A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE VERB SYSTEMS

OF TAGALOG AND CAVITE CHABACANO

IN CAVITE CITY, CAVITE

Research Paper
Submitted to the Faculty of the
Department of Language and Mass Communication
Cavite State University
Indang, Cavite

In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the subject
ENGL90A – Language Research

ALDRIN A. ALCEDO
JENNIFER R. DALIT
JHADE JEN A. JACINTO
DAISY B. LO
JENIFFER B. PLANAS
JOEYLYN P. PAGUNTALAN
DEAZERIE VIR G. VILLAHERMOSA
September 2018
 INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Language, according to Gumperz (2009), is the most potent tool for verbal

contacts due to its adaptability. It has always been a crucial factor in the biological,

sociological, historical and cultural development of mankind. The fundamental mode of

intercommunication since the prehistoric period has evolved, became more complex,

and branched into richer although diverse majority and minority dialects around the

globe. It is said that of the 6,000 languages of today (Wurm, 2001), partly have less

than 10,000 speakers and a quarter less than 1,000. However, Cerny (2010) points out

and presuppose that these languages are very susceptible from becoming extinct, in

which half of the numbers are likely to disappear in the course of the 21st century. A

very disturbing case for language is extremely significant in preserving the local identity

and ethnicity of people, in a larger context, humanity’s progress and survival. (Abbang,

2014)

Philippine Creole Spanish (PCS), also known as Cavite Chabacano (CC), is a

Spanish lexified contact language spoken in Cavite City in the area of Manila Bay,

Philippines. The language is one of several varieties that formed during the Spanish

colonial period in the Philippines, which lasted from 1571 until the American invasion in

1898. Chabacano is one of three remaining Spanish-lexified creoles in the world; CC is

furthermore atypical as it is the only Spanish-lexified creole language in Asia.

 Due to this, the researchers decided to conduct the research to increase self-

awareness about the preservation of Cavite Chabacano avoiding ethnocentrism and

leading to intercultural communication.

This paper examines the contrasting verbs in Tagalog and Cavite Chabacano. To

do so it is necessary to apply the method of contrasting analysis, which presupposes

the fact that in each language and there are certain elements which can be described

as mutually similar or different, therefore this type of analysis attempts to establish and

explain the aforementioned similarities and differences. (Dordevic, 2000).

The study aims to highlight the historical backgrounds of Tagalog and Cavite

Chabacano with the goal of contributing to the contrastive analysis of morphological and

syntactical aspects of the two given languages and the possible implications of its

analysis.

Review of Related Literature

Contrastive Analysis

According to Per Egil Hegge (1999), contrastive analysis is the systematic

comparison of two or more languages with the aim of describing their similarities and

differences. CA has often been done for pedagogical/practical purposes. The aim has

been to provide better descriptions and better teaching materials for language learners.

There is more to CA than this, however. When we compare, we often see things more

clearly.
 Contrastive linguistics is a sub-discipline of linguistics. It is concerned with the

comparison of two or more languages or a system of languages in order to determine

both the differences that hold between them. German linguist L.Zabrocki (1976) and

others refer to it as “Kontrsative linguistik” ; while Akhmanova & Melencuk (1977) call it

“linguistic confrontation”. However, the term contrastive analysis or contrastive study is

more frequently used in the context of this kind of investigation.

Contrastive analysis has two versions- (i) the strong version and (ii) the weak

version. In the first version, that is, the strong version; the system of one language such

as the grammar, phonology and lexicon is contrasted with the system of a second

language in order to predict the difficulties a speaker of a second language confronts in

learning the first language and thereby to construct reading materials to help him or her

learn that language. Though, most of the supporters of the theory base their claim; it is

in realistic and impartible as it makes a lot of demand on the linguist. It requires them a

lot of time to arrive at definitive results.

According to Hong Ghee Seah (1981), contrastive analysis used to be the major

field in applied linguistics concerned with drawing the pedagogical implications of

structural differences and similarities between languages. Its main objective was that of

facilitating the learning of a second language. The literature of applied linguistics during

the fifties and sixties illustrates these concerns. The changing view of language and

language learning brought by generative grammar has broadened the school of

contrastive analysis both in the direction of more theoretical objectives such as the

search for linguistics universals in typology and in the direction of psycholinguistics

concerned with the explanation of second language learning.

 According to Lee (1968), contrastive analysis was placed on a pedestal and

unanimously acclaimed as a breakthrough and as a pedagogical panacea for all major

problems in second language learning and teaching. The optimism which was

generated about the possibilities of contrastive analysis led to an over application

among its proponents who were not hesitant to make some over claims.it gave rise to a

strong version of the contrastive analysis hypothesis.

Contrastive analysis is inevitably related both to grammatical models and

linguistic theories. Its assumptions, the rigor and sophistication of its comparisons and

the form of contrastive statements of all change from time to time reflecting the changes

in linguistic theory. Thus, the structural contrastive approach which was most used has

been criticized as based on the structuralists’ inadequate conception of the structure of

a language as a unique self-sufficient system, and for its emphasis on diversity rather

than universality. It would follow logically that languages cannot be compared.

Moreover, the structural approach admits only of a comparison of surface structures

which yields a taxonomy of forms. Dingwall (1964), Nickel and Wagner (1968), and Di

Pietro (1971), among many others, criticize taxonomic contrastive analysis for its

preoccupation with the surface structure of language.

Morphological and Syntactical Aspect

Grammar describes the structure of a language which consists of two major

parts: morphology and syntax.

Morphology is the study of the language’s smallest unit of meaning, called

morphemes – prefixes, suffixes and root words – and how these units are properly
combined. Rules for altering root words to produce such things as plurals, past tenses,

and inflections are parts of a language’s morphological system.

Syntax specifies how words are combined into sentences. Each language has

syntactic rules for grammatical relations such as negation, interrogation, possession

and juxtaposition of subject and object. The rules of syntax allow us to vary word order

so that we are not limited to one way of saying what we mean.

Grammar is organized hierarchically according to the sides of the units it

contains, and most accounts of grammar would organize the sentence as the largest

unit, with a clause, phrase, word and morpheme following as progressively smaller

units.

The sentence also contains words that are made up from smaller grammatical

constituents known as morphemes. Certain of these morphemes, the ‘root’ morphemes,

can stand as in individual words in their own right, whereas others, such as prefixes and

suffixes, depend for their meaning on being conjoined or bound to other items.

Tagalog

Tagalog is derived from “taga-ilog” which literally means “from the river”. Tagalog

is an Austronesian language belonging to the Malayo-Polynesian sub-family, with

outside influences from Malay and Chinese, and later from both Spanish and American

English through four centuries of colonial rule. This influence is seen in Tagalog words

and spelling.
 Tagalog had its own writing system based on an ancient script called the

“Baybayin” that uses a syllabic alphabet, which the Spanish colonialist Romanized.

Even the modern alphabet has been changed several times to incorporate foreign

sounds from both Spanish and English.

There are more than 50 million speakers of Tagalog in the Philippines, mostly in

the southern parts of Luzon, the archipelago’s largest island. Other dialects spoken in

the Philippines include Cebuano, Ilocano, Waray-Waray, Hiligaynon, Pangasinense,

Bicol, Maranao, Maguindanao, Tausug and Kapampangan, but the official language,

Filipino, is based on Tagalog. There are also significant numbers of Tagalog speaking

communities in other countries, with the largest in the United States where it ranks as

the 6th spoken language.

Cavite

Cavite belongs to the CALABARZON region and bounded in the north by the

province of Manila, in the South by Batangas, in the East by Laguna, and in the west by

Manila Bay and Corregidor. The province is divided between the highlands, or towns in

the mountains, and lowlands, cities near the coast. (Pérez, 2015)

Cavite is named as the historical capital of the Philippines. It is the cradle of

Philippine Revolution and birthplace of Philippine independence. Cavite got its name

from a Tagalog word “kawit” which means “hook” owing to the hook shaped land on the

old Spanish map. The land was formerly known as Tangway, where Spanish authorities

constructed a fort from which the city of Cavite rose. Archeological evidence in coastal

areas show pre-historic settlements. According to local folklore, the earliest settlers of
Cavite came from Borneo. In the 1600, encomiendas or Spanish royal land grants

where given in Cavite and Maragondon.

Chabacano and Cavite Chabacano

According to linguists, Chabacano, also known as Philippine Creole Spanish, is a

group of creoles spoken in two regions of the Philippines, on Southern Mindanao and

Northern Luzon in Cavite Province, south of Manila Bay. It was in the Spanish era of the

Philippines when Chabacano language evolved, which lasted from 16 th century until

1898, when American troops controlled the said islands. Most Filipinos never spoke

Chabacano until the 18th century when there was a widespread teaching of Spanish

through the priests preaches using their own language. There are two remaining Manila

Bay Creoles (Cavite Chabacano), one spoken in Ternate, at the mouth of Manila Bay,

and one in Cavite City much closer to Manila. Ternate Chabacano and Cavite

Chabacano each has about 3,000 remaining speakers, but in Cavite City it is only about

3% of the overall population. On the UNESCO (2003) scale of language endangerment,

Cavite Chabacano marked as severely endangered and not stable, where most of the

speakers are of the grandparental generation or older. Cavite City is much more urban

and integrated with Metro Manila, and heavily influenced by English as well as

Tagalog/Filipino, which are the two official languages of the country. Spanish is no

longer spoken in the said town except by a few residents, most of whom are older, and

college educated.
Research Questions

This study presents to compare, and contrast Tagalog and Cavite Chabacano

verbs used in Cavite City, Cavite.

Specifically, it aims to answer the following questions:

1. What are the historical backgrounds of Tagalog and Cavite Chabacano?

2. How do Tagalog and Cavite Chabacano verbs differ in morphological aspect?

3. What are the possible implications of analysis of Tagalog and Cavite

Chabacano verbs?

Theoretical Framework

This study will be anchored to the Contrastive Analysis of Tagalog and Malay

Verbs of Porciuncula, L.P.,2011. The study analyzed the differences of the two

languages. The two languages focus on the verb systems of both languages, Tagalog

and Malay. This will help us to learn Malay language, there may be some differences in

terms of structure, function and tense – but these differences are not that big. Moreover,

they share plenty of words that have the same (or almost the same) sound and

meaning, and this only intensifies the “closeness” of the two languages. After all,

Tagalog and Malay are not that different at all.

The contrastive analysis will serve as the bilingual communication model that

possess the rules existing in the verb systems of the two languages, Tagalog and

Cavite Chabacano. The study will relate to the intercultural communication of the

possible implications of analysis on the specific language.

Conceptual Framework

History of
Language Origin

Rules existing in
Verb System Chabacano and Tagalog

Verb Samples
Terms

Contrastive Analysis of
morphological aspect
Samples
 Analysis

Purpose of the
importance of the study
Implications