Simplified: Bonifacio S. Sibayan's The intellectualization of Filipino.
Because discourse ought not be trapped inside the academic walls.
Sibayan, B. (1991). The intellectualization of Filipino. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 1991(88), 69-82. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1991.88.69.
There has been a movement to educate Filipinos in their mother tongue, Filipino, instead of the traditional languages of Spanish and English. Even while English is significant, it will not be the people's primary language. The term "Filipino" was first used to refer to the subject in 1959. Despite not being designated as the national language, it was made official in the 1973 Constitution. It was designated as the national language in 1987. In 1989–1990, the University of the Philippines launched a program to replace English as the primary language of instruction with Filipino.
Despite efforts to make it coequal with English, various difficulties are present in promoting the use of the Filipino language in education and government. The main problem is the perceived inadequacy of Filipino as a language for intellectual modernization, especially in the controlling domains of language such as government, law, business, and education. The solution to this problem involves intellectualizing Filipino through concepts like Havranek's intellectualization, Ferguson's modernization, and Haugen's cultivation. The focus of Filipino intellectuals is on developing Filipino as a medium of instruction at all levels of education.
The author discusses graphization (writing), standardization (establishing a norm), and modernization (intertranslatability with other languages) as aspects of how the Filipino language has evolved. Modernization, which entails developing an intellectually modernized language (IML) applicable to education and other industries, is the most challenging phase. A popularly modernized language (PML) employed in entertainment and daily life provides the mass base that this IML needs. Growth in PM and IM should ideally take place simultaneously. An IML will perish without a large base, as occurred to Spanish in the Philippines. It took 90 years for English and Filipino to replace Spanish in higher education, which has repercussions for when English is eventually replaced by Filipino.
A language's growth depends on a people's development. A developed language is required to teach and advance its people, and a language cannot develop independently of its speakers. An illustration of this reciprocal interaction is between English speakers and Filipinos. There was no English-speaking community in the Philippines in 1898 when English was introduced there. But in just 37 years, English became the dominant language in business, academia, industry, and the media. This was primarily caused by the Filipinos who received their education in English. Filipino academics aspire to use the Filipino language to replicate this accomplishment. In essence, communication intellectualizes both parties involved.
Intertranslatability is the capacity to translate between languages, especially concerning intellectual works. This ability distinguishes the modernized language. The two types are one-way and two-way. As a one-way language, Filipino primarily relies on English for intellectual development. Filipino researchers and writers must be multilingual to access past and present information in English. It is challenging and time-consuming to intellectualize Filipino through translation from an intellectually modernized language of wider communication (IMLWC) since Filipino still need to acquire vocabulary, terminology, and discourse styles for all academic subjects. The procedure entails disassembling the semantic parts into their constituent parts and then rebuilding them in the new language. Despite its difficulties, Filipino researchers from all fields of study should work toward intellectualizing Filipino.
Compared to English, the Filipino language contributes very little to learning content courses, including social studies, according to the review of a bilingual education program. This can result from the challenges in intellectualizing Filipinos and creating academic vocabulary and terminology.
The necessity for a pedagogical idiom in Filipino is highlighted by the difficulties of translating English into Filipino and the small role Filipino plays in understanding subject-matter content. A pedagogical idiom is a thoroughly graded Filipino subject matter that is methodically assigned to different grades and levels in the educational system, together with the proper teaching techniques and presentational aids. It is based on a large number of texts and sources. Such a pedagogical idiom has been developed for subjects taught in English, but none exists for subjects taught in Filipino. Developing a pedagogical idiom in Filipino would establish the threshold levels and types of proficiency required for graduation and/or continuing to higher educational levels in various professions.
The Institute of National Language (INL) was founded to advance Filipino as a national language. It sued and prevailed in the Supreme Court to give the Filipino language legal standing. It has contributed to producing written resources in the language that have standardized its grammar and lexicon. But because of its purist outlook, it held out for a 20-letter abakada alphabet that eliminated several borrowed letters, delaying the standardization of its spelling. However, the INL has consistently emphasized to Filipinos the necessity of creating a national language.
The following questions should be answered well to know whether Filipino has been intellectualized:
Can Filipinos receive instruction in Filipino from primary school through graduate school?
Is Filipino a commonly utilized language in many fields?
Do most Filipinos like having their kids learn in Filipino?
This has already been accomplished in English, French, German, and Spanish. For smaller national languages, meeting these norms could not be easy. Gonzalez and Sibayan (1988) assert that Filipinos still have a long way to go before intellectualization. Although this is the case, there have been some successes in the last 50 years, which provides encouragement for the future.
In the Philippines, English replaced Spanish after 90 years of struggle. Most of the country's population now speaks English, which is now commonly used. On the other hand, Filipino still needs to be intellectualized, and it will take some time before it completely replaces English. How long will it take for Filipino to predominate, even if only partially, in the areas or contexts in which it is primarily used?
A visionary minority with the skills to carry out a language development program must establish a Third World language like Filipino and be assisted by a team of skilled and devoted workers. The goal of this program should be to simultaneously intellectualize people and the language, and it requires both government and non-government backing. The development of PML takes place in primary and lower secondary schools, the beginning of IML development in upper secondary schools, and IML development in colleges and universities. Since adult colonial language users typically oppose change, replacing a highly intellectualized and modernized colonial language must be done gradually, starting with settings where the target population is most receptive, such as the young in schools.
The written form of a language is essential for intellectualization since it serves as a repository for important information. There is a need for bilingual academics, curriculum writers, and teachers to translate knowledge into the language. A robust publishing sector is also required. However, it is challenging for a Third World language that has not grown to replace a highly intellectualized language firmly established in fields like science and technology that rely on written literature. On the other hand, a colonial language is simpler to replace in fields that rely on oral communication, such as lingua franca and entertainment.
It is easier for all socioeconomic classes and domains to accept a Third World language's mixed oral form (such as Taglish in the Philippines), which aids in the modernization of the language. This could take the shape of a casual speech or a formal lecture. The media, entertainment, and education sectors may all support this development.
Because most advanced knowledge is not available in the emerging language, a Third World language needs to have an IMLWC source language to become intellectualized. Bilingual speakers of both the source language and the emerging national language are required for those who will use the new language to educate others. Bilingualism may persist indefinitely in some nations with minor national languages.
This is the first installment of a series of posts attempting to make difficult texts more understandable. Stay tuned for more!
I only have intuitions and cannot back this up, but I think, artificially intellectualizing Filipino and attempting to shape it into something linearly or analytically translatable to other intellectually developed languages, would probably, along the way, do some damage to its idiomatic and untranslatable aspects that makes it rich and poetic and imaginal in the first place. I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, *it should be* if we want to cultivate an intellectual culture rooted in our original tongue. I am only biased to say, perhaps wrongly, that the untranslatable and idiomatic aspects are not the weakness but the beauty of any tongue.
And also, there's this person in Luzvimindan Project, who I think, thinks that Filipino is really just (predominantly) Tagalog, it's not yet inclusive of other dialects.