MARIANO MARCOS STATE UNIVERSITY Graduate School Laoag City John Paul Castillo Vallente MAED Language and

d Literature SOCIOLINGUISTICS Dr. Shirley B. Mina, Professor

CONVERSATION ANALYSES USING GRICES MAXIMS OF CONVERSATION AND CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE Part One. A Literature Classroom Conversation Teacher: There is a certain measurement, there is even a certain rhyme, rhyme scheme, right? Do you still remember, there are three types of sonnet? Okay, thats sonnet. what else? Ballad Is sonnet not a lyric? No, no. Sabagay. Amman, amman sir. It can be sir. Kasi, uray siak ket maulawak. Manu kad iti types ti poem ngamin aya? First, we usually have, one is the classical, di ba yung classical, pero yung ano yung classical? Lyric. Lyric. What about the ode? Is that not a lyric? Amman sir. Sonnet, ode, elegy ... Okay, start to give us...oh, neh ay sorry, anan dayta? (He almost tripped) (Laughter) Okay, give me the main types of poem, kasi through these types you will be bale to know what technique are you going to use in the study of poetry, so, lyric, ano pa? Narrative. Narrative, okay, elegy. Ana pay? Isurat tayo sa tayon to ... okay, what composes of lyric? Sonnet, ode, elegy Song pay sir. Songs, correct! Songs, kasi sings are...okay, songs, sonnet, ode and elegy. What about narratives, we have?

Student A: Teacher: Student A: Student B: Student C: Student D: Teacher:

Student A: Teacher: Student B: Teacher: Students: Teacher:

Student B: Teacher: Student C: Teacher: Student A: Student B: Teacher:

Students: Teacher: Student B: Teacher: Student A: Teacher: Student A: Teacher: Students: Teacher: Student A: Teacher: Student A: Teacher:

Student C: Teacher: Student A: Student B: Student A: Student B: Teacher: Student B: Teacher:

Ballad. Ballad, correct. Kaya nga tinatanong ko kung ballad is a lyric. Sabi ninyo, hindi. Oh narrative because it tells a story, correct? Yes sir. Mmm, what else? But, dont you know that ballads are also accompanied with music? Yes sir, lyric sir. It is accompanied with music. Yes sir. But its not a lyric, in as much as it tells a story, it is ore on narrative. Okay, ballad what else? Ay, tay kadaklan, di yo pay ammu dayta? Epic. Correct. Epic. This is probably one of the hardest... Yah, and the most... one of the hardest types of poem na pinakamahirap talagang ituro. You cannot teach this in just one or three sessions, three sessions. You need to give a lot of work for that to really read. What about if the students do not really like to work or read materials like that? Because, especially, yung mga epics, ahm, during the early times, yung mga talagang original, they are the walks of lives, buti nga, meron na tayong mga movie ngayon eh, The Troy, The Helen of Troy, para huwag mo nang basahin, because you know in forms there are, kasi when you watch movies, you dont, mmm, you dont find anymore the metaphorical meaning, the simile, wala na right? Pero mas maganda is that you have to read also the original, in line talaga, by line siya. Okay, because there are many elements which you will, ah, discover in epics. What about dramatic? Wala? ... Ana? Dramatic. Kaslang lyric met gamin... Kasla lyric met ngem... Wen. Haan, kasi ti literature, there are two kasta, divisions, the poetry and the prose. Wen... And in the poetry, the three types of poetry... Dayta. lyric, narrative, and dramatic. Correct. But, but, may I ask you, when we classify yung mga, ah, ibang type of, ah, classification, yung, ahm, verse, ah-eh, hmmm, free verse, adda pay maysa, free verse, blank verse... -End of Recording-

Conversation Analysis: As a form of institutional talk, classroom interaction shows characteristic features in terms of the distribution of knowledge, access to conversational resources, and to participation in the interaction. The teacher is the one who mainly imparts knowledge to students, generally corrects students and controls turn-taking and sequence organization, and who has greater rights to initiate and close sequences. Code switching, a universal language contact phenomenon reflecting the grammars of two languages working simultaneously, exists in the conversation. For bilingual speakers, codeswitching is a valuable tool for various reasons. It offers another language to use when words in the primary language are insufficient due to the speaker or listeners limited English proficiency (Hughes et al., 2006). Since code-switching is motivated by situations, the speaker may use it to identify with a particular group of people. Also, it can be a sociolinguistic tool, used for clarification, emphasis, separation from feelings, and achievement of a dramatic effect. By giving the speaker more ways in which to communicate, code-switching is a useful tool in the bilingual community. The teacher occasionally switches from English to Iluko or Filipino in his discourse in order to encourage interaction. In some instances, whenever the teacher uses pure English in classroom discussion, the students become hesitant to share their opinion because they are anxious on how their classmates would react if they will commit grammatical errors. Consequently, code switching is utilized by the teacher to create a familiar atmosphere to the students as well as to promote an active participation in the discussion of the lesson. Furthermore, the students can have an easy grasp of the topic at hand if the teacher code switches to explain difficult concepts. No maxims of conversation is significantly flouted or violated. On the other hand, maxims of manner and relation are highlighted and considered in most of the utterances in the conversation. The responses of the students as well as of the teacher directly and properly answers the questions posted which means that the teacher-student interaction is clear throughout the period queries asked by the teacher are not ambiguous nor obscure so, in turn, answers given by the students are specific and acceptable. In addition, there is no remarkable instance of the teacher or the students going off tangent. All of the statements are in adherence to the existing topic of discussion and never was there an indication of irrelevance. We can also trace a sense of respect in the language used by the students towards the teacher as exemplified by the frequent use of the polite form of address, sir, after every response. This address of courtesy provides a professional gap between the teacher and his students, which provides a constant reminder that the teacher should always maintain authority inside the class.

Part Two. A Conversation among Friends in a Street-food Stand (Laughter) Friend A:

Friend B: Friend A: Friend B: Friend C: Friend B: Friend C: Friend B: Friend C: Friend B: Friend A: Friend C: Friend A: Friend D: Friend A: Friend D: Friend A: Friend B: Friend D: Friend C: Friend D: Friend A: Friend D: Friend B: Friend D: Friend B: Friend A:

Friend C: Friend A: Friend B:

Adda pay naawat ko di rabii ah, umay da kanu inpan nagkatok ta balay, inyawat ni lakay ko, dwa nga kallikis a singkwenta adda naka-stapler nga nagan. Ta uki ni nana dattoy a pulpulitikon, kunkunak ngarud. (Laughs) Ay, kallikis talaga? Wen, kallikis pay ah... adda pay naka-stapler a nagan maysa a konsehal, maysa nga bokal. Awan pay naawat ko. Adda kanyakon...seven-hundred. Talaga? Two-hundred idi tas five-hundred. Apay awan dita ayan mi yus? Mayat, ata nasisingpet kayo ngamin. Awan, awan agiyaw-awat jay ayan mi. Nagmalas! First time ko iti makasjay ah ata mabain da kanu nga umasideg iti propesyonal. Umay da, ket, umay da met latta mangted. Nagtawag da, ay mam, kastoy, dida maibaga ah tay kayat da nga ibaga... Mmm. Apay kadi kunak ah, kastoy ngamin, ah eh, kasta, ay ket nu adda, di adda latta kunak. Ket wen ah, awan laketdi perpermaam sis. Idi kwan, immay da inpapaw-it ta karruba mi. Pityurek sa daytoy kunak. Ket dagijay ngarud met aggassawa, ibutos mo? Ibutos kon sa ida sika. Madi sis, nu mangatiw da nga agasawa, din to awan iti check and balance. Wen. Isu dapat a ni Kris Ablan iti mangatiw. Ket awan met check and balance na idi last year...ken kadwa da met ni bise. Sabagay, isu nga ti dapat mangatiw ket ni Cheville ken ni Ablan, wenno ni Roger ken ni Michael ta didan to latta aggiginnubat dita munisipyon. Di pay nagbuteng metten? Everyday fireworks! (laughs) Corrected by! Baka haan pay a nalnalpas iti counting of votes ket, daytan. Daytoy met kasta, namin ano ak a nakaawat daytoyen, its confirmed, Legarda and Trillanes are co-authors, mmm, ukin na tis na dagitoyen. Saysayangen yo lat dos ko, punyemes. Apay? Black propaganda. Haan a kuskusto dagita ibagbaga da. Basta agtaray ni Loren, dayta ti maibaga da.

Friend A: Friend B: Friend C: Friend A:

Friend B: Friend C: Friend B: Friend C: Friend B: Friend C: Friend B: Friend C: Friend B:

Friend D: Friend A: Friend D:

Ngem, diak latta met ibutos. Kagura da unay ni Loren. Ta apay? Diak met ibutos latta. Ngem to the point nga isend mo iti messages a kastoy? Ania laketdin. Agballaak to pay! Mamaestra pay a pada, ah, ti mangitext kanyak. Dagitay co-teachers ko aya, aina, iti mangibagbaga kanyak nga iforward ko kanu. Uray siak, adu ti naaw-awat ko, ngem diak, in an ana, intetext, black propaganda dagita. Ngem awan met la maawat kon sika. Isu kuma pay a pagbuya ta sine ket. Awan talaga? Aina, nagpiman kayo met aya? (laughs) Awan umay aginbunbunong talaga. Sigarilyo lang ah. Ay ket, kwa ah. Sigarilyo. Inbulsa ngarud dagitay pulitiko ah, dagitay, adda ngamin talaga nakasagana a pagkampanya dan. Inbulsa dagitay alipores da. Haan, awan ngamin kalaban da. Isu met lang ah. Awan, awan pulos natured a nanglaban ken Nico sika. Ngem, haan tayon to agrirriri, nu makaawat tayo, haan tayon to agrir-riri nu awan to ti iproject dan, wen, haan kanto agrir-riri ata nairamanan tayo metten. (Laughs) alla! Ket, nag-imbassitan metten? Ket manu kuma ti maibunbunong da? Kuwentaemon ah. Ahay, excuse me, dakami ket five-hundred, first wave. Addan sapay part a solid solid ditoy Laoag isu haan mo maibaga nu asinno iti mangatiw. -End of Recording-

Conversation Analysis: The conversation takes place in a street-food stand at Laoag City wherein the participants, mostly teachers, talk about politics and how dirty it could turn out to be especially in its peak. The situations presented by the participants imply the kind of government that we have and the perspective of Ilocanos as regards vote buying and political dynasty. What is conspicuous in the above conversation is the fact that the participants do not have communicative restraint. This means that they are not inhibited to express their opinions because the people whom they are conversing with are someone close to them, and a sense of trust and harmony is already established among them. In the Philippine context, the use of vulgar or curse words ukin na na, are considered to be taboos that if we hear a person utter such words, we tend to conclude that that particular individual has no breeding and it is also indicative of his/her poor upbringing. However, obscene expressions are used in the conversation in many cases. This

is so since the company that Friend A (the participant who often speak bad words) has, is composed of people whom she is comfortable with and who treats her void of superficial judgments. Taking into account Paul Grices maxims of conversation, it can be observed that in some portions of the excerpt, some maxims are actually counted maxims of quantity and quality, because the remarks made by the participants are explanatory and are coupled with adequate evidence to support their claims. Nevertheless, there are also instances in which the maxim of relation and manner are flouted or violated. For example, Friend B asked, Ket dagijay ngarud met aggassawa, ibutos mo? (this question can simply be answered by either yes or no), then Friend D responded with the statement, nu mangatiw da nga agasawa, din to awan iti check and balance. This clearly exemplifies a defiance of the maxim of manner because Friend Ds reaction is indistinct, though, if we mull over her response, we can assume that she is indeed not going to vote for that certain candidate. Another illustration of flouting a maxim is the answer of Friend A to the question of Friend C as to why there are circulating black propaganda against Loren Legarda - Diak met ibutos latta. Ngem to the point nga isend mo iti messages a kastoy? Ania laketdin. Agballaak to pay! Mamaestra pay a pada, ah, ti mangitext kanyak. Dagitay coteachers ko aya, aina, iti mangibagbaga kanyak nga iforward ko kanu. The maxim of relation is ignored in this extract from the conversation because the reaction of Friend A is irrelevant to the question of Friend C. Simply, it could mean that Friend A does not really know the grounds for the creation of text messages as opposition to Legardas senatorial candidacy, or s he might not be interested into who might be the culprit of slander. Finally, we can also notice that the participants are so careless in mentioning names of candidates whom they are going to vote for and whom they despise. In friendship, as they say, everything that may pose danger to your friend should be kept a secret for all eternity, and it is this mantra that we are confident in articulating even our darkest comments to people who are emotionally attached to us. Part Three. A Recorded Conversation of a Professor and her Students during Lunch Break Teacher: Student A: Teacher: Student B: Student C: Student A: Teacher: Student A: Santi, kaanu ka nga agawid? Hmm, ita nga rabii maam. Mabalin nga igatangannak ti bagnet ken longganisa? Wow, bagnet, pakain ha? Ang sarap, di ba kumain na tayo? Wen maam, anya nga longganisa ti kayat yo? Diay at- diay atiddog? Hmm, diay babassit, kasla diay impakan ni Father kanyami idiay parish. E-ewan ko, bakit yung matatanda gusto ng bagnet. Yung mga kasama ng misis ko laging nagpapabili ng bagnet.

Teacher: (Laughter) Student B: Teacher: Student A: Teacher: Student B: Student C: Student A: Teacher:

Ibig sabihin, matanda na ako?

Basta maam, kain tayo sa inyo ha? Basta ako, nilalagay ko s-sa ... Pinakbet. sa Pinakbet Santi. Gusto ko yung walang tatak ha, yung, homemade. Gusto ni maam yung galing sa merkado. Yung gusto niya, yung bili sa palengke. Kasi, mey suki kami ng misis ko, yung nag-eexport. Bahala ka na. -End of Recording-

Conversation Analysis: Doubtlessly, the most obvious observation we can make about conversation is the fact that when people talk with each other, they take turns in speaking. Put simply, one participant (A) talks, then stops; another participant (B) starts to talk, then stops resulting in the formula AB-A-B-A-B, a specification of the basic rule for conversation, that is, one party at a time. Let us consider the given conversation of four participants speaking in Iluko and Filipino. The set of rules governing turn-taking applies. Generally, only one speaker talks at any given time. Moreover, here, we see two instances of simultaneous utterances, one of which overlapped with the previous speaker, and one instance of latching. Notice, too, the occurrence of code switching which is natural and quite expected in multilingual settings. The dialogue starts with the current speaker (Teacher) asking a question in Iluko of the next speaker (Student A) whom she selects calling him by name, Santi, who replies also in Iluko. The teacher and students interaction continue in the same language, but is intercepted by the simultaneous overlapping turns in Filipino of the other two participants in the group who do not speak Iluko but who recognize the Iluko term bagnet. Guessing what is being talked about; they contribute to the conversation switching to Filipino, the national lingua franca. It is interesting to note that in talking to each other, the Iluko speakers talk in Ilocano, but when the non-Ilocanos joined in and were included in the conversation, a switch to Filipino was initiated by Student A and continued till the end. This is indicative of the Filipino hospitality we, Filipinos, as much as possible, do not want an individual in our circle to feel alienated, therefore, we usually feel the drive to include them in our conversations by adapting ourselves to their culture.

Just like code switching, borrowing is also prevalent in the Philippine languages used in the data. Usually, single words or short idiomatic phrases, loan words from other Philippine languages, as well as from foreign languages like English, Spanish are incorporated into the grammatical system of the borrowing languages. These are considered part of the lexicon, adopt its morphological features and enter into its syntactic structures. Some of the loan words seen above are: from Iluko to Filipino, bagnet, pinakbet; from English, parish, misis, homemade, nageexport; from Spanish, trabaho, gusto, basta, and merkado. The maxim of quantity is emphasized in the teachers response to Student As question, Wen maam, anya nga longganisa ti kayat yo? Diay at- diay atiddog? Hmm, diay babassit, kasla diay impakan ni Father kanyami idiay parish. In her reply, she is able to make her contribution as informative as required, and she clarifies the quality of the product that she is requesting in terms of the products size. However, on the latter part of the conversation, the teacher flouted the maxim of manner because her answer, Basta ako, nilalagay ko s-sa ... pinakbet, is not actually the expected reply for the question of Student B, Basta maam, kain tayo sa inyo ha? instead of simply saying yes, the teacher uses unnecessarily confusing words and construction. If we are going to analyze her response, we can conclude that she would like her students to visit their home because her statement is indicative of her, preparing food for the students stopover. Part Four. Telephone Conversation between Spouses (Cutlery sounds in background) Husband: Wife: Husband: Wife: Husband: Wife: Well, uuuh, its still, uh, pretty busy. Mmm, so I hear, uh huh. Yes. One, two, three, well, three... and two three four sit-five six still sitting there. So, uh, its tonight much better than expected. Yes. So, what? Well, yes, uhh...

(Long, awkward silence) Wife: Jesus! I have to... every word that I say, I have to account for, I have to explain four times. Husband: No, you dont have to. You dont. Wife: If I say, yes, like, well, in other words, thats fine, then, uh, then, uhm... Husband: No, you dont have to. -End of Recording-

Conversation Analysis: The excerpt is taken from a telephone conversation between spouses. The wife has called her husband late night in his restaurant bar. The episode starts with the husband introducing aa new topic. He tells how business is doing tonight. This report is concluded with a summary assessment: so, uh, its much better tonight than expected. When his wife parsimoniously confirms this evaluation by only saying yes, the husband is not content with this response. It is challenged almost immediately (so what?). In the aftermath of this exchange, a short dispute develops between the spouses. The wifes initial reaction is rather resistant. Yet when her husband keeps pushing her, she finally bursts out in an angry, reproaching tirade. The wife does the kind of metatalk we all know from our own quarrels. Acting as a competent lay linguist, she formulates explicitly what she meant with her response: if I say yes, (. . .) in other words, thats fine (. . .). In her version, the husband has misunderstood her completely. When reacting with yes, she was giving an agreeing, even approving response. The question is, however, whether the husband indeed did misunderstand her. Did he have any conversational evidence for an alternative interpretation when he threw doubt upon his wifes response? In order to be able to answer this question, we have to go back to the sequence that occasioned the dispute. The utterance so u:h its much better tonight than expected is an assessment. It is an interactional property of first assessments that when its recipient is also knowledgeable about the evaluated object, a second assessment is expected from the part of that party. Second assessments have the property that they find their measure in the assessment they are responding to. Second assessments are never neutral; they either agree or disagree with the first one. Disagreeing assessments are more delicate actions than agreeing assessments. Participants in talk in interaction treat a disagreeing second assessment usually as a less preferred type of next action than its agreeing alternative. They are nonequivalent alternatives. Agreement is preferred and unmarked; disagreement is dispreferred and marked. Preferred second pair parts are delivered without delay and formulated in a frank, concise mode. Dispreferred seconds, on the other hand, are frequently delayed, mitigated, hesitantly produced, hidden away, put in a roundabout way or accounted for. The notion of preference does not refer to psychological dispositions. It is a description of interactionally observable orientations of participants. Preference organization provides the participants with a subtle and powerful apparatus for making interpretative inferences. In the extract, the husband uses it as a resource when he challenges his wifes response. In a context in which an agreeing second assessment is preferred, his wife avoids taking a stance. When she

reacts with yes, she merely acknowledges her husbands statement so uh its much better tonight than expected. She does not affiliate with her husband, but responds in an evasive manner instead. Her husbands reaction attends to precisely this aspect of her response. He challenges a weakly agreeing response in a sequential environment in which another alternative is more preferred. So, despite his wifes subsequent (re-)formulation of the meaning of yes as simply agreeing, the man nevertheless has good reasons to hear her response as a sign of reservation or even foreboding disagreement. From a sequential perspective, the response is not just acknowledging prior speakers assessment. Saying yes in this context is rather deployed as a device to avoid agreeing. As a contextually specifiable selection of another alternative than the preferred one, it legitimizes the interpretation that is subsequently challenged by the husband. Part Five. A Sunday Televised Homily of a Roman Catholic Church (Choir singing halleluiah) Father: People: Father: People: Father: The Lord be with you. And with your spirit. My dear friends, a reading from the Gospel according to St. John Glory to you oh Lord. Jesus said to his disciples, whoever loves me will keep my words and my Father will love him and we will come to him and we will make our dwelling with him. Whoever does not love me, does not keep my words yet the word you hear is not mine but that of the Father who sent me. I have told you this while I am with you, the advocate, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you. peace, I leave you, my peace I give to you not as the world gives as I give it to you, do not let your hearts be troubled or afraid. You heard me, I am going away but I will come back to you. If you love me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father for the Father is greater than I. and now, I have told you this before it happens so that when it happens, you may believe. My dear friends, the Gospel, the good news of our Lord. Praise to you Lord, Jesus Christ. Magandang umaga po ulit sa inyong lahat. Magandang umaga din Father. Gising na po ba kayo? Ako po, inaantok pa. (Laughs) I come from a midnight show, ah, usapang kapatid, ah, pag nakatulog po ako sa aking homilya, pakigising na lang. While we are reflecting on the Gospel, I would like, especially the parents here, to think of the legacy that you are leaving behind to your children. Amen?

People: Father: People: Father:

(Laughter) Father:

Father:

People: Amen. Jesus tells his Apostles, Ill be leaving you, but if you keep my word, if you live by my word, I will be with you, not only me... the Father as well will love you and the two of us will dwell in you. Ang ganda po nun ano? If we keep the word of our Lord, we become a dwelling place of the Holy Trinity, of God himself. Keep His word. Ngayon po, sino po ba ditto sa atin ang, ah, madalas magbasa, magnilaynilay ng salita ng Diyos? Hands up? Oh, nagkakahiyaan tayo. We should be proud for doing so. Its quite sad that in, ah, in the homes that Ive been to, merong bible, noh, pero, nasa baul. Merong bible, pero, inaagiw na, noh, lumang luma na, noh. The word of Christ is very clear in the Gospel today. I leave you my word, live by it, if you do so, my Father and I will dwell in you. Tayo pong mga magulang ano, tayo pong mga nakatatanda, ano po yung iniiwan natin sa ating mga anak? Ang lagging sinasabi sa akin ng aking ina, Nono, you may rest, but dont you ever quit. Nagdadrama kasi ako, I, I just turned five years old as a priest, and sabi ko, Pagod na ko, dib a? yung mga drama natin sa buhay? Pagod na ko, ayoko na, and that, I remember the words of my mother, You may rest, but dont you ever quit. My dear parents, ano ba yung iniiwan niyong salita sainyong mga anak? Anong pangaral, noh. Minsan po nakakalungkot ano? Ang naaalala ng mga anak, mura. That is so sad. Share your wisdom, the wisdom that you have learned in your life. Share them to your children. Word. -End of Recording-

Conversation Analysis: Words have power. Language both reflects and forms human attitudes and actions. As language shapes and influences human perceptions, the language used in worship shapes and influences our perceptions of God. Because language is created and used by humans, it reflects the imperfections and limitations of humanness. Therefore, no use of language can ever totally describe or represent God. Language that excludes, alienates, demeans, stereotypes, or misrepresents persons by gender, race, ethnicity, socio-economic class, age, handicapping conditions, or other classifications should be avoided in worship. The use of masculine terms to describe humankind should also be avoided. While in the past, the "generic masculine" was understood to include persons of both genders, this is no longer true. Generic use of terms such as man, mankind, forefathers, brothers, are readily replaced byhuman, humanity, people, ancestors, or forbearers, brothers and sisters.

In the Lords Prayer, Jesus addressed God as abba, "father." This address does not ascribe human male sexuality to God but is an intimate address that is suggestive of the loving and trusting relationship between parent and child. The image of father used by Jesus draws upon the deepest and most human of all relationships that of parent to child. God traditionally has been called "father" in worship to convey the intimate relationship between God and the church. The metaphorical use of the term "father" continues to be used in worship, alongside many other biblical metaphors for God. However, because sin can distort even the fundamental relationships of parents to children, the image of a father may be difficult to comprehend for some who have experienced alienation in their relationship to a human father. Most of the utterances are produced by the priest since he is expected to take over the mass, enlightening the people to offer themselves to the Lord and to practice the words of God in their daily living. Although some of the discourse of the priest are comical Gising na po ba kayo? Ako po, inaantok pa, (probably, in order not to bore his audience and to motivate them to listen attentively) the language which he used is, to a great extent, formal and suggestive of authoritativeness. This type of language register exploited by the priest establishes credibility on his part as the speaker, and eventually, builds up trust and compliance on the part of the listeners. Part Six. Unofficial Transcription of the Maguindanao Massacre Case Hearing Crowd: Myrna: Wag mong yakapin. Mam kalma lang po. Ayokong kumalma, ayokong kumalma. Ang tagal! Ang tagal! Matagal nang pinatay. Putang ina niyo! Putang ina ninyo. Putang ina ninyo.

Nena Santos, private prosecution lawyer: (Trying to calm her down) Myrna, Myrna. Myrna: Mamatay ang mga Ampatuan. Mamatay din yan. S'an na ang abugado nila. S'an na ang abugado nila. Hoy! Putang ina 'yang mga Ampatuan na yan. Putang ina. Putang ina ninyo lahat. Sa labas na. Turn off the lights. Patayin n'yo muna ang kamera. Mainit kasi.

Crowd:

(Myrna is being taken outside the room. As she was sitting.)

Myrna:

Pwede bang magpatayan ang mga biktima na 'yon? Kung hindi ba naman siya bobo. Bobo. Sabihin ninyo bobo s'ya (Atty. Andres Jr.). Ang bag ko. Lalabanan ko siya kahit saan.

Editha Tiamzon, widow of a journalist: Sira ulo ba ang mga asawa namin para pumunta lang doon para magpatayan? O, 'yon ang tanong namin. Na-interview yan (lawyer) one time. Nagbabasa kami ng dyaryo. Hindi naman kami mga tanga ano. Ang mga asawa namin, hindi tanga para pumunta lang doon para magpatayan. Ampatuan lawyers: Could victims have hurt themselves? Journalists, asking one of the defense lawyers: Your reaction sir. Kayo 'yung nilalambast ng isang kamag-anak. Atty. Andres: Journalist: I don't have any comment on that. I'm sorry. Sir, she was referring to your cross (examination) last time that the victims inflicted injuries upon themselves. Well, it's part of the records. They can simply check it out eh. -End of RecordingConversation Analysis: Myrna Reblando is the widow of Alejandro "Bong" Reblando, one of the 32 journalists who were massacred on November 23, 2009. She, and other widows, who now sit in court to observe every hearing of the case of their husbands, has had a completely different way of life from the past. While their husbands knew of the socio-political context in their community being veterans and seasoned journalists of their time, their wives are not. They had their eye on their husbands; their husbands had their eyes on the news. For Myrna, what she loved to do the most was to prepare coffee every single morning, unlike Bong who read, listened to the radio to hear the latest headlines of the day; to set the table with Bong's favourite Filipino food on it, unlike Bong who was busy himself communicating with his fellow journalists on what news story to follow up on that day. Bong had his computer and an office space where he could write news stories; Myrna had only him, their children and their master bedroom -- which she called her 'love nest' -- in which to be happy.

Atty. Andres:

Myrna's presence in court is not a mere physical presence. She and the other widows who patiently attend every court hearing have to be there; they are forced to do so and deal with a tremendous decision on which only they themselves have to come to terms with. Sadly they have to do this alone as no one could ever grasp the depth of their feelings. They are engaging in a difficult exercise to comprehend and figure out how the country's system of justice functions, with their limited ideas of its legalities, in administering justice for the murder of their husbands. They react to their own experiences and grasp others similar to theirs. In a place where Myrna lives, General Santos City in Mindanao, where news of people being summarily executed almost daily is a way of life, she and other widows of the journalists do not require documentary evidence to be convinced of how the value of lives is lost and how a family could have a member taken away from them in a senseless killing. When killing is a way of life, those who live in these societies have a tremendous amount of anecdotal evidence; only anecdotal because most of this cases are not even properly investigated, not filed in court for prosecution, and most families of the victims would rather chose not to complain because of their deeply-rooted fear of reprisals. The records of these senseless deaths could often, in a limited manner, be available in local tabloids, local radio and TV broadcasts. Those journalists who have been massacred, including Myrna's husband Bong, are those who keep records by reporting them in their news articles. However, with the exceptionally high number of local journalists killed in the massacre, the recording and reporting of summary executions in the locality, where the people could have the possibility of knowing and recording, must have been reduced. For Myrna and the other widows who have read this report, the lawyer's argument is downright stupidity; however, for the lawyers, prosecutors and the court, they are part of the legal and judicial process. That is the dominant perception in the legal practice and the lawyers are presumed to be acting in good faith. For ordinary persons, this could be a ground for Atty. Andres, as subject of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) rules, to be investigated for possible violation of the IBP Code of Conduct. But this could be a question on part of the IBP as to why, as of today, there is no information on whether or not they would be taking disciplinary action on Atty. Andres. The family of the massacred victims, the Filipino people who value rule of law and fair trial; and those who follow this case in court deserve to know why Atty. Andres cannot be subjected to disciplinary investigation for possible breach of Code. One of the defence lawyers, Sigfrid Fortun, interprets Myrna's reaction as "breach of discipline" and argued the incident as being a "..a security issue". Myrna's legal counsel, Harry Roque, referred to it as "continuing trauma"; and he asked the court for "ancillary remedy by way of support pendent lite in the form of "psychosocial" services to be provided".