(MindaNews / 12 August) – Every Buwan ng Wika we debate about whether Filipino should be utilized more prominently by government instead of English. The rationale given is that the latter discriminates against the “masa”, the code word for poor Filipinos.
The premise here is that poor Filipinos struggle mightily with the English language. This seems inconsistent though with official statistics that show majority of Filipinos are functionally literate as far as English is concerned. For how else would Hollywood, the NBA and Taylor Swift dominate the consciousness of millions of Filipinos?
At the core of the debate lies Article XIV, Section 7 of the 1987 Constitution which prescribes the language to be used by government, to wit: “For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines are Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English.”
Thus, we have two official languages, Filipino and English. However, since the American colonial period, our government has always used English as its favored language of communication. This is the reason why our laws, court decisions and other state documents are all in English.
Pertinently, Section 6 provides 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.
Subject to provisions of law and as the Congress may deem appropriate, the Government shall take steps to initiate and sustain the use of Filipino as a medium of official communication and as language of instruction in the educational system.”
Two points need to be raised here. First, while the language of government, of legislation, and of the courts in the Philippines continues to be English, there are institutional mechanisms that facilitate the translation of any official communication or proceedings to Filipino. For instance, every court of justice in the country has an official translator. State documents such as our certificate of live birth also has an integrated translation to Filipino.
Second, the use of Filipino as the language of the nation is suspect because it is basically a Tagalog clone and is very rarely spoken by nationals outside the Tagalog-speaking region. There are actually over 120 languages spoken in the Philippines. Without a doubt, this necessitates a rethinking of the constitutional designation of Filipino as our one and only national language.
Indeed, our language diversity should be more prominently and officially celebrated because it reflects the narrative that is real to all Filipinos. The promotion of Filipino as the primary language of the state can discriminate against non-Tagalog speakers in the country. Imposing this contrived language on the population reeks of Manila imperialism. I know that many non-Tagalog speaking Filipinos resent the fact that their mother tongue is relegated simply as “regional” language.
Obviously, nothing can change the constitutional recognition of Filipino as our national language except Cha-Cha. Nonetheless, the linguistic diversity of the Philippines should be entrenched in the national curriculum. Doing this could provide young Filipinos the opportunity to learn the various local histories and eclectic cultures of our island nation.
Just imagine a college freshman in Dagupan, Pangasinan actually having the option of studying closely the Tausug language, learning the epic stories of the Sulu sultanate, and understanding the roots of Islam in the country. This is a chance at profound cultural scholarship that was never available to me and many from my generation.
We should be celebrating the various languages being used in the country this month. This should be the time when Filipinos proudly promote the language of their community and the history they represent. Unity in diversity must be the guiding principle of our nation-building effort. The more we try to artificially create uniformity, the weaker our sense of nation will become.
(MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. Michael Henry Yusingco, LL.M is a law lecturer, policy analyst and constitutionalist.)