Kyle Romano November 16, 2023

MTH 9:00 – 10:30

Contact with Other Languages

Language is a living entity, constantly evolving and adapting to the social and linguistic
influences surrounding it.
Philippine English, spoken by millions as a second language, mirrors the nation's diverse
linguistic and cultural history. Influenced by the languages and cultures of the Philippines, it
stands as a testament to the country's unique identity. However, this linguistic hybridity
poses challenges in standardization due to the variability introduced by the influence of
Tagalog/Filipino on lexicon and grammar. The influence of Tagalog/Filipino on Philippine
English is evident in the creation of new words and structures. Notable linguistic features
include the use of 'po' and 'opo' as markers of respect, and 'na' as a marker of completed action,
reflecting the intricate interplay between language and culture.
The use of Philippine English and Taglish elicits diverse reactions. Some view it as a sign of
linguistic inferiority or an attempt to assert national identity, while others see it as a channel
for creative expression and adaptability. These attitudes reflect the complex history and
identity of the Philippines, highlighting the complex role of language in determining social
dynamics. Despite challenges in standardization, the creativity and adaptability of speakers lead
to the emergence of new forms of expression and linguistic innovation. This linguistic dynamism
facilitates connections with others and serves as a powerful means of expressing cultural identity
in a globalized world.
Moreover, language contact is a dynamic process that fosters the development of unique English
varieties, such as Philippine English and Taglish. These variations reflect the linguistic and
cultural context of the Philippines, shaped by social factors. Embracing linguistic and cultural
diversity in a globalized world promotes mutual respect, fosters understanding, and celebrates
the unique contributions of each language and culture.
In conclusion, language contact in the Philippines offers an eye through which we can appreciate
the dynamism of language, the resilience of cultural identity, and the potential for creativity and
innovation. Understanding and celebrating linguistic diversity contribute to a more
interconnected and harmonious global community.
Kyle Romano November 16, 2023
MTH 9:00 – 10:30

Philippine English in Relation to American English

Philippine English (PhE) stands as a linguistic testament to the historical ties between the
Philippines and the United States during the colonial era (1898-1946). PhE, unlike its British-
influenced counterparts, owes its linguistic roots to American colonialism. The period of
American rule, lasting from 1898 to 1946, played a pivotal role in anglicizing the Philippines.
The presence of American teachers, particularly the Thomasites, and missionaries left an
indelible mark on the linguistic landscape. Not only did these educators contribute to
linguistic norms, but cultural, political, and familial ties also sustained the influence of
AmE on PhE.
PhE's orientation is decidedly toward Standard American English. The historical role of
American teachers, as well as the enduring cultural connections, has positioned AmE as the
linguistic yardstick. Llamzon (1969) observed that while Filipinos are willing to adopt certain
linguistic norms, there are limits to conformity. Tayao (2004) echoed this sentiment, noting that
Filipinos rarely adhere strictly to the norms of AmE across all settings, implying a nuanced
relationship. While there have been limited empirical comparisons between PhE and AmE,
notable studies by Schneider (2005), Bautista (2011), and Borlongan and Lim (2012) put into
consideration on linguistic nuances. The study by Borlongan and Lim, employing a parent-child
analogy, convincingly portrays PhE as resembling AmE, emphasizing the intrinsic linguistic
similarities.
A thorough comparative analysis, incorporating corpora such as ICE and GloWbE, unveils the
linguistic fabric of PhE. The examination of lexical, grammatical, and spelling differences
reveals that PhE shares notable similarities with AmE, even more so than with British
English (BrE). The degree of resemblance is striking, highlighting a significant linguistic
connection while allowing for subtle variations.
In conclusion, Philippine English stands as a linguistic hybrid with roots firmly embedded in
American English. The historical, cultural, and educational ties have shaped PhE's linguistic
norms, with an exonormative orientation towards Standard American English. While exhibiting a
degree of linguistic independence, PhE maintains a close kinship with AmE, reflecting a
dynamic linguistic relationship that has evolved over time. Understanding the intricacies of this
linguistic connection contributes to a nuanced appreciation of language evolution in the
Philippines and the broader global linguistic landscape.
Kyle Romano November 16, 2023
MTH 9:00 – 10:30

Internal Variation
The study of internal variation in Philippine English (PhE) unravels a fascinating linguistic
diversity and dynamism. It explores themes such as linguistic insecurity, standardization,
social and cultural influences, and the linguistic landscape, which as a whole means only one
thing – connection in differentiation.
Stylistic variation in PhE goes beyond broad distinctions between speech and writing, delving
into finer categorizations within texts. Studies by Gonzalez (1982, 1983, 1985) and Nelson
(2005) reveal a propensity for shifts from casual to formal styles, with a prevalence of the latter.
The use of modal verbs, particularly 'shall,' emerges as a stylistic marker, prominently
appearing in formal and legalistic contexts. This variation, as noted by Nelson (2005), reflects a
sense of linguistic insecurity cultivated by an educational system emphasizing formal English
(Gonzalez, 1991).
While regional variation in PhE exists, debates persist regarding the degree of significance
attached to these differences. Villanueva's (2016) findings suggest that regional disparities are
not distinctive enough to point to separate regional varieties. Llamzon's (1969) call for
standardization, advocating homogeneity across the Philippines, contrasts with studies by
Gonzalez (1985) and McKaughan (1993), which propose that a completely homogenized PhE is
still in the process of emerging.
Meanwhile, PhE unveils sociolectal variation, a phenomenon wherein different social and
ethnolinguistic groups exhibit distinct linguistic patterns. Sociolects such as "yaya English,"
"bargirl English," "colegiala English," and "conyo English" serve as linguistic markers of
varying levels of education and socio-economic status. These sociolects, characterized by
deviations in grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary, provide a lens through which the
influence of cultural and social factors on language use becomes evident.
Internal variation in PhE, as explored through its stylistic, regional, and sociolectal dimensions,
paints a dynamic and intricate linguistic landscape. The interplay between linguistic insecurity in
stylistic choices, debates about regional standardization, and the manifestation of sociolectal
variation underscores the adaptability and responsiveness of PhE to the diverse sociocultural
contexts within which it exists.
Conclusively, the exploration of internal variation in PhE reveals a language in constant flux,
embracing and adapting to the complexities of its environment. Understanding and appreciating
the multifaceted nature of PhE's internal variation contribute to a richer portrayal of its linguistic
evolution and cultural identity. Celebrating this diversity within the unity of PhE acknowledges
the dynamic interplay of linguistic elements in shaping the language spoken by millions in the
Philippines.

Kyle Romano November 16, 2023

MTH 9:00 – 10:30
Hybridization
Linguistic hybridization has always been present in society; it plays a role in the development of
most natural languages and varieties. While such is the case, the general awareness of such
processes and products – the hybrids – in the field of linguistics (particularly in the study of
world Englishes) is relatively recent (Onysko, 2016; Schneider, 2016). There is increasing
attention given toward them, but much remains to be investigated particularly in English-using
societies where multilingualism is not the exception, but the norm. One such example is the
Philippines, where historically indigenous and non-indigenous languages coexist and interact
with each other, resulting in various linguistic hybrids.
Hybrids with borrowing, unveils linguistic phenomena that involve the integration of lexicon
from various source languages into PhE. Notable examples include Conyo English/Englog, a
sociolect associated with elite status, Filipino, the unifying language of the Philippines enriched
by diverse linguistic influences, and Lánnang-uè, a hybrid code reflecting mixed languages such
as Hokkien, Tagalog, Filipino, and English. This illustrates how PhE serves as a canvas for the
amalgamation of lexical elements, creating linguistic hybrids that mirror the complexity of
Philippine society.
Meanwhile, hybrids involving code-switching, a phenomenon characterized by the seamless
shift between languages within a discourse. Tagalog-Filipino-English Code-Switching, prevalent
in metropolitan Manila, demonstrates the fluidity with which speakers navigate between these
languages. The exclusive Hokkien-Lánnang-uè-Tagalog-Filipino-English Code-Switching within
the Lannang community further emphasizes the sociolinguistic aspects of language use.
Additionally, the exploration of Cebuano-English Code-Switching and Contemporary
Chabacano Varieties highlights how linguistic hybrids manifest in different regions, shaped by
local sociolinguistic dynamics.
Furthermore, the influenced of hybridized Englishes revealed how English in the Philippines
undergoes transformations at non-lexical levels. Examples such as Philippine Korean Learner
English (PKLE), Manila Lannang English (MLE), and other Non-Manila Ethno-Geographic
Englishes illustrate the impact of substratum influences on phonological, morphological, and
syntactic levels.
Conclusively, hybridization not only uncovers the vast ocean of linguistic diversity within PhE
but also emphasizes the dynamic interplay between English and other languages in the
Philippines. It challenges the notion of PhE as a homogenous variety, showcasing its ability to
evolve and integrate diverse linguistic elements. As the study suggests, linguistic hybridization in
the Philippines is a testament to the interconnectedness of languages, reflecting the complex
sociolinguistic landscape of the region.