Review

Author(s): Fe Aldave-Yap
Review by: Fe Aldave-Yap
Source: Philippine Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1/2 (First & Second Quarters 1974), pp. 212-215
Published by: Ateneo de Manila University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42634551
Accessed: 02-01-2016 17:21 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Ateneo de Manila University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philippine Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 140.127.23.2 on Sat, 02 Jan 2016 17:21:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
212 PHILIPPINESTUDIES

Muchresearch hasbeendoneon theAudiencia, butthereis no studyof

the Manilacabildo.The actas (minutes)of theManilacabildo'smeetings
forthe eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are preserved in the National
Archives. Thiscedulariomaystimulate someoneto thisneglectedarea of
Filipinolife.
It maybe worthwhile quotingthe abstractof the secondroyaldecree
in thecollection.
Cédulade 21. de Juniode 1574.por
la qual mandaS. M. que estaCiudadse
tituleinsigneM.N. y S.L.C, de Manila.
Apparently itisnotonlypresentdayFilipinoswhodelight in abbreviations.
M. N. and S. L. C. surelycould not meananything but muynobleand
siempreleal ciudad.Muynobledoes not appearin thetextof thedecree.
Anotherinteresting itemis thevariantYo el Rei in thetextforYo el Rey.
Thelatterisincorporated intheSeal oftheBureauof RecordsManagement
(NationalArchives) ofthePhilippines.
The editorsprovidecompelling reasonsforreprinting thecedulario.The
scarcity of the printed version.The almost total absence of any other
collectionoflawsforthePhilippines. Thissmallcollectionoflawsprovides
an epitomeof socialand civiclegislation. Whilethereis disparity between
thelawanditsobservance, thelegislation providesa touchstone forjudging
thebasicattitudesof thelawmakers. But moreimportant thanthestudy
of these laws, taken with the completecorpusof Philippinecolonial
legislation,
is the determination of ifand how theselaws werefulfilled andthe
degree of their on
impact Philippine society.Spanish legislationwas
a key factorin the destruction or transformation of pre-hispanic
Philippine society.If forno otherreasonit is worthy of meticulous
investigation.
V. L. Badillo

MAKABAGONGBALARILA NG WIKANGTAGALOG.By TeodoroA.

Llamzon,S.J., Fe Laura del Rosarioand MarinellaSanchez.Quezon
City:Ateneode ManilaUniversity Press,1974. xii, 133 pages."P14.00
paper.

This book is an effortto bringLope K. Santos*Balarilaup to date.

Balarilawas written in 1939, and is stillthebasisoftextbookson Tagalog
Structurein ourPhilippineschools,bothprivateandpublic.As theauthors
themselves statein the"Pambungad"(Introduction), theMAKABAGONG
BALARILA (henceforth MB) buildson theworkof pastgrammarians and
attempts to modernizethem.It does not demolishtheresultsofprevious
effortsto describethe complexities of theNationalLanguage.In fact,the

This content downloaded from 140.127.23.2 on Sat, 02 Jan 2016 17:21:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BOOK REVIEWS 213

authorscorrectly predictthat,althoughtheirworkis basedon themost

moderntechniquesand theoriesof scientific it is possiblethat
linguistics,
withina decadeor two,it mayin itsturnbecome"obsolete"- suchis the
rapidityofprogress inlinguistictheorytoday.
This book is important fortwo reasons:(a) it is based on the most
moderntechniques ofgrammatical i.e. thetransformational
analysis, model,
as thiswas elaboratedby Noam Chomskyin his 1965 book Aspectsof a
Theoryof Syntax , and as thismodelwas appliedto Englishstructure by
Jacobsand Rosenbaumin theirbook EnglishTransformational Grammar
(1968); and (b) it is writtenentirelyin Tagalog,thusproviding the class-
roomteacherwiththe necessary termsthattheyneedto explain
scientific
the complexities of Tagalogin Tagalog.Let me discussboththesepoints
in greater
detail.
The book is dividedintotwo parts:PartA - PhraseStructure Rules,
and Part B - Transformational Rules. The firstpart givesthe phrase
structurerulesof Tagalog,usingtheFunctional-Structural Approachof the
LinguisticSchool of Prague.Essentially, the phrase-structural rulesof a
languagefurnishstructural descriptionsto the variousutterancesof a
language,Theserules,in otherwords,identify theconstituent partsof the
utterancesof a languageand describetheirrelationships in termsof the
whole.Theyspecifywhether theutterance is well-formedor not.Theyare,
therefore,usuallystatedin the formof equationswiththreeparts:(1) a
symbolon the leftto signify the whole; (2) an equationsymbolin the
middle(Chomskyuses an arrow,whileMB usesthe equalssign);and (3)
symbol(s)on the rightto indicatethe constituent partsof thesymbol(s)
on the left. Let us take an example:Johnsaw a movie.This sentence
wouldbe analyzedas followsby Chomskyand bytheauthorsoftheMB:

Chomsky Makabagong Balarila

S - > NP + VP P = NP * VP * NP
NP - > VP + NP NP = John
NP - > Det + N VP = saw
NP - ►John NP= Det * N
VB - ►saw Det = a
Det - > a N = movie
N - > movie

It is evidentthat the Phrase-Structure rules of Chomskyand MB are

essentiallyidentical,althoughthereare differences in theirtermsand
symbols.Thus, Chomsky uses the following: S 'sentence',NP 'noun
phrase',VP 'verbphrase',Det 'determiner', N 'noun', VB 'verbal'.The
MB, on the otherhand,uses the same termsexceptforP 'period',and
doesnotuseS or VB (at leastforthesentencegivenabove).
ThesePhraseStructure rulescan be represented in the formof a tree
diagram as followsbythetwoauthors:

This content downloaded from 140.127.23.2 on Sat, 02 Jan 2016 17:21:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
214 PHILIPPINESTUDIES

VRs' VP ^"^'NP
VB'^ Det^ 'N
yv
Det ^N
i i
John saw a movie John saw a movie

Fromtheseillustrations, it is clearthatthePhrase-Structure rulesof both

Chomsky andMB areessentially identical.
The secondpartgivesthe transformational rulesof Tagalog.Thispart
uses Chomsky's1965 model,whichassumesthateveryutterancein the
languagehas an "underlying (or deep) structure" and a "superficial (or
surface)structure".The "deep structure" (henceforth DS) of an utterance
specifiesthemeanings of "surfacestructures" (SS). The SS of utterances
are what we hear the speakerssay, whilethe DS is whatthe speakers
meantto say. An exampleof thisis givenbymb: theSS ikinuhaniPedro
ang bata ng Coke has a DS kumuhasi Pedrong Cokepara sa bata.The
same SS mayhave different DS if the utteranceis ambiguous;thusMB
givestheexample:
SS lumipadang eroplanosa Maynilacan have the followingDS's:
1 lumipadangeroplanopatungosa Maynila
2 lumipadangeroplanogalingsa Maynila
3 lumipadangeroplanopaikotsa Maynila
4 dumaanangeroplanosa Maynila
Wheredo the transformational rulescome in? Theycome in to relate
the DS to the SS. If an ss has severalDS's, thenthereare as many
transformational rules. This is the case in the example givenabove.
It is about time that a grammarof Tagalogbe writtenwithsuch
transformationalrules,forto date we do not haveanyotherdevicefor
explainingthe ambiguities, synonymies, and anomalies(e.g. colorless
green ideas sleep furiously)in the language.By followingChomsky's
modelof a grammar withDS and ss together withtransformational rules
whichrelatethe DS to thes S oftheutterances ofthelanguage, we havea
"powerfuldevice"- in thesensethatit hasgreater "explanatory power"
- for solvingthe complexitiesof the language;in this case, Tagalog.
The transformational analysisof Tagalogutterances by the authorsof
MB are modeledon thatof Jacobsand Rosenbaum 's analysisof English
structure. However,theydifferon severalpoints,as forexample,in the
analysisof the verb structure(MB reducesthe variousfocusesof the
Tagalogverbto four,i.e. MAG/UM,(H)IN, (H)AN and I, and pointsout
thatthe (H)AN and I are multi-ways ambiguous), and in theiranalysisof
theverbaspects.
This combination of theuse of the functional-structural approachfor
thePhrase-Structurerulesandthatof Chomsky's modelforthetransforma-

This content downloaded from 140.127.23.2 on Sat, 02 Jan 2016 17:21:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BOOK REVIEWS 215

tionalruleis not reallyan innovation.RobertLongacrehas done thisby

usingTagmemics forthePhrase-Structure rulesand Chomsky's transforma-
tionalmodelforshowingthe relationships betweentheutterances of the
language.As pointed out above, the Phrase-Structure rules essentially
providethe structuraldescriptionsof the utterancesof the language,
whilethetransformational rulesprovidethemeansofrelating one typeof
utteranceto the other. Chomsky,himself,borrowedRoulon Wells'
"structuralapproach"forhistransformational grammar.
The secondimportant contribution of MB is theuse of Tagalogitselfin
itsexplanationand description of Tagalogstructure.This,in itself,is a big
aid to teachersof Tagalog,who are lookingforthe appropriate termsin
Tagalogfor termsused in modernlinguistics. Hopefully,thisbook can
help standardizethe termsused in modernlinguistics. A proliferation of
newtermswillonlylead to confusion.
Thereis a greatneed at presentto construct materialsin the National
Language,if we wanttç>hastentheadoptionandacceptanceof Tagalogas
a NationalLanguagebasis, and if we want to propagatethe National
Languageas quicklyas possible.
On the negativeside,the book MB is rathertoo complicatedforhigh
schooluse. Evencollegestudentswillfindit difficult. Perhapsanswers to
the problemsin the sectionson drills,whichfollowregularly aftereach
section,wouldbe helpful.Apparently, the authorsintendedthisbook for
the teachersof Tagalog Structure, and leftits adaptationto the lower
gradesto the teachersthemselves.If I am correct,then I suggestthe
authorsorganizeseminarsto traintheteachersin the properuse of MB.
Finally,I suggestthe AteneoUniversity Presskeep the priceof this
book down.The listedpriceis 'PI 4.00. The prospective usersof thebook
can hardlyaffordto paymorethanthatpricefora textbook.
Fe Aldave-Yap

FRANCIS XAVIER: HIS LIFE, HIS TIMES. VolumeI: Europe,1506-

1541. By GeorgSchurhammer,S.J.TranslatedbyM. JosephCostelloe,
S.J. Rome: The JesuitHistoricalInstitute,1973. xxxii, 791. pp.
$20.00 cloth.

This is no ordinarylifeof saint.Nor is it an ordinary biography. It is

one of those productsof a lifetimeof scholarship whichone can call
definitivewithoutfearof beingprovedwrong.From1918 untilhisdeath
in 1971 at the age of 89 FatherSchurhammer dedicatedhimselfto the
mostpainstaking and exhaustiveresearchintoall sourcesin everylanguage
to establishthe factsnot only of Xavier'slife but of the Europeanand
Asianworldin whichXavierspenthisextraordinary life.Thisfirstof four

This content downloaded from 140.127.23.2 on Sat, 02 Jan 2016 17:21:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions