Wednesday, June 10, 2009
A RECAP on ISSUE DISCUSSED ON TV
What is a language? This was the first question hurled at Dr. Patricia Schneider-Zioga, a linguistics professor at California State University-Fullerton, and me, when Jannelle So invited us to guest in her TV program, Kababayan L.A., on Channel 18 two days ago, June 8th.
Dr. Schneider-Zioga responded that there's no clear-cut definition what language really is among linguists. She supported her answer by citing a case in Europe. Unfortunately, some viewers, particularly my friends, were not satisfied with her answer. ( I knew...with mine, as well.) A few sent me email that she should have given an example on the Philippine languages, because Kababayan L.A. is a Filipino program. Since her answer is true, I didn't react against it. Instead, I reinforced it by saying that mutual intelligibility is a criterion that linguists uses to determine whether a particular medium of communication is a language or simply a dialect. By mentioning a technical terminology, I made the answer murkier to lay people. I should have given a Filipino example to satisfy the Filipino community. I'm sorry, I didn't. It is tough to think on your toes, especially if there's time constraint.
Anyway, allow me to use this blog to address it now.
It is a fact; a linguist would consider a medium of communication a dialect of another language on the basis of mutual intelligibility, even if the speakers of that "dialect" would consider it differently. A case in point is the Batad Ifugao and the Mayoyao Ifugao. For an outsider or a linguist, he or she may immediately say that these two cultural groups are identifiably speaking the same language. The reason is: mutual intelligibility is high. Ethnologue (1984) mentioned that the intelligibility is at least 86%. It's too high to be considered as two separate languages.
Certainly, the language scientist may come up with his or her decision on how the two language groups understand each other (i.e. mutual intelligibility). Hence, if there is high percentage of cognate or identical words with similar meaning and no big differences in affixation and word formation (i.e. morphology), that other language group may be treated as a mere dialect of the other.
I mentioned in the program that the Laguna Tagalog is a dialect (i.e. language variation) of Tarlac Tagalog, or vice versa. Most Filipinos know that Laguna is south of Manila, while Tarlac is north. It's true, they have disparity, which is more than accent (i.e. pronunciation or intonation); however, both could perfectly understand each other.
The same thing with Binisaya of Cebu and Mindanao; the obvious difference is just the /l/. Cebuano will never say the /l/ in between vowels, while the Binisaya in Mindanao will always have it. (e.g. waa vs. wala (nothing), baay vs. balay (house).) The meanings are the same; hence, the Binisaya in Mindanao is just a dialect of that of Cebu.
Nevertheless, if we'd compare Binisaya of Cebu or the Binisaya in Mindanao to the Bisaya of Ilo-ilo, there are words (i.e. lexicon) that may be said or spelled without any difference at all; however, the meaning may be 100% not the same. (e.g. sabut is a word found in both Binisaya in Cebu, Mindanao, and in Ilo-ilo. However, sabut in Cebu and Mindanao means 'to understand', while in Ilo-ilo it means "pubic hair". Besides different meaning in some words, affixation or affixes also has considerable differences. Hence, the Bisaya of Cebu and Mindanao is one language, and the Bisaya of Ilo-ilo is another. We, Filipinos, all know it as Hiligaynon. Well, with regular contact, speakers of Hiligaynon and Binisaya do understand each other. We just have to be careful on our word usage so as not to offend someone.
Definitely, mutual intelligibility is not a perfect criterion to distinguish a language from the other. The reason is that language is strongly interrelated to the speaker's thought process and behavior. How one conveys meaning is affected by how he thinks of the person (or a people group) and how he behaves around that person.
Historically, a feud existed between the Batad Ifugao and the Mayoyao Ifugaos. Socially, interaction between the two language groups might be reserved and minimized. Competition as to who might be speaking the high or the low standard language might be existing. So, when a translation of literature had started for the Batad, the Mayoyao speakers did not accept it as theirs. (But the language difference is very minimal!) Mayoyao speakers wanted to be recognized that theirs is a distinct language. As a result, in Philippine linguistics, Batad and Mayoyao Ifugaos are recognized as two different languages; two of the 175 languages in the Philippines.
Therefore, what is a language? Let me now put it this way. It is a set of symbols of sounds that is structured using a set of rules to express a meaning to a thought process or behavior and is transmitted from one generation to another.
(NOTE:
1) In celebration of the Philippine Independence (June 12th), I plan to blog about the Philippine language and culture for the whole month of June.
2) Those who have checked out my poetry reading on You Tube, please accept my sincere thanks. I apologize of the poor synchronization of my voice and my mouth in Part 1. Part 2 and 3 are better. Check them out.
Thanks again, guys.
Edmund Industan
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
An email I received from Dr. Schneider-Zioga:
Thank you for sharing this! One reason I thought it best to not use examples based on languages and dialects in the Philippines is the fact that people would not clearly agree on what is a language versus a dialect. However, no one would dispute Dutch and German being different langauges (whereas Kapampangan and Tagalog being different languages would be disputed). Nonetheless, my husband also criticized my examples! He is from Greece and has experienced a diglossic situation there with Katharevousa (the "clean" language) and Demotiki (the "people's language"). This did however really help him understand what some of the situation might be like in the Philippines. I will look at your blog as well! Best wishes, Patricia
*****************************
Patricia Schneider-Zioga, Ph.D.
CSU Fullerton
Department of English, Comparative Literature,
and Linguistics
800 N. State College Blvd.
Fullerton, CA 92834-9480
And my response:
Dear Patricia,
I perfectly understand you. In fact, many of my friends do accepted your response, because it is a fact. However, a few of my friends are so "tight" on nationalism that they get very narrow-minded with how they see things; vis-a-vis, because it is a Filipino program, Kababayan should speak in Filipino, guests should also speak in Filipino, etc.
Well, I spoke Tagalog when I first guested on Kababayan LA. Since I am not a native Tagalog speaker, I have heavy accent. One of my friends suggested that I should speak in English, the next time around. This tells you that not all Kababayan LA followers are not happy with your response. Perhaps many might not be happy with Jannelle and me, because we spoke English throughtout the program. But hey, Jannelle and I spoke in English, because the situation called for it. The viewers should understand that.
Also, I take more of the blame for not reinforcing your example with a situation in the Philippines. I actually thought about talking about it during commercials; however, I wasn't able to. You know, we, guests, have to rely on a cue. So, when Jannelle opened the next segment with another question, my thought process was mess up. It should have been great, if I was able to do that, because we could have addressed the question from a general point of view to the specific, or from the least known to a common (Phil.) example. My bad!
I will be blogging on dialect and diglossia on weekend. Hope you'd check it out.
Thank you, Patricia, for guesting on Kababayan LA. If not with the issues we talked about in the program, I could have not thought of blogging on Philippine languages.
Hope to hear from you again.
Sincerely,
Edmund
Post a Comment