'Toy napigket nga daga
Pitpitenmi nga umuna
Danggayanmi't kankanta
Takkiagmi a napigsa
Kettang ken bannogmi
dikam igingina 

     Mannamili
     Ilokano Folk Song
 

HOME  |  NEWS UPDATE  |  CONFERENCE SCHEDULE  |  ONLINE REGISTRATION  |  Q & A  | CONTACT US

  So, what is Nakem?

 MESSAGES

 VENUES

  ABSTRACTS

 KEYNOTES

 FULL PAPERS

Today is

The Bastardization of Ilocos Languages and Place Names:
Tracing Roots and Identities

By: Fay L. Dumagat, Ph.D.

All Filipinos who went to elementary and high schools in our country were taught about the so-called “waves of migration” of different peoples from Mainland Asia and Southeast Asia coming to and settling in the different islands of the Philippine Archipelago during different past time periods, explaining why there were and still are different linguistic groups in the country. The theory propagated by Professor H. Otley Beyer was that in 250,000-25,000 B.C. the small black men with kinky hair called Agta, Aeta, or Negrito came and settled here through the “land bridges” connecting the Philippine Archipelago to Mainland Asia and Southeast Asia. During this period, glaciation and deglaciation occurred because of the changes in the climate such that during the glaciation phase, the sea level went down, exposing the Sunda Shelf and the Sahul Shelf, connecting the Philippines to Formosa, Borneo, Malaysia, Sumatra, and Indonesia, on the one hand, and on the other, connecting the Philippines to New Guinea, Celebes, and the Timor Islands. After the Pleistocene, the climate became warmer, melting the snow in the Temperate Zones, and submerging the former “land bridges.”

The first “wave of migration” by sea came in 5,000-500 B.C. from South China and settled in Northern Luzon; the second one in l,500-500 B.C. from Indo-China, settling in South-Central Luzon; the third wave in 800-500 B.C. from Indo-China and settling in Southern Luzon; the fourth in 300-200 B.C. from Java and Sumatra; and fifth in 300-700 A.D. from South China and settled in the Batanes Islands (Jocano, l967: l30-3l, l35-38; Jocano, l975: 30-70).

The earliest settlers, the Agta, were pushed into the interiors of the islands by the migrants from South China; these in turn, were also driven inland by the migrants from Indo-China, each new comers driving the earlier migrants into the interior uplands successively.  The successive groups of migrants brought with them the language, technology, and social institutions of their homelands.  These account for the varied physical characteristics, language, technology, and institutions as observed by the early Spanish ethnologists like San Antonio, Colin, and Martinez de Zuniga (Blair & Robertson, l903-9: Vol. 40, pp. 297-325; 37-69; Vol. 43, pp. ll3-l27).  Even today, there are still different language groups such as the Iloko², Pangasinan, Pampangan, Tagalog, Bicol, Cebuano, Hilonggo, Tausog, Maranao, and Maguindanao.  There are other language/dialect groups, specifically in the mountains of Northern Luzon, namely: the Tinggian (Itneg) ³, Igorot, Adang (Adasen), Apayao, Ibaloy, Kankanaey, Bontok, Kalinga, Ifugao, Ilonggot, Isinay, Gaddang, Itavi, and Agta (Keesing, l962: 50, 94, 120, l46, l84, 208, 222, 240, 268, passim).

The Problem

In this paper, I wish to present a model that can, in a way, explain how different language groups developed or came about resulting from trade, migration, and intermarriages among them.  I call this “bastardization” of languages and place-names.

I use the term “bastardization” to refer to the process of a dominant language “submerging” or “ assimilating” a minority language, eventually extinguishing in the end such minority language. In the case of Northern Luzon, it refers to the spread of Iloko language or in-Iloko⁴ as lingua franca throughout the Ilocos Region including parts of Pangasinan, Nueva Ecija, Tarlac, and Zambales where there were massive migration of the Iloko mostly from Batac and Bacarra, Ilocos Norte in the l9^th and 20^th centuries (Fonacier, l953).

The dictionary meaning of “bastardization” is the process of producing a bastard or mongrel or the “inbreeding of diverse breeds or strains” (Webster’s, l969: 72, 547). For example, the combination of Itneg and Iloko in Bangued, Pidigan, and Tayum in Abra Province produced the distinctive in-Iloko of Abra quite different from the in-Iloko of Ilocos Norte. The in-Iloko of Abra had replaced in-Itneg⁵ formerly spoken in Bangued, Pidigan, and Tayum. How this happened is therefore the subject matter of this paper in the hope of shedding some light into the problem of explaining the diverse ethnolinguistic groups in our country which is still observable today.

The early Spanish historian-writers from Colin, San Antonio, to Martinez de Zuniga wrote and speculated on the ethnolinguistic diversity of the native people of the Philippine Archipelago, of the small black people they called “Negrillo” who were reputed to be the earliest inhabitants in the island they settled in as in Negros Island which still bears their name.  The other ethnolinguistic groups they identified were the Malays or brown and mongoloid, and stocky people whom they identified as the Tagalog, Pampangan, and Ilocan (Iloko).  They were informed that the Pampangan came from Sumatra, and the others from Borneo and Java (Blair and Robertson⁶, l903-9: Vol. 40, pp. 37-69, 297-325; Vol. 43, pp. ll3-l27).

Later writers like Cole, Keesing, and Jocano proposed revised views about the “wave migration” theory as formulated by Beyer.  Cole believed that the Tinguian (Itneg) and Iloko came in the same “wave of migration,” and that the Tinguian were the more conservative coastal people who sought sanctuary into the interior valleys and mountains of Abra, escaping from the Spanish conquest of Ilocos by Juan de Salcedo in l572 and the subsequent reduction⁷, Christianization, and the harsh imposition of forced labor, tribute-payment, and the bandala or forced requisition of produce by the colonial authorities. Cole believed that in-Itneg and in-Iloko have dialectical differences only and that in-Itneg is “primitive” in-Iloko (Cole, l908: 2ll; l922: 235-246).  Keesing, on the other hand, concluded based on ethnohistorical and linguistic studies that the mountain groups of Northern Luzon had close affinity, ethnolinguistically and physically with their lowland neighbors such as the Tinguian (Itneg) with the Iloko of Ilocos Sur and Ilocos Norte; and the Ibaloy with the Pangasinan (Keesing, l962: 30l-343, esp. 340-343). Later, in l967 and l975, Jocano came out with more comprehensive picture of Philippine prehistory, disputing Beyer’s “wave migration” theory and proposing an alternative view of the peopling of the Philippine Archipelago as rather “trickle migration” than “wave migration” and from island-to-nearby-island, and the culture they brought with them being modified by adjustments to the local condition (Jocano, l967: l29-l35). Later, in his l975 publication, he advocated the idea of a widespread distribution of early Homo Sapiens as far back as l.9 million years ago in Island Southeast Asia and the occurrence of separate evolution of early man and his culture as he adjusted to his local environment, at the same time allowing cultural exchanges among the peoples of Island Southeast Asia.  He pointed out that:

     Thus, to say that Filipinos are Malays or that Filipino culture is derived from the Malays is to create a myth of origin, which has no basis in fact.  It is doubtful whether one can safely recognize Malay characteristics in the Java, Solo, Wadjak, Niah, and Tabon fossil men – a population so widespread in the area prior to any prehistoric or proto-historic movement of people. In addition, influences of external cultures and local responses to them show recognizable differences during historic times, even if there was a common prehistoric culture, which linked these ethnic groups (Jocano, l975: 70).

Jocano is evidently stretching his imagination too far back in time and exaggerating the distribution of Homo Sapiens as too widespread and too early. The earliest fossil of man found in the Philippines so far was that from the Tabon Cave at Lipuun Pt., Quezon, Palawan dated by Carbon-l4 from 22,000 to 30,000 years ago (Fox, l967: 99-l00). The earliest estimate of the presence of man in the Philippines was 250,000-300,000 years ago by Beyer based on the recovery of fossil of stegodon teeth and tektites  (Fox, l967: 97). This is only one-eight of the l.9 million years that Jocano thought Homo Sapiens to be already present in the Philippines.  In fact, the l.9 million years back in time had the ancestors of man being half- ape and half- man or Homo Erectus. It was only between l, 200-40,000 BP that Homo Sapiens Sapiens or man as he appears today appeared (Larousse, l995: l98-l99).

Anyhow, one can see that archeology does not give much help in resolving the problem of explaining why different linguistic groups existed in the Philippine Archipelago since l521 when linguistic diversity of the native peoples called by the Spanish explorers “Indians” (B & R, l903-9: Vol. 33, pp. l03-2ll) was observed by Pigafetta, and later by Colin, San Antonio, and Zuniga  (mentioned above). Nevertheless, despite such diversity, common vocabularies and grammar existed among such language groups.  For example, of the l60 vocabularies in Cebuano language recorded and translated into Spanish by Pigafetta in l521, 30 per cent or 48 words were understandable to a Tagalog, and 27 per cent or 46 words were understandable to an Iloko (B & R, l903-9: Vol. 33, pp. l87-l99). Then, it may be noted that the slave of Magellan from Sumatra could communicate with the people of Samar, Agusan, and Cebu (Ibid., pp. ll3-l75).  These facts indicate the close affinity of languages in Island Southeast Asia whether or not they are generically called “Malay” of which Jocano seemed to have reservation or aversion. In other words, Southeast Asian peoples had a common ancestry or origin, physically and linguistically.

The controversy of whether or not Southeast Asian peoples have had a common origin and ancestry in the remote past through migration, trade, and intermarriages, indeed need more evidence and proofs; and this could not be resolved in just one paper like mine.  However, I wish to present here a model that empirically shows how two language groups, particularly the Iloko and Tinggian (Itneg) under colonial conditions, interacted and demonstrated what happened to their respective languages. One interesting historical fact is that as late as the l850s, Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan  (towns of Abra Province) were recorded as inhabited by the “Tinguianes” or “Itanegs” and described as:

… Peaceful … have long been converted to Christianity and the missionaries are working toward the conversion of the rest of the villages.  These people also dedicate themselves to commerce, taking rice, wax, gold, and lumber to the [Ilocos] provinces and trading for merchandise, which they need.  They possess vast and rich rice fields, which they plow and cultivate with intelligence; they also have numerous herds of carabao, horses, and oxen  (Keesing, l962: l39).

This quotation was taken from Buzeta and Bravo (l850-l: Vol. I, pp. 54-55) and translated into English by Keesing.  This is the first document published where the name “Itaneg” or Itneg is mentioned.  They were not called  “Ilocan” as the coastal people of the Ilocos were usually called by the Spaniards.  This implies that the said people did not speak in-Iloko but in-Itneg.  But after about four or five generations since then, Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan became predominantly Iloko (Batoon, l970) and spoke in-Iloko with some in-Itneg words adopted into the language like “agpatang” or “to speak” instead of “agsarita” or “agsa-o” as used in Ilocos Norte; “dinengdeng” in Abra and “inabraw” in Ilocos Norte for viand, and  “agsangit” in Abra but “agibit” in Ilocos Norte for  “to cry.”

                                      The Model of Language-Groups Interaction

Just like in the interaction among living organisms, especially in genetic transmission, one partner may be dominant over the recessive one. The dominant language “absorbs” or submerges the recessive language, eventually extinguishing it.  Larousse (l995: 205) commented that:

Over 5,000 languages are known to have existed in the world.  Many of these are dead languages, in other words no longer spoken such as Etruscan, Cretan, Iberian and Gaulish.  During the last 200 years, language death has accelerated, with hundreds becoming extinct.  This is especially true of indigenous languages, above all in the Americas and Australia, where the languages of the colonists have obliterated native tongues.…

… The most serious problem for a language is the influence of an external more powerful group.  Australian Aboriginal and Native American languages have died due to political and cultural pressures, as have many minority languages in China, Africa, the former USSR, New Guinea (especially Papuan languages) and even in Europe. When a language is replaced by another, the people’s linguistic identity survives only in local dialect words and accent.

This case of a dominant language “obliterating” a recessive or minority language was echoed by Fonacier (l953: 93) when he wrote:

The Ilokano Movement is the best example we have of a mass settlement and colonization in the Philippines.  This fact is made doubly significant if we stop to consider that quite a considerable portion of Northern and North Central Luzon fell under the colonizing influence of the Ilokanos.  They brought with them their own culture into the regions, which they settled and have in many places succeeded in submerging, if not completely obliterating, any vestige of the ethnographic groups, which was originally living in the region.

He did not, however, explain how the original language was “obliterated,” including the native or original ethnographic group as noted in the Larousse commentary above.  Unlike Fonacier, Larousse identified “political and cultural pressures” of an “external more powerful group of a “colonist” or a colonial power that cause the “obliteration” of a colonized native or aboriginal people.

By definition, a colonial power means a foreign government conquering by force of arms and religion a weaker and unorganized native people like the “Indians” of the Philippine Archipelago who were conquered and Christianized by Legazpi in l564 (Cor-

Puz, l989; Zafra, l967; de la Costa, l965).  Conquest means death as alternative to submission and slavery.  The phrase “political and cultural pressures” used by Larousse means the ”pacification ” or the military conquest by the Spaniards against the “Indians” or “Indios” or Philippine natives; the reduction or resettlement of the conquered people in villages within reach of the church bell sound and the control of the conquered people by the occupying forces of the colonial power; the Christianization or proselytization of the conquered people by the accompanying missionary priest, which replaced the native religion by the conqueror’s religion; the imposition of exploitative measures designed to promote the prestige, power, and wealth of the colonizing power such as the collection of tribute, the forced labor called polo y servicio, the bandala or requisitioning of products by the colonial authorities; and the structuring of society into a “monastic” system through the doctrina as described by Corpuz (1989: I, 161-210).

The case of “Ilokano Movement” as described by Fonacier above maybe called “indirect colonization” in the sense that the Iloko were able to exercise “political and cultural pressures” over the regions they settled in by encouragement or tolerance of the colonial government. Thus Cole wrote, describing the relations between the Iloko and Itneg of Abra:

Following the appointment of Gov. Esteban de Peñarrubia in 1868, the tribesmen [i. e., Itneg] suffered still greater hardship…but when it was learned that many of the new converts [to Christianity] still practiced their old customs, the governor had the apostates seized and imprisoned. The hostile attitude of

Peñarrubia encouraged adventurers from the coast [i.e., Bantay and Vigan areas] in the seizure of land, and the exploitation of the pagans, and thus a deep resentment was added to the dislike the Tinguian already held for “the Christians.” (Cole, 1922:246)

In other words, “political pressure” refers to the rigid colonial government that imposed a strict and exploitative regime; and “cultural pressure” refers to the control of the mind and spirit of the colonized people by imposing a socio-cultural regime where the religion, values, supremacy, and prestige of the colonial power is upheld over the native religion and social structure and institutions.

The elements or components of the model therefore are: (1) a colonial regime where a foreign government imposed a rigid and exploitative government over a conquered people; (2) the use of the language of the conqueror or the language of its allies as language used in government administration, and other institutions like the church, schools, and commercial establishments; (3) intermarriages between the colonizing people and the colonized, including that between the allies of the colonizing people and the colonized (i. e., the Iloko who served the Spaniards as interpreters, cooks, and servants and the Itneg who were the subject of colonial impositions).

The operation of the model or the process by which the dominant language group eventually “obliterated” or “extinguished” “absorbed” or “submerged” the language of the recessive (i. e., colonized) language group refers to the continued and habitual use of the language of the dominant group in government, schools, church, information agencies (i. e., newspapers and radio and television broadcasts), and the market; and the intermarriage between the dominant language group and recessive group. The second process or intermarriage between the two language groups is the most effective way of killing minority language because the children of the marriage alliance invariably adopt the dominant language. This was somehow clear to the ancestors of the Itneg; and they had strictly prohibited their women marrying a Spaniard or Iloko just as they stayed away from the proselytization of the Spanish missionary priests. This prohibition eventually relaxed as more and more Itneg went to school, became Christianized, and lived and raised families in other parts of the Philippines and abroad.

This was the story of the Itneg of Bangued, Pidigan, and Tayum: the extinction of Itneg as a lingua franca; and the virtual assimilation of the Itneg families into the Iloko community or the Itneg children of mixed Iloko-Itneg intermarriages speaking in-Iloko and identitying themselves as Iloko.

Proof of the Model

The empirical verification and validation of the model is the story of the “Ilokanization” of Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan. It maybe noted that the Iloko in the Christianized towns of Abra always referred to themselves as “Kristiano” not “Ilokano” or “Iloko.” But the Itneg always called them “Iloko,” not “Kristiano.” In other words, throughout the Spanish colonial period from 1572 to1898 and the American colonial period from 1898 to 1946, the people of Abra were classified into Christians and non-Christians. The non-Christians were sub-categorized as “Infieles “ (or non-believers or Infidels) and “salvajes” (or savages) (Schmitz, 1921:112-113). The “Infieles” were those who lived in villages peacefully cultivating their rice fields, and engaging in commerce as described by Buzeta and Bravo above concerning the “Itanegs” of Bangued and Tayum. The “salvajes” referred to the mountain people sometimes called “alzados” (literally “rebels”) who were known to continue the headhunting and raiding practice against the Christians or lowland people.

Citing Buzeta and Perez statistics, Schmitz (Ibid) provides the following comparative data:

Table 1. Christian and non-Christian Population, Bangued, Tayum and Pidigan, 1847,             1818 and 1898.

Source: Schmitz, 1971:112            *- Buzeta statistics    �- Estado statistics

+-  Perez statistics    · - Difference between total population and Christian

The data provided from the Spanish source documents of Schmitz cannot provide accurate and comparative data. For example, it is not clear whether or not the Buzeta population figure for Bangued (3,962) and Tayum (2,709) for 1818 referred to the “Christian” population only and did not include the “non-Christians.” For, in the population statistics for Pidigan, the total population from Perez was 2,883 such that it can be deduced that the non-Christian population would be 5,725. One cannot accept the Bangued population (3,962) and that of Tayum (2,709) to be the total population since for the same year (1818), Pidigan had a total population of 8,608 but it was a smaller town than Bangued and Tayum. Perhaps the Bangued (3,962) and Tayum (2,709) population figure for 1818 referred to the “Christian” population, which approximates that of Pidigan’s “Christian” population (2,883). Assuming then that the total population for Bangued (11,237) in 1898 was the same as in 1818, and subtracting the “Christian” population of 3,962, the non-Christian population would be around 7,275 or 65 percent of the total population, this would justify Buzeta and Bravo to characterize Bangued as “Itaneg” or “Tinguian” town. Of course, the assumption would be somewhat exaggerated because it does not consider population increase from 1818 to 1898. In the case of Pidigan, the non-Christians constituted 66 percent of total population. The higher percentage of non-Christians in Pidigan (66%) compared to Bangued (65%) could be due to the effect of Bernardo Lago’s missionary zeal and activities in Pidigan including his successors (Schmitz, 1971: 58-63) and Father Juan de Pareja’s earlier and successful Christianization of 3,000 Itneg in Bangued (Schmitz, 1971: 45-62). In the 1948 census, the total population of Abra was 84,866, and the Tinguian were 22,348 or 26.3 percent of total population (Keesing, 1962:142). By this time, Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan “had become fully Ilokanized,” using Keesing’s, generalization for the Southern Central Communities of Ilocos Sur in 1939.

This is confirmed by table 2 showing the percentage shares of Iloko and Itneg for Abra, Bangued, Tayum, Pidigan, and Peñarrubia. For the whole province the Iloko constituted 71.93 percent of the total population compared to 26.68 percent share of the Itneg. Pidigan (99.53%) had the highest percentage share of Iloko followed by Tayum (98.54%), and Bangued (95.77%). Peñarrubia, which had been traditionally an Itneg town already, had 64.91 percent Iloko and only 33.91 percent Itneg. Around 1896, based on tribute payers of Iloko and Itneg, the Iloko constituted 38.65 percent, and the Itneg 61.35 percent. (Dumagat, 1974:62). There was an increase in Iloko percentage point of 26.26 from 1896 to 1995 or during an interval of 99 years.

Table 2. 1995 Abra Population and Percent distribution by Mother Tongue

Source: 1995 Census of the Philippines. Report No. 2-1 N: Socio-Economic &

Demographic characteristics, Abra, Manila. National Statistics Office, 1997 pp. 126-133.   

In the case of Ilocos Sur, 94.32 percent were Iloko and the Itneg constituted only 2.26 percent. The traditional Itneg towns like Nagbukel, including those municipalities who had previous Itneg populations in the mountains like Sto.Domingo, Magsingal, Bantay, and Sinait (Keesing, 1962:138,142) no longer reported Tingguian or Itneg population. The Ilocos Sur municipalities reporting bigger percentages of Itneg population were: Lidlidda (68.58%), Banayoyo (41.29%), and Burgos (11.9%). Those with smaller percentage share of Itneg were: San Juan (1.48%) and Narvacan (1.75%).

Table 3. 1975 Ilocos Sur Population and Percent Distribution by Mother Tongue

Source: 1975 Integrated Census of the Population and its Economic Activities;

Population: Ilocos Sur. Manila: National Census & Statistics Office, 1975.

In the case of Ilocos Norte the Iloko constituted 96.69 percent of total population (Table 4), with only 0.08 percent Tinggian (Itneg), and 0.45 Itneg or Apayao. By municipality, Adams had the highest percentage of Itneg (9.14%) and Isneg (Apayao) (33.15%), with the smallest percentage of Iloko (34.95%). Vintar (0.92%), Paoay (0.04%) and Dingras (0.03%) reported very small Itneg population percentages; and Vintar (0.83%) also reported a small Isneg (Apayao) population percentage. The former municipalities with known Itneg population like Nueve Era, Bacarra, Carasi, Bangui, and Dumalneg (Keesing, 1962. pp.162-167) no longer reported an Itneg population.

Table 4. 1990 Ilocos Norte Population and Percent Distribution by Mother Tongue

Source: 1990 Census of Population and Housing; Report No. 3-41 A: Socio-Economic &                   Demographic characteristics- Ilocos Norte. Manila: National Statistics office               1992, pp.66-71.

The process of “bastardization” or “Ilokanization” that led to the “assimilation” of the Itneg into the Iloko language group as shown in Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan must have occurred faster in Ilocos Norte and Ilocos Sur than in Abra because they lived in the mountain fringes of the municipalities mentioned above and intermarried with the Iloko population more readily who were displaced by the urbanization of the coastal areas or who needed more lands to cultivate.

Having shown the general pattern of the reduction or decrease of the population reporting their Itneg ethnic identity in Abra, Ilocos Sur, and Ilocos Norte, the process of “bastardization,” or “assimilation” of the Itneg to the Iloko-language group in Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan, will now be explained. 

The decrease of population of course maybe due to death or to out-migration normally considered in demography. But here, the decrease of the Itneg population over time was primarily the result of Itneg-Iloko intermarriages, in which the children and grandchildren eventually count themselves as Iloko and speak in-Iloko. Moreover, the decrease in the Iloko percentage share was further increased by massive Iloko immigration into Abra.

It is abundantly clear from many Spanish historical sources that Spanish colonial rule in the Philippines was extremely oppressive and exploitative to the extent of even decimating the populations of occupied areas. This point was shown and well documented by Corpuz (1989: vol. 1, pp.78-109). The cruelty of the Spanish encomenderos and the heavy imposition of tribute, forced labor in making churches and military service against their rebellious countrymen, and compulsory production and confiscation of produce by colonial officials, drove may Ilocos coastal populations into Abra, seeking relief from the evils of colonial rule. On the other hand, Spanish military expeditions against the inhabitants of the Northern Luzon Mountains locally called Golot (or mountain) from which the name Igolot was derived (meaning “people of the mountains”) like the Monforte military campaign to find and exploit the gold mines, brought back new Christian converts like those Igolot resettled by father Alvarez in La Paz (formerly, Namagpagan), and Tayum, Abra (Dumagat: 1974: 80-89, Keesing 1962: 102-104). Virtually, Abra became a “melting pot” of different ethnolinguistic groups, giving rise to the emergence of different languages or dialects like Adasen, Binongan, Mabaca, Banao, Gubang, Maeng, Masadiit, and Moyadan.

Other coastal people moved and settled into Abra in the course of trading activities like the grandfather of Luis Bersamin who went trading as far as San Juan, and the family intermarried with the Itneg of Bangued. Some Iloko families followed the Spanish occupying forces in Bucay (formerly Labon) in 1846 when it was opened as capital of the separate military province called Comandancia of Abra and launching pad for the final conquest of the Igolot. This was why Bucay was purely an Iloko town, and also San Jose in Manabo, Abra where as early as the 1620, Father Juan de Pareja opened up his easternmost mission station (Dumagat: 1994: 56-57; Keesing 1952: 127-128; Schmitz, 1971: 45,81). It was however, in 1823 that the Spaniards renewed determined efforts to pacify the Itneg and Igolot. Through the efforts of Father Bernardo Lago proselytization was intensified, and gathering of people in villages (so-called “reduccion”) was effected. And “on the heels of the mission workers, too, came the vanguard of Ilocano colonists” (Keesing, 1962:137).

Intermarriages between the Iloko and Itneg had been documented by interviews with Itneg informants in Bangued and Peñarrubia in 1971 to 1973 in connection with my thesis on social change in Peñarrubia, particularly with Jose Farro, William Elpa, Daywan Salabaoan, Apo Kay-an, Catangdan, Kallit, Bigao Sagasag, Luisa Bersamin, and Santos Bargas who attested to the blood relation of Itneg families in Bangued, Tayum, Pidigan, and Peñarrubia (Dumagat, 1974: 210-211). Elpa said that Peñarrubia people and Bangued people represented by the brothers Etten and Dagwali set the boundary between Peñarrubia and Bangued in Palangin, at the Southern border of the two municipalities. He also pointed out that whenever the people of Peñarrubia harvested their rice plants, they invited their relatives in Tayum to join the harvest. Daywan Salabaoan, on the other hand, pointed out that the Astudillo family originated from their Itneg ancestor called Udangan; and other prominent Iloko families in Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan descended from Itneg forbears like the Pariñases, Purruganans, Dumawals, Batoons, and Alzates. Thus Cole (1922:489) was not fabricating fact, when he wrote:

…were this lacking, it requires but a little inquiry and the compilation of genealogical tables to show that many Ilocano families are related to the Tinggian. It is a matter of common observation that the chief barrier between the two groups is religion, and once let the pagan accept Christianity, he and his family are quickly absorbed by the Ilocano.

Even today in Lagangilang, for example, the Cagaid family (descended from a well-known Itneg leader) had become Iloko because the great grandfather married an Iloko woman.

Changes in Vigan in-Iloko, 1621-2007 (386 yrs. Interval)

          To show the autonomous change in in-Iloko without the influence or with minimal change due to the influence of a minor language, the initial portion of the Doctrina Cristiana, which was rendered into in-Iloko by Fr. Pacifico Lopez (1621) and published in 1621, was analyzed (See Appendices 1,2,3, for in-Iloko text in 1621 and its rendition now, including English translation). Of the 318 words six (1.89%) are no longer in use today, and 19 (5.97%) phrases are no longer used and could hardly be understood today. The phrases involved obsolete grammatical construction not in use today. This means that changes are minimal. It maybe noted that when two languages have 70 percent common vocabularies, they are considered to belong together, and that one is a dialect of the other (Scott, 1968:48). Dyen’s lexicostatistical analysis of Northern Luzon languages, on the other hand, found that they share 40-50 percent common basic vocabularies. My own analysis of common vocabularies between Iloko and Itneg showed that they share 50 percent common vocabularies which indicate that they are separate languages, unlike Kalinga and Igorot that had 75 percent common vocabularies (Dumagat, 1974:40:43). In the analysis of Calip (1957:20) the divergence between Iloko and Itneg of 27 percent in 745 years, the rate of change per year is 0.03624161, and when this is multiplied with 386 years, it would give a divergence of 13.99 percent. If this were compared to the changes in the Doctrina Cristiana of 1.89 percent, the rate of change estimated by Calip would be 7.4 times faster than in the Doctrina Cristiana. In other words, Iloko divergence into Itneg (13.99%) was 7.4 times faster than Iloko changing into a dialect. Perhaps another language or dialect contributed to the 13.99 percent change.

          Another aspect or form of “bastardization” of in-Iloko is the distinctive in-Iloko as spoken in Vigan and Laoag with the former schwa sound or ¶ pronounced as e as in bed or bet. For example: Saan ka met nga agraep no nasipnget (Do not also plant rice when it is dark). All the e traditionally were pronounced ¶, but perhaps the Spanish missionary priests taught their young Iloko students of the Doctrina Cristiana to use the e rather than the ¶ sound. In fact Foronda (1976:50-51) commented in relation to the Doctrina Cristiana written in in-Iloko by Fr. Francisco Lopez:

This catechism contains a section of Christian doctrine in Iloko language written in ancient Tagalog characters incorporating Fr. Lopez’s suggested “reform” of the Tagalog alphabet, which should be of interest to students of folkloristic and linguistics. Equally interesting are references to agculam, mangnganito, aganito, manglabueg, managaamo, managampay, and agcaniao pagan semi- or quasi-religious practices which has undoubtedly survived the early efforts at Christianization of the Ilokanos.

Vanoverbergh (1955:25) also noted in his Iloko Grammar that:

In the old native writing the Filipinos had only three signs for the vowels: one for the A, another one for the E and the I, and a third one for the O and the U. In the alphabet imposed by the Spaniards, and which we shall partially use in the course of this publication, there are five vowels: A, E, I, O and U….

          It is clear then, that the Spaniards were responsible for changing the schwa (¶) sound to e sound as in bed and bet which Abra people call nabasa (wet), referring to the Vigan in-Iloko pronunciation of e.

          Most likely, the children of Iloko-Spanish and Iloko-Chinese marriages or mestizos and the principalia (native elites) were the early users and advocates of the bastardized in-Iloko in Vigan and Laoag, because they studied the Doctrina Cristiana (Foronda, 1976:13-23). The Spaniards did not only tinker with how words were spoken and written. They also tinkered with the names of the natives. Zaide (1979) wrote: 

Since the 16^th century, the Filipinos had lost their native names, for when they were converted to Christianity they were given Spanish first names, mostly after the Christian saint--Jose after San Jose (St. Joseph)….

After acquiring the names of the Christian Saints, the early Filipinos, following the Spaniards in having surnames, also assumed surnames, which they indiscriminately chose… So it came to pass that in the course of time many Filipino families came to posses similar surnames as de Jose, San Pedro… etc., although they had no blood relationship….

Governor Narciso Claveria (1844-1849), in the course of his visits to the provinces, noticed this confusion in the Filipino surnames. To rectify this anomaly, he ordered the heads of the different religious orders to compile a list of surnames and have them printed under the title Catalogo Alfabetico de apellidos. He sent copies of the published catalogue with his Gubernatorial Decree dated November 4, 1849 ordering the local authorities and the parish priests to have every family head adopt a surname from the list….

          Thus, in Candon, Ilocos Sur many families have surnames beginning in A as in Abaya, Alconcel, Alvarez, Aglipay, Aldeguer, etc. Others like in Vintar, Ilocos Norte also adopted native names beginning in A as in Agdeppa (to stretch arms sidewise), Agbayani (to be a hero), Agpuon (to be the base), Agtarap (to winnow rice), etc. perhaps to make the name sound funny and to show their contempt of the Spaniards’ system of giving surnames by ridiculing them. Corpuz (1989: I: 186-87, 194) explained:

…The Filipinos bore their burdens and endured oppression for as long as these were bearable and endurable. But they did not surrender nor lose themselves…. Most of the time they coped with the weight of the worlds by accommodation and escape. For this they developed great talent….

For instance they were given Spanish names upon baptism…. So the new Christians were baptized Juan, or Maria or some other Christian names. But then they did not use these names, and instead blithely called themselves Demo, or Tonay, or Panema.

. . . . The Spaniards therefore could not penetrate into the native world, and the people developed techniques for keeping them at bay. The most common was to agree with everything the friar said, and then to plead ignorance whenever caught in an inconsistency. This was frustrating to the latter, and they decided that the natives were childish, bundles of contradictions. Another common behavior was to ridicule the friar by telling jokes and making fun of him behind his back.

          If the Spaniards changed the names of the natives or “Indians,” they also changed the name of places after the name of saints like Sta. Lucia (formerly Dumanquake and Kaog) (Foronda 1972:11-29) or of places in their native land like Nueva Segovia for Lallo, Cagayan which became the capital “Bishopric” in 1595 that included Pangasinan, Ilocos and Cagayan and transferred to Vigan, Ilocos Sur in 1755 (Keesing, 1962:26, 176-177); or after important persons like King Ferdinand whose name was given to Vigan (Keesing, 1962:126); and other Saints like Sta. Catalina (formerly Tuley) which was formed into a town by the Franciscans in 1579 (Foronda, 1972:15,21,29).

          They also corrupted the names of places because of unfamiliarity in pronouncing native names like Vigan. The old Itneg called the place Baygan, and it could have been derived from the word “baybay” which means “sea.” They also called Laoag “Ylagua” (Foronda, 1972:23), and Narbacan instead of Nabukan or more correctly “Nabuagan” which means “released” or untied.”

           It must be noted that places were named by our ancestors based on memorable events that happened there or on special features like the predominant trees or plants like “tayum,” a plant from which indigo was extracted and which was given as the name for a town in Abra where indigo was produced. For example, my own hometown now called Peñarrubia in honor of a Spanish governor named Esteban de Peñarrubia who was hostile and cruel to the Itneg (Cole, 1922:245) was called Alfonso XII in honor of the Spanish King. It was formerly called Patoc or “hilltop” or “mountaintop.” The Itneg inhabitants who were driven inland by Spanish pressure brought and gave this name to all the places where they reestablished their settlement eastward like Patoc Bucay and Patoc in Daguioman, Abra (Dumagat, 1974: 18-46).

          The changes and bastardization of place names by the Spaniards makes it difficult to trace the settlement and identity of the people under study. For example, it is possible to hypothesize and verify the proposition that some people of Dingras, Ilocos Norte fled to Danglas, Abra to escape the harsh imposition of tribute and servitude to the Spaniards (cf. Foronda, 1972:150-151). Moreover the similar place names in Golot or Northern Luzon Mountains like Guinaang near Bontoc, and Guinaang near Lubagan and Balbalasang (Keesing, 1962:222; Scott. 1974:198,230,266) and Banao at the headwater of Ambayabang River and Banao along Saltan River in Northern Kalinga (Scott, 1974: 59,106,138) could have been settled by the same ethnolinguistic group, escaping from the numerous Spanish expeditions to find the gold mines. In fact the people of Malibcong and Daguioman, Abra distinguish themselves as i-Banao or people of Banao or descendants of migrants from Banao in the headwaters of Saltan River in Northern Kalinga. 

Recapitulation and Conclusion

          The fact about the diversity of ethnolinguistic groups in the Philippine Archipelago which was noted and studied by the early Spanish writers, and scholars in the 16^th century, which is still observable today, has been partly explained by the theory of migration of different ethnolinguistic groups from Mainland Asia and Southeast Asia at different time periods in the remote past more than half a million years ago to the early part of the Christian Era. Some scholars like Beyer and followers believed the migrations in “waves.” Others like Jocano believed the migrations in “trickle,” and even favor the possibility of Homo Erectus to have reached the Philippines more than a million years ago.        

          Given the above controversy as a theoretical background I presented a model by which the present languages in the Philippines like in-Iloko, in-Itneg, tina-Tagalog, and pina-Pangasinan could have evolved out of the languages brought by the early immigrants to this country. I showed that a new language evolves faster when a dominant language combines with a recessive language such that the dominant language incorporates some features and vocabularies of the recessive language, and the dominant language group eventually intermarries with the recessive language group, absorbing in the process the recessive language group. However, where the dominant language group do not dominate over the recessive language group as in Peñarrubia, Manabo, Lagangilang, Danglas, Sallapadan, and other mountain language groups, the local languages/dialects continue to be in use and evolve on their own. The Itneg in Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan were absorbed into the Iloko language group through intermarriages between the Iloko trader settlers and the original Itneg inhabitants. I called this process “bastardization” although other writers called it “Ilokanization.”

          The bastardization did not only end in intermarriages and the development of in-Iloko mixed with Itneg vocabularies and intonation as developed in Bangued, Tayum, and Pidigan. Names of people and places were also bastardized and corrupted. Thus, it becomes more difficult to trace the movement of people than if the original names of families and places were maintained. For example, if one were to study the impact of the many Spanish expeditions against the Igorot in their eagerness to find and exploit the goldmines as in Mexico and Peru, the places mentioned in the accounts of the military expeditions would be difficult to identify because of the change in the name or the corrupted name as recorded. It is disturbing to note that there has been no serious thoughts and efforts to rectify such historical anomalies. Even if place names or personal names do not make sense or do not sound pleasing to the ear, there is scarcely any effort to change them. Such family names like Sampayan (where clothes are hung), Pitpitan (anvil) and place names like Tangid in Laoag which was originally Tang-ed (or “nod”) and which does not make sense as it is now pronounced need to be changed to something more pleasing to hear and to understand. For example the name “Vigan” does not make sense at all. But if changed to “Baybay” it becomes meaningful, referring to the coast and to the sea.

          The process of decolonization, the dismantling of colonial structures and institutions, the making of our language or medium of communication more pleasing and easier to understand, and the preservation of our ancestral heritage must be pursued relentlessly until we are cleansed of the poison of colonialism. The preservation of our regional languages and local dialects should not defeat our efforts at unifying our people as one nation by continuing the development of our national language, Pilipino. In fact we should change the name of our country and the national language to some words more meaningful and historically significant. Why should our country continue to be named after our colonizer, King Philip of Spain?

          The word “maharlika” as proposed by former President Ferdinand Marcos would sound and mean better because it means “freeman” like Thailand which was formerly called Siam. Better still as Dr. Jose Rizal poetically called it, the name Perlasilangan may be adopted. In the case of my hometown Peñarrubia, I personally believe that its former name Patok should be revived because it is descriptive of the place and in memory of our ancestors who established it.

           What seems to be the welcome trend in our national effort to unite the diverse ethnolinguistic groups in our country is that Pilipino which was largely derived from Tagalog language is becoming understood and used as medium of communication formally and informally from Tawi-tawi in the far South to Batanes in the North. It is also becoming a “prestige” language to show class and high social status in provincial capitals like Laoag City, Cagyan de Oro City, Davao City, and Cebu City, implying that when one speaks in Pilipino, he/she had been to college in Manila, (never mind if only in a small college like Republican College in Cubao, Quezon City). Nevertheless, although Pilipino is becoming widely understood and spoken because taught in our schools, the regional languages like in-Iloko, pina-Pangasinan, bini-Bicol, and bini-Bisaya are being alternatively used as lingua franca in their respective regions.

          Together with this happy observation must be added the sad observation of the continuing bastardization, for example of in-Iloko due to its ungrammatical usage and the incorporation of grammar foreign to it and derived from a foreign language. For example, in in-Iloko grammar past tense is indicated by the suffix en appended to the root verb like in nagsuraten (“sent letter already”). When this involves the first person the suffix akon is appended instead of en which does not indicate who did the writing act. It would be awkward to say “Nagsuraten siak” (literally translated: “Already written by me” where “siak” means “I”). The correct way to express past tense in the first person would be “Nagsuratakon.” In Laoag, I often hear the awkward sentence “Nagsuratnakon” using the suffix nakon instead of akon. The suffix nakon means a third person already did it to him/her or it makes the verb transitive and the subject the object that receives the action of the verb. Thus: “Sinuratannakon” (He sent me a letter already). Literally it can be translated “Written to me he already.” Here “na” in “nakon” refers to the third person doing the act, and “ak” refers to the receiver of the action, and “on” indicates past tense.

          Another form of bastardization of in-Iloko is the use of en to indicate past tense among in-Iloko speakers in Baguio City. For example, in saying: “Sika laengen ti mapan” (“You only must go”), is often worded as “sika laengenen ti mapan.” Note en is appended after laeng to emphasize the sense of only. The second en at the end is unnecessary. 

           The above in-Iloko bastardization has counterparts in Tagalog. English phrases are mixed up with Tagalog phrases in most television and radio programs. For example, when one says: “Let’s go camping in summer.” In Tagalog language it is often worded: “Magkamping tayo sa samer.” Sometimes when one says: “Let us play outside.” It is expressed as: “ Let us make laro sa labas.” Sometimes verb is formed by affixing the prefix mag plus the infinitive of an English word or Spanish word to show sophistication like in “Magrespetar tayo sa mga magulang natin.” (“Let us respect our parents”).

In view of the on-going bastardization of our native languages, there is a need for arresting this trend by teaching the correct native grammar to our children in our schools. By teaching good English, for example, to young Englishmen and Americans, English as spoken and written has become systematic, effective, and uniform throughout the English-speaking countries. We can do no less to our languages to our own children. If foreigners speak our language incorrectly and inaccurately, we can forgive them because they do not always live with us to constantly offend our sensibilities. But when our own children speak our language incorrectly and ungrammatically, the blame boomerangs to us because we did not take effort to teach them as a matter of parental and national duty. We can no longer blame Father Lopez for bastardizing our language because even if he did start tinkering with it, we had all the time and resources to rectify historical anomalies since 1948 when we became a free and self-governing nation.                              

- - -

                                                                                                Dumayco, Peñarrubia

                                                                             Abra, Philippines

                                                                             May 5, 2007                                                                                                            

NOTES

1. Paper to be presented at the 2007 Nakem International Conference with the theme: “Panagpanaw ken Panagindeg – Exile and Settling in Ilokano and Amianan History and Culture” to be held at the Mariano Marcos State University Campus, Batac, Ilocos Norte, Phillipines on May 22-25, 2007.
    

2. Iloko is the correct name of the people of the Ilocos coasts of Northern Luzon, Philippines. The name Ilokano had been incorrectly popularized by the Spaniards who earlier used the word “Ilocan” specifically by Medina in 1609 (Keesing, 1962:325). The language spoken by the “Ilocan” or “Indian” of Ilocos or Ylocos was Samtoy (or “sao mi ditoy,”) meaning “our language here.” (See Lopez, 1621; 1767)

The word “Ilocano” is derived from the prefix “i” which indicates place of origin or residence plus “loco” or name of place. The suffix “ano” also means “from” or “of” as in Mexicano or person of or from Mexico. The suffix ano is superfluous and certainly foreign to the construction of a supposedly indigenous word and language. It is obviously a Spanish word construction which obfuscates any attempt at historical reconstruction and truth. The place name “Loko” does not make sense as a place name signifying the importance of the place or what the place means to the people living in it or frequenting it. But when the word “Loko” is compared to “Luzon” which is the name of the whole island it is obvious that the two words are actually one and the same word. The word “lukong” in both in-Iloko and in-Itneg means “hollow,” or “depression.” It may have been a Chinese word adopted both by the Iloko and Itneg as indicated by the use of Chinese bowl called “mahlukong” or “mallukong.” 

 In Blair and Robertson, vol. 3, p.121, Northern Luzon, mistakenly referred to as “toward the south is a province called Yloqiuo,” as quoted in the report to the Spanish King in 1573 by Martin de Goite and Hernando Riquel. Later, Guido de Lavezares referred to it as “… in this island of Luzon, on the coast of Yloco….” (p. 188). It was again referred to as “los Ylocos” by Lavezares, Goite, Maldonado and others (p. 266). In 1574 Lavezares reported to the king that the island of Luzon “is so large, and… we need some settlements of Spaniards to protect and defend them… it seemed best to send Captain Juan de Salcedo with 70 or 80 soldiers to people the coast of Los Ylocos, on the shores of a river called Bigan.” (Vol.3, p. 276).

 In Blair and Robertson, vol.4 (p. 90-93) Francisco de Sande reported in June 7, 1576 of the death of Juan de Salcedo due to “a sickness that kills old and young…” and referred to the “island of Luzon” with the z spelled as c as in Cubu (vol.4, p.149) or Cebu which means that “Luzon” was actually pronounced LUKON or Lukong. Since the Spaniards were notoriously clumsy in pronouncing n or ng at the end of a word, they substituted n or ng with s, thus, “Lukon” or “Lukong” becomes “Lukos.” Note c in Cubu or Cebu. The k in Lukong may have been replaced by C in Spanish orthography.

3.      Tinguian, Tingguian, Tinggian or Itneg. - The word “Tinggian,” using Pilipino spelling, was derived from the old Malay word “tinggi” which meant “mountain’ or “hill.” During the early part of Spanish colonial rule of the Philippines, the word      “Tingguian” was generally used to refer to mountain peoples in Luzon, Mindanao, and the Visayas. Later on, it was confined to the native people of Abra as late as 1763 in Mozo’s ethnography (B & R, vol. 48, pp. 68-86).

          It is interesting to note that it was only in the 1850s, in the work by Buzeta and Bravo (1850-51) that the native people of Abra were called by the name “Itaneg” and were known by their neighbors, Itneg, which means “people of Tineg” and referring to the area watered by the Tineg River in Northwestern Abra. The word “t’neg” means “cold and wet.” Note that “Agta” or “Ita,” the name of the small black people with kinky hairs who are known as the aboriginal people of Abra call themselves “Agta” or “Ita” which means “people here.” Similarly, the Adasen people or “Adang” in Spanish ethnography (Mozo in B & R, vol. 48, pp. 68-69, 80-84) who traditionally occupied Northwestern Abra and Northwestern Ilocos Norte could have adopted the name “Tineg” and called their homeland “wet and cold.” These people were reported to be migrants from the Babuyan Islands (Keesing, 1962:331). They were also described as having intermarried with the Agta (Keesing, 1962:155-158,163) by Buzeta and Bravo (1850-51: vol. II, p.88).

          Local historical accounts from Northwestern Abra, particularly from Malibcong tells of the Banao people of the headwaters of Saltan River settling in Northeastern Abra and finding the place already occupied by the Agta and Adasen (story by the father of Fr. Oscar Alunday S.V.D.). This means that the Agta were the earliest inhabitants, followed by the Adasen, then by the Itneg (Inglaud or “Western people”) refugees from the Vigan and Bantay areas in the 1570s through the 1800s (Cf Cole, 1922: 238-245).

          The so-called “Tinggian” or “Itneg” is actually composed of different ethnolinguistic groups basically descended from at least four distinct language groups, namely (1) the Agta; (2) the Adasen (Apayao or Isneg); (3) the Itneg (Inglaud) or refugees from the Ilocos coast; (4) the Kankanaey (or Igolot). The intermarriages of these different language groups produced the: (1) Binongan people along the Binongan River, particularly Lacub and Licuan: (2) Banao, Mabaka, Gubang, Masadiit, Maeng, and Moyadan group; and (3) Itneg-Adasen-Apayao group.

4.      In-Iloko means Iloko language. The language group called Iloko is explained in note 2 and need not be repeated here. Iloko grammar uses the prefix “in” to denote the language of a people indicated by the prefix “i” plus the name of the place of origin or residence.

5.      In-Itneg means Itneg language, particularly in-Inglaud. “In” is also used to denote the language of other people like the Pangasinan people whose language maybe called pina-Pangasinan. Note that “in” becomes an infix, and letter “P” is added before “in” because “P” is the first letter of the name of the people. Also in referring to the language of the Tagalog, it is called Tina-Tagalog.

6.      B & R refers to Blair, Emma H. and J.A. Robertson (Eds.) The Philippine Islands, 1493-1803. Cleveland, Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark Co., 1903-09.55 vols. B & R is used as convenient reference to historical materials contained in the 55 volumes to avoid lengthy documentation of references.

7.      Reduction is “reduccion” in Spanish which means resettling new Christian converts, from the mountain or from unsubdued lowland populations called “Indians,” “Infieles,” and “salvajes” by the Spaniards, into Spanish-controlled areas usually assigned to an encomendero who is rewarded for his military services by his tribute collection from the conquered “Indians.” In modern times, this is called “hamletting” or concentrating surrenderees among the enemies within an area controlled by the military both to prevent such surrenderees to give assistance or refuge to the enemy and to make use of the labor and resources of the surrenderees for military purposes. This technique was perfected by the Spaniards in the Philippines and by the Americans in Vietnam.

 REFERENCES

Batoon, H.V.

1970        “The People of Abra.” In: The Abra Journal of History, (March), pp. 34-44.

Blair, E. and Robertson J. (Eds.).

1903-09   The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898. Ohio:

                 The Arthur H. Clark Co. 55 vols.

Buzeta, M. and Bravo F.

1891        Diccionario, Estadistico, Historico, de las Islas Filipinas.

Madrid: Imprenta de D. Jose la Peña. 2 vols.

Calip, Jose R.

1957        “The Iloko Epic – Lam’Ang. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis.”

Manila: University of Sto. Tomas.

Cole, Fay-Cooper

1908        “The Tinggian.” In: The Philippine Journal of Science,

3:4 (Sept.), pp. 197-211.

___________.

1922        The Tinggian: Social, Religious, and Economic Life of a Philippine Tribe.

Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History. 172 p.

Corpuz, O.D.

1989        The Roots of the Filipino Nation.

Quezon City: Aklahi Foundation, Inc. 2 vols.

De la Costa, H.

          1965   Readings in Philippine History. Manila:

                   The Bookmark, Inc.

Dumagat, F.L.

1974        “Social Change in an Itneg (Tinggian) Community: 1723-1941.”

Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of the Philippines.

Fonacier, T.

1953        “The Ilokano Movement: A New Frontier in Philippine History.”

In: The Diliman Review, 1:1 (Jan.), pp. 89-94.

Foronda, M.A. Jr.

1975        “Kailukuan: Historical & Bibliographical Studies.”

In: The Journal of History. 21:1 & 2 (Dec.), 1-151.

Fox, Robert B.

1967        “Excavations in the Tabon Caves and Some Problems in Philippine Chronology.” In: Zamora, M.D. (Ed.). Studies in Philippine Anthropology. Quezon City: Alemar-Phoenix, pp. 88-115.

________.

1965        “A Preliminary Glottochronogy for Northern Luzon.”

In: Asian Studies, 3:1 (April), pp. 103-13.

Jocano, F.L.

1966        “Beyer’s Theory on Filipino Prehistory and Culture: An Alternative Approach to the Problem.” In: Zamora, M.D. (Ed.). Studies in Philippine Anthropology. Quezon City: Alemar-Phoenix, pp. 128-150.

________.

1976        Philippine Prehistory. Quezon City: Philippine Center for Advanced Studies.

Keesing, F.M.

1962        The Ethnohistory of Northern Luzon.

California: Stanford University Press.

Larousse       Desk Reference Encyclopedia. Ed. By James Hughes.

          1995   London: Larousse plc.

Lopez, Francisco

1621   Libro a naisuratan amin ti bagas/ Doctrina Cristiana nga naisurat iti libro/ ti Cardenal a Agnagan Belarmino ket inaon ti P. Fr. Francisco/Lopez padre a S. Agustin iti Sinafan toy. Manila: Imprenta en el convento de San Pablo de Manila.

Republic of the Philippines
          1997   1995 Census of the Philippines. Report No. 2-1 N: Socio-economic and

                   Demographic Characteristics, Abra. Manila: National Statistics Office.

________.

1990        Census of Population and Housing. Report No. 3-41 A: Socio-economic and Demographic Characteristics. Ilocos Norte. Manila: National Statistics Office.

________.

1975        1975 Integrated Census of the Population and Its Economic Activities, Ilocos Sur. Manila: National Census and Statistics.

Schmitz, Josef

1971        The Abra Mission in Northern Luzon, Philippines, 1598-1955. Cebu City: University of San Carlos.

Scott, W.H.

1974        The Discovery of the Igorots. Quezon City: New Day Pub.

________.

1967        Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History. Manila: University of Sto. Tomas Press.

Vanoverbergh, M.

1954        Iloko Grammar. Bauko, Mt. Province: Baguio Catholic School Press.

Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary

1968        Massachusetts: G.C. Merriam Co., Pub.

Zafra, N.

1967        Philippine History Through Selected Sources. Quezon City: Alemar-Phoenix Pub.

Appendix 1. DOCTRINA CRISTIANA

MCF Lopez, Francisco

1964

Libro a naisuratan amin ti bagas ti Doctrina Cristiana nga naisurat iti libro ti cardinal agnagan Belarmino quet inaon ti Fr. F. Lopez. Tercera ed. Malabon, Tipo-lit. del Asilo de Huerfanos, 1895.

Definiciones

De los vocablos que en este libro ha podido excusar la lengua ilocana de tomar de la castellana.

Iti sasaoén itoy, iti caipapanán daguiti saó a quina-castila nga buluden ti samtoy, ta di mabalin á saoén iti sanga cabitlá nga saó no di naynayónan.

Libro

          Iti libro á coná, iti nagpunipúnan ti adú á naisurat á insursurat á sasaó.

Caridad

            Iti caridad á coná, iti ayát ti Dios a ili nan onay iti ayát iti dadduma quet mairaman muet ti ayát á naimbág iti páda nga tao, á isu ti ayatén, ta anác, piman ti Dios iti panagábo.

Virtudes

          Iti virtudes á coná, adú ti papanan na nga saó, em iti nangroná ónay á caipapanán na, iti naimbag ónay á bileg ti naquem, á isu ti pacabalinán da nga agaramid amin iti uray á sebbáng ti naimbag á arámid á mayal-lót iti naquem ti Dios quet maipaáy muét iti cararóa. Adú ti sebbáng ti virtudes, ta nagcaadú muét á sebbáng ti naimbág á arámid.

Misterio

Iti misterio á coná, nga maipapán iti pammatit iti Dios, iti napatég ónay á saó, ngem no aramid á naitalimueng á ditay maisip á tao, ém utang muet laeng á patien.

Cararag

Quen Santa Maria,

Tapno idauatán na dagiti Ilocot iti gaguet da nga agbasat iti librot toy, quet cailalaán da met ti sursuro á bagás na.

     Ó Virgen Santa Mariá

pangronaen ca nga cararagan,

ta sica ti catalec,

quet sicát pagcammatalcan.

     Ammóm ti sicat cot toy

ta saan á pampamayán,

saan muét á barengbareng,

imbag quet á guinagara.

     No castá nangronat imbag,

Virgen nangrona nga Santa

paimbaguem ti aramid co,

ta no saan, diac maala.

     Di ac magapó ti naimbag,

Ta aoán ti capapaayac;

Ngem matalec ac ituy

iti sicát cararagac.

     Ta mangaasi ca piman,

mangngaasi ca á di lumangan;

anansá ta sica laeng,

ti pinili ti Dios Amá,

     Sicá ti quinayát na;

isún to, muet laeng, coná na,

ti iná ti Anac co á Dios,

á mapán mangisalacan.

     Adú ti inturéd na nga tóoc,

quet patáy ti nanungpalan;

ta isút nanursuro piman,

isu muet ti manimána.

Appendix 2. AGDAMA NGA IN-ILOKO

Pannakaitarusna

          Dagiti sarita ditoy a naipatarus manipud kinakastila ken nabulod iti in-Iloko ta saan a mabalin a maysa a sarita laeng a di nayonan tapno maawatan.

Libro

          Iti daytoy a makuna a libro nagtitipon ti adda a naisurat a sarsarita.

Panagayat

          Ti caridad a makuna isu ti ayat ti Dios kadagiti umili, kangrunaan ti ayat iti pada a tao a masapul nga ayaten ta anak ngarud ti Dios iti aramid.

Dagiti Galad

          Ti virtudes a makuna, adu ti kaipapananna a sarita, ngem ti kangrunaanna unay a pakaitarusanna ti naimbag unay a bileg ti nakem nga isu ti pakabalinanda nga agaramid amin iti uray ania a pamaayan ti naimbag nga aramid a maiyallubog iti nakem ti Dios ket maipaay met iti kararua. Adu ti pakaitarusan ti virtudes, ta nagkaadu met ti wagas ti naimbag nga aramid.
 

Misterio

          Ti misterio a makuna a maipapan iti pammati iti Dios, iti pammati napateg unay a sarita, ngem no aramid a maimaldit ditoy iti nakem ti tao, ngem utang a rebbengna a patien.

Kararag ken Santa Maria

          Tapno idawatan na dagiti Iloko iti panaggaget da nga agbasa iti daytoy a libro tapno kailalaanda ti sursuro a linaonna.

     O Virgen santa Maria

Umuna ka a kararagan

Ta sika ti katinnalek

Ket sicat pagkammatalkan.

     Ammom a sika ti adda ditoy

A saan a nakairuaman

Saan met a barengbareng

Imbag ket ti sangratna.

     No kasta nangronat imbag

Virgen nangrona a Santa

Paimbagem ti aramid ko,

Ta no saan, diak maala.

     Diak ammo ti naimbag

Ta awan ti kapapaayak;

Ngem matalekak itan

Ta sikat’ kararagak.

     Ta manangaasi ka ngamin

Manangaasi ka a di lumangan

Anansa ta sika laeng

Ti pinili ti Dios Ama.

     Sika ti kinayatna

Isunto met laeng kunana

Ti ina ti Anak ko a Dios

A mapan mangisalakan.

     Adu ti intured na a took

Ket patay nagtungpalan

Ta isut’ nanursuro piman

Isu met ti pagnamnamaan.

Appendix 3. ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF “CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE”

Definition

          In the words here, are the meaning of the Spanish words borrowed by ini-Iloko, because they cannot be expressed in a few words without some additions.

Book

          The book is the repository of many written words.

Love

          In the word Caridad is the love of God for the country especially the love for fellowmen whom one should also love because they are also the children of God in action.

Virtues

          In the word virtudes, it has many translations, but the primordial meaning is the very good power of thought which enables people to do all or any way of doing good work in accordance with the will of God and benefit the soul. There are many ways of virtudes (virtues) because there are many ways of doing what is good.

Mystery

          In the word “mystery” it refers to the faith in God in the very precious word, but if in a secret act that a man may think one owes it to believe.

Prayer to the Holy Mary

          So that she pleads for the Iloko to be dedicated to read this book and value the teachings that it bears.

     O Virgin Holy Mary

I pray to you first

Because you are faithful

And you are the refuge.

     You know I know you here

Because it is not all the means,

And it is not also a joke

It is good that is the objective.

     If that is the case, good is primordial

                                      Virgin, the primary Saint

Make my deeds good

For otherwise, I do not get it.

     I do not know what is good

Because I am not worthy

But now I’m trustworthy

Because to you I pray.

     So that you give me please your mercy

Be merciful without fail

Because you are the only

One chosen by God the Father.

     You are the one he liked

That will be just the same he said

The mother of my Son who is God

Who will come to save.

     He suffered much anguish

And death is the end

Because He is also the hope.

TOP

Nakem Centennial Conference Secretariat
E-mail: nakemconference@yahoo.com or atvisaya@yahoo.com
Phone:  808-956-8405.  FAX:  808- 956-5978
Website developed and maintained by Raymund Ll. Liongson