Tuttle Concise Tagalog Dictionary: Tagalog-English English-Tagalog

By Joi Barrios, Maria Cora Labobis and Nenita Pambid Domingo

Easy-to-read and extensive, this Tagalog dictionary is an essential language learning and translation tool.

The Tuttle Concise Tagalog Dictionary gives you the most complete and up-to-date translations from English to Tagalog/Filipino and is the most current dictionary available today. Designed primarily for English speakers, it can also be used by Tagalog speakers who are learning English.

The dictionary is bidirectional with over 20,000 entries covering the everyday vocabulary used in all educational, work-related and tourist situations. For each entry, in addition to giving all useful definitions, information is given on the part of speech, common collocations and the pronunciation of the word. The introduction at the front provides a guide to pronunciation as well as other grammar pointers and explanations. For ease of use, this dictionary is divided into two parts: Tagalog-English and English-Tagalog.

Key highlights of this Tagalog dictionary are:

• Over 20,000 entries cover everyday words that are used in educational, work-related and tourist situations.
• Extensive information on parts of speech, common collocations, and the pronunciation of each word.
• A helpful introduction provides a guide to pronunciation and many other Tagalog grammar pointers and explanations.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Tuttle Publishing
• Release date: Sep 26, 2017
• ISBN: 9781462914951

Book preview

INTRODUCTION

Why do we constantly need to develop dictionaries? What informs a dictionary project? What makes this dictionary different from other available Tagalog-English-Tagalog dictionaries?

First, because language is dynamic and ever changing—new words are borrowed and adapted from other languages, some words become less frequently used, and others are imbued with different meanings. For example, the word kasama originally meaning companion, has come to mean comrade for Filipino activists, while the English word salvaging, originally meaning to recover, is now used to refer to extra-judicial executions. These new meanings need to be incorporated in new dictionaries, such as this one.

Second, because of particular needs of specific populations. In the Philippines, dictionaries were essential to the colonization project, with Spanish-Tagalog and English-Tagalog dictionaries developed by scholars so that the native population could be better understood and effectively colonized. In compiling this dictionary, co-editor Nenita Pambid-Domingo and I, as well as our copyeditor and consultant Romulo Baquiran, Jr, and our contributors Agnes Magtoto, Maria Cora Larobis, and Teresita Raval were mindful that many of the users will be heritage language learners (second or third generation Filipinos living in the United States, Japan or other countries). Thus, our work was informed by our experiences as teachers of Filipino/Tagalog at University of California Berkeley (for myself), University of California Los Angeles (for Domingo), Osaka University (for Baquiran) and New York University (for Magtoto).

Third, because dictionaries reflect the values and principles adhered to at a particular time. For example, Vocabulario de la lengua Tagala (Imprenta de Ramirez y Giraudier, 1860) by Juan D. Noceda and Pedro Sanlucar contains examples of indigenous poetry. For this dictionary, it was important for us to point out words used pejoratively to women and other groups as a way of discouraging sexist, racist or demeaning language.

This introduction is divided into six sections that start with questions you may have:

1. Who are the Tagalogs and what is their language Tagalog?

2. How widely is Tagalog spoken? What makes Metro Manila Tagalog/Filipino different from the Tagalog spoken in other parts of Central and Southern Luzon? How can we study these language variations?

3. What are the differences between Tagalog, Pilipino and Filipino? How can we understand this by studying the history of the Philippines?

4. How can we understand the language through the history of its letters?

5. What makes this dictionary different from other dictionaries? How were the entries selected in this dictionary?

6. How do we pronounce words in Tagalog/Filipino?

7. How can we use this dictionary?

Who are the Tagalogs and what is their language Tagalog?

The word Tagalog refers to both the Tagalogs, and the language of this ethnolinguistic group. The ethnolinguistic group, the Tagalog, lives in Metro Manila or the National Capital Region, and the provinces of Aurora, Bataan, Batangas, Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, Marinduque, Nueva Ecija, Quezon, Tarlac, and Zambales, as well as in the coastal areas of Mindoro and some areas of Palawan.

Here is how historian William Henry Scott described the Tagalog in the 16th-century:

Sixteenth-century Tagalog farmers grew rice both in swiddens and irrigated fields, and knew neither draft animals, plows nor wheeled vehicles. Cloth was woven in backstrap looms; pottery was made by the paddle-and-anvil technique and fired in the open air with rice straw, and iron was worked with a two-piston Malay forge and stone mauls. Sugarcane juice was extracted, not for sugar, but for wine, with a two-pole press operated like a pump handle, and reduced to alcohol in a still made from a hollow tree trunk, and sipped through reed straws. Boards were adzed to size in the forest, now sawed and mortised together without nails, and boats were constructed of carved planks sewn together. Chinese porcelains were esteemed as heirloom wealth, and bronze gongs played either with naked palms or a drumstick to accompany dances in which both men and women danced with outstretched arms without touching their partners. (10)

Scott’s chapter in the book, Looking For the Prehispanic Filipino, 1992, portrayed the Tagalogs as farmers and fisher-folk, practicing their knowledge of boat making and metal-working, expressing themselves through indigenous literature and arts such as weaving, dance, and music, and engaging in robust trade with neighboring countries such as China. He emphasizes the importance of Manila as a trade center, citing that Manila had a gun foundry as early as 1572, and that apart from Tagalog, which had its own system of writing, the urban elite had a knowledge of Malay as a second language.

Scott was critical, however, of one of the earliest accounts of the Tagalog people, Juan de Plasencia’s 1589 Customs of the Tagalogs commissioned by the Spanish authorities. According to Scott, there were many inaccuracies in Plasencia’s account, as well as its subsequent translation by Frederick Morrison found in the 55-volume The Philippine Islands 1493–1898, edited by Emma Blair and James A. Robertson. These inaccuracies have led to misinformation, among them, confusion on the term barangay, described by Plasencia as both a boat (supposedly the means by which the inhabitants came to the islands) and a tribal gathering defined by relationship and occupied space. Yet what Plasencia’s account and Morrison’s translation provide us is the opportunity to look into the Western orientalist view of the Tagalogs. These texts caution us of the need to be careful of the way words are translated—something essential to compilers and users of dictionary projects.

While Plasencia’s account does not provide any descriptions of the language of the Tagalogs, it is littered with Tagalog words. In the following list, two meanings are sometimes given, that of Plasencia and the translators, and what are hopefully more accurate meanings that are not pejorative of gender or beliefs: datos (chiefs; community leader), barangay (tribal gathering; community), maharlica (nobles; did not pay taxes or tributes); tingues (mountain ridges); aliping namamahay (commoners; workers), aliping sa guiguilir (slaves; servants because of debt) inaasawa (unmarried woman who has children), simbahan (place of worship), pandot (worship, festival celebration), sibi (roof), lic-ha (term for idols) and Tigmamanuguin (magical bird). Plasencia also identifies twelve kinds of witches, using the word both incorrectly and pejoratively: catalonan (officiating priest either a man or a woman, spiritual leader), mangagauay (pretended to be healers), manyisalat (applies medicine such that men would abandon their wives), mancocolam (emits fire), hocloban (can kill even without the use of medicine but can also heal those they made ill), silagan (eats a person’s liver), magtatangal (appears at night), osuang (sorcerer; spelled aswang in contemporary times), mangagayoma (made charms for lovers), sonat (preacher, a sort of bishop who ordained priestesses and received their reverences), pangatahojan/pangatohoan (soothsayer) and bayoguin (signified a cotquean, a man whose nature inclined toward that of a woman; transgender). Other Tagalog words found in the text are: maca (place of rest in the afterlife), casanaan (a place of anguish), vibit (ghosts), Tigbalaang (phantoms), patianac (woman who died in childbirth and who had an unborn child).

The Tagalog words in Plasencia’s text, as translated by Morrison, show not only a confusion with community relations (Who indeed are the maharlica? Is a barangay defined by territorial space or by relationships? Are the aliping sa guiguilir really slaves in the context that this word has been used in other parts of the world?), but also a prejudice against indigenous beliefs and gender. We bring focus to this prejudice in the Introduction because of the need for dictionary users to understand that eyewitness accounts, documents and even dictionaries are written and compiled from specific points of view.

Fast forward to contemporary times. Who is the Tagalog today? Although most of the people living in the Central and Southern Luzon provinces still identify themselves as Tagalog, many Filipinos residing in Metro Manila come from other ethnolinguistic groups, and speak one other Philippine language aside from Tagalog.

Interestingly, the word Tagalog was used more than a century ago to refer to all native Filipinos and not just the Tagalogs. This was true for several Katipunan documents, such as the widely anthologized, Ang dapat mabatid ng mga Tagalog (What the Tagalogs should know) by Andres Bonifacio (first published in the Katipunan newspaper, the Kalayaan, ca. March 1896), and the term Katagalugan (the land of the Tagalogs) was used to refer to Filipinas (the Philippines). Another such document was Emilio Jacinto’s Gising na, mga Tagalog! (Rise, Tagalogs!), written on October 23, 1895, and quoted here with the translation by Jim Richardson (http://www.kasaysayan-kkk.info/1892–1895/emilio-jacinto-gising-na-mga-tagalog). Jacinto starts his call with:

Mahigit sa tatlong dan taun—¡kahangahangang kalaunan!—na lumubug sa kalunuran ng bangis at daya ang araw ng ligaya nitong Katagalugan! Mahigit sa tatlong dan taung tayo’y na sa dilim, dilim na nakapangingilabot ng gabi ng kaalipinan!

(For more than three hundred years—an amazing length of time!—the felicitous sun in this land of Katagalugan has been submerged and drowned by cruelty and deceit. For more than three hundred years we have been in darkness, the horrifying dark night of slavery!)

And ends with:

…kayo ay gumawa, makilaban at matutung mamatay, mga tagalog!"

(…You, Tagalogs, mobilize, fight and learn how to die!)

In using the term Tagalog to refer to all Filipinos, and Katagalugan to refer to the Philippines, Jacinto shows not regionalism, but an assertion of nationalism. At this time, the term Filipino was used to refer only to the insulares or Spaniards born in the Philippines. Thus, it was possible, that the idea was to use these terms, Tagalog and Katagalugan, in conceptualizing a sovereign nation and unifying the ethno-linguistic communities inhabiting the islands.

How widely is the language spoken? What makes Metro Manila Tagalog/Filipino different from the Tagalog spoken in other parts of Central and Southern Luzon? How can we study these language variations?

Latest Census Reports from the National Statistics Office published in 2013 show that of a total population of 92,097,978, there are 22,512,089 Tagalog speakers or 24.44% of the population. A problem with the census report is that the language being polled was called Tagalog. However, as early as 1989, the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (Commission on the Filipino Language, KWF) had cited a survey conducted by the Ateneo de Manila that reported the following: 92% understood Tagalog; 83% could read, and 81% could write it. In comparison, only 51% reported that they could understand English and 41% understood Cebuano, another language widely spoken in the Philippines. In spite of these surveys using the name Tagalog, KWF concludes that Filipino can now be considered the people’s language or lingua franca and is being used as a language of communication by any two Filipinos with different native languages but wanting to talk to each other. (Frequently Asked Questions, KWF Website.)

With migration, there has also been an increase of Tagalog speakers throughout the world. Data from the US Census Bureau has cited the American Community Survey (ACS) that claims there are approximately 1.6 million Tagalog speakers in American households, making it the third most widely spoken foreign language. Moreover, on April 2, 2014, Mayor Ed Lee, several Supervisors and local community partners declared Tagalog as San Francisco’s third required language, with over 10,000 residents speaking the language. By this declaration, the city required its department to provide materials and interpreters at public meetings and services.

Similarly, Tagalog is the fifth most common non-official language spoken in Canada. It is also considered to be the fastest growing language, with 279,000 speakers according to the 2011 census as compared to 170,000 in 2006 (The Globe and the Mail 2012). The Commission on Overseas Filipinos also reports that as of December 2013, there are 10,238,614 overseas Filipinos, with 4,869,766 permanent emigrants, 4,207,018 temporary (presumably overseas contract workers), 1,161,830 irregular. This data on huge numbers of Tagalog/ Filipino speakers show that it is growing as a global language.

But are there variations of Tagalog? Yes, like many languages, there are dialectal variations of the Tagalog language—usually classified as northern, central, southern and Marinduque Tagalog. The article Lalawiganin (From the countryside) by Virgilio S. Almario, first published in Diyaryo Filipino 1992, gives examples of how words can have different meanings depending on the region. For example, the word to express pain in the province of Quezon is ando instead of aray, while kidya is the term used to mean kalamansi (Philippine lime or Citrofurtunella microcarpa).

Almario, however, points out how these Tagalog variations can enrich Metro Manila Tagalog/Filipino. The word taguling for example, from Bataan, can be used instead of kanal, which is borrowed from canal. Similarly, the word tabal, used in Batangas, can refer to laundry, which has no direct equivalent in Metro Manila Tagalog/Filipino, and is referred to only as maruruming damit (dirty clothes).

Because this is a concise dictionary, the focus is on the most commonly used words, and the Tagalog variations cited do not appear. However, learners using the language for field research, need to be aware of the varieties and variations of the language.

But how can we study Tagalog language? One way is by looking at studies that have been made on the language. Earnest learners can start by looking at the writings of Spanish scholars who first studied the language.

One of the earliest observations given on the Tagalog language is Fr. Pedro Chirino’s Relacion de las Islas Filipinas y de lo que en ellas an trabaiado los Padres de la Compania de Jesus (Relation of the Filipinas Islands and of What Has There Been Accomplished by the Fathers of the Society of Jesus) published in Rome in 1604, and translated by Frederic W. Morrison and Emma Helen Blair (Philippine Islands 1493–1803, Volume 12). Comparing Tagalog to the other languages spoken in the Philippines, Chirino writes:

Of all these languages, it was the Tagal which most pleased me and which I most admired. As I told the first bishop, and afterwards, other persons of dignity in the islands and in Europe, I found in this language the four qualities of the four greatest languages of the world, Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Spanish: it has the abstruseness and obscurity of the Hebrew; the articles and distinctions in proper as well as in common nouns, of the Greek; the fullness and elegance of the Latin; and the refinement, polish and courtesy of the Spanish.

Chirino’s Chapter XVII entitled "Of the Letters of the Filipinos¹ also notes that the islanders are much given to reading and writing, and there is hardly a man, and much less a woman who does not read and write in the letters used in the island of Manila²—which are entirely different from those of China, Japon³ and India." Chirino refers here to the script baybayin which will be discussed in greater detail in another section. However, the observation of literacy among the indigenous groups of the Phiippines is important because it negates colonization’s portrayal of the natives as savages who needed to be civilized.

Other important early works of Spanish missionaries are: Father Francisco Blancas de San Jose’s Arte y reglas de la lengua tagala, 1610; Gaspar de San Agustin’s Compendio de la lengua tagala, 1703; Tomas Ortiz’s Arte de la lengua-tagala, 1740; and Juan Jose Noceda and Pedro Sanlucar’s Vocabolario de la lengua tagala, 1754. These works are cited here because they might be able to provide learners with insights on the language as it was used in the 17th and 18th centuries, and some of these works have since been digitized and can be found online.

What are the differences between Tagalog, Pilipino and Filipino? How can we understand this by studying the history and laws of the Philippines?

The most common question asked by many, though, is the difference between Tagalog and Pilipino, and between Pilipino and Filipino. Briefly, Tagalog was the basis of the national language; Pilipino was the term first used to refer to the national language in the 1950s; and Filipino was the term used by the 1987 Constitution.

A complete answer to this question, though, leads us to a larger topic—language, history, and the law. In 1897, the Biak-na-Bato Constitution, declared the separation of the Philippines from the Spanish monarchy and their formation into an independent state with its own government called the Philippine Republic has been the end sought by the Revolution in the existing war, begun on the 24th of August, 1896… Written by Felix Ferrer and Isabelo Artacho, in both Tagalog and Spanish, based on the Cuban Constitution, Article VIII of this Constitution states: "Ikawalong Utos. Ang wikang tagalog ay siyang mananatiling wika ng Republika. (Eighth Law. The Tagalog language remains the language of the Republic.)" With this provision, the choice of Tagalog as the official language of the Republic was clear.

The translation here is mine, hence the more literal Eighth Law, to approximate the original better, instead of Article VIII, as found in the original English translation of the document I found in my research. The published English translation reads: "Article VIII. Tagalog shall be the official language of the Republic." What is lost in this translation is the word mananatiling (remains). Why is mananatiling important? In my view, the use of the word is a recognition that even before the drafting of the Constitution, Tagalog has been used as the official language.

A month and a half after the signing of the charter, however, leaders Emilio Aguinaldo-President, Mariano Trias-Vice-President, Antonio Montenegro-Secretary, Baldomero Aguinaldo-Treasurer and Emilio Regio de Dios entered into a pact with the Spaniards as negotiated by Pedro Paterno. Subsequently, Aguinaldo went into exile in exchange for 800,000 Mexican dollars, the Spaniards failed to pay the full amount, and other revolutionaries continued the war against Spain.

Eventually, Aguinaldo returned to the Philippines, and Philippine independence was declared on June 12, 1898. Elections were then held for the Malolos Congress tasked with drafting the Political Constitution of 1899 also known as the Malolos Constitution. Title XIV Constitutional Observance, Oath and Language makes no mention of Tagalog. Instead, Article 93 states: Art. 03. El empleo de las lenguas usadas en Filipinas es potestativo. No puedo regularse sino por una ley, y solamente para los actos de la autoridad pública y los asuntos judiciales. Para estos casos se usará por ahora la lengua castellana. (The use of languages spoken in the Philippines shall be optional. Their 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 may be used in the meantime.")

The Malolos Constitution, therefore, displaced Tagalog as the official language. And, by the turn of the century, a new colonizer, the United States, had invaded the Philippines resulting in the Philippine-American War (1899–1902), with approximately 20,000 Filipino soldiers killed in action and 200,000 civilian casualities (Arnaldo Dumindin, Philippine-American War 1899–1902. http://www.filipinoamericanwar.com/).

Under American colonial rule, a system of schools was established by the Education Act of 1902. In the Second Annual Report of the Philippine Commission, the Secretary of Public Instruction lauds the work of Professor Moses and Doctor Atkinson in making English the language of the schools. The report reads:

"In many of the pueblos, not to say many of the provinces, after five years of American occupation, there is more English spoken than Spanish, and this, in my humble opinion, is the most hopeful sign of a speedy and general understanding by the Filipinos of the real purposes of the American Government and their rights, duties and liberties under the rule of their new sovereign."

The intent is clear—the English language was to be used to transform Filipinos into good colonial subjects. With the dominance of English, came what Renato Constantino would later call the miseducation of the Filipinos. In an essay published in 1970, Constantino wrote: With American education, the Filipinos were not only learning a new language, they were forgetting their own language; they were starting to become a new type of American. Regrettably, the effect of this colonial language policy, would be felt decades after the end of colonial rule.

By the 1930s, the passage of the Tydings-McDuffie Act by the US Congress had paved the way for a Commonwealth Republic. Through the 1935 Constitution of the Commonwealth government, steps were taken to develop and adopt a national language. Article XIII, Section 3 reads: The Congress shall take steps toward the development and adoption of a common national language based on one of the existing native languages. Unless otherwise provided by law, English and Spanish shall continue as official languages.

Two things are worth mentioning here. First, that at this point, the basis of the national language to be developed has yet to be determined. Second, the designation of English and Spanish as official languages, can be viewed as problematic, because by using these languages in official documents, courts and government communications, Filipinos who did not have sufficient knowledge of these languages continued to be disempowered.

Two years later, in 1937, The Surian ng Wikang Pambansa (Institute of National Language) was established through the Commonwealth Act 184, with members representing various languages in the Philippines (Jaime C. de Veyra, Samar-Leyte Visayan, chair; Filemon Sotto, Cebu Visayan; Casimiro F. Perfecto, Bicol; Felix S. Salas Rodriguez, Panay Visayan; Hadji Butu, Moro⁴; and Cecilio Lopez, Tagalog and secretary of the Surian ng Wikang Pambansa). In a speech given in December 30, 1937, Commonwealth President Manuel L. Quezon explained that the Surian had recommended the selection of Tagalog as the national language (Quezon 1937 in Filipiniana 1938: 403):

Hence, in deciding to adopt a national language culled from different languages spoken in the Philippines and mainly from the Tagalog, which was not only the native tongue of Rizal but also is the most developed of all the existing languages of the country, we are merely carrying into realization one of the ideals of our national hero as a means of consolidating and invigorating our national unity.

The reasons given to make Tagalog the basis of the national language were as follows⁵: first, Tagalog is widely spoken and is the language most understood in all the regions of the Philippines; second; it is not divided into smaller, separate languages as Visayan; third; its literary tradition is the richest and the most developed and extensive; fourth, Tagalog has always been the language of Manila, and the political and economic capital of the Philippines under both Spanish and American rulers; and fifth, Tagalog is the language of the 1896 Revolution and the Katipunan—two very important turning points in Philippine history. This then resulted in the standardization of the language, a new orthography, and guidelines for Tagalog grammar studied in schools.

There was no mention of the name by which the language should be called in Quezon’s speech. However, in commencing the process of developing the national language, the Surian published Lope K. Santos’s Balarila ng Wikang Pambansa (Grammar of National Language), the official textbook on Tagalog grammar in 1940 and a Tagalog-English dictionary.

Bureau of Education Circular No. 6 also provided for the teaching of the national language effective June 19, 1940: …the national language shall be taught forty minutes a day as a regular, required two-semester subject … The national language shall replace an elective in each semester of the second year in normal schools and shall be an additional subject of all secondary schools … (as quoted in Espiritu). This ensured that Filipinos, whose mother tongue was not Tagalog, would be able to learn the language for their use.

Language policy also changed during the Japanese Occupation of the Philippines, resulting in an even greater boost for the use of Tagalog. The popularization of Tagalog was among the basic principles of education outlined by the instructions given by the military administration to the Executive Commission. Both Japanese and Tagalog became the official languages on February 17, 1942. Consequently, in the years that followed, both languages started to be taught in all grades at the elementary and high school levels, literature in Tagalog was encouraged through contests, and the first court decision written in Tagalog was promulgated on July 30, 1942 by the Court of Appeals (Kaplan and Baldauf 2003 71). Moreover, in 1944, a Tagalog institute was opened to enable non-Tagalog teachers to learn the language. While data on the casualties of the Japanese occupation (approximately 27,260 POWs, 17,200 soldiers at the Bataan Death March, and 90,000 civilians, according to Rummel 1997) paint a horrific picture, it was during this time that Tagalog language and literature were able to flourish.

A new policy for schools was adopted in 1957, making the local vernacular the medium of instruction in the first two grades of elementary school, and English after the second grade. The national language, named as Pilipino in a Memorandum by the Department of Education in 1959, was taught as a subject and was also used as an auxiliary medium in the intermediate and high school levels.

If you are a heritage learner studying Filipino at a university, do you ever wonder why your class is named Filipino, while many of the organizations on campus are named Pilipino? For example, at UC Berkeley, among the student groups we have are Pilipino Academic Social Services (PASS) and Pilipino American Alliance (PAA). This comes from the naming of the national language as Pilipino in 1959.

Language policy changed once again with the 1973 constitution. Three years earlier, on August 24, 1970, The Constitutional Convention Act (also known as Republic Act No. 6132) was enacted, providing for the convening of a new Constitutional Convention. Delegates drafted the new constitution from June 1971 until November 1972, but then President Ferdinand E. Marcos declared Martial Law on September 21, 1972. Consequently, the constitution was railroaded through the creation of a citizen’s assembly which ratified the amendments proposed by Marcos, thereby cementing his continued rule, and allowing for a change to a parliamentary government and the abolition of the Senate.

It was, however, the 1973 Constitution that was cognizant of both terms Pilipino and Filipino. Article XV (General Provisions), Section 3, states that:

1. The Constitution shall be officially promulgated in English and in Pilipino, and translated into each dialect spoken by over fifty thousand people and into Spanish and Arabic. In case of conflict, the English text shall prevail.

2. The Batasang Pambansa shall take steps towards the development and formal adoption of a common national language to be known as Filipino.

3. Until otherwise provided by law, English and Pilipino shall be the official languages.

Note that while numbers 1 and 3 use the term Pilipino, number 2 shows a vision of the development of Filipino.

This becomes reality through the 1987 constitution, following the ouster of President Marcos in 1986 and the establishment of a revolutionary government by Corazon Aquino. Article XIV: Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture, and Sports, Sections 6 devoted to language states that:

The national language of the Philippines is Filipino. As it evolves, it shall be further developed and enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other languages.

Through this constitution, the development of a national language was reiterated, with the choice of the term Filipino, coming from the inclusion of the letter F in the new alphabet. Although the orthographic changes will be discussed in greater detail in the succeeding section of this introduction, we need to mention here that these changes were made bearing in mind the letters of other Philippine languages, with F, for example, coming from the languages of the Cordillera region. In explaining the change from Pilipino to Filipino, Filipino language professor and scholar Pamela Constantino writes in the essay Tagalog/Filipino: Do They Differ?:

"Because it was based on Tagalog and usage by the Tagalogs, the non-Tagalogs were not given the opportunity to become part of the enrichment and development of Pilipino. And in the schools, (the word) aklat is more correct (to use) than libro; takdang-aralin than asaynment; pamantasan than kolehiyo/unibersidad; mag-aaral than estudyante. It was quite a long period that Tagalog prevailed and swayed. In applying for a job, for example, teacher and translator in Pilipino, the Tagalog (native speaker) would get hired before the non-Tagalog. What only turned out to be the problem then was which (variety of) Tagalog is more beautiful, better, appropriate that was disputed among the Tagalogs from Bulacan, Laguna, and Batangas. Occurrences such as these were labelled by Professor Leopoldo Yabes then as Tagalog Imperialism. People were so conditioned to Tagalog that in spite of the change on how to call the national language (Pilipino, Filipino), Tagalog was still used by Filipinos and foreigners when referring to it.

This conditioning also brought about the negative reaction from the non-Tagalogs."

However, through the continuing efforts of the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (Filipino Language Commission, KWF), as well as Filipino departments and centers in several universities, and organizations of writers and translators, guidelines on standardization have been successfully disseminated, scholarly works published, and conferences and seminars held. In 2013, the KWF also defined the language through resolution 13-39:

Filipino is the native language being used all over the Philippines as the language of communication, orally as well as written, by native groups from all over the islands. Because it is a living language, it is rapidly being enriched through daily use and through other manners of usage in different places and situations and developed in different levels of research and academic discourse but in an integrative process that gives importance to entries bearing the creative qualities and necessary knowledge from the country’s native languages.

As we study the evolving language Filipino, the orthography changes in the 1987 constitution, and the use of the language today in education and research, a crucial step is to trace the history of its letters.

How can we understand the language through the history of its letters?

An essay I had written for the book Tagalog for Beginners, 2011, but was not published for lack of space, asked the following questions: when do we use din, and when do we use rin? Or for that matter, dito and rito, doon and roon? What is the difference between d and r? I argue that we need to know that in the ancient Tagalog script, the baybayin, there was only one symbol for d and r. But studying the baybayin and the path that Filipino orthography tells us more than the history of d and r. It also tells us about history of colonialism and the nationalist movement for independence.

The Baybayin

The baybayin,⁶ had seventeen (17) basic symbols. Fourteen have the inherent a sound (see the chart in the next page for the symbols representing these Romanized sounds): ka, ga, nga, ta, da, na, pa, ba, ma, ya, la, wa, sa, and ha. Three symbols represented vowel sounds. To change the sound of the consonant symbols, diacritical marks, called kudlit (also called corlit), were used. Placed above a consonant symbol, the sound became an i vowel sound or e; below, it became a u vowel sound or o. For example, the syllable for ba without diacritical marks, became bi with a kudlit above, and bu with a kudlit below. This can be illustrated as follows:

Each symbol, shown in the chart above, signifies a syllable that has a consonant and a vowel. In writing a syllable, however, that has for its components, a consonant, a vowel and a consonant (CVC), the final consonant is simply dropped.

According to William Henry Scott, the baybayin of the Philippines is among the indigenous Southeast Asian alphabets that are derived from India. Thus, they share the Sanskrit characteristic mentioned above—the unmarked symbol is pronounced with the vowel a while the addition of diacritical marks change the vowel. For the past four centuries, this is consistent in documents categorized by Scott as follows: early Spanish works published in a formalized type; Spanish descriptions; old documents and signatures; and contemporary specimens.

The direction of the writing is from left to right, meaning the next letter is written on the right, after a kudlit. Although this has been questioned, Scott’s study offers evidence by saying that Tagalog signatures appear in documents as early as 1603, even among a pageful of Chinese signatures written vertically, often showing a penmanship with a graceful, Spencerian script. The confusion, however, occurs when the writer uses materials which offer more resistance such as bamboo and a knife (as used by the Tagbanua), and the writer holds the bamboo pointing away from the body, to engrave the letters toward or away from himself/herself. Thus, he/she appears to be writing ‘up’ or ‘down’ the bamboo.⁷

The first book published in the Philippines, the Doctrina Christiana en la lengua española y tagala, 1593, contained examples of the baybayin script. The baybayin texts in the book followed both the original text written in Spanish and its Tagalog translation written in Roman letters. Thus, although historical documents such as 16th-century letters signed in baybayin could also be found in the archives of religious congregations, it is the Doctrina that provides historians and linguists with unrevised baybayin symbols. (See the baybayin chart below).

Studies of the baybayin script reveal two characteristics of the Tagalog language that have been passed on to the usage of the national language now known as Filipino. First, there is only one symbol for the letters d and r. The pronunciation depends on the location of the symbol. At the start of the word, it is pronounced d. Between two vowels, it is pronounced r. For example, the word dalita, meaning poverty, starts with the letter d. With the adjectival suffix ma, the word becomes maralita, meaning poor. Thus, in the contemporary use of the Roman alphabet in writing Tagalog, d is written as r. Second, is the symbol for the syllable nga. Written in Roman script, ng remains to be a single letter.⁸

In 1620, Father Francisco Lopez attempted to revise the baybayin script by suggesting a new kudlit shaped like a cross. Placed below a symbol, the cross-shaped kudlit cancelled the inherent a sound. According to Verzosa, 1939, this suggestion was hence called the Belarmino style and was highly recommended by the authorities. This additional kudlit, however, was hardly used.⁹ The unpopularity of the cross-shaped kudlit was remarked upon by Pedro Andres de Castro in his book Ortografia y letras de la lengua tagala, 1783. Apparently, the Filipinos politely refused to use it (from Marcilla 1895: 93-94 as quoted in Scott 59):

They, after much praising of it and giving thanks for it, decided it could not be incorporated into their writing because it was contrary to the intrinsic character and nature which God had given it and that it would destroy the syntax, prosody, and spelling of the Tagalog language all in one blow, but that they did not mean to give offense to the Spanish lords and would be sure that special use would be made of it when writing words from the Spanish language in Tagalog script …

There are several theories on why baybayin ceased to be used by the Filipinos. First, the limitations of the indigenous script, as repeatedly pointed out by the Spanish linguists, in expressing Spanish sounds—and consequently, the new words introduced and used in Philippine colonial society. In Totanes’s Arte de la lengua y manual para la administración de los Santos Sacramentos, 1745, he remarked (Totanes 2 in Rafael 52): "They have no F but they supplement it with a P so they can say confesar, they say kumpisal. Nor ll to say caballo, they say cabayo, because they substitute for it a Y. Nor do they have X, Z, or J…"

The examples given by Totanes, such as confesar (to confess), show the difficulty in writing, through the baybayin, words associated with the religious culture imposed by the Spanish colonizers, or the new imports such as the caballo or horse, which at that point became integrated into everyday Philippine life.

Another reason is the increasing number of Filipinos learning the caton, the system used by the friars in teaching the Roman alphabet. According to Almario (7-8), San Agustin was still criticizing the limitations of the baybayin in 1703 because many Filipinos were still using it while only a few knew the Roman system of writing. However, by the 18th century, very few remained interested in learning the baybayin because the ability to read and write using the Roman system provided them with better chances in acquiring good jobs. This resulted, in two kinds of literacies—the young and the educated knew how to read and write in the Roman system, while the old and the impoverished read and wrote using baybayin. Later, many more would be attracted to learning the Roman system because this provided them with access to literature, from the religious pasyon (passion of Christ) to the metrical romances known as awit and corrido.

Vicente Rafael, in Contracting Colonialism: Translation and Christian Conversion in Tagalog Society Under Early Spanish Rule, 1993, offers another view. Rafael quotes the various criticisms of the Spanish friars of the baybayin, among them: inadequacy (based on Marcilla’s comments that the diacritical marks do not suffice to make the texts readable); ambiguity (the reader needs to guess the breaks in each syllable referred to as suspended consonants by Lopez), and illegibility (de San Agustin’s remarks that two letters can be read eight ways). Rafael notes that the word kudlit also means a scratch in Tagalog.

"This, a kurlit (or kudlit) marks the boundary where writing is given up to voice, that is, the line that by giving value or stress to a syllable determines the sound of the signifier, thus delimiting the range of signifieds that can be attached to it; as called forth a multiplicity of sounds and consequently other signifiers. Hence, from a Spanish point of view, the illegibility and unreadability" of the script results from the lack of a direct and fixed correspondence between script and sound. (Rafael 47).

For Rafael, the Spaniards failed to understand that Filipinos related voice and writing in a different way, and were not disturbed by ambiguity. His observations, however, can be affirmed if we look into indigenous Tagalog poetry, with its images and talinghaga (metaphor) that suggest a multiplicity of interpretations. These indigenous verses, transmitted as oral literature, contrast sharply to the fixed aral or lesson, found at the end of the religious poetry written by Filipinos during the Spanish colonial period.

Thus, while social expediency and practicality may have been valid reasons for the gradual but complete shift to Roman letters, the imposition of a new system of writing also reflected the imposition of the colonizer’s worldview.

The Use of Spanish Orthography

From the 16th to the 19th century, the Tagalog texts written by the Filipinos (or perhaps more accurately, the Tagalogs who lived in the seat of commerce and government) were published using Spanish orthography. Thus, when writing their original works, they now used the letters of the Spanish alphabet: A, B, C, CH, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, L, LL, M, N, Ñ, O, P, Q, R, RR, S, T, U, V, X, Y, Z. Some articles on the history of Tagalog orthography (such as the article Ortograpiyang Filipino: Isang Pag-aaral sa Istandardisasyon ng Wika in the book Pulitika ng Wika, eds Teresita Fortunato and Ma. Stella Valdez) during this period lists the letters k and w, and do not discuss the other characteristics of Spanish orthography as used by the Tagalogs from the 16th to the 19th century. However, according to Virgilio S. Almario’s Tradisyon at Wikang Filipino (Tradition and the Filipino Language), 1997 as well as my own observations from studying the Tagalog dedication in verse, entitled Ala purissima virgen y verdadera madre de dios madre rey, found in Fray Francisco San Jose’s Arte y reglas de la lengua tagala, 1610, and in Modesto de Castro’s Pagsusulatan nang Dalauang Binibini na si Urbana at Feliza Na Nagtuturo ng Mabuting Kaugalian (Letters Between Two Young Women Urbana and Feliza—That Teach Fine Manners), 1864, the following can be observed:

1. The letter k was not used during this time. The reason why it exists in the new Spanish orthography is because of loan words in contemporary Spanish. From the 16 th to the 19 th century, It was substituted by:

a. c such as capantay (today spelled as kapantay , meaning equal) and caavay (today spelled as kaaway , meaning enemy), both words found in San Jose;

b. q, such as quinalulugdan (now spelled kinalulugdan which means something/or someone one is fond of); or daquilang (now spelled dakila meaning great), both words found in de Castro;

c. or cq such as bacquin (now spelled bakit , example given by Almario).

2. The letter w was also not used. Instead:

3. The dipthong iw was spelled io such as mapañgalio (now spelled mapang-aliw , meaning gives pleasure); or iu such as aliu (also spelled alio , now spelled aliw , meaning pleasure)

4. The dipthong aw was spelled ao such as malinao (now spelled malinaw , meaning clear,) found in San Jose

5. The letter y was used for sound for the short i such as in the words Yna (now spelled ina , meaning mother), and ycao (now spelled ikaw , meaning you,) found in San Jose

6. The letter f was usually used for the sound of s although s was used in the word maralas . Examples are fanglibutan (now spelled sanglibutan , meaning the whole world) and cafalanan (now spelled kasalanan , meaning wrongdoing). The letter f was also used for p as in fangongofap . However, this observation is not true in the 19th century text, leading us to believe that it could be so because of printing limitations in the earlier text.

7. The sound ng was written as g with a ˜ above it, as in the words manga ¹⁰ (word that indicates the plural form for the noun following it), and langit meaning heaven.

In 1610, Tomas Pinpin, a Filipino¹¹ who was then working for the Dominican press, published Librong Pag-aaralan ng mga Tagalog nang uicang Caftilla (The Book that the Tagalogs Should Use in Learning Spanish). In the first chapter of the book, he advises fellow Filipinos to study Spanish orthography first: "Hindi magaling na itoloy co, itong aral cong ito, cundi co mona kayo aralan, mga capoua co Tagalog nang di pagturing nang ibang mga letrang, na di natin tinotoran torang dati, ang uala nga fa uica nating Tagalog. (It would not be wise that I continue this lesson, if you, my fellow Tagalog, do not study the letters that we do not know, that we do not have in Tagalog.) (Pinpin 1610 in Almario 54.) Virgilio S. Almario, former Director of the University of Philippines Sentro ng Wikang Filipino or UP Filipino Language Center, in his article on Pinpin, also noted how Pinpin explained the differences between p and f, i and e, and o and u. Almario also pointed out that four centuries later, many Filipinos still find it difficult to distinguish the f from the p sound and how the name Nena in Bulacan (Central Luzon), becomes Nina" in Cebu (an island in the Visayas region).¹²

The following quote from Pinpin (as quoted in Almario 55), also shows how in the 17th century, the Filipinos were still grasping the Spanish orthography:

…Ay ang lubha ninyong napagcamalan ay ang i at ang e fampon nang o at nang u at fa pagfulat man at fa pangongofap man ay inyong pinagpalit nang maralas, at fiya ding iquinalalayong lubha nang fangongofap niyo nang uicang Caftilla, fa totoong catouiran…

"You usually make a mistake in using i and e and also, o and u, both in writing and speaking, you interchange these, and thus you make your speech far from the Spanish language, and that is the reason…"

Two hundred years later, Filipinos/Tagalogs were adapting the Spanish orthography by writingTagalog words using Spanish letters. An example is Pagsusulatan nang Dalauang Binibini na si Urbana at Feliza Na Nagtuturo ng Mabuting Kaugalian (Letters Between Two Young Women Urbana and Feliza—That Teach Fine Manners) by Modesto de Castro, 1864¹³:

"Paunaua sa Babasa,

Cayo mañga binata ang inaalayan ko nitong munting buñga nang pagod, cayü ang aquing tinutungo¹⁴, at ipinamamanhic sa inyo na aco, i, pagdalitaang dinguin."

(Note to the Reader,

It is to you, young men, that I offer this humble fruit of my labor, you are the ones I address, and I ask you to hear me out.)

Thus, D. Pedro Serrano Laktaw’s Diccionario Tagalog-Hispano, 1914, concludes that Tagalog spelling has three stages (as of 1914): the first stage, (1571–1754)¹⁵ marked by the introduction of the Roman alphabet; the second stage (1754–1889), which he calls the "period of confusion and retrogression because of the use of unnecessary vowels and spellings from the Spanish orthography; and the third stage (1889–1913), where the former letters of the baybayin, w and k were reintroduced.¹⁶

This third stage could largely be attributed to the studies and recommendations of 19th-century Filipino scholars. Foremost among them was Jose Rizal,¹⁷ who wrote the article "Sobre la nueva ortografia de la lengua Tagalog" in 1890 and published it in La Solidaridad, the newspaper of the Propaganda Movement.¹⁸ Other studies are: Contribucion para estudio de los antiguos alfabetos Filipinos, 1884 and El sanscrito en la lengua tagala, 1887, both by Trinidad Herminigildo Pardo de Tavera; Diccionario hispano-tagalog, 1889, by Pedro Serrano Laktaw; and Los antiguos alfabetos de Filipinas, 1895 by Wenceslao E. Retana.

A New Orthography as Suggested by Pedro Serrano Laktaw

Laktaw’s dictionary, published in 1889 is considered to be the first complete dictionary written by a Filipino during the Spanish colonial period. Viveca Hernandez’s study of Laktaw’s work reveals that Laktaw proposed a new way of writing. He claimed that this new system made it easier to distinguish suffixes from root words. He also changed the 11 letters from Spanish (c, ch, f, j, ll, ñ, q, rr, v, x and z). The chart below shows a summary of Laktaw’s proposals (Hernandez 10):

On the rightmost side of the chart, therefore, we can see the inconsistencies of the dictionary.

A New Orthography as Suggested by Jose Rizal

In Rizal’s article, he acknowledges the publication of Pardo de Tavera’s El sanscrito en la lengua tagala, and remarks that Tavera’s work employed an orthography more perfect than I imagined though placing it, that is, the formed spelling of the word, in parenthesis in the transcription of the words. (Rizal, Jose 1890 trans. by Manuel 350). Rizal then praises the three vowels and fourteen consonants of the ancient Tagalog alphabet, saying that these characters have continuously been able to express the words of the language. Although he did not specifically mention Pinpin’s observation nor quote Pinpin to dispute the latter’s criticism of the baybayin, Rizal explained in detail that the Tagalogs did not use i and e and o and u indifferently. The use of i, for example, is imposed in the middle or the end of words, rejecting e. Thus, Tagalogs never say selid instead of silid (meaning room).

Rizal then proceeds to suggest the following changes to Tagalog orthography:

1. The use of the letter K, which is not found in Spanish orthography. K not only has a value more fixed than c and q, but also facilitates the grammatical formulation of verbs whose roots begin with ka and ku. Also, the Tagalog syllables ka, ki, ko, ku do not sound the same as the Spanish ca, qui, co, qu, because the Tagalog k is subtly aspirated.

2. The use of the letter W as equal to u, as seen in the words wala (nothing) instead of uala and araw (sun) and arau , in which u is not a vowel but a consonant, and does not form a dipthong but a full and perfect syllable.

3. The long and stressed vowel should be marked with a grave accent (à) in stressed words, as punò (tree) and tamà (correct), because in these vowels, the long vowel has the tonic accent; but when this accent falls on the last vowel, the circumflex shall be used as in masamâ (bad). This rule makes writing simpler.

4. Words currently written with a hyphen because they are contractions, for example mas-dan (from masidan , or to look) and palab-sin (from palabasin , or to let out), should use an apostrophe, thus mas’dan or palab’sin instead, or leave it without a hyphen.

5. The nasal guttural ng could be simplified into g, for historical reasons, and also for simplicity, clarity, and logic.

6. The substantive particle ay when joined with another word ending with a vowel should be written as ako’y (I am) instead of ako’i , because there is no reason for the change of y into i.

Rizal then concludes his essay by saying that the new orthography is logical and easy as it is the national writing.

Standardization of Tagalog Orthography

It was only, in the 1930s, however, that efforts were made to standardize Tagalog orthography with the establishment of the Surian ng Wikang Pambansa (Institute of National Language) in 1935 as discussed earlier. Santos’s Balarila has twenty letters, A, B, K, D, E G, H, I, L, M, N, NG, O, P, R, S, T, U, W, and Y, with five vowels, A, E, I, O, U and the fifteen consonants, B, K, D, G, H, L, M, N, NG, P, R, S, T, W and Y.

With the incorporation of K and W, this alphabet followed the suggestion of Rizal. Moreover, with the objective of the standardization of spelling, it removed the letters from the Roman alphabet that were used in spelling words that needed specific Tagalog sounds such as that produced by the letter K. Thus, we no longer find in this 1940 orthography the letters C, Q, and Ñ. Moreover, the identity of NG was recognized, which, according to Almario, was written as g with a ~ (tilde) above it during the Spanish colonial period.

The Filipino alphabet has changed twice since then. In 1973, it was recorded to have had 31 letters. However, this did not make much of an impact, as educational institutions, writers and editors seem to have followed the letters and guidelines set by the Balarila during succeeding decades. Finally in 1987, 8 more letters were added to the original 20 letters above of the Balarila. These were C, F, J, Ñ, Q, V, X, and Z. It is believed that only by adding these letters can Filipino truly incorporate words from other Philippine languages. With these new letters, the new orthography recognizes not only the F in the Cordillera languages, but also the V in Ibanag, and the J in Ivatan. Thus, the creation of a new orthography is not just a political act that recognizes the need for a national language that responds to all the ethnolinguistic groups. By modernizing Filipino orthography, the national language remains relevant to the needs of Philippine society.

The need for standardization has also been responded to by the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (KWF) and other groups. Currently headed (as of 2016) by National Artist for Literature Virgilio S. Almario, among the downloadable publications are Manwal sa Masinop na Pagsulat (Effective Writing Manual), Patnubay sa Korespondenisya Opisyal (Guide to Official Correspondence), and Baybayin: Ortograpiya at mga Tuntunin sa Wikang Filipino (Baybayin: Orthography and Rules for the Filipino Language). Other spelling guidebooks are Gabay sa Editing ng Wikang Filipino (tuon sa pagbaybay) (Guide to Editing in Filipino [emphasis on spelling]) published by the Sentro ng Wikang Filipino (Filipino Language Center) of the University of the Philippines Diliman. These guides have informed the spelling used in this dictionary.

What makes this dictionary different from other dictionaries? How were the entries selected in this dictionary?

This dictionary differs from existing dictionaries because of the following:

First, is the way the words are organized. Taking into account the nature of the Tagalog language where a word can become a noun, a verb, and adjective or an adverb through the use of nominal, verbal, and adjectival affixes, the entries usually are ordered in the following manner: noun, verb, adjective, adverb. Where a word is inherently a descriptive word, for example payat (thin) then, the entry is classified as an adjective. Then the noun kapayatan (thinness) comes next, followed by pumayat (became thin) a verb. Phrases, idioms and other related terms are also given. For example,

administer V manage mamahala, mangasiwa (AV) pamahalaan, pangasiwaan (PV) administration N administrasyon, pamahalaan, pangasiwaan administrative ADJ administratibo administrator N administrador, tagapamahala, tagapangasiwa

Furthermore, verbs are classified as AV (active verb) or PV (passive verb). Most commonly, active verbs use the following affixes: -um-, mag-, ma-, mang-, makapag-, magkaroon, maging + adjective or noun. When the verbs are AV, the doers of action are the pronouns and nouns in the nominative case or the ones used as subjects of the sentence: ang/ang mga + noun; si/sina + names of persons or pets; ako (I), ikaw, ka (you), siya (he/she), tayo (we, inclusive), kami (we, exclusive), kayo (you, plural), sila (they), ito, iyan, iyon (this, that, that over there). When the verbs are passive (PV), the doers of action are in the genitive or NG case: ng/ng mga + noun; ni/ nina + names of persons or pets; ko, mo, niya, natin, namin, ninyo, nila, nito, niyan, niyon.

Second, the dictionary includes new words that have been incorporated into the Filipino language. For example, ading (younger sibling), a word in Ilocano, has been adopted into Filipino to refer to younger siblings. In Tagalog, the words ate (older sister) and kuya (older brother) are used not only to address family members but also to emphasize familiarity (for example, with co-workers), discourage romance (in situations like field work), and gain favors (when haggling at a market). While there are other words used to refer to siblings, for example ditse (second eldest sister), sanse (third eldest sister), diko (second eldest brother) and sangko (third eldest brother), apparently derived from Hokkien Chinese, no Tagalog word exists to address a younger sibling.

Third, colloquial and slang words are included, and obviously earlier dictionaries, for example, those published fifty years ago, would not have these words. An example is bading, defined as a gay male. Similarly, the word bagyo is defined not only by its indigenous meaning storm, but also as a slang word for someone extremely beautiful.

Fourth, it lists words influenced by contemporary political and social conditions and issues. An example is the word desaparecido, originally used in Latin America, to refer to a missing or abducted person, usually by the military. Similarly, the word tuta is given not only the meaning puppy, but also lap dog or puppet, as it was used to refer to politicians deemed to be puppets of former American colonizers.

Fifth, this dictionary recognizes that some terms are pejorative, and thus hints that these words should be used with caution. Among these words are kerida, a pejorative term for women having an affair with a married man, and atsay/atsoy, pejorative terms for female/male domestic helpers. As editors, Nenita Pambid-Domingo, Romulo Baquiran, Jr. and I believed that dictionaries are written from a particular worldview or perspective, and for this dictionary we wanted to point out terms that could be considered discriminatory of gender, race, age, body shape and class.

Sixth, spelling was informed by the latest guidelines of the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (Filipino Language Commission). Thus, words like bagong-tao (young man) is spelled as such instead of the former spelling bagung-tao, with the latter listed as a variant.

Seventh, we opted to use a simplified pronunciation guide. For example, for abdikasyon (abdication), we chose to write the pronunciation as [ab-di-ka-shon]. Why? Because no one really says ab-di-ka-si-yon. Also, because stress is often in the penultimate syllable, we did not put stress marks in a word such as dehado (at a disadvantage) which just appears as [de-ha-do].

How do we pronounce words in Tagalog/Filipino?

So, as you can see from the simplicity of the pronunciation guide, with the exception of words such as the marker ng (pronounced nang) and words such as mga (pronounced manga), speaking in Filipino is basically guided by this rule: "Kung ano ang bigkas, siyang baybay, at kung ano ang baybay, siyang bigkas." Say it the way it is spelled and spell it the way you say it.

In my book Tagalog for Beginners, I turned to earlier studies and explanations of the sounds of the language. What has been written however, may seem a bit technical for the average user. For example, The Structure of Tagalog, 1980 by Cecilio Lopez, based on his earlier work A Manual of the Philippine National Language, 1941, lists 21 segmental phonemes and one supra-segmental phonemic contract (with fourteen consonants, five vowel phonemes, and two front-vowel phonemes). Schachter 1972, points out that the five vowel phonemes are: the high-vowel phonemes /i/ and /u/; the mid-vowel phonemes /e/ and /o/ and one vowel phoneme with a range from mid to low /a/. From the point of view of tongue frontness, there are two front-vowel phonemes, /i/ and /e/ (characterized by spread lips), one central-vowel phoneme, /a/ (neutral lip position), and two back-vowel phonemes, /o/ and /u/ (rounded lips.)

The useful chart on page xlv, Tagalog/Filipino Sound is from Schachter 1972.

One should also remember that while there are no aspirated sounds in Filipino, there are Tagalog diphthongs: ew, iw (front); ay, ey, aw (center); and oy, uy (back).

Some examples are:

In using this book, what is most useful are five principal stress and three principal accents in Tagalog/Filipino.¹⁹

1. Penultimate stress or diíng malumay . The stress is on the syllable before the last.

2. Penultimate stress and glottal or diíng malumì . The stress is either on the penultimate syllable, or the first syllable in words with only two syllables. The vowel at the end is given a glottal sound, produced by the abrupt closing of the throat. For example, awà (meaning pity) given with a grave on the second vowel, is sometimes confusing to my students (when reading old texts) and making them think the accent is on the last syllable.

3. Acute stress or diíng mabilís . The stress is on the last syllable. In old texts, the acute or pahilís accent is used. For example, labás (meaning outside).

4. Acute glottal or diíng maragsâ . The emphasis is on the last syllable with the glottal sound. In old texts, the circumflex or pakupyâ accent is used. For example, tuyô (meaning dry).

5. Antepenultimate acute stress or diíng mariín . This is a heavy stress given to a syllable before the penultimate syllable. The acute accent is used. Note that there may exist another stress in a word. For example, lílima (only five).

To further guide speakers, Aspillera 1980, also gave the following pronunciation reminders:

1. A difference in stress may cause a change in the meaning of the word

2. With the addition of a ligature or suffix, the final glottal stop is lost

3. Monosyllabic words take the stress of the preceding word

4. To avoid mispronunciation, a glottal stop between a vowel and a consonant is represented by a hyphen.