See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/329013502

Verbal Power Play in the Market : A Filipino Pragmatics Analysis

Article · November 2018

CITATION READS
1 1,759

3 authors, including:

Dahlia Romero-Domingo

5 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Speakership View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dahlia Romero-Domingo on 17 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Verbal Power Play In The Market : A Filipino Pragmatics Analysis
Dahlia R. Domingo, Ph.D.- New Era University
Florencia M. Marquez, Ph.D./Zenaida Q.Reyes,Ph.D.
Phil. Normal University

ABSTRACT: Market interactions have its power play. The verbal prowess and dominance in the course
of buying and selling is manifested in many ways. In a market conversation, the kind of language
articulated by both participants (buyer and seller) can serve as an expression of power and will put control
to win the negotiation. This research investigates strategies of Filipinos in the famous Divisoria market in
Manila. A total of forty four (44) speech events were video-recorded and transcribed. The research is
descriptive qualitative in design using the framework of Hymes (1972) SPEAKING model extracted
from Ethnography in Communication. Its level of analysis, adopts Conversational Analysis, Speech Acts
theory, Pragmatics, and Theory of Context. The participants’ strategy are analyzed using linguistic
parameters patterned after the research on cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns of Blum-
kulka and Olhstein (1987).Interesting results show that the participants’ ability to negotiate demonstrate
some techniques which enable them to be successful in bargaining.

Keywords: Pragmatics, Linguistics, Conversational analysis, Speech acts, Context

Introduction

We buy goods everyday in the market. We negotiate and ask discounts. The Filipino term

for asking market discounts is tawaran. This is a business market speech wherein buyer and

seller negotiate with each other. The price negotiation is termed haggling, to establish acceptable

terms for both parties concerned as defined by Uchendu, (1967). Haggling as a term for market

negotiation is also defined as an intricate behavior of give and take, engaged by a buyer and a

seller in an attempt to establish a price acceptable to both (Kassaye, 1990). Verbal power play in

the market is the focus of this paper. The nature of market language used in a particular setting.

Verbal power play for domination as used in the context of this study refers to the capacity of

either party in the marketing negotiation process to produce an effect on the other (Ayoola,

2009). The verbal power play during the interaction forms a significant part that may outdo the

other in the reduction or extension of profit margins.

1
 Everyday conversation takes place in a market place. The contexts of “palengke” in the
Philippines is described as an ordinary place for buying stuff and is intended for customers from
all walks of life. In this place, variety of goods such as local food, clothes, accessories, shoes, or
daily necessities may not be well-organized into identifiable categories, and its surroundings are
crowded and filled with noises and shouts. Sellers may be more friendly and willing to sell
merchandise for a lower price. What differs “palengke” from department stores and mall markets
mainly is that people can negotiate with the price of the goods being sold, that is, the buyer and
seller can negotiate with the price, , thus verbal power play takes in.

Language use in some specialized areas, like the market, is receiving more and more
attention from researchers in linguistics. In this study, the market place becomes a source of
corpus of business interactions and conversations. The researcher conducted an analysis of
conversations, observed utterances, and described societal conventions based on Filipino culture
traits. It investigates how the structures and organization of talk is delivered during haggling
exchanges, and look into the details of performance of participants through context description
under ethnography of speaking by Hymes (1972).

Pragmatics, generally defined as the study of language in use, is characterized by the

study of linguistic choices, context, and language users’ intention with the purpose of making
sense of language use in different types of context (Yule, 1996). In this sense, “Pragmatics” is a
very useful tool in business discourse research because the market is a site of communication
where language plays a subtle role in negotiating relationship, and hence, the outcomes of a
transaction” (Kong, 2009, p. 241).

Communication exchange in the market has been investigated by several language

researchers. Mostly these language analysts are drawn by the regularities of these interactions
and see their study as constituting a genre, and seek a description of their schematic structure. To
mention some of them, it was Ventola, (Ventola, 1987) who created a data set for analysis of
some instances of service encounters and has intuited the act as that being of the same kind (p.3).

Ventola, (1987) approaches the topic by considering similarities in lexico-grammatical

choices made on the planes of conversational structure, lexical cohesion, reference chain,
conjunction, and boundary marking in instances of service encounters.

2
 Negotiation process is a complex process which is significantly influenced by the
culture(s)within which participants are socialized, educated and reinforced. For example,
individual’s conduct during a negotiation encounter is influenced by ethnic heritage and the
attitudes and customs which are embedded in his/her culture, according to Shenkar and Ronnen
(1987).

Another language analysis is that of Hasan (1989) who focused on the level of
conversational moves of service encounters and identified the Generic Structure Potential (GSP)
for service encounters. French (2001) examined how social groups (Mayas and Ladino) with
power differences interacted in the bargaining transactions in a Guatemalan market. Flores
Farfán (2003) has looked into the inter-ethnic power differences (Mestizo and Hñahnñu) in a
Mexico market.

Orr (2007) examined the retail encounters in traditional Chinese local markets with a
focus on verbal and nonverbal interactions in bargaining discourse between marketers with equal
forces. French’s (2001) and Flores Farfán’s (2003) studies, mainly highlight the unequal power
between sellers and buyers.

A group of researchers led by Chen, with Cramer & Kojuma (1996) first used the term
“business pragmatics” when examining how far culture-specific traits persist or change in both
American and Japanese business people who interact for business interactions. Shaw (2001)
introduces the term “prescriptive business pragmatics”, which describes how various
transactions should be carried out, teaching people how to perform functions like giving
presentations, negotiating, and serving customers.

Common findings among reviewed researchers showed that individuals having the same
cultural backgrounds tend to display common patterns of thinking, feeling and reacting in line
with their cultural heritage. As a result, behavior in negotiation is consistent with cultures and
each culture has its own negotiation style.

Objectives

This research aims to make a linguistic analysis of market negotiation and interaction
where verbal power play is being practiced. It aims to analyze strategies of Filipinos in their

3
market interactions from the famous Philippine market, Divisoria. To carry out the investigation
of strategies of the participants, this research utilized linguistic scales which became the
parameters in the investigation of verbal power play and dominance strategy. This was patterned
after the study on realization of request as a speech act across cultures by Blum-Kulka
(1987).The parameters of interactions are based on their social distance, social power and
degree of imposition.

Parameters of Verbal Power (P)

The most transparent linguistic signs of power are the lexical and morphological
structures which are employed in language to encode status and prestige, such as use of titles and
honorifics between or in reference to individuals with whom one is in an asymmetrical social
relationship along an inferior-superior dimension (Saville-Troike, 2003).

The social bases of power are culture specific and discovering identities and relative
strength in various aspects of communicative performance is one of the goals of ethnographic
analysis. An interactional approach in language study would hold that power can be realized or
co-constructed in such forms because people have more control than others over the production
of discourse, and that differential (and deferential) language forms have create and enact
differential social status in the process of communication. Whatever theoretical perspective,
linguistic forms can be displays of power and that they index and acknowledge the capacity of
some individuals or groups in a society to control others (Saville-Troike: 256).

Dominant signs of verbal power include politeness strategies, intonation or loudness of

voice, discourse organization, and form-function mapping of speech acts, as in directives, or
performatives as well as non-verbal communication. A speech act intended to function as
directive by individuals who are in decreasing positions of power can function as a demand,
request, suggestion, hint, or entreaty.

According to Saville-Troike (2003), the term “naturalistic” or “in situ” involves

intensive data collection for a certain period of time in a natural setting. This refers to the fact,
that the variables being investigated are studied where they occur. The researcher conducts
observations, with the belief that, behavior is significantly influenced by the environment in

4
which it occurs. Behavior occurs in a context, and the accurate understanding of such behavior
requires understanding of the context, in which it occurs (Fienberg, 1979).

Methodology

The corpus of data came from Divisoria Night Market situated at Divisoria, along Claro
M. Recto Ave, Manila, Philippines. The researcher selected this locality as it is the most famous
palengke site in the Philippines, and that the current research objective aims to capture the real
Filipino way of haggling in the market. “Divi" or “Sorya”, as it is called, where the cheapest
items can be bought.

The Subjects

This research used a purposive sampling and quota sampling that screened more than
sixty (60) haggling events captured by video-taping on different dates and different sections of
the market. However, in the final analysis, the total successful audio-video recordings were
forty-four (44) which were classified as follows: twenty-eight (28) from the Dry Goods Section
(DGS), ten (10) from the Fruits and Vegetable section (FVS), and six (6) from the Wet Market
Section.

The three parameters of Verbal Power Play (VP) used in this research are as follows:
distance, social power, and degree of imposition. Distance means social distance, and is best
seen as a composite of psychological real factors such as (status, outward age gap, degree of
intimacy, etc) to determine the degree of domination in a given speech situation (Thomas, 1995).
Social distance (SD) relates to closeness in terms of personal relations on a scale of being a 1-
stranger, 2-an acquaintance or 3- a friend.

Social Power (SP) scale measures; 1-S (Buyer) is lower than H (Vemdor); 2-S and H are
equals and 3-S is higher than H. The degree of dominance starts with the outward age gap, tone
of voice, and evidence of social status of the buyer).

On Degree of Imposition (DI) -Imposition here refers to the degree (or severity) of
request the participants conveyed in the negotiation. The scale measures are : 1- Low (when
there is only one line of discount request; 2- as Medium ( when there are 2 lines of discount
requests); and 3- as High (when there are more than 2 discount requests and a constant

5
pleading, cajoling, and mercy asking during the request). The pleading and constant cajoling
and mercy asking of the buyer served as a parameter while on video viewing, among the speech
events.

1. Social Distance: 1-3 : (1-Stranger 2-Acquaintance 3-friend)

2. Social power scale 1-3; (1= S lower than H; 2=S equals H and 3= S higher than H).
3. Degree of Imposition of S to H on a scale of 1-3; (1-low 2-Medium 3-High)

The stated parameters aid as an analytical tool in the analysis of data on speech events. A
checklist with these parameters is used while viewing the audio-video recordings of the speech
events, and a summary is featured on a tabular presentation. The speaker or S will be the
buyer, and H or hearer will be the vendor. The amount of discount is also featured to show the
effectivity of discount request strategy of the buyers.

Results and Discussions:

Table 1: Frequency Distribution of Social Distance Scale of Market Participants

N= 44

Market Sections 1- % 2- % 3- % Total %

Strangers Acquaintance Friends
Dry Goods Section (DGS) 19 43.18 8 18.18 1 2.27 28 63.63
Fruits and veggie Section 7 15.91 3 6.82 0 0.0 10 22.73
(FVS)
Wet Market Section (WMS) 2 4.54 4 9.09 0 0.0 6 13.64
Total 28 63.64 15 34.09 1 2.27 N=44 100.0

Out of forty four (44) speech marketing events, there are twenty eight (28) or 63.64%,
among the participants who are mostly strangers with each other. This is followed by fifteen or
34.09% who acted as acquaintance (regulars or “suki”) and only one or 2.27 % declared as a
friend.

6
 Table 2: Frequency Distribution of Social Power Scale of Market Participants N=44
Market Sections 1-Lower in % 2-Equal in % 3-Higher in % Total %
Dominance Dominance Dominance
Dry Goods Section) 5 11.36 17 38.64 6 13.64 28 63.63
(DGS)
Fryits and Veggies 3 6.82 4 9.09 3 6.82 10 22.73
Section (FVS)
Wet Market Section 3 6.82 3 6.82 0 0 6 13.64
(WMS)
Total 11 25.0 24 54.55 9 20.45 44 100.0

The table above shows that, out of forty-four (44) speech marketing events, there are
twenty-four (24) or 54.55% among participants, where the buyer is of equal dominance with the
vendor. This is followed by eleven (11) or 25% of the participants, where buyer is of lower
dominance to the vendor. There are nine (9) or 20.45% buyers who acted as having higher
dominance to the vendor. This scale considers outward or estimated age gap, tone of voice in
negotiation interaction, their verbal play and the linguistic skill of either party to dominate the
negotiation event.

Table 3: Frequency Distribution of Degree of Imposition of Buyers Into their Discount

Request (Severity of Request of B to V) N=44

Market Sections 1-Lower % 2-Medium % 3-High % Total

Dry Goods Section (DGS) 10 22.72 7 15.91 11 25.0 28

Fruits and Veggies Section (FVS) 0 0 1 2.27 9 20.45 10

Wet Market Section (WMS) 0 0 3 6.82 9 20.45 6

Total 10 22.72 11 25.0 23 52.27 44

The table shows that out of forty four (44) speech marketing events, the degree of
imposition is high in all of the buyers (53.27 %). This is revealed with their constant pleading,
cajoling and insistence with their discount request. This is followed by medium degree of
imposition, and lower degree of imposition (25 % and 22.72% respectively).
To recapitulate, market participants are mostly strangers (scale 1)with each other. The
buyers treat themselves as having equal dominance (scale 2) with the vendors. All buyers
practice high severity of imposition (scale 3) in their requests for discounts in their negotiation
interactions.
7
 Dominance or verbal prowess in interpersonal communication is more personal, referring
to the ability of one to control others and influence the action of others in the interactions.
Allowing individuals to be more ‘dominant’ simply means allowing them to be able to achieve
what they intend to achieve. Part of the verbal prowess of an individual is personal stemming
from his mastery of verbal skills: knowing when to speak (and when not to speak), and how to
speak. Most of us know the situation of wanting to have our saying, but not quite sure when is it
appropriate to interrupt, and thus staying silent and feeling powerless. This happens to the buyer
in this excerpt. She is powerless against the vendor when the vendor is able to control her
decision making thoughts, and thus yields to the sale.

Here is an excerpt showing linguistic dominance of the buyer to the vendor. The
classification is 3-Buyer is higher than vendor. This is FVS Speech Event : Kalabasa Power.

Case No. 1: Buyer has higher Verbal Dominance than Vendor

Descriptions:
S -etting: This is at the vegetable section around 7:30 PM .
P-articipant speaker(s) : The buyer is a chubby woman in his mid-thirties,
while the vendor is a female around mid-twenties.
E-nds ; The buyer is holding ten pesos coin intended to pay an item she bought
for seven (7) pesos, but since she has a change of three pesos, she requested that
a squash (Kalabasa) worth five pesos a slice be sold three pesos so that she will
not get a change anymore. The buyer got the discount request.
A-cts or act sequence: Initially, the buyer was able to buy vegetable in the amount
of P7, and she has P10 expecting a change of P3.00 Since a slice of squash is P5,
she haggled for it to P3. The transaction lasted for thirteen seconds only.
K–ey : The manner is light and casual. The buyer made the bargain within her b
budget, but has tried to use persuasive force to grant the slash.
I-nstrumentalities: Face to face interaction using Tagalog as their verbal exchange
message.
Norms The norms of interaction is always to get a discount request, however,
some cultural factors are within the environment. In here, the buyer has succeeded
with her request, in the event of being an elderly than the vendor.
G –enre: Conversation, in a haggling speech event.

Moves FVS Transcript #9: Kalabasa Power

Turn Text where B-buyer V-vendor

Price inquiry 1B Magkano kalabasa? [How much is the squash?]

Price quotation 2 V Lima po [Five]
Discount request 3B: Pwede tres? [Can it be three?]
Vendor refuses 4V: Hindi pwede, kasi … (?)
Insistence 5B: Kasi sampu lang tong pera ko eh. [Because I only
got tenpesos, only money left here to pay] Tres na

8
 lang ‘yan, O hetong sampu (sabay hitsa sa pera sa
harap ng tindera) [Give it at three, here is ten peso
coin, and threw the coin to the seller.
Silence 6V: Hesitant (inaudible comments by standers)
Forceful tone 7B: BIGAY MO NAHHH! [Give it here!!]
Approves 8V okey

The transcript excerpt from Fruits and Veggies Section (FVS) entitled, Kalabasa Power
shows that the buyer is dominating the vendor in buying a slice of squash. In the process of
haggling interaction, the verbal dominance of elders greatly influence the buying power of
consumers. In this excerpt, the buyer is in her mid-thirties and insists on the force of her voice as
she haggles the squash slice for P3, where the buyer yields.

Language, as a method of communication in our culture, is the fuel we use to empower

our desires and to direct and align our energy. Language has immense power, and its impact
depends entirely on how we wield it. (Saville -Troike, 2003). In daily conversation, we must
pay a great deal more attention to our utterances. We’d be as determined to get our language “in
shape” when we want something to happen. By becoming more aware of the impact and power
of language, we can make more conscious and insightful choices about how we express
ourselves and how we interpret others.

Case 2: Buyer and Vendor have Equal Dominance

Here is an excerpt where two women who are interacting as market participants,
demonstrates equal dominance. As evidenced by the video recordings, the buyer and seller are
almost of the same age, and talk at the same level. This excerpt comes from Fruits and Vegetable
Section : Speech Event No. 10: Eggplant haggle.

9
 Descriptions:
S -etting : This is at the vegetable section around 7:00 PM .
P-articipant speaker(s) : The buyer deals with a hawker of vegetables in her cart, almost all veggies sold. Both vendor
and buyer are almost of same age, female around mid-thirties.
E-nds ; The buyer has several items already on a plastic bag, but inquired on eggplant cost. She requested a half the
price slash, as she has bought many things already The discount request granted at P35 for everything, including her
request cost for eggplant.
A-ct:s : The interaction was conversational and it lasted for 19 seconds.
K–ey : The manner is light and casual. The vendor still inquired for more items to buy, when she doesn’t have any
more things to sell.
I-nstrumentalities: Face to face interaction using Tagalog as their verbal exchange message.
Norms The norms of interaction is always to get a fair discount request. The buyer has succeeded with her request,
in the event of having bought other items already.
G –enre: Conversation, in a haggling speech event.

FVS Speech Event Speech Acts Moves Text : where B-buyer and
No.10 : Eggplant haggle V-Vendor

Opening stage --- 1B: Talong , magkano?[How

Price inquiry
discount request
Main Interaction
Stage
vendor strategy
Buyer requests discount
after so many items sold
much is eggplant?]
2V: Bente [Twenty]
__________
3B: Di pa ba pwedeng, sampu
na lang yan? Marami naman
akong binili? [Can it not be P10?
Anyway I got other items.]
4V : Mahal talong ngayon eh.
[Eggplant is expensive now]
5B : Sampu na lang ‘yan, ang
dami ko namang nabili.
____________

This Speech in the Fruits and Veggies Section (FVS) Event: Eggplant buying shows
how two market participants talk on an equal status. They are almost of the same age as
evidenced by the audio-video recordings. It will be noticed that the same level conversations
does not use honorifics, and talks freely with each other. The tone of voice is friendly, and the
degree of imposition is on scale 2 (medium imposition).

According to Stevens (2005), our choice of language can either hamper or enhance our
ability to create the experiences of our choosing. It is a fundamental software and the operating
system that supports our thoughts and actions. Stevens also suggests that, because our behaviors
are heavily influenced by our “personal language programs,” by consciously monitoring and
choosing our language, we can effectively reprogram our lives. An upgrading of our language

10
choices, he asserts can also upgrade our negotiation skills, our attitudes, belief systems, and life
patterns.

There are many descriptions of the way language functions as a medium of

communication, in any kind of context in negotiation. Negotiation is an art of letting other
person have them your way.” (Alvares, 2006).

In the workplace, people negotiate with almost everyone. They can do this to their
business clients, and to their families and friends in one way or another, to obtain their full
consent and cooperation. Any discussion that requires a decision at some level with an expected
or unexpected outcome involves and requires negotiating skills. This is haggling. Haggling is
present in all kinds of market situations. An employee can haggle for his salary promotion, a
student to raise his grades from teachers’ rating, any kind of purchases, as well as services that
one can be avail of himself.

According to Lusch (2011), preparation is the single most important element to a

successful outcome. Preparation to whatever you want to negotiate includes

 Identifying the intended goal as well as setting limits to achieve that goal.
 Next is effective communication. This plays a fundamental role in any interaction and is
essential to successful negotiations. Effective communication skills include the ability to
listen and understand the intended message of the sender, clearly expressing his own
thoughts and ideas in a way that is easily followed and understood by others, and
 Finally, accurately interpreting the messages expressed through body language.

Techniques in ‘Closing the deal’ rely on the negotiator’s ability to recognize that all
elements of the goals have been achieved and all that remain is to finalize the process to
implement those goals.

Conclusion

Dominance in market negotiation involves both verbal and non-verbal communication.

The tones of voice, the gesture, and persuasive skills are just some of the effective ways to gain
linguistic dominance in haggling. Generally, participants in market negotiation are;

11
a) Strangers; b) show equal in dominance with each other; and c) Exhibits high degree of
discount request imposition.
Verbal power and domination in market negotiation entails preparation and practice.
The intended goal of the speech event is getting the most into the sale. Thus, in a free exchange
such as everyday market conversation, verbal and non-verbal power play are worked out to
reach consensus. Haggling in the market needs to be practiced too. This research acknowledge
the value of powerful free exchange to attain the most in getting price discounts in the market.
Among the areas of research that can be explored further are the following:
1. Language and marketing discourse where topics on consumer behavior in different
settings can be explored; 2. Social researches on regional varieties where the different dialects
all over the country are being used as codes in haggling interactions. Comparative studies can
be done to see how an ethnic group does market haggling; 3. Applied linguistic researches
investigating on line and internet marketing discourse and finally, 4.For language teachers and
curriculum planners, teaching pragmatics of negotiation can be done inside the classroom and
can be ventured by allowing students to become actors, and rehearse the interactions as a
simulation role play, to make it naturally occurring. Students can be encouraged to use these
negotiation skills tried into the classroom and report back in class the result of their real market
activity. Curriculum planners should include authentic naturally occurring events (like placing
an airline reservation, ordering menus in a restaurant etc.), in the course outline integrated as
enrichment of the language course.

Bibliography
Blum Kulka Shoshana and Olshtain Elite (1987). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural
study of speech act realization patterns. Vol XXXI in the series, Advances in Discourse
Processes by Roy O. Freddie ed. Ablex Publishing Corporation: Norwood, New Jersey.

Chen, H. J., Cramer, P. K., & Kojima, T. (1996). Japanese and American cross- cultural
business pragmatics: A study. Paper presented at the Annual Conference on Languages
& Communication for World Business and the Professions, Ypsilanti, Michigan, USA.

Farfan, Flores and José Antonio. (2003). Pragmatics of power in Hñahñu (Otomi) markets.
Language in Society . Volume 32, Issue 05. pp 629-658.

12
French, Brigittine M. (2001). The symbolic capital of social identities: The genre of
bargaining in an urban Guatemalan market.Journal of Linguistic Anthropology
10:155–89.

Hymes, Dell (1972). Models of the interaction of language and social life. In J. Gumperz &
D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, 35–
71. New York.

Kassaye, Wossen W. (1990), "The role of haggling in marketing: an examination of buyer

behavior," Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7 (4), 53-62.

Kong, K. C. C. (2009). Pragmatics. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini (Ed.), The handbook of business

discourse (pp. 239-255). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Saville-Troike, Muriel (2003). The ethnography of communication: An introduction 3rd

edition. Malden, MA: Oxford Blackwell.

Shaw, Philip (2001). The intercultural validity of prescriptive business pragmatics. p. 180-
194.

Shenkar, O. and Ronen, S. (1987), “The cultural context of negotiations: the implications of
Chinese interpersonal norms”, Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, Vol. 23 No. 2,
pp. 263-75.

Stevens, Helga (2005) Equal rights for Deaf people: From being a stranger in one’s own country
to full citizenship through sign languages. Paper presented at ICED 2005, Maastricht, 17-
20 July 2005

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London:

Longman.

Uchendu, Victor C. (1967). "Some principles of haggling in peasant markets," Journal of

Economic Development and Cultural Change, 16 (1), 37-50.

Ventola, Eija (1987). The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the
semiotics of service encounters. London: Frances Pinter.

Short Bio-Note

Dr. Dahlia R. Domingo is a graduate of Ph.D. Linguistics, with specialization in applied linguistics at the
Philippine Normal University in 2015. Her dissertation advisers are Dr. Florencia M. Marquez and Dr.
Zenaida Q. Reyes. She is employed at the New Era University, Quezon City, Philippines. She is connected
with the language department of the College of Arts and Sciences and College of Education Department.

13
 Dr. Florencia Felix Marquez, Ph.D. -is a graduate of Filipino Linguistics and Literature and is concurrently
the Director of Spanish Resource Center., Philippine Normal University (PNU). Previously she was the
head of Linguistics Bilingual Education and Literature Department (LBEL) then became the Associate
Dean of the College of Graduate Studies Teacher Education Research (CGSTER), also at Philippine
Normal University.. Being a faculty, she handles undergraduate and graduate level students in language
and literature subjects. She teaches translation in English, Filipino and Spanish and other Philippine
Languages. Added to the field, she is also a teacher of Spanish language As A foreign language.

Dr. Zenaida Q. Reyes is presently the Director of Linkages and Information Office, and formerly the Dean
of the College of Graduate Studies Teacher Education Research and Dean of the College of Arts and
Social Sciences of Philippine Normal University, the National Center for Teacher Education. She is
presently one of the gender experts working with the Technical Panel on Women and Gender Studies in
CHED. Dr. Reyes is also a full time professor of Social Sciences, trainer in women studies, women’s
rights, human rights education, teaching social studies and social sciences, school leadership and
educational management, assessment and evaluation, and qualitative research.

14

View publication stats