change in the statusof creóles in theirrespective
countriesand theirchangein statusin linguisticsitselftellus thatmore
shiftsin paradigmsare just around the corner,changes not one of us
can predict.
One is temptedto say that,in the postcolonial age, the centerno
longerholds, but thiswill be an illusion,as the United Statesis clearly
takingthe lead in spreadingand shapingthe global language,which is
English. In the Philippines,for example, where dire predictionshave
been made as to the futureof English, nobody anticipatedthat the
local entertainment industrywould relyon foreigntelenovelasthathave
sparkedan interestin the Spanish language,a "colonial" languagemost
have taken for grantedbut which we also must learn for a betterun-
derstandingof our country's over three hundred years of history.
Clearly,however,Hollywood reigns supreme in the Philippines now
more than ever,and we cannot ignorethe depth of penetrationof the
U.S. entertainment industryin our part of the world.
What now for Pinoy English?
Up until five years ago it was frowned upon to have an American

accent. Now to have an American accent commands a premium.
Unfortunately, but it is a fact,some of the best graduatesof our uni-
versitiesare landing jobs in call centers.Their ease with the use of
English stilloffersthe possibilityof a job, providingan alternativeto
migration.Cable televisionwas also just beginningto be all the rage a

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 553
decade ago, and the flood of bargain books from the United States
was just about to come. Now we look at bookstores and the call of
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and the presidentsof most of the leading
universitiesto reinvigorateEnglish in the classrooms,and we can con-
clude thatEnglishmay just live on in the country.The move of Manila
mayorLito Atienza,however,to requirestudentsto speak onlyEnglish
in Pamantasanng Lunsod, except in designated"free" zones on cam-
pus, will only add to the idea of English as solely an instrumentof
colonization (otherwisecalled globalization),and the servicingof the
global economyrun in Washington.
I am not sure if Brion'sobservationin 2000, thatnovels and movies
in Filipinowere outsellingmaterialsin English,can easilybe made to-
day,not only with the dyinglocal movie industry,but with the flood
of American movies in piratedDVDs that are equally as badly made
as most of those made in the Philippines.Universitypresses are the
firstto point out that thereis no differencein the sale of theirbooks
thatare eitherin Englishor Filipino.The factstillremainsthatFilipinos
don't read. Given the televisionshows foistedby the eliteon the poor,
the need is not a debate on language but ratherto produce quality
materialsfor Filipinos, imaginativeworks worthyof being taughtin
classrooms.
To improvethe learningabilityof our students,the need is not to
prolong the debate on which language should be used to teach in the
classroom.Quadruplingthe salaryof teachersto attractinto the educa-
tion sector some of the best of each generationwill go a longer way
than engagingin the languagedebate.
There is a beliefheld by a numberof well-meaning, educated,and

highlyplaced some
individuals, of them in
(sadly) academe, thatFili-
pino children would be able to learn and understand science and
technology better and fasterif theywere taughtin theirnativelan-
guage fromthe beginning.Unfortunately such a view is, to say the
least,naïve. (Sibayan1998, 149)
In studiesdone by linguistson our education systemand its effecton

the languageissue, thereis no correlationshown betweenbilingualism

STUDIES
and the grasp of the subject by the students.There is, however, a

strongcorrelationbetweenlearningand the qualityof teachers.
Gonzalez's essay "Language and Nationalismin the Philippines:An
Update" gives a detailed historyof the travails of the search for a
political solution to the effortto look for a language that can be a
unifyingsymbolof the country.Gonzalez (1996, 22) makes the point
thatnon-Tagalogpeople do not begrudgethe use of Tagalog Filipino
in the mass media; what theybegrudgeis the privileging of Tagalog as
the symbolof our nationalunity.The greatcontributionof Gonzalez's
essayis that,as he himselfgrappleswithnationalismall throughoutthe
book, he tellsus that
languageis not necessarily equatedwitha sense of nationhood;util-

itymore than integration takes This is clearlythe case with
priority.
Singapore; in the Philippines, thisis the preferenceof the majority
although there is a vocal minority thatis presentlychallengingthis
and once more contributing to the forcesof divisionin Philippine
society.(Gonzalez 1996, 26)
This nonequationof languagewithnationalismis supportedby Filipinos,

as noted by Gonzalez in his studyof the surveysdone by linguists.The
multilingual-basedFilipinolanguageis a politicalsolution;it is not a lin-
guisticsolution.This happened with the 1986 Constitution,which was
not at all acrimonious with the Filipino language decision, as it was
acrimoniousin the 1935 and the 1973 constitutions.
So what is thishang-upover a "borrowedlanguage"thatis English?
Sa pagdaming gumagamitng Ingles sa internetng mga websiteng

tungkolat para sa mga Pilipinoay lalongnapananatiliang mababang
pagtinginnatin sa atingwika at identidad.Ang ganitongkolonyalna
pag-iisipang siyang dahilan kung bakit hindi umuunladang bansa
dahilparatiitongtumitingin sa ibang bansa upanghinganng tulong,
makunanng ideya o hindikaya ay bilangpoint of comparison.Ito
ang dahilankungbakithindimatatagang atingkamalayang Pilipino,
hindimatatagang pagtingin natinsa atingsarilibilangPilipino,bilang
tao. (Tauro-Batuigas2004, 171)

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 555
Tauro-Batuigas's point in the quotation above helps in the attack

againstthe use of English of whateverkind,perhapslessens its prestige
among aspiringusers,but it also isolates Filipino,or Tagalog, or what-
ever language it wants to promote because it puts the question in bi-
naryopposition.At the same time,the articleitselfobviouslybenefited
fromEnglish as it is litteredwith quotations in English, withoutthe
effortof translation into Filipino, from Lyotard, Braid, Benedikt,
Gramsci,Thiongo, Salazar,Eco, Nash, Said, Roy.It will only succeed in
convertingthe converted.
As much as the nationalistdiscourse would have us not privilege
English over Filipino, the underprivilegedwhom the nationalistssay
theyrepresentwant to learn English:
Affluent Filipinosin relatively

well-offcollegesand universities,
sen-
sitizedto the nationalismissue,opt forthe wideruse of Filipinoin
all domainsof Philippinelifeincludinghighereducation;less affluent
Filipinos,insecurein theirknowledgeof Englishbut alreadysecure
in theirknowledgeof Filipino,insiston the maintenance of English
for highereducation and for futureuse. The affluentones have
arrivedin theirmasteryof English; theyare less secure in their
masteryof Filipino. If secure in both languages,theirsuccess is
certain, since in the perception of businessmen (Sibayan and
Secovia 1982), knowledgeof both languagesis needed for success
in Philippinelife. (Gonzalez 1996, 27)
Englishwill remainin the Philippinesbecause, as Gonzalez has con-

cluded,utilityis the most compellingreason to use a language.And the
power of the United States at the moment,which is all encompassing
in trade,war,banking,education,and sports,assuresEnglish'scontinu-
ing utility.The earlierwe accept this fact,the more likelywe will be
able to use Filipino,English,Cebuano, and whateverlanguagewe want
to fashion ourselves, and, more importantly,to help attain a more
egalitariansociety.The more it will be easierto sell Filipinoand English
as languages worth cultivatingand empoweringto use. There is no
binaryopposition; it is only a figmentof a certainkind of nationalist,
sometimesxenophobic, view of the world. Too much time has been

STUDIES
takenup alreadyby the languageissue, too much confusioninflictedon

students.
Our view of PhilippineEnglishwill change if we accept thatPhilip-
pine English is a legitimatevarietyof English, and that Filipinos may
be evolvingmore variants.We also need to realize that,because of the
Filipinodiaspora,the Philippinesis contributing to making
significandy
English a global and dynamiclanguage.
Gonzalez (ibid.,35-37) righdypoints out that"a monolingualcoun-
tryis reallythe exceptionmore than the rule,since the normalstateof
affairsis linguisticand culturaldiversity
withmanyof the citizensbeing
bilingual,trilingualor even multilingual."Switzerlandhas threeofficial
languages;Singapore has Malay,but the governmentactivelyuses and
promotes English and Mandarin.That the language Filipino needs to
undergoa process of "intellectualization,"a process of buildinga body
of scholarlyand scientificworks using thatlanguage,is true and must
be supported and encouraged, not by attackingthe development of
PhilippineEnglish,but by makingsure Filipino writersin Filipino are
given the opportunityto writetheirbest and to publish these works.
Translationmust also be encouraged,while Filipinos who only read
books in English must be made to realize how much theyare missing
in not readingwritersin Filipino. There is no arguingthatwritersin
Filipino,because of the limitedpossibilitiesof gaininga footholdin the
internationalmarket,have remainedrooted in Philippineissues, with
litde temptationof exoticizingthe country.The Filipinowriterin En-
glish must learn fromthem.
The Literature We Need
We mayassumethatthe Filipinomindwas colonizedby language -

firstby Spanish and then by English. Many of theirwords, not
rooted in our nativelanguages,have become our eyes: look any-
and you will see, forthe same reality,
wherein our archipelago, only
botica, farmacia,drugstore,Mercury.(Abad 1993, 11)
To be historicallymore precise, a few Filipinos acquired Spanish, in

spite of the greatreluctanceof the colonizersto give it to us, precisely

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 557
to fightback againstcolonial abuses. We never reallyhad Spanish,but

Rizal and company thoughtwe needed it to gain power. Aside from
the sword,we were colonized with the Bible, using our own "native"
languages. One way to fightback today is to have great literaturein
English and Filipino and any otherlanguagewe desireindependentof
the colonial and colonized imagination.Developing such literaturehas
absolutelynothingto do withlanguage,yetit has everything to do with
language. As English will continue to have a deeper penetrationin all
countries,certainlyincludingthe Philippines,it is paramountthatwe
move out of the language debate. In the end, the question about the
politicsof the textis inevitablefor the Third Worldwriterand reader.
It is the most importantquestion. It can be arguedas too narrowand
essentialist,but thereis no otherway around it for the Filipinowriter.
Notes
1. See,forexample, Chamoiseau'snovel,Texaco(1997).
2. RajaRao (1967,vii)already
exhibited
thisconfidence
overhalfa century
ago:
The telling hasnotbeeneasy.One hasto conveythevariousshadesandomis-
sionsof a certainthought movement thatlooksmaltreated in an alienlan-
guage. I use theword 'alien'
yetEnglish is not reallyan alienlanguage to us. It
is thelanguageof ourintellectual make-up - likeSanskrit or Persian was be-
fore- but not of our emotionalmake-up. We are all instinctivelybilingual,
manyof us writing in ourownlanguage andin English.We cannotwritelike
theEnglish.We shouldnot.We cannotwriteonlyas Indians.We havegrown
to lookat thelargeworldas partof us. Our methodof expression therefore
has to be a dialectwhichwillsomedayproveto be as distinctive andcolorful
as theIrishor theAmerican. Timealonewilljustify it.
SalmanRushdie(1997,xiv-xv),in an introduction to an anthology celebrating
fifty
years of Indian writing, published to coincide with theanniversary of Indian
from
independence Britain, says:
The pointaboutthepowerof theEnglishlanguage, andof thewestern pub-
lishing and critical
fraternities,also contains some truth. Perhapsitdoes seem
to some'home'commentators, thata canonis beingfoisted fromtheoutside.
The perspective fromtheWestis rather different.Here, what seemsto be the
case is thatWestern publishers and criticshave been growing graduallymore
andmoreexcitedbythevoicesemerging fromIndia;in Englandat least,Brit-
ishwriters areoftenchastised byreviewers fortheirlackof Indian-style ambi-
tionand verve.It feelsas if theEast is imposing itselfon theWest,rather

558 PHILIPPINE
STUDIES
53,no.4 (2005)
thantheotherwayaround.And,yes,Englishis themostpowerful medium

of communication in theworld;shouldwe not thenrejoiceat theseartists'
mastery of it,andattheir growing influence?
To criticize
writersfortheirsuccess
at "breaking ouť is no morethanparochialism is
(andparochialismperhapsthe
mainviceof thevernacular One
literatures). important dimension ofliterature
is thatit is a meansof holdinga conversation withtheworld.Thesewriters
areensuring thatIndia,or rather, Indianvoices(fortheyaretoo good to fall
intothetrapof writing willhenceforth
nationalistically), be confident,indis-
pensableparticipants in thatliterary
conversation.
3. See Aguikr's(2005)excellentarticle
on thesubject of tracing whichis
origins,
important readingforanyoneinterested in issuesof race,nationalism,language,
andPantayong Pananaw.
4. Manythanksto CarolineS. Hau forthediscussions aboutwriters who are
stillpracticingvoodoo nationalism.
5. Foran engaging comparative seeAguilar
study, s (2001)article
on Indonesia.
6. bee Roxas-Topes{'Jn)jramtng Southeast
Asia (1998).
7. Yet Pantayong Pananawalso looksfortheessential and trueFilipinolan-
guageandthetrueFilipino, as if suchweregenetically programmed intotheFili-
pino,opening itto thechargeof usingessentialistarguments. Zeus Salazar(1998,
62) writes:
These"ties"areconceived heremorein relation to ourownlanguages, princi-
pally the one which has become ournationallanguage, Cer-
Tagalog/Pilipino.
tainly,linguisticaffinitywith the restof Asia should not be construedin the
light of our common culturalenslavement. We know thatwithin the last
twenty years,Englishhasbeenspreading withtheAnglo-American andAustra-
liancommercial andsocio-culturalpenetration of SoutheastAsia.In thiscon-
text,affinityshould not referto anythingbeyond our nationallanguageand,if
at all,otherFilipinolanguages. Our commonborrowings fromEnglishcannot
be construed as a legacy;
theyareatbestacquisitions to ourcontact
incident with
theWest.As fortheEnglishlanguageitself, it cannotbe takenseriously as a
factor ofunity in theregionbutrather as one of alienation
fromourcommon
moorings in thepast,fromthecultural kinship whichhas onlybegunto be
moreconsciously perceived.
8. BrajB. Kachru(1997,2) writes:
Thereis no paucity
of metaphors,in Asiaor elsewhere, to variousat-
to refer
titudes
toward The metaphors
worldEnglishes. 'theworldlanguage,' 'thelan-
guage on which the sun neversets,'and 'a universal language'refer to the
imperialspreadof the Then
language. there are metaphors of distanceand
othernesswhichreferto thedeception perceived in themedium and itsmes-
sage,forexample,'a Trojanhorse,''theothertongue,'and 'step-daughter.'

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 559
And on theotherextreme is thecharacterization

of theEnglishlanguageas
'themostracistof all humanlanguages' (Ngugi1981).In thisjungleof meta-
phorsEngishis Hydra-like withmanyheads,including theone thatin India's
metaphysical writer for,as he says,it '. . .elevates
RajaRao'sview,is uplifting us
in equating
all' (1978).Rao has no hesitation Englishin IndiawiththeBrah-
manicsacredlanguageSanskrit. The metaphors ťtheFlowering Tree'or ťthe
Speaking Tree'pointto yetotherdimensions of Engilish- itsmulticulturalismi
and pluralism.
9. I findit significant
thatevenIsaganiCruz(2005b,16) has acceptedEnglish
as something we need,although he frames itpurelyin economicterms:
The keywordhereis globalization.
SincethePhilippines cannotmoveoutof
its povertywithoutlookingforbusinesselsewhere, it has to use English,
whichis theinternational ofbusiness.
language (Thisis myreasonforbeingin
theESU [EnglishSpeakingUnion],despitemywellknownadvocacyforre-
movingthelanguagefromitsinordinate positionin theeducational system.)
10. In an endnoteto another San
paper, Juan(2000,384) writes:
WhenI first broachedin thesixties
thisideaof thedeclineof Englishas a lit-
erarymedium forexpressivecultural
forms,I was attackedbytheAmerican
New CriticLeonardCasperandhisFilipinodisciples. ShouldFilipino
literature
continue to be judgedbytheimperial master'scriteria?
Casper'sentryon Fili-
pinopoetics in thePrinceton ofPoetry
Encyclopedia and Poetics is
(1965) typical
of suchprocedure whenit denigratedthevernacular whileseemingto judge
Filipinopoets objectively in English,obliviousof its own discriminatory
reductiveness.AndCasper'srecent of theentry
revision compounds hisdoctri-
naireselectiveness.
11.ChinuaAchebe(1990,41) writes:
I realizethata lothasbeenmadeof theallegation thatAfrican writers
haveto
writeforEuropeanandAmerican readersbecauseAfrican
readers wherethey
existat all are onlyinterestedin readingtextbooks.I don'tknowifAfrican
writersalwayshavea foreign audiencein mind.WhatI do knowis thatthey
don'thaveto.At least knowthatI don'thaveto. Last yearthepattern
I of
salesof Things FallApartin thecheappaperback editionwas as follows:
about
800copiesinBritain; 20,000inNigeria;andabout2,500in allotherplaces.The
samepattern was truealso of No LongeratEase.
12.NadineGordimer
(1983,344) in an interview
states:
Therearegivensthatareunderstood onlyin SouthAfrica,thatperhapspeople
in Englandand Americasimplydon'tunderstand. But it'shappenedto me
againandagain,sinceI've traveled
after
mybookshavebeenwritten andhave
talkedto peopleor perhapsbeeninterviewed, thattheseblanksobviouslydo

STUDIES
exist.But thisis something thathappensaftertheevent,afterthebook has

beenwritten,andI couldputmyheadon a block- I'm notlying to youwhen
I saythatI neverthinkaboutthemwhenI'm writing.
13. The expanding circleis said to havethefollowing countries: China,the
Caribbean Countries,Egypt,Indonesia, Israel,Japan,Korea,Nepal, Saudi Arabia,
SouthAfrica,SouthAmerica, andZimbabwe. The outercircleis saidto havethe
followingcountries:
Bangladesh, Ghana,India,Kenya,Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan,
Philippines,
Singapore,SriLanka,Tanzania,Zambia.The innercircleis saidto
havethefollowing countries: theUnitedStates,Britain, Canada,Australia, and
New Zealand.
References
Abad,Gèmino.1993.A native QuezonCity:University

clearing. of thePhilippines
Press.
. 1997.Standards in Philippine English:The writers' forum. In English is
anAsianlanguage: The"Philippine context:
Proceedings the
of conference held inManila
onAugust 2-3y1996, ed.MariaLourdesS. Bautista, 163-76.Manila:De La Salle
University Press.
Achebe,Chinua.1990.Hopeandimpediments . New York.AnchorBooks.
Aguilar,Filomeno V. Jr.2001. inheritance
Citizenship, andtheindigenizing of the
" Chinese" in Indonesia, east asia cultures 501-33.
Orang positions: critique9(3):
. 2005.Tracing origins: Ilustrado
nationalism andtheracialscienceof migra-
tionwaves.Journal ofAsianStudies 64(3): 605-37.
Anderson, Benedict. 2003.Imagined communities.Pasig:AnvilPublishing.
Azarcon-dela Cruz,Pennie.2004.Who'safraid of Ninotchka Rosea.Sunday Inquirer
22
Magazine August: 5-6.
Bautista,Ma. Lourdes.2000.Defining standardPhilippine English.Manila:De La Salle
University Press.
Brion,RofelG. 2000.Englishlessons:Towards theaesthetics of thecontemporary
Filipinonovelin English.In TheUkhaan bookofPhilippine critiásm1992-1997,
ed.J.NeilC. Garcia,24-49.QuezonCity:University of thePhilippines Press.
Cannell, 1999.
Fenella. Power and in
intimacy the ChristianPhilippines.Quezon City:
Ateneode ManilaUniversity Press.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh.2000.Radicalhistories andquestionof enlightenment ratio-
nalism:Somerecentcritiques of subaltern studies.In Mapping subaltern studies
andthe ' ed.
postcolonial,Vinayak 256-80.
Chaturvedi, London and New York: Verso.
Chamiseau, Patrick.1997.Texaco. London:GrantaBooks.
Cruz,Isagani. 2005a. Wika sa edukasyon. Bantva: Journal 1(1):124-30.
sa tilipinohiya
. 2005b.Englishforliterature andbusiness. Star
Philippine 1 December: 16.

KWAN /PINOY
ENGLISH 561
David.1997.English
Crystal, as a global
language.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
JoseY.,ed. 1997.Thelikhaan
Dalisay, bookofpoetry
andfiction
1996.QuezonCity:
University of the PhilippinesPress.
Deriada,LeoncioP. 2002. Dragonseed.In Thelikhaanbookofpoetry andfiction
2001, ed. Cristina PantojaHidalgo,135-47.Quezon City:University of the
Philippines Press.
Enriquez,Antonio.1999.Subanons. of thePhilippines
Quezon City:University
Press.
Gadamer,Hans-Georg. 1994.Truth andmethod.New York:Continuum Publish-
ing.
Gonzalez,AndrewB. 1996.TheAndrew B. Gon%ale%
FSC reader.
Manila:De La
SalleUniversity Press.
Gordimer, Nadine.1983.Interview byStephenGray.In Interviews
with
contemporary
writers
, ed. L. S. Dembo, 339-47. Madison: of
University WisconsinPress.
Guillermo,Ramon.Exposition,critiqueand new directionsforPantayong
Pananaw.Kyoto Reviewof Southeast Asia March2003. http://kyotoreview.
cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Hamilton-Patterson, James.1994.GhostofManila.London:Jonathan Cape.
Hartendorp, A. V. H. 1940.Howmybrother Leonbrought home a wifeandotherstories.
Manila:Philippine Book Guild.
Hernandez,Amado. 1969. Mga ibong mandaragit: Nobelangsosyopolitiko.
QuezonCity:International GraphicService.
Hidalgo,CristinaP.,ed. 1999.Thelikhaan bookofpoetry andfiction
1997.Quezon
City:University of thePhilippine
Press.
Jacob,Malou Leviste.1992. Anatomiyang korupsyon. Manila:Instituteof
Women's Studies,St.Scholastica's
College.
Jose,E Sionil.1978.Tree.Manila:Solidaridad Publishing House.
. 2005.Hiroshima andus. Philippine
StarAugust21: G2
Kachru,Braj.B. 1997.Englishas an Asianlanguage. In English is anAsianlan-
guage:ThePhilippine ; Proceedings
context oftheconferenceheldinManilaonAugust
2-3y1996, ed. Ma. LourdesS. Bautista, 1-23. Manila:De La SalleUniversity
Press.
KwanLaurel,R 2003.A hundred yearsaftertheNoli:The threecentennial novels
in English.Philippine Studies
51(4): 599-643. Revisedversion:http://www.
geocities.com/centennialnovels.
. 2004.NVM Gonzalezin Philippine In Remembering
literature. NVM, ed.
Y.
Jose Dalisay, 256-79. Quezon City:Universityof thePhilippines Press.
Lapeña-Bonifactio,Amelia. 2002.Philippinedrama in English: A brief overview.

STUDIES
In Thelikhaan anthologyofPhilippineliterature from1900tothepresent

in 'English ,
ed. GèminoH. Abad,481-86.QuezonCity:University ofthePhilippinesPress.
Larson,CharlesR. Theordeal of theAfricanwriter. Londonand New York:Zed
Books.
Lumbera, Bienvenido. Writingthenation,
pag-akda ngbansa.QuezonCity:University
of thePhilippines Press.
McArthur, Tom.2002. LheOxford guidetoworld hngush. Oxford:OxfordUniver-
sityPress.
McCrum,Robert,WilliamCran,and RobertMacneil.1993.Thestory .
ofEnglish
New York:PenguinBooks.
Montes,Timothy R. 1994.Theblackmenandother Pasig:AnvilPublishing.
stories.
Pakir, Anne. 2003. Which English? The nativization of English.In Anglophone
culturesinSoutheast ed.
Asia, Rudiger Ahrens, David Parker,KlausStierstorfer,
andKwok-KanTam,73-84.Heidelberg: University of Heidelberg.
Piatt,John,HeidiWeber,and Ho MianLian. 1984. ThenewEnglishes. London:
and
Roudedge Kegan Paul.
Rao,Raja.1967.Kanthapura . New York:New Directions.
Reyes,EdgardoM. 1986.Sa mgakukongliwanag. Manila:De La SalleUniversity
Press.
Roxas-Tope, LilyRose.1998.(Unjframing SoutheastAsia. Quezon City:University
of thePhilippines Officeof ResearchandCoordination.
Rushdie,Salman.1997.Introduction. In Thevintage bookofIndianwriting1947-
1997, ed. SalmanRushdieandRebeccaWest,ix-xxiii. London:Vintage.
Salazar,Zeus A. 1998.TheMalayan angFilipinas dunia
connection, sa Melayu. Quezon
City:Palimbagan ng Lahi.
SanJuan,Epifanio. 2000.Postcolonial theory versustherevolutionary processin
thePhilippines. , ed. Diana Brydon,358-86. London and
In Postcolonialism
New York:Roudedge.
. 1996.History andform. QuezonCity:Ateneode ManilaUniversity Press.
Sibayan, Bonifacio P. 1989. Reflections on some dilemmas posed byliteracy in
English, Filipino,and the Philippine vernaculars. In on
Essays language
Pagtanáw:
in honor ofTeodoro A. Llamrón, ed. Ma. LourdesS. Bautista,149-57.Manila:
Linguistic Societyof thePhilippines.
Tauro-Batuigas, Janet2004.Angwikasa cyberspace: Angpagkontra sa hegemonic
linearity.In Bin-I new and
theoretical writingsPhilippine , ed.Janet
critical on studies
Tauro-Batuigas and Ernesto V. Carandang II, 61-179.Manila:UST Publishing
House.
Taylor, Alexandra IsabelleOchangco.2005.Lumbera's Irwinchairlecturetackles
bendingEnglish,http://www.ateneo.edu/news.


"Pinoy" English: Language, Imagination, and Philippine Literature Author(s) : R. Kwan Laurel

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

"Pinoy" English: Language, Imagination, and Philippine Literature Author(s) : R. Kwan Laurel

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

"Pinoy" English: Language, Imagination, and Philippine Literature

Author(s): R. Kwan Laurel

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

Englishhasbeenin thePhilippinesfora hundred years,yetsomeofthe

Just a year before the Márcoses would be booted out of power by

PHILIPPINE 53, no.4 (2005):532-62

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

mire of tryingto decide which language our children should use in

Pagod na rin ako sa kakukulitsa mga may kapangyarihan na sun-

Language is said to be the main culpritof our problems.Hardlyis

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

No doubt, English is the language of the elite. It made possible

No Room for English in Philippine Literature?

Clearly,our educationalsystem,in usingEnglishas mediumof in-

Bienvenido Lumbera (ibid., 108) asserts: "Sa pamamagitanng Ingles,

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

fromMandarinto Filipino,such as CarolineS. Hau, are of the opinion

Ang kailangangpasiglahinay ang pagsasalinmula sa iba pang wika

The nationalistdiscourse that came with the activismof the 1970s

Dr. BienvenidoLumbera,the multi-awarded critic,teacher,poet, and

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

and culture,as a resultof which,many of our local writersand

I suppose wishfulthinkingon the part of some Ateneo studentsand

The Henry Lee Irwin Chair is a project of ADMU Class 54.

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

In the actual lecture,which I attended,Lumbera talked about the re-

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

the country. It must be forced and coerced by a certain kind of

American English: Forever the

Amid globalizationand the worldwidespread of English, it has been

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

glish are touchstonesfor all othervarietiesand all learnersof English

The standardvarietiesof Britishand AmericanEnglishare touch-

In the Philippinesthe bone of contentionis thatwe will alwayslook to

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

The practiceof manyFilipinousers of English has only heightened

Implicitly, Pilipinolohiya'sconcernis to reportand explain about

In contrast,PhilippineStudiesis preciselyan "area studies"forthe

As "the Other,"Pilipinasis not and cannot be the vantagepoint,

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

groundof severalnational-cultural "consciousnesses"(if such a plu-

Interestingly,this Otheringis a tendencyfound in some of those

These taipanscame to the Philippinesverypoor as all immigrants

Nor is thisa questionof nationality, as the book 'Power

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

First,the principleof using the nationallanguage as the primary

Second, communication and translation

Third,the "pananaw"in PP shouldnot be consideredas pertaining

Fourth,effortsto developappropriate and effectivemediatingstruc-

At the same time,in spite of the prescriptionin the extractabove

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

English language traditionsin Philippine social science," Guillermo

The privileging of hybridityas the alternativeto the construction of

Guillermo's(2003) caricatureof PhilippineEnglish above characterizes

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

them at theirown game and, if we do, we lose somethingimportant,

Calling attentionto the matterof language is due, accordingto Rofel

names in manynovels that

The paper of Brion has no appreciationof PhilippineEnglishin this

Timein a WarmPlace,"killedthe lights,"whichcomes from

This content downloaded from 193.142.30.167 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:59:18 PM

becausewhateverwe say,it isn'tour language,especiallyin the

His novel,in fact,shows how English"isn'tour language"through