APPROPRIATIONS OF THE MID-CENTRAL VOWEL

IN WORD FINAL SYLLABLES OF ENGLISH LOANWORDS

IN 3 PHILIPPINE LANGUAGES

Elisha Danne Ponio

Abstract
This paper explores the corresponding vowel adaptation of the mid-central vowel (also known as
the schwa or pepet) heard in word final syllables of English loanwords in three major Philippine
languages—Ilokano, Cebuano, and Tagalog—the first of which also has a schwa in its southern
dialect phonemic inventory, whilst the other two do not have a corresponding schwa. Results
show that the schwa from loanwords is generally appropriated as a schwa in Ilokano, although
there are variations such as /ɔ/ and /ɛ/ which also appear in Cebuano and Tagalog.

Keyword: Schwa, Loanwords, Phoneme-adaptation

1. INTRODUCTION
Loanwords refer to words which enter a recipient language by borrowing those words from
another language (Peperkamp & Dupoux, 2003). The study of loanword adaptations has been a
continuous source of interest for linguists in the domain of phonology (Peperkamp, 2005) since
Hyman’s (1970) work on how borrowing contributes to the justification of phonological
grammars was published, and such interest stems from the exercise of uncovering the processes
by which native speakers possessing their own phonological perceive and apply their own
phonological constraints on these words that they borrow which have been generated by a
different phonological system (Silverman, 1992). To add, there is the assumption that these
loanwords do not have their own phonological representation; only at the moment of borrowing
will the native speaker perceive such forms “…in accordance with their own phonological
system” (Silverman, 1992, p.61); however, despite the possible absence of a phonological
representation of these loanwords as they are borrowed, these loanwords can manifest distinctly
from that of the phonological system of the borrowing language (Silverman, 1992). With that
said, this occurrence must be noted as a factor contributing to how the phonological system and
constraints of the borrowing language must be tested and determined (Kenstowicz, 2003).

A significant number of studies regarding loanword phonology have been done across languages
spoken in Asia, particularly amongst Chinese languages (Hyman, 1970; Yip, 1993; Guo, 2001;
Lin, 2008), and Japanese (Smith, 2005a; Smith, 2005b; Ito, Yoonjung, & Kenstowicz, 2006).
Amongst Philippine languages, studies on loanwords focused on verbal behaviour (cf. Zuraw,
1996; Nolasco & Tangco, 2002) with regard to morphological processes such as infixation and
reduplication, although there have been some works which discuss language contact-related
phonological phenomena (Reid, 2005).

As a response to the amount of work done on loanword phonology in Philippine languages, the
primary purpose of this paper is to illustrate how the mid-central vowel in word-final syllables
patterned [-Cəl] of English loanwords is appropriated in three widely-spoken Philippine
languages: Ilokano, Tagalog, and Cebuano. This paper aims to see whether or not the mid-
central vowel from the English loanwords automatically becomes a mid-central vowel in Ilokano,
which contains a schwa in its southern dialect phonemic inventory1, and how the English schwa

1
Rubino (1998, p. 8;12) states that this phoneme is a high back unrounded vowel, but Almeida & Esteban (n.d.)
state that the vowel spacing of this phoneme appears to be closer to [a] and [e], and their acoustic properties lead
them to assert that this vowel is indeed the mid-central vowel rather than the high back unrounded vowel [ɯ].
is appropriated in Tagalog and Cebuano which do not have a corresponding mid-central vowel,
in relation to the environment of the segments.

Data were elicited using a wordlist composed of 28 English loanwords with the word-final
syllable patterned [-p/b/k/g/f/v/s/z + ə + l]2 from two native speakers of each language. The
author flashed pictures representing the loanwords, and the selected informants uttered these
words in English. An additional set of four words also ending in a similar phonological pattern
was added (not flashed as pictures but shown orthographically) in order to distinguish the
appropriations of the schwa in relation to the influence of orthography (see section 5 for further
discussion).

2. POSSIBLE PHONEME-ADAPTATION PATTERNS

This study compares two possible approaches in which the phoneme-adaptation of the schwa
may be categorised. The first of which is the Pepet Law discussed in Conant (1912). Conant
(1912) describes the evolution of a schwa phoneme (called a pepet) through several of the
Philippine languages. His examination of the sets of words containing pepet reflexes in relation
to the individual languages concludes the existence of i-languages (in which the pepet became an
/i/), e-languages (in which the pepet became an /e/), a-languages (in which the pepet became an
/a/), and u-languages (in which the pepet became an /u/ with an /o/ variant). This work serves
as a point of reference in determining if the English schwa in loanwords would behave similarly
to the original schwa of Philippine languages—that is, if the English schwa would show a reflex
of /i/ in i-languages , /e/ in e-languages, /a/ in a-languages, and /u/ in u-languages. Following
Conant’s (1912) classification, Tagalog would belong to the i-languages, Ilokano to the e-
languages, and Cebuano to the u-languages.

Another pattern of or approach in studying loanword phonology is called divergent repair

(Kenstowicz, 2005) which describes how an adaptation pattern seems to contradict the native
repair strategy—that is, there is a separate repair done on loanwords containing unacceptable
phoneme patterns in contrast to the native repair done on the same unacceptable environment.
Furthermore, there may also be a case of unnecessary repair (Peperkamp, 2005), wherein adaptation
occurs even when there is no apparent illicit structure in need of repair. In the case of the

2
The wordlist originally included words also ending in [-t(ə?)l] and [-d(ə?)l]; however, since the transcription of
such words do not contain a schwa (rather, the /l/ is syllabic) in between the two consonants, adaptations of
these syllables in Philippine languages may yield an epenthetic vowel rather than an appropriation of an original
one.
southern dialect of Ilokano (also the Ilokano variety spoken in the province of Pangasinan),
which contains a schwa in its phonemic inventory, it would then be a case of unnecessary repair
if the phoneme resulting from adaptation is not a mid-central vowel. As for the Tagalog and
Cebuano counterparts, if the resultant phonemes do not appear in the original phonemic
inventories, and if these resultant phonemes also have conditioning environments stricter than
that of the native phonology of these languages, then this would be a pattern called retreat to the
unmarked (Kenstowicz, 2005).

3. DATA ON THE CORRESPONDING PRONUNCIATIONS IN ILOKANO,

3
CEBUANO, AND TAGALOG

The following table shows the corresponding adaptations of English loanwords in Ilokano:
Table 3.1 English loanwords and their Corresponding Pronunciations by Ilokano Speakers
ENGLISH ILOKANO ILOKANO
(from Speaker #1) (from Speaker #2)
/'æ pəl/ /'ʔa pəl/ /'ʔa pɔl/
/'pɪm pəl/ /'pim pəl/ /'pɪ:m pɔl/
/'pɜr pəl/ /'pʌr pəl/ /'pɜr pəl/
/'sæm pəl/ /'sɑm pəl/ /'sam pɔl/
/ə 'vej lə bəl/ /ʔə 'bɛ lə bəl/ /ʔa 'bej la bɔl/
/'bʌb əl/ /'bab əl/ /'bɑb ɔl/
/'tej bəl/ /'tɛ bəl/ /'tej bɔl/
/'vɛʤ tə bəl/ /'bɛʤ tɛ bəl/ /'bɛʤ tɛ bɔl/
/'krɪŋ kəl/ /'krəŋ kɜl/ /'krɪ:ŋ kɛl/
/'pɒp sɪ kəl/ /'pɑp sɪ kəl/ /'pɒp sɪ kɛl/
/'traj sɪ kəl/ /'traj sɪ kɜl/ /'traj sɪ kɛl/
/'twɪŋ kəl/ /'twɪŋ kɜl/ /'twɪ:ŋ kɜl/
/'i gəl/ /'ʔi gəl/ /'ʔɪ gɜl/
/'sɪŋ gəl/ /'sɪŋ gəl/ /'sɪŋ gɜl/
/'tæŋ gəl/ /'taŋ gəl/ /'taŋ gɛl/
/'trajˌæŋ gəl/ /'trajˌaŋ gəl/ /'trajˌæŋ gɛl/
/'ræf əl/ /'rap əl/ /'rʌf ɔl/
/'raj fəl/ /'raj pəl/ /'raj phəl/

3
Phonetic features of each sound follow the 1993 revision of the IPA chart. All misinterpretations of
pronunciations by the native speakers belong to the author.
 /'trʌf əl/ /'trʌɸ əl/ /'trɑf ɔls/
/'wɒf əl/ /'wɒp əl/ /'wɑp ɔl/
/'lɛv əl/ /'lɛ:v əl/ /'lɛb əl/
/'mɑr vəl/ /'mɑr bəl/ /'mɑr vəl/
/'nɒv əl/ /'nɒv əl/ /'nɒv əl/
/'træv əl/ /'trɑ bəl/ /'trav əl/
/'kæs əl/ /'kas əl/ /'kas ɜl/
/'di zəl/ /'dɪ səl/ /'dɪ: sɜl/
/'ʰwɪs əl/ /'ʰwɪs əl/ /'ʰwɪ:s ɜl/
/'pʌz əl/ /'pas əl/ /'pɑz ɜl/

For speaker #1, 25 out of 28 of the schwa sounds were retained, except some of those occurring
after the voiceless velar stop /k/. The vowel sound occurring after /k/ was heard by the author
as a low-mid central unrounded vowel /ɜ/ (although the author also considers the possibility of
a centralised low-mid front vowel /ɛ/). For speaker #2, 5 out of the 28 schwa sounds were
retained, which mostly occurred after the voiced labiodental fricative /v/, with three instances
occurring after a voiceless bilabial stop /p/ and its aspirated counterpart /ph/, and a voiced
bilabial stop /b/. Other corresponding vowels include: 1) the low-mid back rounded vowel /ɔ/
which occurred 10 times after /p/, /b/, and /f/; 2) the low-mid central unrounded vowel /ɜ/
which occurred 7 times after /k/, /g/, /s/, and /z/; and 3) the low-mid front vowel /ɛ/ which
occurred 5 times after /k/ and /g/.

The following table shows the corresponding adaptations of English loanwords in Cebuano:
Table 3.2 English loanwords and their Corresponding Pronunciations by Cebuano Speakers
ENGLISH CEBUANO CEBUANO
(from Speaker #1) (from Speaker #2)
/'æ pəl/ /'ʔa pɔl/ /'ʔej pɔl/
/'pɪm pəl/ /'pɪ:m pɔl/ /'pɪ:m pɔls/
/'pɜr pəl/ /'pɔr pɒl/ /'pʌr pɒl/
/'sæm pəl/ /'sɑm pɔl/ /sam 'pɔl/
/ə 'vej lə bəl/ /ʔa 'vej la bɒl/ /ʔa 'bɛ la bɔl/
/'bʌb əl/ /'bɑb ɔl/ /'bɑb ɔls/
/'tej bəl/ /'tej bɒl/ /'tej bɔl/
/'vɛʤ tə bəl/ /'bejʤ tə bɒl/ /'bɛʤ tɛ bɔl/
 /'krɪŋ kəl/ **/'krɪ:ŋ gɛls/ -4
/'pɒp sɪ kəl/ /'pap sɪ kɛl/ /'pap sɪ kɛl/
/'traj sɪ kəl/ /'traj sɪ kɛl/ /'traj sɪ kɛl/
/'twɪŋ kəl/ /'twɪŋ kɛl/ /'twɪ:ŋ kɛl/
/'i gəl/ /'i gɛl/ /'ʔɜ gɛl/
/'sɪŋ gəl/ /'sɪŋ gɛl/ /'sɪ:ŋ gɛl a/
/'tæŋ gəl/ /'tæŋ gɛl/ **/'tam bɔl/
/'trajˌæŋ gəl/ /'trəjˌəŋ gɛl/ /'trajˌɛŋ gɛl/
/'ræf əl/ /'rɑf əl/ /'rʌf əls/
/'raj fəl/ /'raj fɔl/ /'rʌj fɜl/
/'trʌf əl/ /'trɔf ɔl/ -
/'wɒf əl/ /'wɔf ɔl/ /'wʌf ʊl/
/'lɛv əl/ /'lɛv ɛl/ /'lɨv ɛl/
/'mɑr vəl/ /'mɑr vɛl/ /'mɑr vɛl/
/'nɒv əl/ /'nov ɛl/ /'m,n(?)ov ɜl/
/'træv əl/ /'trɑ vɛl/ /'trav ɛl/
/'kæs əl/ /'kas ɛl/ /'kas ɛl/
/'di zəl/ /'di zɛl/ /'dɪ: zɛl/
/'ʰwɪs əl/ /'wɪ:s ɛl/ /'ʰwɨs ɛl/
/'pʌz əl/ /'pas ɛl/ /'paz ɛl/

For speaker #1, it can be said that Conant’s (1912) Pepet Law does not directly apply to foreign
words, seeing as the borrowed schwa was mostly appropriated as: 1) the low-mid back rounded
vowel /ɔ/ which occurred 7 times after /p/, /b/, and /f/; 2) the low-mid front vowel /ɛ/
which occurred 16 times after /k/, /g/, /v/, /s/, /z/; 3) the low back rounded vowel /ɒ/
which occurred 4 times after /p/ and /b/. For speaker #2, the distribution is generally similar,
with /ɛ/ occurring after /k/, /g/, /v/, /s/, and /z/, and /ɔ/occurring after /p/ and /b/. It is
interesting to note how one foreign word (‘raffle’) retained the schwa for both speakers; however,
the appearance of /ʊ/ for speaker #2 in one of the words can suggest a possibility of a foreign
schwa following the Pepet Law.

The following table shows the corresponding adaptations of English loanwords in Tagalog:
Table 3.4 English loanwords and their Corresponding Pronunciations by Tagalog Speakers

4
Instances wherein the informant was not able to give the word are represented by a dash (-). Incorrect words
are represented by double asterisks (**).
 ENGLISH TAGALOG TAGALOG
(from Speaker #1) (from Speaker #2)
/'æ pəl/ /'ʔa pɔl/ /'ʔa pɔl/
/'pɪm pəl/ /'pɪ:m pɔl/ /'pɪ:m pɔl/
/'pɜr pəl/ /'pɜr pɔl/ /'pɜr pɔl/
/'sæm pəl/ /'sam pɔl/ /'sam pɔl/
/ə 'vej lə bəl/ /ʔa 'vej lə bɔl/ /ʔə 'vej la bɔl/
/'bʌb əl/ /'bab ɔl/ /'bab ɔl/
/'tej bəl/ /'tej bɔl/ /'tej bɔl/
/'vɛʤ tə bəl/ /'bejʤ tə bɔl/ /'vejʒ tə bɔl/
/'krɪŋ kəl/ /'krɪ:ŋ kɛl/ /'krɪ:ŋ kɜl/
/'pɒp sɪ kəl/ /'pap sɪ kɛl/ /'pɒp stɪ kɛl/
/'traj sɪ kəl/ /'traj sɪ: kɛl/ /'traj sɪ kɛl/
/'twɪŋ kəl/ /'twɪ:ŋ kɛl/ /'twɪ:ŋ kɛl/
/'i gəl/ /'ʔi gɛl/ /'ʔi gɛl/
/'sɪŋ gəl/ /'sɪŋ gɛl/ /'sɪ:ŋ gɛl/
/'tæŋ gəl/ /'taŋ gɛl/ /'taŋ gɛl/
/'trajˌæŋ gəl/ /'trajˌæŋ gɛl/ /'trajˌæŋ gɛl/
/'ræf əl/ /'rɐf əl/ /'rɑf ɔl/
/'raj fəl/ /'raj fəl/ /'raj fɔl/
/'trʌf əl/ /'trɑf əl/ /'traf ɔl/
/'wɒf əl/ /'waf ɔl/ /'wɒf ɔl/
/'lɛv əl/ /'lɛv əl/ /'lɛv ɛl/
/'mɑr vəl/ /'mɑr vɜl/ /'mar vɛl/
/'nɒv əl/ /'nɒv ɜl/ /'nov ɛl/
/'træv əl/ /'trɑ vɜl/ /'trav ɛl/
/'kæs əl/ /'kas ɛl/ /'kas ɛl/
/'di zəl/ /'dɪ: zɛl/ /'dɪ: sɛl/
/'ʰwɪs əl/ /'ʰwɪ: zɛl/ /'wɪ:s ɛl/
/'pʌz əl/ /'pas ɛl/ /'paz ɛl/

The similarity between the two speakers’ pronunciation is seen in how the foreign schwa often
becomes a /ɔ/ if it occurs after /p/, /b/, and /f/ (with 9 instances from speaker #1 and 12
instances from speaker #2). Also, the foreign schwa is generally appropriated as /ɛ/ if it occurs
after /k/, /g/, /s/, and /z/, with a slight variation from speaker #1 if it occurs after /v/.
4. SUMMARY OF DATA AND ANALYSIS
Table 4.1 summarises the patterns of correspondences:
Table 4.1 Summary of Vowel Correspondences
Preceding Ilokano Cebuano Tagalog Common among the 3 PLs
Consonant
/p/ ə, ɔ ɔ, ɒ ɔ ɔ
/b/ ə, ɔ ɔ, ɒ ɔ ɔ
/k/ ɜ, ɛ, ə ɛ ɛ ɛ
/g/ ɜ, ɛ, ə ɛ ɛ ɛ
/f/ ə, ɔ ɔ, ɜ, ə, ʊ ə, ɔ ə, ɔ
/v/ ə ɛ, ɜ ɛ, ɜ None
/s/ ə, ɜ ɛ ɛ None
/z/ ɜ ɛ ɛ None

From this table, we can say that the schwa from loanwords does indeed appear as a schwa in
Ilokano (with the exception of the /z/ conditioning environment), although there are varieties
such as /ɔ/ which appear after /p/, /b/, and /f/, and /ɛ/ or /ɜ/ after /k/, /g/, and /s/. The
/ɔ/ and /ɛ/ trends are also generally and constantly seen in the Cebuano and Tagalog
counterparts.

The author suggests that there is a possibility of the place of articulation of the preceding
consonants which influences the corresponding vowel in terms of the position of the tongue in
an opposite manner—that is, the bilabial/labiodental places of articulation of /p/, /b/, and /f/
result in vowels such as /ɔ/ which are articulated with a ‘back position’ of the tongue, while /k/,
/g/, and /s/ which are articulated at the latter parts of the oral cavity result in vowels such as
/ɛ/ which are articulated with a ‘front-to-central position’ of the tongue; however, at this
moment, it is difficult to determine what sets /v/ and /z/ apart from the rest of the preceding
consonants.

5. INFLUENCE OF ORTHOGRAPHY ON PHONEME ADAPTATIONS

Mentioned in section 1 was an additional wordlist which showed orthographic representations of
English loanwords rather than pictures as eliciting material. The table below shows a summary of
these four loanwords and their corresponding vowel articulations in Ilokano, Cebuano, and
Tagalog:
Table 5.1 Orthographic Elicitation of 4 English Loanwords and their Vowel Correspondences
Word Ilokano Vowel/s Cebuano Vowel/s Tagalog Vowel/s
Babel ɛ ɛ, ɨ ɛ
/ˈbej bəl, ˈbæb əl/
barbell5 ɜ, ɛ ɛ ɜ, ɛ
/ˈbɑr bəl/
label ə, ɛ ɜ, ɛ ɛ
/ˈlej bəl/
rebel (n.) ɛ ɛ, ɨ ɛ
/n., ˈrɛb əl/

Although the phonetic transcriptions of these loanwords include the same word-final
environment as the four –ble words in the previous wordlist (bubble, available, table, and vegetable),
there is a sharp contrast between the expected corresponding vowel phoneme /ɔ/ and the
resultant vowels /ɛ/, /ɜ/, /ə/, and /ɨ/. This suggests a similar case to that of Vendelin &
Peperkamp’s (2006) study regarding the influence of orthography on loanword adaptations. To
quote, results show that “…the adaptations in the mixed condition6 follow the between-language
grapheme-to-morpheme strategy more often than the adaptations in the oral condition.” (p.
1002). It is important to note, therefore, that this implies that a separate set of phoneme-
adaptation patterns have to be taken into account when orthographic representations are
considered alongside oral conditions, and will affect the native speakers’ pronunciations of
loanwords.

5
Its American English spelling barbel was shown in the eliciting material to avoid confusion for the speakers.
6
That is, including the orthographic representation.
References
Almeida, V. R., & Esteban, A. B. (n.d.). Some remarks on Ilokano vowels and accent/stress.
Unpublished manuscript. Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines.
Conant, C. E. (1912). The pepet law in Philippine languages. Journal of the American Oriental Society,
32, 246-279.
Guo, L. (2001, May). Mandarin loanword phonology and optimality theory: Evidence from
transliterated American state names and typhoon names. Paper presented at The
Seventh International Symposium on Chinese Phonology, Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved from
http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/Y99-1021
Hyman, L. M. (1970). The role of borrowing in the justification of phonological grammars.
Studies in African Linguistics 1, 1–48.
Ito, C., Yoonjung K., & Kenstowicz, M. (2006). The adaptation of Japanese loanwords into
Korean. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 52, 65–104.
Kenstowicz, M. (2005). The phonetics and phonology of loanword adaptation. In S.-J. Rhee
(Ed.), Proceedings of ECKL 1: Proceedings of 1st European Conference on Korean Linguistics (pp.
17–32). Seoul: Hankook Publishing Co.
LaCharité, D. & Paradis, C. (2003, May). Category preservation and proximity versus phonetic
approximation in loanword adaptation. Retrieved from
https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/iverson/www/lacharitecatpres.pdf
Lin, Y. H. (2008). Variable vowel adaptation in Standard Mandarin loanwords. Journal of East
Asian Linguistics, 17, 363–380.
Nolasco, R., & Tangco, R. (2002). Taglish verbs: How English loanwords make it into Philippine
languages.
Peperkamp, S. (2005). A psycholinguistic theory of loanword adaptation. Proceedings
of the Annual Meeting, Berkeley Linguistics Society, 30, 341–352.
Peperkamp, S., & Dupoux, E. (2003). Reinterpreting loanword adaptations: The role of
perception. In M. J. Solé, D. Recasens & J. Romero (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th
International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 367–370). Barcelona: Causal Productions.
Reid, L. A. (2005). A cross-generational view of contact-related phenomena in a Philippine
language: Phonology. In S. Quakenbush & D. Dayag (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language
Education in the Philippines and Beyond: Festschrift in honor of Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista. Manila:
Linguistic Society of the Philippines and the Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Rubino, C. R. G. (1998). Ilocano: Ilocano-English, English-Ilocano: Dictionary and phrasebook. New
York, USA: Hippocrene Books.
Silverman, D. (1992). Multiple scansions in loanword phonology: Evidence from Cantonese.
Phonology 9, 289–328.
Smith, J. L. (2005). Loan phonology is not all perception: Evidence from Japanese loan doublets.
In T. J. Vance & K. A. Jones (Eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 14, 63–74. Palo Alto:
CLSI.
Smith, J. L. (2005). Modeling loanword adaptation: Evidence from Japanese. Paper presented at
The International Conference on East Asian Linguistics, University of Toronto, Canada.
Vendelin, I., & Peperkamp, S. (2006). The influence of orthography on loanword adaptations.
Lingua, 116, 996-1007.
Yip, M. (1993). Cantonese loanword phonology and optimality theory. Journal of East
Asian Linguistics, 2, 261-291.