See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/337211360

Phonological and Lexical Variations of Two Subanen Dialects

Article · November 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 9,614

2 authors, including:

Nancy Echavez
Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology
3 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nancy Echavez on 13 November 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Taru en, Thalu en: Phonological and Lexical Variations of Two
Subanen Dialects
Gergie A. Ambato Nancy Q. Echavez, Ph.D.
MA English language Studies PhD language Studies
MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology
09266529477 09366264371
gergie.ambato@gmail.com nancy.echavez@g.msuiit.edu.ph

Abstract
The Subanen language, like any other language in the world, is dynamic and constantly changing as it continues to grow and
flourish over time.At present, Subanen has eight (8) known dialects (Lobel, 2013) and this study compared two of these
dialects. Specifically, this study attempted to find out the variations of two Subanen dialects, identified as Salugnon and
Sibugaynon, in terms of (a) lexicon and (b) phonology. Finally, it also attempted to explain the (c) phonetic environments
that motivate the variations found. This study used quantitative-descriptive method with the 200 Swadesh word list utilized
by Lobel in 2013.

Keywords: lexical variation, phonological variation, cognate, dialect, Subanen

1. Introduction
There are 171 languages spoken in the Philippines; five 1.1 Significance of the Study
of these are considered major languages and the rest are
minor languages. Subanen is one of the minor languages Languages and dialects change, if not die, every day. In
(Blust, 1992). There have been many changes in the the Philippines, before the advent of the K to 12
Subanen language (Lobel, 2013). curriculum, schoolchildren are only allowed to speak two
languages—the Filipino and English. This occurrence
Over the years, different researchers have documented made the minority languages and dialects, including the
different aspects of the language and in understanding Subanen dialects, “unwanted” by their own speakers,
how far this relationship has diverged from one another, leading to fewer speakers every day. Although the
two dialects of the Subanen language were compared. government is trying to revive the passion of the
These were Subanens, who live in the municipality of minorities for their own culture and dialects like creating
Kabasalan, Zamboanga Sibugay where the two dialects programs to empower them and changing to K to 12
are presently spoken. The participants of the study were curriculum, English or Filipino remain the to be the
specifically occupying the barangays of Sanghanan and languages widely used and spoken in school. Thus, the
Simbol, the former called themselves Salugnon and the findings of this study are especially useful to the
latter, Sibugaynon. following:

SIL has already published handful of papers in Subanen  This would be helpful to the groups of linguists
language, but none has been done on the comparison of who are trying to preserve minority dialects;
Subanen dialects. This paper, then, is a direct response to  It would also be useful to the Subanen people
the observation of Lobel and Hall in 2010 that there is a for yet, another aspect of their dialect is
“…striking lack of published information and source documented, the similarities and differences in
materials on the Subanen languages”. With this paper lexicon and phonological variations found in
aiming to make a comparative study on phonological and these two dialects;
lexical variations, at least, a small gap is filled to add  It would also be useful to the students and
more literature and information about the Subanen scholars who are focusing on linguistics as
languages. their specialization as it will greatly help them
understand the dynamics of Subanen language;
To reiterate, this study attempted to find out the
 This would also help the government to
variations of two Subanen dialects, identified as
strengthen their campaign for the preservation
Salugnon and Sibugaynon, in terms of (a) lexicon and (b)
of the Subanen culture, funding more projects
phonology. Finally, it also attempted to explain the (c)
based on and related to the result of this study;
phonetic environments that motivate the variations
and
found.
  In the advent of K to 12 curriculum, the (2) The sporadic loss of PSUB *k in a number of words,
findings of this study are helpful for the found in all members of the Subanen subgroup except
government as input to develop instructional Western Subanon and Western Kolibugan.
materials for Subanen children and adults
alike. 1.3 Conceptual Framework

1.2 Theoretical Framework Two Subanen dialects are chosen for this study, the
Sibugaynon and Salug, as shown in the first box in the
The main theory utilized in this study is the left, as shown in Figure 1. The speakers of these dialects
reconstruction of the Proto-Subanen language by Jason reside in two different barangays of the municipality of
W. Lobel (2013), which discussed the evidence for the Kabasalan, barangays Sanghanan and Simbol. These two
unity of the Subanen subgroup and its internal structure. barangays are geographically near each other and the
It posited five phonological innovations and 74 lexical residents are mostly Subanen lumads who speak different
innovations that define the Subanen language as a whole. Subanen dialects. In Simbol, almost all Subanens speak
He described the loss and reduction of Proto-Greater Sibugaynon while Sanghanan has more diverse Subanen
Central Philippine phoneme (PGCPH) in the first three residents, speaking Sibugaynon, Salug, and Sindangan
rules, which also occur in other Philippine languages, dialects.
and the last two rules are exclusively happening to
Subanen language. Specifically, these rules are: Two different analyses are done in this study. The first
box, pointed out simultaneously to the two boxes on the
(1) Loss of PGCPH *h (< PMP *h) in all positions; right labeled as lexical and phonological variations. The
first analysis is for lexical variation. First is the recording
(2) The loss of PGCPH *ʔ (< PMP *q) in all but word- of word-lists and asking its equivalent in the two
final position; Subanen dialects through an interview. Second, the box
at the bottom of lexical is the next step, the identification
(3) Reduction of PGCPH *a > *ə in prepenult syllables of the phonological variations found in the two dialects,
and in closed penultimatesyllables; including both vowel and consonant sounds. This is done
using theory of descriptive phonology, which does not
(4) The addition of word-initial *g- to all nouns that only explain and notate difference, but also find patterns
would have otherwise beenvowel-initial, including those and possible rules that govern these similarities and
that had become vowel-initial due to the loss ofinitial *h differences.
or *ʔ (i.e., Rule 4 occurred after Rules 1, 2, and 3)
It is important to note that in the diagram, no double
(5) Assimilation of most PGCPH consonant clusters to arrow is used. It means that the two analyses do not
clusters of *kC, *gC, or pre-nasalized cluster. Note that affect each other. Although it is stated above that lexical
while *k could precede both voiced and variation is the first to be determined, it does not mean
voicelessconsonants, *g could only precede a voiced that the phonological variation cannot be discussed and
consonant. The process of clusterassimilation can be analyzed without it. Each of the categories is distinct
broken down into four separate shifts: from the other. Thus, analyzing one area, lexical
variations for example, would already generate
(5a) [+obstruent] > [+velar, +stop] / __C
similarities and differences.
(5b) *g > [-voice] / __ [-voice]

(5c) *l > nasal / __C, with assimilation of this nasal to Lexical

place of articulation offollowing consonant
Variations
SUBANEN Similarities
(5d) *kk> k DIALECTS
and
1. Salug
Although Rule 4 specifies that it happened after the
changes in Rules 1 through 3, there is no clear evidence Differences
2.
Phonological
for the relative order of Rules 4 and 5. Two additional Sibugaynon

phonological innovations are found in most but not all of Variations

the Subanen languages. These are:

(1) The shift of PSUB *r > /l/, found in all members of Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual
the Subanen subgroup except Tawlet/Kalibugan and Framework.
Salug-GododSubanen;
2. Review of Related Literature Robert Brichoux entitled “Spelling Subanon Style: A
Test of a Phonemic-cultural Orthography”. In here, he
There were a handful of studies done on phonological suggested some possible spelling of Subanen words in
variations, lexical variations, and the Subanen language. Sindangan dialect. In 1984, he published his other work,
“Hortatory Strategy in Subanen II” as a follow-up to the
One very interesting study conducted in the Philippines earlier paper and added more information about
by Endriga is entitled, “The Dialectology of Cebuano: exhortations as the backbone of hortatory discourse.
Bohol, Cebu and Davao.” The study concluded that
although the National Statistics Office (NSO) separated Another one paper authored by Felicia Brichoux (1984),
Boholano, Cebuano, and Binisaya (Cebuano variant entitled “Intersecting Functions of Topic Markers in
spoken in Mindanao) as languages during the 2000 SindanganSubanun”, focused on the occurrence of topic
census, by virtue of mutual intelligibility, these three are markers ki, i, and su, as governed by an interplay of
actually dialects of a single language, and therefore be factors like lexical components of the forms themselves.
counted as one. The study also noted the similarities and
differences among the dialects with regards to phonology Blust (1991) briefly mentioned Subanen language saying
(only consonants and vowels are included) and lexicon. that there is a set of two or three closely related
languages (Subanun, with at least two rather divergent
Another study conducted on phonological variations was dialects, Kalibugan) spoken in the Zamboanga Peninsula
done by Tyler Casperson in 2010 entitled “The of western Mindanao. He also noted a general
Phonology of Hiligaynon (Ilonggo)”. He concluded that recognition of the close relationship of Subanun to the
Hiligaynon, as a language is in a unique position. Manobo and Danaw languages.
Although there are evidences showing its similarity to
other neighboring languages, it still retained its key In 2010, Jason William Lobel and William C. Hall
attributes to be identified as distinct language from the published their research entitled “Southern Subanen
others. Casperson, like Endriga, made an inventory of the Aspiration” in the academic journal Oceanic Linguistics.
consonant and vowel sounds of the Hiligaynon and was Their study focused on “the most noteworthy feature of
also able to identify three (3) morphophonemic rules. Southern Subanen”, which is the presence of aspirated
These are: stressed vowel deletion rule, nasal place consonants /[p.sup.h] [t.sup.h] [s.sup.h] [k.sup.h]/ that
assimilation rule, and nasalization stop rule. reflect Proto-Subanen clusters [sup.*]kp, [sup.*]kt,
[sup.*]ks, and [sup.*]gk (via [sup.*]kk), respectively.
For lexical variations, one study was conducted by
Baguio, Dizon, and Flores. It was about the lexico- Perhaps, the most comprehensive study done on the
statistical relationship of Tausug and Higaonon relationship of the dialects of the Subanen language is
languages where they found out that these two languages the 2013 dissertation of Dr. Jason W. Lobel. Here, he
are not mutually intelligible since only 19.5% of the total reconstructed the Proto-Subanen language and discussed
Swadesh list of words are categorized as probable its possible reasons for splitting. All in all, he listed more
cognates, 48.5% are perfect non-probable cognates, and than 600 reconstructions. He further found out the
32% are non-probable cognates but share similarities in phonological and lexical innovations defining it and the
some part of their phonemes. historicaldevelopment of the daughter languages. He
presented five phonological innovations and 74 lexical
Another study done in the Philippines on lexicostatistics innovations as evidence for the unity of the Subanen
was done by Hans Nelson in 2001 entitled subgroup and its internal structure.
“Lexicostatistics Applied to the Historical Development
of Three Languages of the Philippines”. This study He also made a phoneme inventory as part of the Proto-
focused on the possible cognate relationship of Tagalog, Subanen reconstruction and specified four vowel sounds
Ilokano, and Bicolano languages. It was found out that as /i/, /u/, /a/, and / ǝ/. He also listed 15 consonant sounds
Tagalog seemed to have an equal relationship with both as follows: /p/, /t/, /k/, /? /, /b/, /d/, /g/, /s/, /m/, /n/, / ŋ/,
of the languages having a cognate percentage of about /l/, /r/, /w/, and /y/. Other important details mentioned in
52%. In addition this study also examined the the study are the reflexes of the consonant sounds like
glottochronological comparison of the languages by dropping or retaining the /r/ in favor of /l/ sound and
removing first the distantly geographic borrowed words. dropping the /k/ sound in all parts of the words, except in
As a result, it was found out that Ilokano and Bicolano Western Subanen and dropping of /?/ in the words except
both diverged from Tagalog about 2, 200 years ago and in final syllable. It is worth noting that Proto-Subanen
that both are more related to Tagalog more than to each had sequences of like vowels /aa, ii, uu, əə/, and
other. sequences of two different vowels /ai au/, resulting from
the loss of intervocalic /h/ or/ʔ/ (Lobel, 2013).
SIL has already published papers in Subanen language,
but none has been done on the comparison of Subanen Variation in language is multi-dimensional. Some
dialects. Some of these studies include the 1977 paper of variations are on sound patterns, also known as
 phonological variation, and this variation is often 4.2 Vowel Sounds
indicative of language change in progress. Many studies
published on phonological variation centered on VOWEL SOUNDS DIPHTHONGS
Front Central Back
sociolinguistics or the external manifestations of the ǝ Front Central Back
Close
differences, mostly observed from speakers of different Close
ɪ
backgrounds. Some studies though, focus on phonology ʊ
Close-mid
ἐ Close-mid
and lexicon, or the internal manifestations of these ᴐ
ee uu ᴐɪ
differences, like this present study. It is shown that the Open-mid e
Open-mid
studies on the variation of languages, whether,
Open a
phonological, lexical or sociolinguistics, are mostly done aa Open aɪ
aw
in the prominent or major languages. Subanen, being a
minor language, has many but still limited literatures and Both dialects utilized five vowels /a, e, i, o, u/. From
studies. these, Sibugaynons form 10 sounds (/a/, /ɪ/, /ʊ/, /ǝ/, /ᴐ/,
/aa/, /ee/, /uu/, /e/, /ἐ/) while Salug has nine (9) sounds
SIL has already published handful of papers in Subanen
except the /e/. Both dialects had the same set of
language, but none has been done on the comparison of
diphthongs (/ᴐɪ/, /aw/, /aɪ/). The presence of the schwa /ǝ/
Subanen dialects; hence, this paper.
is very prominent and can occur in all positions. This is
similar to Cebuano language as shown in Endriga’s
3. Research Design and Methodology study. She listed three (3) vowels for Cebuano and
explained the differences in their usage among the
This study uses the quantitative-descriptive research
dialects. Casperson (2010), on the other hand, listed five
design. The research instrument utilized is the 200 word-
(5) vowel phonemes of Hiligaynon.
list by Morris Swadesh. The use of the list is verified as
advantageous since it is made up of non-cultural items
4.3 Consonant Sounds
that have been specifically chosen as part of the core
vocabulary. There were at least four (4) informants per
dialect (Kumau, 1996) but the validation of data was
through focus group discussion with at least 10
participants. The data were gathered through interview of
the informants. The study was conducted in barangays
Simbol and Sanghanan, Kabasalan, Zamboanga Sibugay.
Figure 3. Consonant Sounds of the Subanen Dialects.
4. Results and Discussions
A total of sixteen (16) consonant sounds are found in the
4.1 Lexical Variations Sibugaynon Subanen dialect as opposed to fifteen (15) in
the Salug dialect, which lacks the glottal fricative /h/ as
The two dialects share 79% percent of the words, shown in Figure 3. It is also important to note that aside
categorized as true cognates. It has 6% probable cognates from all the similarities, Sibugyanon dialect has an
and 15% non-cognates. Nouns retain 91% of its words aspiration. The aspirations occur in voiceless stops /p, t,
while verb has the lowest retention at 69% (refer to k/ followed by a stressed vowel sound like thulan
Figure 2). /thUlan/ (bone). In addition, the /r/ sound is pronounced
as a trill, not as an approximant or a flap. The presence of
Non-
Cognate True Cognate the glottal /?/ sound is mostly found in the final position.
Probable 29 out of Probable Cognate Agin, this is similar to Cebuano language as shown in
Cognate 200
Non-Cognate Endriga’s study. She listed 16 consonants and three (3)
12 out of 15%
200
vowels for Cebuano and explained the differences in
6% their usage among the dialects. Casperson (2010), on the
other hand, listed 17 consonant phonemes and five (5)
vowel phonemes of Hiligaynon.
True
Cognate 4.4 Phonological Variations and the
159 out of
200 Environment affecting Variations
79%
4.4.1 The Contrastive use of /r/ and /l/
Figure 2. Lexical Variations of Salug and Sibugaynon
Salug Subanens mostly use /r/ in their words while
Subanen Dialects.
Sibugaynons use /l/ like in the words taru and thalu,
rugong and lugong as shown in Table 1. The variation of
the use of /r/ and /l/ usually occurs in word initial and 4.4.3 The Use of Aspiration by the Sibugaynon
medial position followed by a vowel. Even though there
is variation, it is not clear whether there exists a pattern Sibugyanons aspirate their voiceless stops /p, t, k/
or a certain phonetic environment that motivate this especially if they occur in a stressed syllable preceding a
variation. vowel sound like thulan and thali (please see Table 3).
There are also cases when the Sibugaynons completely
According to Conant’s RLD law (1912), this happened in drop the velar stop /k/ in favor of the glottal fricative /h/.
the different Philippine languages. Many had shifted This happens in pronouns ‘this’ and ‘that’, as well as to
from /r/ to /l/. He categorized the major Philippine words which has the /k/ sound in the middle of the word.
languages, and Subanen, as a minor Philippine language, So, instead of keni (this), Sibugaynons say it as hini not
was not mentioned in his study. What is interesting to the aspiratedkhini and kitu (that) is said as hitu not khitu.
note though is that Subanen language cannot be put in Gekut and gehut show the dropping of the middle /k/
one category as shown in the table above. Subanen sound and retaining the glottal fricative thus, replacing
cannot be categorized as /l/ language since the Salug the /k/ with /h/ sound. This phenomenon seems to
dialect still uses /r/. So in RLD law, Salug Subanen is *r exclusively happen in the voiceless stop /k/, as /p/ and /t/
while Sibugaynon is *l. do not seem to be affected with this.

Table 1. List of words with /r/ and /l/ There is a study done by Lobel and Hall in 2010 about
English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon the Southern Subanen aspirations following the
Subanen consonants, p, t, k, and s. They have also noticed that
below -- sirung silung although never reported in the linguistics literature, the
good -- merengas melengas
existence of these aspirated consonants in Southern
bad meraten meraten melaten
back -- rekud lehud Subanen is well known to other Subanen groups, to other
name ngaran ngaran ngalan neighboring Philippine groups, and to the few foreigners
one sarabuk sarabuk selabuk familiar with the languages of the area. It is also clear
that the Bible translators who worked in the area decades
ago were aware of the aspirated consonants, evident in
4.4.2 The Contrastive use of /k/ and /h/ the orthography that was used in their Southern Subanen
New Testament translation (1982): unaspirated /p/, /t/,
Sibugaynons replace the /k/ sound with an /h/ such as and /s/, are spelled p, t, and s, respectively, while
rekud and lehud,kitu and hitu.Sibugaynon appears to aspirated are spelled ph, th, and sh, respectively.
completely drop the /k/ sound in the medial position but
retain it in both initial and final positions. The contrastive Table 3. List of words with aspiration in Sibugaynon
use of /k/ in Salug and /h/ in Sibugaynon mostly happens English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon
when the sound is in the medial position of the word Subanen
preceded by either vowel or consonant. belly -- tiyan thiyan
bone -- tulan thulan
Examining the words closely showed that the contrastive branch panga panga phanga
use of /k/ in Salug and /h/ in Sibugaynon happens in fruit bunga bungagayu bungakhayu
sounds which are in the medial position and preceded by hand kemet kamet khamet
mosquito kalemut kalemut khalemut
either vowel or consonant.
rope tali tali thali
say taru taru en thalu en

Table 2. List of words with /k/ and /h/

4.4.4 The Contrastive use of /d/ and /r/
English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon
Subanen
What Salug Subanens pronounced as /d/ like seda
back -- rekud lehud
chop -- putuken pemutuhen becomes /r/ in Sibugaynons like sera.This does not seem
open -- pukaan buhaan to show any special ruling except that all the words have
scratch kekut gekut gehut the change of sound in the middle position. The variation
sit ingkud gingkud ginghud in the use of /d/ and /r/ also happens in the initial sounds
spider belingkawa belingkawa belinghawa of the words like ditu and ritu (at).
tail gikug gikug gihug
tie iket iketan ihetan In Conant’s (1912) RLD law, languages are categorized
that itu kitu hitu
that ien kin ihin as a group, but the findings below show that Salug uses
wide melekpang melekpang melephang /d/ while Sibugaynon uses /r/. Again, as the case of
whether Subanen is *r or *l language cannot be
determined. It is also true in this case. The Subanen
language as a whole cannot be identified as *d or *r has a simple explanation. He said that “...that –g
language but its dialect can be. originates from the final *-g of the case marker, a
prosodic shift resulted in the case markers becoming
Table 4. List of words with /d/ and /r/ strongly proclitic, to the point that the boundary between
English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon the case marker and the following noun became so
Subanen blurred that the final *-g of the case marker was
at -- ditu ritu eventually reinterpreted as the initial consonant of the
fish seda seda sera
noun that followed….”
hear midengeg midengeg mirengeg
Table 6. List of words with /g/ and /d/
English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon
4.4.5 The Contrastive use of /m/ and /b/ Subanen
above ditas tug ditas tuditas
Some adjectives have a contrastive use of /m/ in Salug cold metegdaw metegdaw betidaw
and /b/ in Sibugaynon like metud and betud; mindek and husband glaki glakinen dlainen
bendek. This happens to adjectives in the initial position louse glisa glisa dlisa
following vowels, with the Sibugaynons replacing the neck glig glig dlig
bilabial nasal /m/ with the bilabial plosive /b/. It can be
said then that where Salug Subanens use /m/ in the
beginning of adjectives, the Sibugaynons use /b/. 4.4.6 Metathesis

The words affected by this difference in usage are Metathesis only affects verbs of both dialects especially
adjectives, specifically the prefix me- like in the Tagalog when the verb has multiple infixes. For example, the
ma- in maganda is replaces with be- in Sibugaynon. This word tubu (grow) becomes tinumubu for Salug and
innovation seems to be unique in the Sibugaynons since tuminubu for Sibugaynon when specified that “grow” in
there is no reported literature published on this yet. the list means the verb “to grow”. Although the root
tubuis retained in both dialects, the order of the two
Table 5. List of words with /m/ and /b/ infixes is slightly different. Salug use the infix –in-
English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon followed by -um- to form t(in)(um)ubu while
Subanen Sibugaynon use the infix –um- followed by -in- to form
cold metigdaw metegdaw betidaw
t(um)(in)ubu. This is the same in the word to buy which
dirty meremu meremu belemu
far merayu merayu belayu are translated as s(in)(um)aloy and s(um)(in)aloy,
fat melembu melembu belembu respectively.
fear -- minendek bendek
long meyaba metas/meyaba betas/beyaba Proto-Subanen does not show which of the two dialects
sharp mekuteng muteng buteng has changed the order of the prefix since the words under
small mika mika en beha en it only show root words and the infix –um-.
true/correct metud metud betud
Table 7. List of words undergoing metathesis
English Proto- Salug Sibugaynon
4.4.6 The Contrastive use of /g/ and /d/ Subanen
buy saluy sinumaloy suminaloy
There is a contrastive use of /g/ and /d/ in front of nouns grow tubu tinumubu tuminubu
starting with /l/ as it is glig and glisa in Salug and dlig swim lumangoy linumangoy luminangoy
and dlisa in Sibugaynon. This might be done by the to fly lumayug linumayug luminayug
Sibugaynons for easier articulation as the dropping of the turn lingay linumingay luminingay
/g/ means dropping of the velar sound in favor of the
alveolar /d/. This is easier to articulate because the
consonant prior to the /d/ is also an alveolar /t/ in the 5. Synthesis
words tu(g) ditas and beti(g)daw. The replacement of
velar /g/ to /d/ also follows this pattern since all the The Subanen language, like any other language in the
affected words start with /l/. The /l/ sound, being an world, is dynamic and constantly changing as it
alveolar lateral is easier to be partnered with an alveolar continues to grow and flourish over time. At present,
plosive /d/ than when it is followed by a velar plosive /g/. Subanen has eight (8) known dialects (Lobel, 2013) and
this study compared two of these dialects. Specifically,
When the words were elicited from the informants, they this study attempted to find out the variations of two
do not include the –g and –k so instead of saying Subanen dialects, identified as Salugnon and
ktubung, they just said tubung. The –g and –k just came Sibugaynon, in terms of (a) lexicon and (b) phonology.
out when they are using it in sentences in the actual Finally, it also attempted to explain the (c) phonetic
conversation. Lobel (2013) wrote in his paper that this environments that motivate the variations found.
 7. References
This study showed that the two dialects shared 79%
percent of the words, categorized as true cognates. Few Anttila, A. (1997). Deriving variation from grammar.
(6%) were probable cognates and 15% were non- In Frans Hinskens, Roeland van Hout and Leo
cognates. Nouns retained 91% of its words while verb Wetzels, eds. Variation, Change and
had the lowest retention at 69%. Phonological Theory. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins. p. 35-68.
Anttila, A. (2002). Morphologically Conditioned
Further, Sibugaynon dialect showed more vowel and
Phonological Alternations. Natural Language and
consonant sounds than that of the Salug dialect. Linguistic Theory, 20:1-42.
Sibugaynon listed 10 vowel sounds, including the /e/ Antilla, R. (1972). An introduction to historical and
sound, which could not be found in the Salug dialect. In comparative linguistics. New York: Macmillan
the consonant sounds, Sibugaynon had 15 sounds Baguio, D.A., Dizon, R.B., and Flores, L.E.. (_____).
including the /h/ that could not be found in the Salug Lexico-Statistical Relationship of Tausug and
Higaonon Languages. MSU-IIT.
dialect, which only had 14 sounds.
Blust, R. (1992). The greater central Philippines
hypothesis. Oceanic Linguistics 30 (2):73-129
All in all, there were seven (7) phonological variations Blust, R. (2005). The linguistic macrohistory of the
identified in this study. These were: Philippines: some speculations. Manila:
(1) The use of /r/ in Salug and /l/ in Sibugaynon; Linguistic Society of the Philippines and Summer
(2) The use of /k/ in Salug and /h/ in Sibugaynon; Institute of Linguistics. pp. 31-63
(3) Aspiration of Sibugaynon (Southern Subanen) and http://www.sil.org/asia/philippines/books/Current
Issues_2.1.pdf
none in Salug;
Brichoux, F. (1977). Intersecting functions of topic
(4) The use of /d/ in Salug and /r/ in Sibugaynon; markers. Manila: Linguistic Society of the
(5) The use of /m/ in Salug and /b/ in Sibugaynon; Philippines and Summer Institute of Linguistics.
(6) The use of /g/ and /k/ in Salug and /g/, /k/, and /d/ in pp. 4-65
Sibugaynon; and Brichoux, R. (1977). Spelling Subanen style: a test of a
(7) Metathesis of infix –in- and -um- in Salug and –um- phonemic-cultural orthography. Manila:
and -in- in Sibugaynon. Linguistic Society of the Philippines and Summer
Institute of Linguistics. pp.151-162
Brichoux, R. (1977). Hortatory strategy in Subanen.
6. Conclusions and Recommendations Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines and
Summer Institute of Linguistics. pp. 80-117
The Subanen language, with its eight dialects, is a Campbell, L. (2000). Historical linguistics: an
complicated language to learn and a challenging introduction. Cambridge: MIT Press
language to study. Proto-Subanen shows that between the Caspersn, T. (2010). The Phonology of Hiligaynon.
Boise State University
two dialects, Salug Subanen has fewer changes over
Chafe, W. L. (1970). Meaning and the structure of
time. The two dialects chosen for this study already show language. Chicago and London: University of
considerable differences both phonologically and Chicago Press.
lexically, but are still highly mutually intelligible. Chambers. J.K. (1995). Sociolinguistic theory. Oxford,
U.K., and Cambridge, U.S.A., Blackwell
This study recommends the following: (a) that another Chomsky, N,. & Hale, M. (1968). The sound pattern of
study on Subanen dialects be made, this time, not only English. New York: Harper and Row
focusing on lexical and phonological aspects, but making Clark, J. and Yallop, C. (1995). An introduction to
phonetics and phonology. Oxford:Blackwall
a cultural dictionary; (b) since this study only includes
Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic
segmental analysis of phonology, it is suggested that a typology. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of
study focusing on suprasegmental, including stress and Chicago Press
intonation, be conducted; (c) another recommendation is Conant, C.E. (1910) The RGH Law in Philippine
to include all Subanen dialects in a single study to language. Chicago: Journal of the American
confirm the general pattern presented by Lobel in 2013; Oriental Society
(d) and it is also recommended that similar study should Constantino, E.A. (1996). Mga Linggwistik na Ilusyon sa
Pilipinas. In Constantino and Atienza (eds.). Mga
be done using other dialects, not Subanen; lastly (e)
Piling Diskurso sa Wika at Lipunan. Quezon
Subanen children who endeavor to understand their City: UP Press.
neighbors need to learn many languages before they can Constantino, E.A., Sicat, R. & Cruz, P. (1974). Pilipino o
join the mainstream education. Hence, in the advent of K Filipino? Manila: Rex Bookstore.
to 12, the government should support undertakings for Cowan, H.K.J. (1959). A Note on Statistical Methods in
Subanen children and other indigenous people such as Comparative Linguistics. Lingua 8: 233-246
making instructional materials to adapt mother tongue in Crowley, T. (1998). An introduction to historical
linguistics. 2nd ed. Auckland, New Zealand:
the primary years of education. Oxford University Press
 Donegan, P. (2002). Phonological processes and ESL/EFL learners. Pennsylvania: Indiana
phonetic rules. Honolulu, Hawaii: University of University
Hawaii at Manoa Papenhuyzen-C.B. (2007). Treasures of Indonesia’s
Embleton, S. M. (1986). Statistics in historical cultural heritage: Van der Tuuk’s collection of
linguistics. Quantitative Linguistics 30. Bochum: Batak manuscripts. Leiden University Library:
Studienverlag Brockmeyer Indonesia
Endriga P. (____). The Dialectology of Cebuano: Bohol, Reid, L. (1963). Kankanay and the problem /r/ and /l/
Cebu and Davao. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila reflexes. Hawaii: Linguistic Society of the
University Philippines and Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Fasold, R. (1991). The quiet demise of variable rules. pp. 52-63
American Speech 66 Rexova,, K, Bastin, Y., & Frynta, D. (2006). Cladistic
Gudchinsky, S. (1955). The ABC’s of lexicostatistics analysis of Bantu languages: a new tree based on
(glottochronology). combined lexical and grammatical data. In:
Halle, P.A., Best, C.T., & Levity, A. (1999). Phonetic vs. Naturwissenschaften. 93-189
phonological influences of French listener’s Rubrico, J.G.U. (1997). An Annotated Bibliography of
perception of American English approximants. Works and Studies on the History, Structure, and
Paris, France: Laboratoire de Psychologie Lexicon of the Cebuano Language: 1610
Experimentale to1996.Thesis (MA Linguistics). University of
Hayes, B. (1996). Phonetically driven phonology: The the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City
role of optimality theory and inductive Shosted, R. (_______). Romani roots: a lexicostatistical
grounding. Rutgers Optimality Archive analysis of Romani, Hindustani, and Czech.
Hooper, J.B. (1976). An introduction to natural _______:_______
generative grammar. New York: Academy Press Traugott, E.C. & Pratt, M.L.(1980)Linguistics for
Ho Man Yee, P. (1995). Some aspects of the students of literature. USA: Harcourt Brace
phonological features of English spoken by Jovanovich Inc.
school-age Indians in Hong Kong. Vajda, E.J. (2002). Aerial diffusion and genetic
____________: Hong Kong relationship: problems in comparative linguistics.
Hudson, R. A. (1996). Sociolinguistics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vennemann, T. (1974). Phonological concreteness in
Hymes, D. (1964). Language in culture and society: A natural generative grammar. Shuy, R. and
reader in linguistics and anthropology. New Bailey, CJN (eds.) Towards tomorrow’s
York: Harper and Row linguistics. Washington DC: Georgetown
Kamau, T.G. (1996). The major phonological processes University Press
of Kindia and Kigichugu dialects of Gikuyu: A Vennemann, T. (1972). Phonological uniqueness in
comparative survey. A dissertation natural generative grammar.Glossa6: 105-61.
Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to
variability of the English copula. Language 45. sociolinguistics, 5th ed. Oxford: Blackwell
Labov, W. (1994). Principles of Linguistic Change: Publishing
Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell. Wardhaugh, R. (1972). Introduction to linguistics. USA:
Lehman, W. P. (_______). Historical linguistics: An McGraw-Hill Inc.
introduction. Texas: Oxford and IBH Publishing Widdowson, H. G. (1996). Linguistics. Oxford Ox 260
Lewis, M. P. (ed.). (2009). Ethnologue: Languages of the DP: Oxford University Press
world, Sixteenth edition. Dallas, Tex.: SIL Zorc, D.R. (1972). Current and proto Tagalic stress.
International. Online Philippine Journal of Linguistics 3 (1): 43-57
version: http://www.ethnologue.com/.
Llamas, C., Mullany, L., & Srockwell, P. eds. (2007).
The Routledge companion to socioliguistics. NY:
Taylor and Francis e-Library
Lobel, J.W. & Hall, W.C.. 2010. Southern Subanen
aspiration. Oceanic Linguistics
Lobel, J.W. (2013). Philippine and northern Bornean
languages: Issues and description, subgrouping
and reconstruction. University of Hawai’i at
Manoa.
Lopez, C. (1938). Origins of the Philippine languages.
Maryott, K.R. (1978). Pre-Sangir *l, *d, *r and
associated phonemes, part 1. Manila: Linguistic
Society of the Philippines and Summer Institute
of Linguistics. pp. 115-138
http://www.sil.org/asia/philippines/sipl/SIPL_2-
1_115-138.pdf
Nelson, H. (2001). Lexicostatistics applied to the
historical development of three languages of the
Philippines. ____:___
Ohata, K. (2000). Phonological differences between
Japanese and English: several potentially
problematic areas of pronunciation for Japanese

View publication stats