Department of Language and Literature, De La Salle University, 2401 Taft Avenue, Manila 1004, Republic of the Philippines
The article begins with the language profile of the Philippines based on census dataand the sociolinguistics and historical literature of the languages (local and second,largely English) in the country. The uses of the languages in various domains, espe-cially in the field of education are described, and current policy on the Philippineversion of bilingual education discussed and evaluated. In the third section, on lan-guage policy and planning, a historical sketch of language planning from laws enacted,revised and policies implemented is given. The prospects for the future are weighedand some guesses and estimates made on the future of the local languages and thesecond language, English.
The national language of the Philippines is
, a language in the process ofmodernisation; it is based on the Manila lingua franca which is fast spreadingacross the Philippines and is used in urban centres in the country.
, it is named in the l987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippinesas a language that will be enriched with elements (largely vocabulary) from theother Philippine languages and non-local languages used in the Philippines.
, the structural base of Filipino is Tagalog, a language spoken in Manila andin the provinces of Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Quezon, Camarines Norte tothe south of Manila and Bulacan, Nueva Ecija, and part of Tarlac to the north ofManila. The enrichment has been going on as the language spreads itself throughthe mass media and as a medium of instruction in schools at all levels. Thevocabulary enrichment comes from the Philippine languages other than Tagalogand from second languages spoken in the archipelago, largely English andearlier, Spanish, together with Arabic and Sanskrit as remnants of an earlierpolitical period when the islands maintained contact with Malay culture in thesouth (largely Borneo) and Malacca in the west.In l959, Tagalog, which was renamed
(National Language) by President Manuel L. Quezon in l939, was renamed by the Secretary ofEducation, Jose Romero, as
to give it a national rather than ethnic labeland connotation. The changing of the name did not, however, result in betteracceptance at the conscious level among non-Tagalogs, especially CebuanoBisayans who had not accepted the selection of Tagalog by the NationalLanguage Institute in l937 as the basis of the national language. The oppositioncontinued, and shortly after the renaming of
as Pilipino, a querycame from Hiligaynon Bisayan Congressman Inocencio Ferrer challenging the
0143-4632/98/05 0487-39 $10.00/0© 1998 A. Gonzalez, FSC JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENTVol. 19, No. 5&6, 1998