Engl 2212: LANGUAGE PROGRAM AND POLICIES IN MULTILINGUAL SOCIETIES

2nd Semester, A.Y 2023-2024

NAME:Shaira May C. Pajaganas YR.&SEC:BSED 2A ENGLISH Date: April 1, 2024 Score:

Response Paper #1
The Current Linguistic Situation of the Philippines by Marlon “Al” Mandane

Introduction:

In the famous Filipino proverb, “Ang hindi marunong magmahal sa sariling wika, masahol pa sa hayop at
malansang isda,” it is clear that language has a profound impact on our identity and sense of belonging. It
is within this context that we delve into the intricate world of the Philippines’ linguistic landscape as
presented by Marlon “Al” Mandane in his piece “The Current Linguistic Situation of the Philippines”.

This response paper aims to provide a new viewpoint on Mandane’s arguments by closely analyzing the
intricate relationship between language, personal and national identity, and political dynamics in the
Philippines. Its aims to shed light on the implications of the country’s linguistic policies, the role of
language in shaping national identity, and the potential paths towards a more inclusive and diverse
linguistic future. As the saying goes, “Wika nga’y hindi lamang salita, ito’y simbolo ng ating kultura.”
Language is not just words, it is a symbol of our culture.

Body:
Marlon “Al” Mandane’s piece, “The Current Linguistic Situation of the Philippines”, presents a
comprehensive exploration of the linguistic landscape of the Philippines, shedding light on the complex
interplay between language, identity, and politics in the country. It also highlights the linguistic diversity of
the Philippines, with over 185 languages, primarily belonging to the Austronesian family. In the article,
Mandane argues that the Philippines’ language policies, particularly the prioritization of our Filipino
language (essentially a variant of Tagalog) and English have led to the marginalization of the country’s
numerous other languages (dialects). This has resulted in a form of linguisticide, where non-Tagalog
languages are subconsciously ostracized, and their speakers are made to feel inferior or less Filipino. He
challenges the idea that being a true Filipino citizen is tied to speaking the Filipino language. This
viewpoint is often associated with nationalistic perspectives suggesting that a person’s loyalty or sense of
belonging to a country is determined by their ability to speak the national language. Mandane argues that
this is a flawed conclusion as it overlooks the rich linguistic diversity of the Philippines (different dialects)
and as we all know that speakers of other local languages are less Filipino. This perspective can lead to
the marginalization of non-Tagalog languages and their speakers, undermining the cultural diversity that
characterizes the Philippines.

I find Mandane’s arguments compelling and largely agree with his observations. The imposition of a
national language often leads to the marginalization of other languages, particularly in a country as
linguistically diverse as the Philippines. This situation is not unique to the Philippines but is a common
phenomenon in many multilingual countries where a single language is elevated to the status of a
national language. The consequence is often the gradual erosion of linguistic diversity and the loss of
cultural heritage that each language carries leaving it as a memory of yesterday.

Reflecting on my own experiences, I can see parallels in other contexts where a dominant language
overshadows other languages, leading to a loss of cultural diversity and richness. For instance, the global
dominance of English often leads to the neglect of local languages, especially in education and official
communication. This can result in younger generations losing touch with their linguistic heritage.

In relation to other readings, Mandane’s arguments echo those things found in linguistic anthropology and
sociolinguistics, which emphasize the importance of language diversity and the role of language in
shaping cultural identity. His criticism of the nationalistic perspective on language which promotes a
single dominant language is also in line with those postcolonial theories. Those theories that often oppose
the practice of imposing a dominant language or culture on groups that have been historically
marginalized or underrepresented. Mandane’s critique of the educational system also resonates with my
concerns about language pedagogy or language instruction. The emphasis on Tagalog-based Filipino
and English neglects the linguistic rights of non-Tagalog speakers and hinders their educational
development. As future educators, it is our responsibility to create inclusive learning environments that
validate students’ linguistic backgrounds and promote multilingualism.

The persuasive power of Mandane’s article lies in its detailed examination of the Philippine context, its
use of compelling examples, and its clear and passionate argumentation. However, it might be seen as
less persuasive by those who hold a different view of nationalism and language, particularly those who
believe in the unifying power of a national language. Nonetheless, Mandane’s article provides a valuable
contribution to the ongoing discourse on language policies and their impact on cultural diversity. So, the
article inspires me to advocate For policy changes that promote linguistic diversity and social justice. By
raising awareness and mobilizing support, educators can contribute to the revitalization of minority
languages and the promotion of inclusive language policies. I am now committed to advocating for
curriculum reforms that reflect the linguistic diversity of our future students and empower them to embrace
their cultural heritage. I am not excluding the point of learning a second language but prioritizing our
native language making it as a foundation if we want them to learn the national language. We need to
have a good foundation and embrace our linguistic heritage as it will serve as our identity

Conclusion:
In exploring the complex relationship between language, identity, and politics in the Philippines, Marlon
“Al” Mandane’s analysis sheds light on the marginalization of non-Tagalog languages and the erosion of
linguistic diversity. It is crucial to recognize the value of linguistic diversity and promote inclusive language
policies that celebrate the cultural richness of the Philippines. As the saying goes, “Ang bawat wika ay
may kani-kaniyang ganda” (Every language has its own beauty). By embracing and valuing the different
languages spoken in the country, we can foster a greater sense of unity in diversity. Moving forward, it is
important for educators and policymakers to advocate for curriculum reforms that reflect the linguistic
diversity of students. This includes promoting multilingualism in education and creating inclusive learning
environments that validate students’ linguistic backgrounds. By doing so, we can empower individuals
especially the younger generations to embrace their cultural heritage and foster a greater sense of
belonging.

As we conclude, let us keep in mind that language is not just words, but a symbol of our culture and
identity. By celebrating and preserving the richness of the Philippines’ linguistic tapestry, we can create a
more inclusive society that respects and appreciates the contributions of each language. Let us strive for
linguistic justice, where every language is given the recognition and respect it deserves.