Talk:Spanish language in the Philippines/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

I inquired last year about the Spanish language program at the University of Santo Tomas during enrollment, and they told me that since English was more important, there is no Spanish language course offered, nor is it required. The person who posted that info over here must have been a UST student from the past, in the past maybe it was required, now it's no longer a requirement in ANY UNIVERSITY IN THE PHILIPPINES.

They are required for specific majors at the Faculty of Arts and Letters, perhaps BS tourism too. --Howard the Duck 08:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I am a 2nd year student from the University of Santo Tomas. SPANISH is still a required subject in several colleges in UST such as the Faculty of Arts and Letters, Institute of Tourism and Hospitality Management, College of Science, BS Pharmacy, BM in Voice etc. Spanish is not required anymore in the College of Nursing, Architecture, Fine Arts and design, accountany, engineering etc.

---

Well thank you for clearing that up, I guess that stupid lady who I was registering with just had crab mentality, because when she found out I spoke Spanish, she said "Oh, we here at University of Santo Tomas like to focus on English, Spanish is not important!" Envidiosa just because another Filipino speaks Spanish and she was jealous, typical Filipino crab mentality behaviours... But then again, right before I registered, she was speaking to this Fil-Aussie who was speaking with a perfect Australian accent, so my American accent wasn't good enough for her colonial mentality-affected mind, sheesh. You'd expect a prestigious university like UST to have staff that would be better educated than that, but I guess you shouldn't expect too much from people in the Philippines anyway or you'll just be disappointed all the time, hehe, which many often are. Anyway I was turned off the by the school at that instant, and I just registered at De La Salle instead, so ha.

Hi! I agree with your post, that Filipinos themselves cannot see the significance of culture and reviving it. I am the guy who wrote something on the top most discussion. I hope you could read it. Thanks. If you have comments, you may reach me at tengosueno_miguel@hotmail.com. I am willing to help in any possible way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.76.219.235 (talk) 23:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

About False Friends

I think you Filipinos need to read this article to understand why certain Spanish words and the way they've changed in the Philippines does not necessarily mean that it's incorrect or a "false friend":

Forty-Fourth Edition - Neutral Spanish - What is it?

Neutral Spanish is not new. It is a recurring theme, one that has been brought front and center recently by the Internet and global communications. Translation services are offering it and clients are requesting it. But what is “Neutral Spanish”? I think most will agree that “Neutral Spanish” is not a language. In this writer’s opinion, it is the name given to the process that translators go through to select the term or terms best suited to a multinational and multicultural target audience.

Spanish, like any other widely spoken language, is not “vanilla” or standard. Each place, region, country, community where Spanish is spoken has added its own flavor to the language - they have adopted different words, grammatical constructs and distinct accents. For example, when Argentines dive into a swimming pool, they dive into a “pileta”. However, in Uruguay, where swimming pool is “piscina”, they would be jumping head-first into the “kitchen sink” (Ouch!). (Something you definitely need to keep in mind if you are in the resort or swimming pool business.) On the other hand, “swimming pool” in Mexico is “alberca”, which means “reservoir” in Spain, a “sink” (for washing clothes) in Colombia and a “trough” (comedero) in Bolivia and Perú. OK, you get the idea...

Now let's assume that we are working on a translation project that includes the term “swimming pool”, and our target audience is all the Spanish speaking population of the world. According to the rules, we can only select one term for “swimming pool” and our choices are: “pileta”, “piscina” and “alberca”. Which one would make our translation more “neutral”? I would select “piscina”. But, is this the right choice?

A quick check in Google (google.es) reveals the following (What a marvelous tool, the Internet!):

   * “Piscina” gets 3,570,000 hits, including some hits to U.S. sites referring to “swimming pool safety”.
   * “Pileta” gets only 108,000 hits, including some where the meaning is “kitchen sink” or “bathroom sink”.
   * “Alberca” gets 235,000 hits, including some hits on sites in Spain, where the meaning is not “swimming pool”.

No, we don't suggest that you select “neutral” terms in Spanish by consulting Google. This method was only used for purposes of illustration for this newsletter. The decision should be based on your best assessment of which term is most appropriate for the target audience, based on your experience and after careful research. The operative word is “best assessment”, since, as far as I know, there is not a dictionary for “Neutral Spanish”.

Technical text tends to be more neutral and many terms are shared by Spanish speakers worldwide. For example, “reflectómetro de dominio frecuencial” (frequency-domain reflectometer) will be understood by Spanish-speaking professionals everywhere with knowledge of the subject. The same applies to “microquímica” (microchemistry), “MRI (imágenes por resonancia magnética)” (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) and other such terms. Of course, there are exceptions. For example, a computer is “una computadora” in Latin America, but “un ordenador” in Spain. Therefore, to keep it “neutral” we suggest using “equipo”, “equipo informático”, or another “neutral” term that properly conveys the intended meaning. Avoid using “computadora” or “ordenador”.

If you are dealing with the spoken language, as in the case of an interpreter, in addition to choice of words, you need to go through the process of selecting the appropriate accent (inflection, tone, rhythm) for your target audience. I recently read an article in the Washington Post Telemundo, a U.S. Spanish-language television network, and how they have been able to reduce the significant competitive edge of their major competitor, Univision, who is the leading Spanish-language television network in the U.S. Among other changes, Telemundo decided to train the actors of their telenovelas (prime time soap operas) to speak like Mexicans, specifically, like Mexican television news anchors. Anyone aspiring to become an actor in a Telemundo telenovela must be able to speak in a well-paced, accent free rhythm, whether they are originally from Cuba, Argentina, Colombia, Venezuela, Perú or Chile. Univision also encourages accent-free Spanish among its actors, but it does not enforce it like Telemundo does. And another interesting fact: Both presidential campaigns in the recent elections used “neutralized” Spanish in their Spanish-language television ads targeting Hispanic voters.

According to Telemundo, this “neutralized” Spanish is the middle ground between Colombian Spanish, that they consider too fast and terse, and some Caribbean accents that are, in their opinion, too slow and imprecise. For Telemundo executives, Mexican Spanish is “the broadest-appeal, easiest-to-understand Spanish”. Needless to say, not everyone agrees, particularly Colombian television and cultural critics. Many Colombians believe that their version of Spanish is the purest spoken. But the article also mentions that about eighty percent of Telemundo's potential audience -- households whose viewing habits are monitored by Nielsen -- is Mexican. Could it be that Telemundo is merely providing good customer service and localizing their message to the requirements of their largest audience? The bottom line is that Telemundo is doing better against their major competitor, so they must be doing something right.

The “neutralization” process should also include paying attention to variations in grammatical constructs, such as pronoun to verb correspondences. An example, is the “voseo” that consists in the use of the pronoun “vos” instead of “tú”, followed by the corresponding form of the verb - “vos sabés” instead of “tú sabes” (you know). The “voseo” is common in Argentina, but used also in other Latin American countries. It should not be confused with “Vosotros sabéis”, the form used in Spain, but not in Latin America. Other examples are “tú sabés” (instead of “tú sabes”) used in Uruguay, for instance; and forms like “tú tenís” (you have) – a variation on “vosotros tenéis” and “tú tienes” – used in Chile. “Neutral Spanish” uses “ustedes” instead of “vosotros” for the second person plural and “usted” for the second person singular. Therefore “you know” (where “you” is singular) is “usted sabe” and the plural form is “ustedes saben”.

A complete analysis of the Spanish language is most definitely beyond the scope of this newsletter, so I will leave it at this. Hopefully, I have succeeded in explaining why “Neutral Spanish” does not consist in creating a new language, or coining new terms, but in carefully selecting words that will convey your message so it will be understood, to varying degrees, by most of your targeted audience and, hopefully, misunderstood by none.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.57.39.12 (talk) 20:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

This makes no sense, first of all Colombian Spanish is no more “neutral” than any other type of Spanish, Colombians just like to spread that myth to make them look better abroad, but the truth is their accent’s certainly are not neutral. Anybody can speak neutral Spanish if they wanted to, standard Spanish is not reserved for a certain country, standard Spanish is taught in ever Spanish speaking country, just like standard English is taught in every English speaking country, it is up to the speak to speak properly and use a standardized form of the language, usually well educated people speak from any Spanish speaking country with speak “standard Spanish” As for vosotros, it is standard in Spain, and well it’s called Spanish for a reason, the language does originate in Spain, so just like English originated in English, I would safely be the most “proper” form of the language is spoken there, especially in Salamanca, where Spanish originated, not in Colombia, and definitely not in Mexico. Oh and one more thing, you need work on your English, this is not a “newsletter” it’s an encyclopedia entry.

Debate on the History of the Spanish language in the Philippines

Wow, very well said. I'm a mailing list called Hispanofilipino on YahooGroups. One of the people there is Guillermo Gómez y Rivera, a Filipino who has been claiming for so long basically everything the opposite of you said and has a bunch of followers. He could really see what you have written. --Chris 18:22, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm sure that Spanish always was a minority language in the Philippines, and that by the time it ceased to have any official status, the damage was already done.

However, while there are some similarities between East Timor and the Philippines, it's wrong to say that all of those who speak Portuguese in East Timor are elderly. I know many Indonesian-educated East Timorese who can't, but I know many who can. While Tetum is not a Portuguese creole, it has continued to derive vocabulary from Portuguese, which can be seen in newspapers like this one The Philippines' links with the Spanish-speaking world were severed a century ago, East Timor's links with the Portuguese-speaking one have remained strong, with many living and studying in Portugal, and many Brazilians living and working in East Timor itself. Sure, English is important, but East Timor's leaders don't want Tetum to be turned into its "Little Brown Brother", just as Tagalog was in the Philippines. [1] Britain did the same in Malta, abolishing Italian, promoting Maltese and English as more 'relevant' and 'practical', although Malta's proximity to Italy has meant that it is still widely spoken.

As regards the importance of Chinese to the Philippines, how many Filipinos (as opposed to ethnic Chinese) are doing business with China and Taiwan in Chinese? About the same as the number of indigenous Malays, Indonesians, and East Timorese. In short, not many - it's most likely ethnic Chinese. Given the number of Filipinos working in the Middle East, perhaps they should be teaching more Arabic, too. Whatever languages the Filipinos speak (the more, the better) I hope it will be to help them trade with the rest of the world, not to work for other people in other countries. Quiensabe 01:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

---

:From: Guillermo Gomez-Rivera <ggrhisfil@yahoo.com>

Don Luciano era el abogado de los acusados por libelo a raíz del editorial "Aves de Rapiña" y es de una credulidad, en este caso, irrefutable. Era miembro del Katipunan. Odiaba a los españoles en Filipinas como nadie. Se jactaba de haber matado a frailes españoles durante la revolución. Era masón de alto grado. Fue miembro de la Convención Constituyente de Malolos que escribió la Constitutción Filipina de Malolos.

Odiaba a los invasores WASP usenses, "Kano" según él. En sus últimos años fue colaborador de NUEVA ERA semanario que actualmente tiene a este servidor como su Director (Editor in chief).

Don Luciano de la Rosa tenía un amigo íntimo que se llamaba Sr. Renato Constantino, padre del historiador izquierdista Renato Constantino author del "A past revisited".

El viejo Renato Constantino era otro escritor filipino que colaboraba en NUEVA ERA, publicación fundada por D. Emilio Ynciong, oriundo de Lipá Batangas, y todos hablaban español como su primera lengua. El tagalo era su segunda lengua de hecho. La única hija de D. Emilio, Doña Fe, habla español porque era el idioma de su hogar. Doña Fe, de casi 80 años de edad ya, es la actual publicista de NUEVA ERA.

Todos estos filipinos que un servidor conoció de joven y que aun conoce, desde 40 años atras, han estado de acuerdo con el dato dado por D. Luciano de la Rosa, como censor que era del Katipunan, de que era el 70% de los filipinos los que tenían el español como su segunda lengua.

Estaba igualmente de acuerdo con esa cifra del "70%" el director de NUEVA ERA en aquel tiempo, el ex-jesuita Joaquín Lim Jaramillo de Zamboanga, gran gramaturgo del idioma español y gran patriota filipino.

También estaban de acuerdo con el hecho de que habían muchísimos filipinos que tenían el idioma como su lengua materna, su primera lengua. Pero no estaban de acuerdo con el dato dado por el Censo de 1905 deque tan solamente eran el 10% de los filipinos los que tuvieron al idioma español como su primera lengua, es decir, lengua materna.

Pensaban que eran más del 10%, cifra regateada según ellos por los "Kanó" o los WASP usenses. De hecho, el que ahora es director de la AECI ha hecho sus investigaciones y concluye que eran el 14% de los filipinos los que tenían al español como su segunda lengua.

Lo que el autor de esa "refutación" no menciona es EL GENOCIDIO de los filipinos de hablahispana que conformaban la República Filipina, la primera, fundada en 1896 cuya lengua oficial era primariamente el español. Tampoco menciona EL OTRO GENOCIDIO que cometieron los "liberadores de Filipinas" en 1944 y 1945. Tampoco menciona la propaganda de mentiras que es ahora la "historia filipina" que la UP, la TV "K" y el DECS enseñan a la incauta juventud filipina para entorpecerles y hacerlos sonar como a uno que acaba de mostrar su "mis-education" en este foro..

El mismo autor de esa refutación fallida no menciona los datos autorizadísimos de HENRY FORD sobre el español que el racista y Protestante sectario Earl Stevens lo confirma con su desdén por los chinos cristianos "con acentos españoles".

En resumidas cuentas, la refutación que se quiere hacer del artículo que escribimos a base de fuentes irrefutables resulta ser un vano intento. La verdad con la lógica es la que ha de prevalecer a la larga. Saludos y gracias. GUILLERMO GOMEZ RIVERA

ENGLISH What I can say about the refutation written by, I dont know who, is that it is terribly flawed. It is flawed because the source that gave the data about 70% of Filipinos having Spanish as their second language, as a group that is separate from those 10% or 14% that had it as their first or primary language or mother tongue, is PRIMARY therfore irrefutable. And that data was even concurred with by a WASP invadr like Dean C. Worcester in a courtroom presided by an american judge who, in 1908, was the U.S. WASP Vice Governor General of the Philippines.

To compare the situation of the Spanish language in Filipinas vis-a-vis Spain is to compare apples with oranges. Even if both countries were ruled by Spain, situations radically differ in the case of language.

And it is not true that all government officials during the Spanish times, as well as in the realm of the Primera República filipina, and even during the early years of American occupation, were Spaniards from Madrid who made Spanish official. This is balderdash.

The refutation does not give alternative sources, document footnotes, to the ones given such as the FORD REPORT of 1916 when the Spanish language in the Philippines should have been yanked out by then.

But it just could not be yanked out yet. there had to be a second GENOCIDE in 1944-45 and an entir "educational system" campaigning so brazenly, so undemocratically, so unfairly, to prohibit children from speaking Spanish with fines and even corporal punishments. The undersigned was one of the victims of this monstrous U.S. WASP policy over the Filipino people who were at first threatened, then cajoled, then fooled to accept the mangled "Filipino History" being taught by the UP history department, the "K" TV and the DECS as well as the CHED.

In the end, we are glad that there is that intent to refute the data and the sources of that article THE TRUTH ABOUT SPANISH IN THE PHILIPPINES, a translation from "ESTADISTICAS: EL IDIOMA ESPAÑOL EN FILIPINAS".

---

I'd like to add my commentary on why the Spanish language (and culture) never really had a grip on the Philippines.

Race Mixing and Westernization in Latin America and the Philippines

In his book Race and Ethnicity, Belgian sociologist Pierre van den Berghe compares the impact of European colonization on Africa and the Americas. While the former largely retained its original character despite being under European rule, the latter ended up with a predominantly Western culture. As well, race mixing was widespread in the New World but occurred on a much smaller scale in Africa, with the exception of South Africa's Cape Province. The amount of acculturation and miscegenation moreover did not depend on whether the European power in question took an "assimilationist" approach, as France, Spain and Portugal did, or a "racialist" one, as did Britain and the Netherlands. At the end of the day, the Americas are a "cultural extension of Europe," whereas Africa is not.

The same observation can be made of Latin America (1) and the Philippines. Though both were under Spain's control for roughly three centuries, Latin America essentially adopted a Western (Iberian) culture as a result of colonization while the Philippines remained more or less as it had been before the conquest. Similarly, miscegenation between the conquered and conquerors took place extensively in the former region but was fairly negligible in the latter. To paraphrase van den Berghe, Latin America is a cultural extension of Spain; the Philippines is not.

This is not to say that the Philippines was not influenced by three hundred years of Spanish rule. Among Spain's legacies to the islands were Castilian2 loan words to the local languages, Spanish personal names of the inhabitants, and perhaps most importantly, Roman Catholicism, today the religion of over 80% of Filipinos. (When it comes to being good Catholics, the Filipinos may have beaten their former colonial masters and the latter's overseas descendants at their own game. Several years ago the international newswires reported on Father Ener Glotario, a priest in Barranquilla, Colombia who refused to give communion to scantily clad female parishioners. I couldn't help thinking how much easier Father Glotario's life would have been if he were stationed in the Philippines, where the women, unlike their Western sisters, generally eschew miniskirts, midriff-baring tops and short shorts.) Yet the Philippines' status as an Asian country is undisputed not only geographically but also culturally.

In fact, the example of the Philippines provides a powerful counterweight to claims by left- and right-wing ideologues alike that Latin America is not Western and that its "soul" is Indian rather than European. If such were the case, the counter argument might go, why did the region not end up like the Philippines, whose people were conquered by Spain but nonetheless kept their own languages and cultural traditions?

One of the most striking differences between Latin America and the Philippines today lies in the racial composition of their inhabitants. Mestizos (3) form the bulk of Latin America's population. By contrast, most Filipinos are of indigenous Malay stock, and individuals of mixed Spanish-Malay descent are relatively rare.

What accounted for the low rate of miscegenation between Spaniards and natives in the Philippines? Certainly not a lack of desire by either party. Even clerics succumbed. Spanish chronicler Sinibaldo de Mas attempted to explain why so many Spanish priests in the Philippines broke their vows of celibacy: "The offense is most excusable, especially in young and healthy men placed in the torrid zone... The garb of the native women is very seductive; and the girls, far from being unattainable, consider themselves lucky to attract the attention of the curate, and their mother, father, and relatives share in that sentiment. What virtue and stoicism does not the friar need to possess!" (The good de Mas is perhaps a little too quick to blame the "girls" and their attire for his compatriots' lust. More likely, the women's eagerness to couple with curates stemmed from the higher social status that mixed race children in colonial -- and according to some sources, modern -- Philippines enjoyed compared to their unmixed native counterparts. In addition, I suspect Spanish priests' fall into temptation was due less to the native women's "garb" than to the fact that, as Pierre van den Berghe writes in his book Human Family Systems: An Evolutionary View, "celibacy, however saintly, goes against most people's grain.")

The main reason for the dearth of Spanish-Filipino mestizos was that few Spaniards ventured to the Philippines. For one, the voyage from Spain to the islands was considerably long. The Philippines in addition lacked natural resources like gold and silver that the Americas had and that might have convinced large numbers of Spaniards to migrate there (indeed, at one point the scarcity of potential riches led Spain to consider abandoning the islands). According to de Mas, in some Philippine villages the friar and/or the mayor were the only white residents.

Whatever the cause, the low incidence of race mixing in the Philippines effectively stopped that country from going down the path of Hispanicization. The offspring of Spanish men and Filipino women (4) may have adopted the culture of their fathers -- some mixed race families in the Philippines still speak Spanish among themselves, for instance -- but ultimately there were simply not enough Spanish mestizos in the country to have much of an effect on Philippine culture as a whole. Mestizos in Latin America conversely came to constitute the largest racial category in the region, so as a group they managed to maintain and promote the Spanish language and culture.

One giveaway to Latin America's "Westernness" is the fact that the majority of the population speaks Spanish, not an indigenous language or even a Creole, as their mother tongue. On the other hand, it has been estimated that even at the height of Spanish domination only 10% of Filipinos were able to speak the language of their masters, and undoubtedly fewer still learned it as a mother tongue. And while the Americans who took over the islands in 1898 were much more successful in teaching their Filipino subjects English than the Spaniards were in teaching their language, the reality is that English in the Philippines is a lingua franca and an administrative medium rather than a mother tongue. Neither the Americans nor the Spaniards managed to eradicate the islands' Asian character.

Going back to van den Berghe's argument, the example of the Philippines and Latin America shows that regions colonized by the same power may nevertheless turn out quite differently. It also shows how miscegenation can change the course of history. Despite Spain's assimilationist approach and occasional "successes" in the Philippines (such as religious conversion), the Spaniards failed to acculturate the islands to any significant degree. Spain's conquest of Latin America on the other hand transformed that region into a part of the Western world. As van den Berghe explains with regard to Africa and the Americas, differences in the Philippines and Latin America themselves rather than racial attitudes on the part of the colonizer were responsible for the different outcomes of European rule in the two regions.

(1) For the purpose of this essay, Latin America will refer only to the Spanish-speaking part of the region. (2) The term "Castilian" refers to the official language of Spain (as opposed to regional dialects and languages like Galician and Catalan). (3) Though the term "mestizo" literally means "mixed" in Spanish, for the purpose of this essay the term will refer to individuals of mixed Spanish and Native American descent in the Latin American context and to those of mixed Spanish and Filipino Malay origin in the Philippines. (4) The opposite combination was virtually non-existent, as even fewer Spanish women than men traveled to the islands.

Posted by User:216.123.186.177

>>I should call this PLAGIARISM, this is NOT your work User:216.186.177, how can it be your commentary?

I just want to add that I did not plagiarize the essay "Race Mixing and Westernization in Latin America and the Philippines." Please contact me directly if you wish at msemilia68@yahoo.ca if you wish to ask me any questions about it.

Emilia

Contribute,reword,

Please feel free to contribute. Plagiarism is when you copy verbatim, don't qoute sources/references and pass it on as your own work. Most contributers here reword. Plus , editors normally give the source of info at the external links or external sources section. Don't be so quick to accuse. Most authors can't claim original work because their work/articles in turn gets re-edited almost everyday.

Debate summary

This debate is timely and needed. I hope a final, authoritative and informative conclusion can be established that everyone can agree to. But just to clarify, everyone is free to edit a 100 times or more as long as the changes are factual and devoid of profane language, etc.. For reference I just would like to summarize the above discussion.

The major factor for the failure of the establishment of Spanish as a language is demographics. In the case of Latin America, there was a lot more interbreeding with the Spanish, hence the gradual embedding of the Spanish language. This was not the case with the Philippines. There were very few Spaniards.

(My own addition) The widely held view, however is that the Spanish authorities repressed its use, which is not the main reason.

About Rizal

Jose Rizal wrote in Spanish because that was the standard formal language for Filipinos then then.

Just as English is Today. He would have written in English if that was the standard.

(This not anymore related to language , it should go on another wiki page). True he wanted the Philippines to be a Spanish province. It was neglected. I read somewhere that Mexicans(New Spain) mestizos, pretending to be Spaniards were one of the oppressors. However , I have no proof of this.　The issue for Rizal was that Filipinos were 'indios', second class citizens and had less rights . Filipinos could not aspire to become priests (research Gomburza). Becoming a full pledge province allowed equal representation and rights. (If this Rizal discussion gets longer , could we transfer to a more appropriate page like History of the Philippines or Jose Rizal, etc.? )--Jondel 04:38, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Philippine-Mexican Words (For reference only)

Some Philippine words which are nahuatl (Mexican)(for future reference): Tiannge, Palengke

(see Palenque) -- Error 23:44, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

, Zapote (chico in my hometown Roxas City) Some Philippine words which may be nahuatl (Mexican)(need investigation): balasar(to shuffle) Nanay(nantle), Tatay(tatle).--Jondel 00:28, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From [2] : chongo (mono; monkey), tiange (mercado; market), mani (cacahuete; peanut), carajay (sarten; frying pan), bejuco (rattan), mecatillo (cuerda; string); action words or verbs like botar (tirar; to throw away), jalar (estirar; to pull), fregar (enjuagar; to rinse), caminar (andar; to walk). The Zamboangueño’s favorite palabrota or expletive “chinga” is also of South American origin. --Jondel 02:47, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

uso diario. The are many Latin American words in Philippine Spanish, mostly from Mexico, since Manila was supplied from the port of Acapulco. Still surviving are zacate `grass, lawn, césped,' petate `rustic cot,' changue [tiangue] `market,' chili `hot pepper,' camote `yam, sweet potato,' chongo [chango] `monkey,' palenque `market,' sayote [chayote] small green squash.' To

In fact, neither "fregar" nor "caminar" is of Amerindian origin. Both have Latin roots (though "caminar" ultimately has a Celtic root), and Italian has similar words, "fregare" and "camminare" respectively. I think the influence of Amerindian culture, or cultures, on Mexico and on Latin America as a whole has been overestimated. - Emilia

Just for filing and future wiki articles

The Instituto Cervantes is a public, non-profit institution founded by the Spanish government in 1991 to promote and teach the Spanish language and spread the culture of Spanishspeaking countries. Established in the Philippines in 1993, it strives to provide Filipinos with an understanding of Spanish culture and a broader view of the Hispanic world.

Needs a lead

This article needs a lead. Just a short intro to set up context to understand it.

I will be placing the following intor. Please feel free (anybody)to improve on it:

Spanish is a languaguage of historical and cultural significance. It is deemed as the language of the elite. It used to be a an official language until 1987. Courts of law still recognize documents written in Spanish.

According to the 1990 census, there are 2,658 Spanish speakers and 292,630 creole (Chavacano ) speakers in the Philippines. The Philippines was a Spanish colony for more than 300 years (1565-1898). There are thousands of Spanish worlds in all dialects and around 13 million Spanish documents in the archives. It used to be a an official language until 1987. Courts of law still recognize documents written in Spanish.

false friends

For addition--Jondel 09:39, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

• Maldita
• Bruha
• bomba
• sige
• delikado

Removed

||Donde andas?||Chabacano||where are you going?||andar||to go, to walk

¿Dónde andas? is standard Spanish for "Where are you know?". Is it really a false friend?

Please understand that we're not talking about standard Spanish but false friends, they appear Spanish but have a different meaning like embarazado which means pregnant but to an English speaker it appears to be 'embarrassed'. Also 'syempre' means 'of course' in Tagalog but 'siempre' in Spanish is 'always'. A Chabacano speaker told me that 'Donde andas?' means 'Where are you going?'. False friends are a source of confusion and potential trouble. --Jondel 01:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Jondel, I'm sorry but you obviously are not a Spanish speaker, because any Spanish speaker will tell you that "Donde andas" is a common expression to ask someone where they're going, used in the same exact manner.

Mexican Spanish

I think there is too much stress . I think it is a bit pretentious to say that Mexican Spanish had that much influence on Philippine Spanish. Only historians( and linguists) are really qualified to comment on this. First, Spanish is and was hardly spoken. Second while there were indeed Mexicans , there were not that much of them to make an influence. When the Suez Canal openned up, there were more recent arrivals from Europe. Also, when Mexico became independent, the influx of Mexicans also stopped.--Jondel 01:18, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Section on "orthography"

Better we call it "writing" rather than "orthography." (unsigned comment by 210.213.170.99)

• Orhtography, while arguably too academic af a word choice, is the most accurate. "Writing" conceivably covers a broader range of topics such as literature, spelling and orthography.--Hraefen 20:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

ado becomes aw

I know many Spanish speakers in the Philippines. Many of them say cuidaw instead of the standard cuidado. Or pescaw instead of pescado. Also Tagalog and English tends to get mixed.--Jondel 08:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually ado becomes ao or aw in practically every spoken dialect of Spanish language. You will hear few Spaniards in Madrid saying Pescado rather than Pescao. --Burgas00 19:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

más que

In Spanish, does this mean 'even if', same as in Tagalog?--Jondel 00:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Quite close. The cognate is mas que, without the diacritic.

Thanks to Chris and company at the language portals, they said it means, 'as much as' or 'even if' , Por más que viva en Japon , no puedo /puede hablar japones,' -Even if I/he she lives in Japan, I/He can't speak Japanese. etc.--Jondel 23:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Mexican or Sanskrit?

"These include nanay(nantl), tatay(tatle), bayabas [from guayaba(s), guava], abokado (avocado), papaya, zapote, etc."

In the book of Sonia Zaide, she identified that Nanay and Tatay are of Sanskrit origin and not Mexican. Any confirmations? I think it's more of Sanskrit since the Ilocano equivalent would be Nanang and Tatang. Also, other way to say nanay is "Inay" and tatay is "Itay"

Could I have more info ? What page?I have the book The Philippines 'a unique nation' by Sonia Zaide, an amazing book! If the roots are Sanskrit not Nahuatle, there would be a major overhaul here. But I would need sources for back up.--Jondel 00:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't able to take note of the page... if I'm not mistaken, it's a yellow book. I just skimmed through the book which was my classmate's book. If my memory were correct it's on the same page as the Filipinos words that has been derived from Chinese(Fukien)

By the way, there is word TATA meaning father in Estruscian and ancient Latin.--Jondel 00:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Delikado

Delikado, meaning “dangerous” or “hazardous” in Tagalog, is another false cognate.

--- No it's not. It's also used in Spanish to mean a dangerous or hazardous situation. --Angel

Maybe it is only a difference in nuance.Just to play safe, I would like add the entry below. I will also discuss this with a native. --Jondel 08:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

|- ||delikado||Tagalog||precarious||delicado||delicate(complicated, fragile) |-

--- Excuse me, I am a native Spanish speaker and I've lived in Spain since I was born, it does mean that based on the way you use it. -Angel

The 60s and 70s

During the 1960s and 1970s, Filipinos grew up with Spanish being their first and primary language, even before they learned to speak Tagalog or English.

How much of the population was this?

That is true. Spanish was prevalent in the entertainment industry during that time. You know how television, or in this case, the radio or videogames affects children.--Fifteencounts 16:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I rephrased that sentence in the article to make it clear that, just as in the case of English today, continuous exposure to English-language TV, books, and movies does not necessarily make a populace well-versed in that language.

I have family members who grew up in the 60s and 70s who learned Spanish before they learned Tagalog. IT'S TRUE, but perhaps only among certain Filipinos, I do come from a mestizo family to be honest. -Angel

Underused Tagalog equivalents

I just notice that a lot of Spanish/Spanish-derived words are used more frequently by the Filipinos rather than its Filipino equivalent.

eg. Peligro/Peligroso - Panganib/Mapanganib

   Importante - Mahalaga
   Mundo - Daigdig
   Presidente/Vice-presidente - Pangulo/Pangalawang Pangulo
   Presyo - halaga
   Silya - upuan, salumpuwit
   Kalye (calle) - daanan
   Ayuda - saklolo
   Eskwela (escuela) - Paaralan
   Estudyante - mag-aaral

and many others..

Doesn't saklolo come from the word socorrosocorrer('help'), ? Also, 'tulong' is more popular than 'ayuda'. --Jondel 08:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

question

But I'm asking why aren't Filipino people speaking Spanish as a Native language that they would speak personaly with family, friends, at work, and in public as they do in Latin America. When people suggest that the Spanish supressed the language on the Natives or whatever that dosen't make sense. They didn't do that in Latin America so why would they do it in the Phlipines. I understand the part about the US part of the story. That does not answer the question why arn't they speakning Spanish as a native tounge as it is in Latin America and English is in the US. I mean why Taglog instead of Spanish? How was this Taglog language developed? I just want to get the facts straight and now the truth not just personal opnions on history. If Spanish instead of Taglog was spoken today do you think the Philipines would be diffrent or the same?

Philippine Historical textbooks say that the Spanish wanted to keep the natives ignorant and divided. There were many regions, each having their own language and culture. When a revolution would occur in one region the Spanish authorities would use soldiers of natives of another region. User Al-Andalus says in demographic articles that there was just not enough Spaniards and that there was much more immigration of Spaniards to Latin America. Also , some historical text say that the American colonial government heavily institutionalized English in Educational systems. Ironically, during the American period, the greatest amount of Spanish literature by native Filipinos were produced at this time, since older Filipinos were educated in Spanish and experienced greater freedom of expression.--Jondel 03:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

well what you say has ben disputed.... just use your eyes and look at the article above..

The question is, was that "historical" textbook done through the American view and funding?

-- i believe it was, because in reality spanish was NOT supressed or prohibited among the natives, or else the emerging "ilustrado" class (educated natives) or mestizo and castizo class would not have learned Spanish, but they did just disproving that entire theory. I believe that was just an assumption, and spread among the native population, but there's no fact backing it up that Spanish was denied on purpose from the natives. -Angel

ULAP appeal

Isn't it that Spanish has already been removed from the curriculum since 1987 (or even earlier)? How can they ask for the enforcement of its teaching when there isn't even a law anymore mandating it? 210.213.184.10 04:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

That's why there is an appeal to the President. Through a presidential proclamation, the president has the power to elevate Spanish from an optionally-promoted language into an official language. Besides, no bill from Congress is required to make it part of the college curriculum.--Fifteencounts 01:04, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

There are too few persons who speak it, unless you consider chabacano. However, consider the massive archive and historical documents that should make it imporant. It would be very good though to have a foreign language(if not Spanish, then Chinese, Japanese, French,Latin, etc ) as a qualification and to open up other opportunities. In the US it is a very good qualification. By the way, the ULAP link doesn't function.--Jondel 05:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Knowledge of Spanish would help Filipinos appreciate more their history, national identity, and political independence. This does not entail however that I support its compulsory learning.

But then how would Filipinos appreciate more of their history, reading it in its original context if they won't make it mandatory?? 61.9.55.76 22:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, I edited the part about the president approving it since no news has been confirmed. The ULAP link now works, by the way.--Fifteencounts 02:03, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Great!--Jondel 03:16, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Rename to Spanish language in the Philippines?

Spanish what? People? Language? --Howard the Duck 13:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

They don't say Spanish language in the United States but Spanish in the United States, anyway the move is ok with me.--Jondel 05:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Are there any other precedents? But I think Spanish language is clearer than Spanish per se. --Howard the Duck 15:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

None. Here, look ! (Tadaan!)

Local varieties

• Andalusian Spanish
• Argentine Spanish
• Caliche
• Central American Spanish
• Chilean Spanish
• Colombian Spanish
• Cuban Spanish
• Dominican Spanish

• Mexican Spanish
• Panamanian Spanish
• Peruvian Coast Spanish
• Puerto Rican Spanish
• Rioplatense Spanish
• Spanish in the Philippines
• Spanish in the United States
• Venezuelan Spanish

--Jondel 15:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Ahhh... I see. Since there is no convention (There's Spanish Filipino, btw), lets leave it where it is. --Howard the Duck 15:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

We don't have to follow convention, specialy if there is no agreement. Let us move it if the same issue will come up again in the future.--Jondel 01:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Done.--Jondel 12:30, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey this move is out of consensus!!!! </sarcasm> :p --Howard the Duck 06:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Aaargh ‡P, what should the article's name be? We can also vote on Castillian in the Philippines, Castillian language in the Philppines. Hispanic language in the Philippines. Lets leave it for about two weeks to see how others might feel about this name, then I will revert it back ok?--Jondel 10:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I think "Spanish" suits best. But I'm happy now with article title hehehe. --Howard the Duck 14:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[I]n 2006, there are roughly 3,180,000 Spanish speakers…

That’s…a lot. In fact, I’m doubting whether those figures are at all accurate.

I've just erased that figure from Spanish language. The same anon user inserted it here. It looks plainly like a hoax or advertising for minority demands. Unless a good-quality verifiable source is cited to back it up, this ridiculously high figure shouldn't be left to stand. Where were these 3 million hiding up to now?? —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 20:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The figure should be 3,180,000 Spanish speakers plus one , ME!. 3,180,001 Spanish speakers I just arrived from Japan. Mwa ha ha ha.--Jondel 08:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Pablo. I found the link. Apparently, it's about 300,000 speakers less, about 2,900,000. [3]--Fifteencounts 11:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Any other sources? The source seems to have a vested interest in inflating the number of spanish-speakers. I'd trust it if the info can be corroborated. Shrumster 20:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

WRONG! It's 2,900,001, indluding me. mwa ha ha ha :D --Jondel 13:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Japan then has one less Spanish speaker… :-(

:) --Jondel 11:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yo y mi presidenta tambien hablamos español. Otro filipino.

It's not surprising and it is believable that almost 3 million Filipinos speak Spanish. Remember that it was once a true official language and was required at school and more used naturally everyday. The older Filipinos and the baby boomers (who have knowledge in Espanol) constitute a big part of the population, especially the boomers, and they were a part of this era. What this study is saying is that these 3 million speak Spanish not necessarily as a native tongue but as a second, third or fourth language. And though some may be rusty, I'm sure that when the time comes to use it, they are able to communicate with their Spanish. And don't count out that there are younger ones today who do speak Spanish just like the older ones as well.

Exactly. The study is not saying that 3 million Filipinos speak Spanish as a mother tongue, but have a certain degree of fluency and speak it as a second, third, or even fourth language. This is also the case when we talk about Spanish-speakers in the early 20th century. Some history books say that at its peak Spanish was spoken by 10% of the population in the Philippines. This is not strictly true: it was spoken by 10% of Filipinos as their FIRST LANGUAGE, but as much as 60% of the population spoke it to different degrees of fluency (according to different historians) because Filipinos have always been extraordinary poliglots. However, this fact is usually ignored in history books, specially English-language history books. Therefore, it is not at all surprising or strange that 3 million Filipinos speak Spanish today with different degrees of literacy. For one, Tagalog is full of Spanish words and expressions. Any Filipino who has studied a minimum 1 or 2 years of Spanish can be reasonbly fluent in the language. I hope editors will stop contending this 3 million figure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.15.140.66 (talk) 12:47, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

What "Study" are you speaking of? The link provided above by Jondel is for a page which doesn't seem to mention a study. The link is to a page which mentions some numbers (the 2,900,000 number among them) without saying where those numbers come from. That page does not explain the meaning of the numbers which it contains, and I'm curious where you got the information about what the "study" does and does not mean to say about the numbers. That page is located on a site which identifies itself as am "interactive service "Sí, Spain" (3.0), which promotes free exchange of information on Spanish current affairs and its historical, linguistic and cultural development." Offhand, my perception is that this is not credible as a reliable supporting source (see WP:RS). -- Boracay Bill 21:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

You are right that the cited reference is not a "study". But there is a study conducted by the Instituto Cervantes in Manila which actually produced the above-mentioned figure of 3.18 million Spanish-speakers in the Philippines. I insist that this figure does not refer to native speakers, but those who speak it with a reasonable fluency as a second, third, or even fourth language. The main article reads:

A 2006 study conducted by the Instituto Cervantes and the Consejería de Educación de la Embajada de España (Education Council, Embassy of Spain), in coordination with the Academia Filipina de la Lengua Española (Philippine Academy of the Spanish Language) produced an estimated figure of 3.18 million Spanish speakers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.33.16.155 (talk) 01:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

False cognates vs. false friends

The article had false cognates and false friends backwards, so I changed it. A false cognate is a word that is not cognate — that is, it is unrelated and the similarity is coincidental. My understanding is that a false cognate is a particular kind of false friend: false cognates are false friends, but not vice versa. But I think "false friend" can also be used to contrast "false cognate", that is, a false cognate is a word that is not cognate, so a false friend is a cognate word with a different meaning. In casual usage "false cognate" may be used for "false friend", but this article was making an incorrect distinction. - furrykef (Talk at me) 09:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

La mierda is the same in filipino language as Spanish

I took out la mierda because it is the same in SPANISH, HACER LA MIERDA DE LA NOCHE, means to paint the town red in Spanish, same as Filipino.

Dont you mean painting the town brown? SqueakBox 21:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Pera

Please understand that we all know and agree that today money is translated as 'dinero'. But in this article, we are referring to the origin of the Filipino word from archaic Spanish which came from silver coin in Spanish.Hence 'Original Spanish word'. Pera is not a native Filipino word and it is useless to metion it here if it did not have a Spanish root. --Jondel 11:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Most likely it was originally "perra", as in "perra gorda" and "perra chica", a type of coin. The harder double-r phoneme may have been soften into r with use? Asterion^talk 12:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Added pwerta, konyo, and letse to false friends

pwerta added, since it means vagina oddly enough for Filipinos and konyo. also added letse / leche since that one gets on my nerves, i told my nephew to drink his milk (leche) in spanish once, and everyone looked at me as if I just swore at the baby, so annoying. also added padre and madre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.111.127 (talk • contribs) Section added as of 00:26, August 4, 2007 (modified several times since initially added)

Interesting. I'm not a Tagalog speaker, but I have a good Tagalog-English dictionary which has no "pw..." words at all. It does have "puwerta Sp. (puerta) n. (1) door; doorway. Syn. Pintô, pintuan. (2) entrance; gate. Syn. Pultahan. Tárangkahan. (3) port; harbor. Syn. Dáúngan." Perhaps the catholic priest who authored the dictionary considered the "vagina" meaning to be taboo — I see that the companion English-Tagalog dictionary has no entry for that english word. -- Boracay Bill 06:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

That's what I figured out before for the conservative culture of the Filipinos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.111.127 (talk • contribs)

Getting back to a sidelight which I mentioned above, my dictionary (Tagalog-English Dictionary, ISBN 971-08-4357-5, Leo James English, First printing 1986, reprinted each year since) lists no word beginning with the two letters "pw". In particuler, it does not list "pwerta". It does list "puwerta", though without describing the alternative defingition which we have been discussing. Question: "is "pwerta" (used in this article) a mis-spelt word? -- Boracay Bill 01:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

A word beginning with "puw" can be written as "pw", it is interchangable. --Howard the Duck 02:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Trivia section

Didn't Quezon himself say in a speech on his proposal for a national language that he spoke Spanish badly? I don't have and cannot find a copy of the speech itself but it was in a textbook I used in grade school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.172.216 (talk) 10:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Breaking News: Spanish to be reinstated as an Official National Language in Philippines

Hi, added the new section about Arroyo's plan about Spanish being reinstated as an official language this coming January 2008, also added more vocabulary words, the section that was moved to the bottom, as it was announced on August 8 in Buenos Aires, Argentina by President Arroyo. This will be beneficial to the Filipinos, as simultaneously, it was also announced that by 2030, Spanish will be the second most spoken language in the world. For sure, there will be tons of objections from misguided Filipino nationalists coming very very soon in the media, so be prepared for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.111.127 (talk • contribs) Section added as of 00:26, August 11, 2007

It will be interesting to see what happens on that, considering Article XIV, Section 7 of the RP constitution (see here). -- Boracay Bill 06:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

So guys, I keep hearing about this. Is this just a rumour or what? How come I have never seen or heard of it except on Wikipedia and some obscure South American news article online that Spanish was to be reinstated as official by GMA? Is it actually true? So is Spanish an official language as, right now, along with Filipino and English? What the heck's going on?! Si lapu lapu (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)si lapu lapu

this edit added a section titled The reinstatement of Spanish as an official language, citing a Spanish-language news item on Yahoo.com.es. That news item is no longer available but, as I remember it, it reported that PGMA had promised in a speech at a state dinner in Spain that Spanish would be made an official language in the Philippines by January of 2008. I found this somewhat surprising because the country's official languages are designated in Article XIV, Section 7 of the RP constitution, the list of official languages does not include Spanish, and a constitutional amendment would presumably be needed to change the list of languages designated as official languages. At some later point, news reports were seen that PGMA had announced that the teaching of Spanish would be made compulsory in Philippine schools. I vaguely recall that this was somehow tied to financial aid from the government of Spain. AFAIK, that has not happened. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Henry Ford

I think he mistook Spanish for Tagalog and could'nt tell the difference when he said Spanish is spoken everywhere in the Philippines.--Jondel (talk) 12:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Not sure he was that thick... Asterion^talk 12:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm... WP:V says: "Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source." (emphasis added) I see a supporting cite alluded to here, but haven't tried to dig up a copy of that supporting cite. That page just mentioned also says:

“ "It is to be noted that with the increased study and use of English, there has been an increased study of Spanish. I think it is a fact that many more people in these islands have a knowledge of Spanish now than they did when the American Occupation occurred" (The 1908 School Report, p. 96)."

"Spanish continues to be the most prominent and important language spoken in political, journalistic and commercial circles. English has, therefore, active rivals as the language of trade and instruction. It is equally probable that the adult population has lost interest in learning English. I believe it is a fact that many more people now know the Spanish language than when the Americans sailed for these islands and their occupation took place...The customary prerequisite for dispatchers is for them to know English and Spanish. Through the great upsurge in numbers and circulation of newspapers and publications, there is much more reading matter in Spanish than before... (Op. Sit. p.9)

”

My guess is that Spanish was much more widely spoken in the Phils in 1916 than presently, especially in venues which Henry Ford might have experienced. A blue collar visitor named Joe Schmutts might have had a different experience and have gained a different impression. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 12:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

One thing is for sure, Filipinos suddenly had more freedom to speak the language. Spanish (and education) was heavily suppressed for natives during Spanish times. Plus, the infrastructure, government systems,travel, everything was still in Spanish. However, even now Filipinos don't really use English for communications except in formal situations, e.g. government, academe, etc. If they don't speak English now, they wouldn't have spoken much Spanish then. Plus there are so many Spanish words in Tagalog and all the other vernaculars.--Jondel (talk) 11:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Your sentence "Spanish (and education) was heavily suppressed for natives during Spanish times" demonstrates "heavy" brainwashing by history books in English and the Philippine variety of the anti-Spanish Black Legend. First, there was no such concept as "free public education" in any part of the world until the 19th century. For example in the US public education did not start until the 1840's, and even then it was not widespread. In Europe it also became common in the mid-19th century. Before that there was no such concept, no such mentality or point of view that free education is a basic human right. So you cannot say that any country "suppressed education" before the 19th century because it ignores the historical context completely. Second, if you read the main article you will see the Spain did create a free public school system in the Philippines in the year 1863. This was at the vanguard of Asia and led to a rapid increase of Spanish fluency throughout the islands in the late 19th century. It also led to a class of educated Filipinos called the ilustrados who were among the best scholars in Asia. It also made the Philippines one of the most advanced countries in the region according to different European travellers of the time. So please review your interpretation of Philippine history, and be specially careful in accepting negative "facts" about Spanish colonial rule, which have been spoon-fed to young Filipinos through twisted history books in English since the 1950's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.221.52.70 (talk) 20:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Spanish as the first official language

I've deleted the sentence which read, "Spanish was proclaimed the official language of the independent First Philippine Republic by the Malolos Constitution of 1899 which was itself written in Spanish." and replaced it with a {{fact}} tag.

Article 93 of the Malolos constitution reads as follows: "Article 93. The use of languages spoken in the Philippines shall be optional. This use cannot be regulated except by virtue of law, and solely for acts of public authority and in the courts. For these act the Spanish language may be used in the meantime." It's a real stretch to construe that as proclaiming Spanish to be the official language of the country. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 00:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The last part of that translation is incorrect. It should read "For these acts the Spanish language will be used in the meantime", not "may" be used. Here is the original Spanish:

Articulo 93. El empleo de las lenguas usadas en Filipinas es potestativo. No puede regularse sino por la ley, y solamente para los actos de la autoridad pública y los asuntos judiciales. Para estos actos se usará por ahora la lengua castellana.

Please reinsert the deleted sentence. JCRB (talk) 17:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up on this talk page before reverting this change yourself. I don't have a POV axe to grind here, but neither do I have the historical, legal, or linguistic expertise to argue either side of the question. I certainly do not have expertise as relates to how things would have been viewed in 1899 from the point of view of the linguistics or the legal thinking of the period. I'll describe my understanding below, and hope for further input here from others more knowledgeable than myself.

I probably relied on this translation, which is credited to one Sulpicio Guevara, in removing the sentence. I had no idea at the time who this Sulpicio Guevara might be. Further research has since turned up this page, which identifies him as the compiler and editor of the 1972 publication, The laws of the first Philippine Republic (the laws of Malolos) 1898-1899.. The translation is footnoted on page 203 "Translation by the author". The title page of this publication credits "Sulpico M. Guevara A.B., LL.B., LL.M.; Division of Research & Law Reform; University of the Philippines; Law Center", as of 1972. Article 93 reads, in this translation, as:

“ Article 93. The use of languages spoken in the Philippines shall be optional. This use cannot be regulated except by virtue of law, and solely for acts of public authority and in the courts. For these act the Spanish language may be used in the meantime. ”

That page mentioned above also leads to an alternative translation from The development of Philippine politics by Maximo M. Kalaw. A footnote identifies this Document 188, fifty-sixth January 31, 1900. The title page of this publication credits "Maximo M. Kalaw AA.B., ll.B." and identifies it as a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of Michigan. Article 93 reads, in this translation, as:

“ ART. 93. The use of the languages spoken in the Philippines is optional. It can only be regulated by the law, and solely as to the acts of public authority and judicial affairs. For the purpose of these acts shall be used at present the Castillian language ”

The Spanish text found here reads as follows:

“ Artículo 93

El empleo de las lenguas usadas en Filipinas es potestativo. No puede regularse sino por la ley, y solamente para los actos de la autoridad pública y los asuntos judiciales. Para estos actos se usará por ahora la lengua castellana.

”

My (re?)interpretation of the thinking here, after looking at both of these english translations, is that Article 93 recognizes that the Spanish language is de-facto the language used at the time of the promulgation of the Malolos constitution for the specified official purposes, and the article provides explicit constitutional authority to specify a de-jure official language for these purposes.

Looking at this article, I see that the lead sentence presently reads: "Spanish was the first language of the Philippines since the conquest by Spain in the 16th century.", with the word language wikilinked to the official language article. I think that the piped-wikilinking done there goes beyond the boundaries of Spanish being an official language. I suggest that this sentence should be changed to something like, "Spanish was recognized in the first constitution of the Philippines as being the de-facto official language at the time."

Comments, anyone? -- Boracay Bill (talk) 01:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the research and explanation Boracay Bill. The second translation you have reproduced by Maximo M. Kalaw is correct. The Spanish verb "se usará" translates exactly as "will be used", and not "may be used". Spanish was established as the official language of the Philippines beyond any doubt, even if temporarily (the text reads "in the mean time"). Therefore the deleted text should be reinserted:

Spanish was proclaimed the official language of the independent First Philippine Republic by the Malolos Constitution of 1899 which was itself written in Spanish JCRB (talk) 11:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I made the change in the article. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

First Philippine Republic

I've edited this page regarding the First Philippine Republic, which never achieved sovereignty. This may lead to discussion and, if it does, I suggest that such discussion take place on the discussion page of an article more directly related to the point at issue -- perhaps Talk:First Philippine_Republic, Talk:Philippine-American War, Talk:Philippine Revolution, Talk:Philippines of Talk:History of the Philippines.-- I have all of these pages on my watchlist.

To roughly capsulize my understanding of Philippine history concerning sovereignty:

The Philippine Revolution against Spain began in April of 1896, culminating two years later with a proclamation of independence and the establishment of the First Philippine Republic. However, the Treaty of Paris, at the end of the Spanish-American War, transferred control of the Philippines from Spain to the United States. This agreement was not recognized by the Philippine Government which, on June 2, 1899, proclaimed a Declaration of War against the U.S.[4]. The Philippine-American War ensued, officially ending in 1902, though hostilities continued until about 1913. U.S. colonial rule of the Philippines started in 1905 with very limited local rule. Partial autonomy (commonwealth status) was granted in 1935, preparatory to a planned full independence from the United States in 1946. Preparation for a fully sovereign state was interrupted by the Japanese occupation of the islands during World War II. Full independence came with the recognition of Philippine sovereignty by the U.S. in 1946.

Also, to quote from page 159 of Max Kalaw's book already referenced in this article, "All conclusions as to what the Philippine Republic could have been must be purely hypothetical. [...] From beginning to end it was purely a formative period." -- Boracay Bill (talk) 00:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

8,000

Considering demand in call centers, overseas workers, and some unconfirmed info from Instituto de Cervantes from the Philippine page of the Spanish wiki, there now seems to be 8,000 Spanish speakers in the country. I will work on this or anyone else are welcome to update this info but please use verifiable, reliable info.. --Jondel (talk) 05:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:La-solidaridad2.jpg

Image:La-solidaridad2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Major Typo

"and Spanish was substituted for English" referring to education in the post-hispanic era, following the take-over by the USA is obviously the wrong way round. Will give it 2 weeks then edit. --MichaelGG (talk) 12:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Malolos Constitution article 93

I just rolled back a change to the article from

"... Constitution of Malolos in 1899, which had established Spanish as the country's sole official language."

to the previous text, which had read and now again reads

"Constitution of Malolos in 1899, which had authorized continuted use of Spanish as an official language "... in the meantime.""

Article 93 of the Malolos Constitution, which concerns this, reads

"Article 93. The use of languages spoken in the Philippines shall be optional. This use cannot be regulated except by virtue of law, and solely for acts of public authority and in the courts. For these acts the Spanish language will be used in the meantime."

I don't have time to pursue this in detail just now, but it is my understanding that official actions of the First Philippine Republic were carried out generally in Tagalog and/or in Spanish and/or in English. Some insight can be had in War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs (1907), "I. Telegraphic Correspondence of Emilio Aguinaldo, July 15, 1898 to February 28, 1899, Annotated" (PDF), in Taylor, John R.M. (ed.), Compilation of Philippine Insurgent Records, Combined Arms Research Library, retrieved 2008-03-10 — search for the phrase "Original in". More info may eventually be available through The Philippine Insurgent {Revolutionary) Records, 1896-1901, with associated Records of the United States War Department, 1900-1906, Vibal Publishing House, retrieved 2008-03-15. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 22:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Taft Commission and English

I have again revised the language regarding the Taft Commission and English vs. Spanish. My latest revision reconciles this article with cite-supported language in the Taft Commission article. Regarding the language I have eliminated ("the U.S. Taft Commission imposed' English as the language of education and government" -- emphasis added), imposed is a strong word. Please provide a supporting cite if you're going to assert that English was imposed as the language of government.

I've {{fact}} tagged the assertion that public schools and Philippine press were forced to switch to English under the threat of legal punishment. Please provide a supporting cite for that. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 10:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3