Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Submitted to:
Submitted by:
Michaella A. Azores
1
1. Introduction
1.1. Background of the Study
language planning and policy making. In a country where more than 170 languages
Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (KWF) oversees the direction of language planning and
has been the authority in planning and enriching the orthography of the national
given to a certain syllable changes the meaning of the word. A classic example in
Filipino would be /ba.ka'/ 'might' and /ba'.ka/ 'cow'. In this regard, the overt usage of
for non-native speakers of Filipino, as well as native speakers alike. One of the
earliest attempts to standardize the usage of diacritic markers was made in 1904 -
Carlos Ronquillo saw the necessity to recognize the usage and the labels for
different kinds of stress markers which occur in Tagalog. The most recent attempt
and other Philippine languages. To represent the schwa, a diacritic mark called the
implementing it is another. Since native speakers of the languages have their own
set of rules in identifying stress in words, there have been concerns regarding the
2
propagation of KWF's standard orthography. This research will mainly delve into the
nonlinguistic variables and issues regarding the attitude and acceptance of the
themselves.
The research aims to determine how beneficial the usage of diacritic marks in
fulfill the main objective of the research, the study identified different perspectives
Filipino (KWF) which is the main proponent for the project, linguists/ language
teachers who will be one of the most in-charged if the proposal will push through,
and students who are one of the most important target learners of the project.
Based on the interviews and quasi-experiment done to gather the data, the
researchers laid out the advantages and disadvantages of having diacritic markers
in written texts, in line with the effects in reading and writing that it may produce
after weighing the pros and cons of the usage of diacritic markers based on the
different perspectives that were considered and the reading exercises that were
conducted (as elaborated in the next part - Methodology). The researchers also
and used especially in education. And lastly, in case the proposal will not be
how the diacritic markers could possibly still be applied and made use of.
3
As stated in the background of the problem, Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino
(KWF) is proposing the use of diacritic and accent marks in documents and other
written texts. For this reason, this research will be of importance to members of the
KWF since the research can be an important reference for their proposal. It will also
it will help them know if diacritic and accent marks should really be used in writing
documents in Filipino.
The study will focus only on the use of diacritic and accent markers in Filipino.
few characteristics that can be attributed to other Philippine languages. Hence, the
study will not touch on the use of diacritic marks in other languages of the
Philippines. Also, the quasi-experimental reading test only included nine (9)
students from the University of the Philippines-Diliman and only two (2) language
na pagsulat ng wikang Tagalog. In this book, Ronquillo (1904) said that there are
three kinds of kudlit known to Filipinos - (1) mariin // (2) impit /`/ and (3)
sinalakot /^/. Mariin is used to mark a stressed sound. Impit is used for an
unstressed but glottal sound and salakot is used to mark a sound that is both
stressed and glottal. According to Ronquillo (1904), there are a lot who know these
symbols but do not know how to use them properly. It is important for him that
4
people know the right usage of these symbols because otherwise, it will lead to
confusion and misunderstanding because there are words in Filipino that change in
meaning depending on the position of the stress in the word. He cited some
examples in his book. Moreover, he said that having these symbols in our writing
will also help foreigners who want to learn or study our language.
Romualdez. Romualdez (1918) stated that his aim in writing the book is to assist in
systematizing and unifying the native writing. In this book, he wrote about the
vowels, consonants and orthographical signs that should be used. Same with
Ronquillo (1904), Romualdez (1918) talked about three orthographical accents: (1)
the acute //, (2) the grave // and (3) the angular //. The functions of the three
markers Romualdez mentioned are also the same as what Ronquillo stated. Aside
words. When he used the term deformed native words, he was referring to
geographical names which were originally based on the native language but was
somehow changed, for a reason he did not specify. To quote Romualdez (1918), he
wrote, the original native form should be restored to all Philippine geographical
names. One example he gave was Lusg (Luzn) because such is the sound
whether it is considered as the Chinese word for island, or as the Tagalog and
Bisayan word for mortar (Romualdez, 1918). Lastly, he talked about how foreign
the title Tagalog Phonetics and Orthography. In this book, they allocated one section
on Tagalog stress and accent. Interestingly, they described the Tagalog language as
naturally onomatopoeic where weak objects and slow motion are spoken slowly
5
and gently, while the terms for strong objects and swift, sudden or violent action are
usually spoken with great force (Subido & Gamboa-Mendoza, 1940). With this
analysis, they gave six (6) classes of stress in Tagalog -- level, level-glottal, acute,
acute-glottal, antepenultimate and pausal stress. For both level and level-glottal
stress, the stress is on the penultimate syllable making the pronunciation of the
word slow. The difference lies in the presence of a glottal stop at the end of the
word. A word with level stress ends with a consonant or a vowel without a glottal
stop while a word with level-glottal stress ends in a vowel with a glottal catch
(Subido & Gamboa-Mendoza, 1940). The acute and the acute-glottal stress differ in
the same way. However, words with acute and acute-glottal stress have stress that
falls on the last syllable making the pronunciation continuous until it reaches the
last syllable with the stress. Lastly, the two remaining kinds of stress, which Subido
and the pausal stress. The antepenultimate stress falls on a syllable farther away
from the penultima, on the fourth, fifth or sixth syllable from the penultima. This
occurs in words with more than two syllables. Finally, the pausal stress is placed
when there is a glottal stop between the final vowel of a word and the preceding
syllable (Subido & Gamboa-Mendoza, 1940). The authors stated in their concluding
remarks that stress marks greatly benefit the learners of the language, especially
the non-Tagalog ones. However, they wrote that when the language has become
widespread to the point that the differences in pronunciation of the words have
already been internalized by Filipinos that they can pronounce them without the
marks, then by that time the use of these stress markers may only be reduced to
dictionaries and may entirely be ruled out in ordinary writing and printing (Subido &
Gamboa-Mendoza, 1940).
6
In 1977, the Surian ng Wikang Pambansa published a book entitled Mga
propagate to the masses the revised way of writing in Filipino. The preface also
states that there were changes in the rules to give way to a faster cultivation of the
language and also to its modernization. Compared to the grammar books published
by Ronquillo and Romualdez in 1904 and 1918 respectively, this grammar book of
the Surian does not contain anything about or diacritic and accent markers. It
mainly talked about the proper syllabification of words, proper spelling of native and
foreign terms, etc. The book has a chapter with the title Mga Bantas na Karaniwang
Gamitin. In this chapter, the proper uses of a dot, question mark, comma,
semicolon, colon, etc. were explained. There was no mention of diacritic and accent
markers. Hence, during this time, the proposal of Ronquillo (1904) and Romualdez
(1918) to use diacritic and accent markers to formalize the writing was no longer
applied.
From the history narrated above, it seems that during Ronquillos time, the
use of what he calls kudlit is not yet standardized since there are a number of
people who are not yet aware of its proper usage. Moreover, his book was only his
opinion together with the pieces of advice from the people he consulted. It was not
way of systematizing the way of writing in Filipino. After 10 years, it was still the
same. As what Romualdez (1918) said, he wrote the book in order to systematize
the writing. Same with Ronquillo (1904), his book was also a compilation of his and
other Filipino linguists knowledge about the Filipino grammar. It can be observed
7
that writers during this time want all Filipino writers to follow a systematized way of
writing in Filipino. This includes the use of diacritic and accent markers. After two
Orthography. The way they described and classified the kinds of stress is different
from the previous two but essentially, they are all the same. The mariin // of
Ronquillo (1904) and the acute // of Romualdez (1918) can account for the level
stress, the acute and the antepenultimate stress of Subido & Gamboa-Mendoza
(1940). The level-glottal stress and the pausal stress are the same as Ronquillos
(1904) impit /`/ and Romualdezs (1918) grave //. Lastly, sinalakot /^/ and
angular // of Ronquillo (1904) and Romualdez (1918), respectively, are the same as
the acute-glottal stress. Hence, Subido & Gamboa-Mendoza just divided them into
more classes. These authors recognized the importance of diacritic and accent
marks for the learners of the language but also acknowledged the possibility that
their use may be eliminated from writing and printing when the speakers of the
language have become perfectly used to pronouncing words without diacritic and
accent marks.
In 1977, after almost four decades, the use of these markers was eliminated
from the system. As mentioned above, in the book published by the Surian ng
Wikang Pambansa, there was no mention of the use of diacritic and accent markers
in the proper way of writing in Filipino. The book did not say anything as to why
diacritic and accent markers were removed but definitely, they must have had their
reason for doing so. Thus, it can be inferred that the use of diacritic and accent
markers were removed in 1977 or sometime before that. At present, the Komisyon
Masinop na Pagsulat (2014) the usage of diacritic marks is important to ensure the
8
correct pronunciation especially of words that are similar in form (spelling) but differ
markers that Lope K. Santos proposed - pahilis or acute () for words that are
pronounced rapidly; paiwa or grave (`) for words that are pronounced with a fall of
pitch; and pakupya or circumflex () for words like with grave accent, but with
emphasis on the last syllable. Through time, the pronunciation of words may
change, and the agency believe that mispronunciation of these words is due to
unawareness, especially of the youth and new users of Filipino, about these
markers. In the book they published, Manwal sa Masinop na Pagsulat, KWF further
discussed the particular use of each marker and an additional accent, the patuldok
which is similar to umlaut or dieresis (), was introduced as a solution to the present
It was not mentioned in the book, however, why these diacritic markers are
that they try to promote and bring back the usage of the said markers by using
them in the documents and publications they produce aside from explicitly
mentioning in the manual the importance and reason why we should use them
again.
As this study aims to recognize the importance of diacritic markers, it will also
be helpful to take a look on other languages that use diacritic markers in their
orthography, like the Romance languages Spanish and French. Indeed, in these
accents (tildes) can only be written over the five vowels , , , , . This indicates
9
where the stress should be put in the word. For words that end in a vowel, the letter
n, or the letter s, the stress is on the next to last syllable (penultimate). For
words that end in all other consonants (not n or s), the stress falls on the last
syllable. Accent marks are added when the stress breaks either of those two rules.
For example, la cancin meaning song, ends with an n and is supposed to have
its accent mark on the penultimate syllable. However, the stress falls on the last
placed on it. It is also helpful in differentiating homographs, or words with the the
same spelling but different in pronunciation and also in meaning. For example, mas
but and ms more; and tu your and t you (subject) (Thering, n.d.). Although in
formal written Spanish accent marks are written, some users do not strictly adhere
to this practice and treat this as a minimal mistake if not employed. It seems that it
is assumed that the reader already gets the context of the sentence with a word
Meanwhile, French uses five accent marks namely, the 1.) cdille (cedilla) ,
2.) the accent aigu (acute accent) , 3.) the accent grave (grave accent) , , , 4.)
cdille which is only used for the phoneme /c/, changes a hard "c" sound (like "k")
into a soft "c" sound (like "s"). // is never used before the vowels e or i, as these
2 vowels always produce a soft "s" sound (e.g. glace, ici). If the accent will be
pronounced as [k]. The accent aigu which is put only on an /e/ often indicates that
an s used to follow that vowel, e.g., tudiant student. The grave laced on /a/
and /u/, usually serves to distinguish between words that would otherwise be
10
homographs; e.g., ou or vs o where. When there is no accent on an /e/, it will
otherwise be pronounced as the regular French /e/ that sounds like a schwa. Like the
accent aigu, the circonflexe usually indicates that an s used to follow that vowel,
e.g., fort forest. However, it does not change pronunciation yet should be
included in written French (Grammarist, n.d.). Meanwhile, the accent trma (dieresis
or umlaut) can be on an /e/, /i/, or /u/. It is used when two vowels are next to each
other and both must be pronounced, e.g., nave, Sal (Lawless, 2017). In French, the
accent marks are strictly used (although not in informal texts like text messages or
discussed Romance languages, the roles that these markers play in identifying the
correct pronunciation and meaning of the words could serve as good points to be
considered to further know how diacritic markers work in Filipino and if they should
really be applied. Although French has more varied diacritic markers than in Spanish
and Filipino, how these markers are used allows us to weigh the usage of diacritics
2. Methodology
the use of diacritic marks. First, to know how students respond to texts with and
without diacritic and accent markers, two quasi-experimental reading tests were
done with nine (9) students from the University of the Philippines - Diliman. The
quasi-experiments were video or audio recorded. Below is the text that will be used
11
Sa byan ng Pangasinn, may isng tong nakatir sa pno
ng mangg. Ang tong ito ay nagnganglang Juan. Sa isng tang
paninirhan niya rto ay tla banakramdam siya ng pangungull.
Ang pnong tintirhan ni Juan ay isng pno ng mangg. Ito ay pun
ng mga bngang mangg. Ngnit dhil may isng butik na nalaglg
sa kanyng mga dalr ay napgdessyunn niyang umuw na sa
kanilng bhay matpos ang isng tong pagtir niya sa pno ng
mangg. Tuwng tuw ang kanyng mga maglang nang siya ay
makta. Tinanng siya ng kanyng in kung nakakaramdm ba siya
ng gtom. p. Gutm na po ak. sagt ni Juan. Kay namn agd
na umals ang ttay niyang mngingisd. Dray, mangngisd na
ak! Pra namn may masarp tyong maipakin kay Juan. ni ng
kanyng Ttay. Sublit, pagdatng nit sa pampng ay biglng
sumam ang panahn kung kayt nasip ng am ni Juan na 'wag na
lang tumuly at sinpin na lang ang mga bka. Nasip kas niya na
bak ang mga ity mapahmak. Is pa namn it sa mga
pangunhing pinagkuknan nil ng hnapbhay. Nakta niya si Mang
Kanr at summa siya dtong pumnta sa palngke pra bumil ng
lam. Matpos niyang gawn it ay umuw na siya sa kanilng bhay.
Sinbi niya sa kanyng aswa na hind siya nakapangsd dhil nga
masam ang panahn kay bumil na lang daw siya ng lam sa
palngke. Napansn niyang tahmik na nakahig si Juan sa isng
slok ng kanilng kwrto. Pinuntahn niya it at tinanng kung may
masam ba itng narramdamn. Ang sakt po ng tiyn ko, Tay,
sambt ni Juan. Nang maring it ng kanyng am ay agd itng
lumabs ng bhay pang humnap ng manggagmot. Ang kanyng
in namn ay agd siyang pinuntahn. Pagbalk ng kanyng am ay
kasma na nit ang mangggamot sa kany sublit nakta nilng
masayng nakaup si Juan sa kanilng msa. Sbi ni Juan, Tay, utt
lang pal.
In the first reading test, the text did not have any diacritic and accent marker.
After a week, the second reading was done and this time, the text had diacritic and
accent markers. The researchers observed each participant if s/he had any
difficulty while reading the text. When the participant finished reading, the
researchers asked follow-up questions about his/her performance during the reading
test. In addition, to get the insights of language experts, one professor from the UP-
12
Filipino (KWF). Through this, the researchers were able to ask various questions
After gathering all their respective opinions, the results were analyzed and
were used to answer the research questions. With the results that came out, the
researchers also laid out the advantages and disadvantages of using diacritic and
accent markers which led them to answer the main research problem of the study.
University of the Philippines - Diliman for the reading test. The informants had no
knowledge regarding the background and aims of the research prior to reading the
texts.
In the first reading test, the informants were to read aloud the version of the
text that didn't use diacritic markers. The second reading test was carried out a
week after the first reading test. In the second reading test, the informants read the
After the reading tests, the researchers explained to the informants the
background and aims of the research, and asked the following questions to the
informants.
b. Did you have any difficulty reading the text or pronouncing some words from the
text?
c. Was the usage of diacritic markers taught in grade school or high school?
d. Do you prefer the text without diacritic markers or with diacritic markers? Why?
13
3.1.1. General findings
the text to maintain the nature of the research impalpable to the informants during
the activity. The table below shows the words and homographs included in the text
tong 0 0
tang 5 1
pno 0 0
pun 5 0
gtom 0 0
gutm 0 0
mngingisd 1 0
mangngisd 3 2
sumam 1 1
summa 1 0
bka 0 0
bak 2 1
manggagmot 0 1
mangggamot 6 4
sinpin 1 1
nagnganglang 1 1
Table 1. Frequency of mispronunciation from the first and second reading activity
pronouncing the word mangggamot in both the first and second reading test. On
14
the other hand, no informant made a mistake in pronouncing the homographs
gtom and gutm. Aside from homographs, some informants also made a mistake
in pronouncing the words sinpin and nagnganglang. Prior to the reading test, one
of the informants did not know of the Tagalog word sinpin, and thus the reason for
her mistake.
Two out of the nine informants have expressed preference to the text with
diacritic markers. The text with diacritic markers can be aesthetically pleasing. The
informants suggested, however, that the markers should only be used when writing
homographs in order to distinguish one word from another. From the perspective of
the writer, writing and typing using diacritic markers can be tedious and time-
consuming. From the perspective of the reader however, the diacritic markers can
serve as a guide to the right pronunciation of words. Seeing the markers can be
overwhelming at first but with adequate practice, the diacritic markers can be
useful.
Five out of nine informants have expressed disfavor to the text with diacritic
markers. Since most Filipino speakers do not use diacritic markers in written
unfamiliar with diacritic markers. The markers can cause confusion to the untrained
eye of the reader. It might be less distracting and easier to the eyes if texts did not
Although they were not required to use the markers in class, some informants
have claimed that the usage of diacritic markers was taught in their Filipino classes
in grade four or five. Some informants learned about diacritic markers in Filipino in
college. One of the informants have admitted that although she is aware of the
15
usage of diacritic markers in English, it was her first time to read a Filipino text
Some informants have suggested that it is more economical to limit the use
which do not cause sound change and in words which only have one pronunciation.
Using diacritic markers to every word in the text would make the document appear
untidy. Moreover, one of the suggestions was to introduce diacritic markers while
learning homographs in Filipino. This is to familiarize the students with the usage
3.2. Interviews
Since the study is mainly related to language use, pedagogy, and writing, the
different perspectives about the issue. The interviewed language teachers were
Prof. Ricardo Ma. D. Nolasco, Ph.D. from the Department of Linguistics and Sir Ronel
16
Through personal communication, the professor sent three files to the
researchers. These files were his works, which are not yet published, containing his
opinions, his beliefs, basically his position on the said topic. Since the professor
specifically told the researchers not to publicize the works, the titles will not be
listed here.
2017) stated that in teaching, the more frequent and more familiar sounds are
taught first, and the less frequent and less familiar sounds are taught later. For
example, in Filipino, the vowel /a/ has the most frequency of occurrence compared
to the other vowels. Hence, it should be taught first. In connection to this, Prof.
Nolasco wants language teachers to teach the historic and variant spellings in the
language. The vowels /i/ and /e/ and /u/ and /o/ vary freely making them allophones
of one phoneme but historically, /o/ is favored in final position and /u/ in all others.
Also along the same vein, Prof. Nolasco believes that for accuracy, the proper
change in meaning. Some examples that he gave were the words tli `string for
tying and tal `to be tied down (Nolasco, personal communication, 2017).
the use of the apostrophe () to symbolize the glottal stop in Filipino (personal
communication, 2017). He added that the symbol will not be written at all times but
only at the end of a syllable or a word. The professor even said, Masaya na ako
kung kikilalaning may glottal stop sa nasabing mga salita (I will be happy if the
presence of the glottal stop in the said words will be recognized) (Nolasco, personal
17
communication, 2017). From the professors statement, it is apparent that he wants
the glottal stop in Filipino to be recognized because according to him, the said
sound was not important in English and in Spanish so when the Americans and the
Spaniards studied Filipino, they were not able to assign a symbol or a letter for it.
Thus, it was reduced to being a diacritic mark. The professor even said that the use
of diacritic and accent markers in Filipino was stopped because people believed that
2017).
Nolasco stated that one national orthography for all the languages of the
sound systems altogether. They may have similar sounds and letters but the
languages of the Cordillera region where /d/ becomes /ch/ after a vowel (e.g.
bodong > fochong). This sound change does not happen in languages such as
This also implies that the set of diacritic and accent marks best suitable for one
language may not be the most suitable for another. Hence, as what Prof. Nolasco
calls it, a one-size-fits-all orthography for the Philippine languages is not possible.
Finally, when asked about what he can say regarding the aspiration of KWF to
bring back the usage of diacritic and accent marks and also about the DepEd Order
(Appendix 1), the professor boldly said that paurong kasi ang nilalaman ng manwal
ating mga wika at sa wastong paggamit ng ating mga wika sa edukasyon ng mga
18
Pilipino (the contents of the manual are backwards and the DepEd order does not
follow the proper ways of analyzing our languages and also the proper use of our
languages in the education of the Filipino). Prof. Nolasco added that, mapanlinlang
kasi gusto ipamukha ng KWF ang kanilang awtoridad na itakda kung ano ang
wala silang ganitong kapangyarihan at wala rin silang ganitong kakayahan ((it is)
deceiving because KWF wants to prove that it has the authority to impose the
standard way of studying ang writing our languages but they do not have the power
and the ability to do so) (Nolasco, personal communication, 2017). From the
they want to establish their authority and their capability to study the Philippine
languages, he does not agree with all of KWFs plans. Thus, when asked if he is in
favor of bringing back the diacritic and accent marks in Tagalog orthography, the
professor said that he is in favor of using them again but he is in favor based on his
own standards and principles of using them and not by the standards prescribed by
the Filipino language, the researchers had as well interviewed an instructor from the
During the 20-minute structured interview, the professor has directly and
elaborately answered the questions of the researchers. He said that he does not use
19
the register of the Filipino language (Laranjo, personal communication, 2017).
According to him, it is only the Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF) who uses the
he added that in written text, the readers rely more on the context of the passage
rather than on how it is written. And even in teaching Tagalog to foreigners, he said
he does not use the markers since the correction of mistakes was more focused on
communication, 2017).
The Department of Filipino and Philippine Literature does not have a single
stand regarding the use of diacritic markers according to Prof. Laranjo (personal
words could be written in similar form; the meaning will be deciphered based on the
context/sense of what has been read. For example, words such as palay, palad, and
pala are written exactly the same way using baybayin; the word that is really
personal communication, 2017). Moreover, the professor has also admitted that
personally, he finds it difficult to apply the use of diacritic markers since he has not
been used to using it. He also uses them very minimally in case he really has to.
Perhaps in dictionaries and literary poems they could be helpful; however, in wide,
everyday usage, he articulated that he does not see the need/importance of them.
The professor is also aware about the DepEd order about the implementation
of the use of the said markers through KWF and MTBMLE (Mother-tongue Based
Multilingual Education). Among the diacritic markers, he personally thinks that the
20
Philippine languages that have this sound. Aside from it, he mentioned that other
diacritic markers are not that necessary and can already be omitted (Laranjo,
When asked about his thoughts if he thinks that using diacritic markers in
writing would help, or would rather cause confusion, Prof. Laranjo (personal
learner i.e 1) the ones who are not used of using them; and 2) those young ones
that are just about to enter school. It is necessary that the ones who will teach the
use of diacritic markers have an adequate knowledge about them as the professor
also thinks that the use of them would be most beneficial in the academe. The use
of such markers could be started through the help of media as it has a wide scope.
2017) expressed his concern about the issue by mentioning economic matters that
he sees the need to be addressed first before starting the implementation of the
order. In the country, there is not yet a microsoft interface that will accommodate
faster encoding of such symbols and so it may be a hassle whenever people need to
type them. Moreover, it will cost more ink and space in publishing materials which
will require an adjustment in budget as well. Efficient training for the teachers and
sufficient budget for the production of materials needed are indeed important for
communication, 2017).
Being the main proponent of the use of diacritic and accent markers, the
researchers also decided to get the side of Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (KWF)
21
through an email correspondence. The researchers sent an email to the organization
containing six questions (6) and received a reply from Miss Maria Christina Pangan
of KWF through email, together with attached supplementary materials - a PDF file
For the first question, since it was mentioned in DepEd Order No. 34, s. 2013
(Appendix 1) that KWF carried out a careful study of the previous Filipino
orthography currently taught in schools, the researchers asked how it was studied,
what was the scope of the study and what were the results. As their response,
Pangan stated that a consultative forum about the Filipino orthography was held last
March 2013 at the UP College of Education. In the said forum, the three previous
orthographies - 1987, 2001 and 2008 - made by KWF was presented. Also, the draft
languages was also presented. Moreover, Pangan mentioned that different experts
of Filipino and other Philippine languages participated in the forum. The convener
was Dr. Galileo Zafra and the results of the consultation may be found in the
KWF (Pangan, personal communication, 2017). The said introduction was basically a
look back on how far the national orthography has come and also a summary of
the March 2013 forum. It was written that the forum decided on five (5) desired
characteristics of the orthography - (1) reflects the history of the languages, (2)
based on a higher model of language use, (3) responds to the basic needs in
writing, (4) flexible in adapting to changes and (5) easy to use. Mr. Almario also
made mention of additions to the orthography such as the symbol that will be used
for schwa - (), which is called tutuldok (Ortograpiyang Pambansa, 2014). However,
22
in his introduction, there was no mention of the use of diacritic and accent markers
Therefore, the researchers asked KWF for their reason why they decided to
bring these markers back. Pangan stated that the markers, which they call tuldik,
were brought back mainly to avoid confusion in pronouncing and in writing words
with the same spelling but with different pronunciation, thus, also with different
meanings (Pangan, personal communication, 2017). The example they gave was
the word paso which, according to them, can be pronounced as malumay (pso
pass e.g. Pasong Tamo, Paso de Blas), mabilis (pas outdated) malumi (pas
burn) and maragsa (pas pot). Pangan (personal communication, 2017) also
mentioned that KWF is encouraging textbook writers to use diacritic and accent
marks, most especially in the lower levels, to help the children get used to seeing
these marks when they read and also for the markers to serve as guide when
reading.
Going back to the DepEd Order, which was first released in 2013, the
researchers asked the organization about the progress and the results of the
implementation since the order was out. For their reply, Pangan (personal
communication, 2017) said that there is no formal study yet on the results of the
implementation but focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted in target areas
in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. However, the results of the FGDs cannot be
disclosed as of the moment since the results are still being analyzed but will be
Then, regarding the use of diacritic and accent marks, the researchers asked
KWF if they use the marks in writing all documents or in specific documents only.
KWF responded by saying that they are the frontrunner of bringing back the use of
23
these markers, hence, they use them in all kinds of documents that they release.
Specifically, they said that the usage of the markers can best be seen in the book
Aklat ng Bayan. However, KWF clarified that not all words must be marked and they
added that Chapter 10 of Ortograpiyang Pambansa contains the words that must be
together with the reply, they attached supplementary materials to the email they
the draft of a memo listing words that must be marked. The memo was released by
KWF and is being used by their employees. A copy of the memo may be found in
Appendix 2.
In connection to the use of diacritic and accent marks, the researchers also
asked KWF if they promote its usage in all kinds of documents or in specific
documents only. KWF stated that yes, they encourage the use of diacritic and
accent marks at all times but only for words which need them to avoid confusion
and misunderstanding. In other words, they encourage its use only on homographs
Lastly, the researchers asked how the organization promotes the use of
diacritic and accent marks. KWF stated that Aklat ng Bayan, a publication program
of KWF, is one of the ways by which they promote diacritic and accent markers. All
books made by KWF are marked even if the books are written in the regional
conducting seminars about the national orthography. Through these seminars, they
believe that they can explain the history of the orthography, how it was made, its
similarities with the previous orthographies and also the changes that was done
24
3.4. Data Analysis
the informants did better on the second reading of the text (the text with diacritic
markers). While some informants proactively ignored the diacritic markers to avoid
being confused, for one informant, the diacritic markers became helpful for her to
pronounce the homographs correctly and distinguish one homograph from another.
The markers also helped her remember the first text. For informants who did not
learn about the usage of diacritic markers in Filipino, it is better not to use the
markers since it can be overwhelming. For informants who have prior knowledge of
the diacritic markers however, the usage of diacritic markers can be beneficial to an
The researchers have also posited some factors which may have led to
mistakes and mispronunciations of the words from the informants. The informants
might have been inordinately conscious of the video recording. While reading aloud,
some of the informants were more focused on the delivery than the overall context
of the story and the right pronunciation of words. On the other hand, some
informants tried to predict what happens next in the story and in turn, lose focus on
the delivery of the words. The influence of the preceding homograph may also be a
mangngisd. Words with more than three syllables have also caused confusion to
25
also a factor in mispronouncing the word. Prior to the reading test, an informant did
not know of the word sinpin, and thus mispronounced the word.
On the interviews with the two language professors, both have quite different
points of view when it comes to the usage of diacritic marks. For Prof. Nolasco, he
strongly recommends and encourages the use of them at all times, in his own
suggested provisions however, and not with KWFs. On the other hand, for Prof.
Laranjo, umlaut () is the only marker necessary and deemed beneficial to be used.
The researchers have considered the difference in the two professors generation
where it is possible that Prof. Nolasco has been used to write using diacritics since
the marks, according to KWF, were first introduced in 1904, used until 1940, but
gone around 1970s. Anyhow, during these years, Prof. Nolasco has then already
started writing studies and researches. On the other hand, Prof. Laranjo, who is
younger than the previous professor, was not used of writing using diacritic markers
since they were not of active usage during his time. Pondering on Prof. Laranjos
interview, the fact that he does not apply the usage of the said markers in teaching
foreigners Filipino was quite surprising; It somehow implies that these markers are
not really necessary to make non-speakers of Tagalog understand and speak the
language, although they can be helpful in explaining why or how the words are
pronounced. The use of the apostrophe () to account for the glottal stop, as
suggested by Prof. Nolasco, was also noteworthy. Although it is not actually applied
in writing in Tagalog, if its usage will be pursued, the researchers were afraid that
this will be understood as a convenient representation for glottal stop only by those
who have technical linguistic knowledge; otherwise, its use may be mistaken as for
possession or contractions. The two professors also have different views about
Filipino - Prof. Nolasco sees Filipino indifferent from Tagalog, while Prof. Laranjo takes
26
into account other Philippine languages aside from Tagalog, which probably is the
reason for his suggestion of using the umlaut () to represent schwa, as this sound
Regarding the reply of KWF, the researchers observed that contrary to what
was expected, the Komisyon was only encouraging the use of accent marks on
homographs. According to their reply, they were not suggesting the use of all
diacritic and accent markers but only those necessary to differentiate words with
the same spelling but different pronunciation and meaning. The respondent from
Pambansa. The respondent added that the chapter also contains the list of words
written that (m)ahalagang ibalik ang paggamit sa mga tuldk o asnto. Kung
mahihirapang markahan ang lahat ng salita, gamitin ang tuldik upang maipatiyak
nagbabago ang kahulugan dahil sa bigkas (It is important to bring back the use of
diacritic and accent markers. If it will be difficult to mark all words, use the markers
to indicate the proper pronunciation, most especially on words with the same
spelling but have different meaning due to difference in pronunciation). From this
statement, it can be observed that KWF did not explicitly state that only the
markers that will differentiate homographs will be used. They only said that IF it will
be difficult, apply the markers for homographs only. Hence, the researchers
suggests that they clearly state their proposals to avoid confusion and
misunderstanding. The chapter also does not include the list of words to be marked.
27
But they attached the list in the email as a supplementary material. A copy can be
homographs. There are still a lot of homographs in Filipino that can be added to the
list such as those included in the researchs reading test (e.g. manggagmot
doctor and mangggamot to heal). Thus, the researchers suggest that the
Komisyon expand their list to include more homographs. Lastly, it can be said that
the whole topic of bringing back the use of diacritic and accent markers is still in
process. KWF is still in the process of spreading knowledge about its proper use and
based on their answers and also the responses the researchers got from the
students, it seems that, as of the moment, it is only the Komisyon using these
markers.
4. Conclusion
After analyzing all the data, the researchers concluded that yes, the use of
diacritic and accent markers are beneficial to its users, but not all diacritic and
accent marks must be used. The researchers agree with the suggestion of the
words with only one pronunciation need not be marked since they do not cause
pronounce them. For Prof. Nolasco, all diacritic marks are encouraged to be used,
while for Prof. Laranjo, only the umlaut () is necessary. Also, it was observed that
for those who have been used to writing using the said marks, they can indeed be
helpful and will not cause confusion, but for the others who have not been trained in
using them, the marks may even add more difficulty and confusion. Hence, it all
28
boils down to what writing system one is used to. In connection to that, the
researchers believe that it is also important for the teachers to have sufficient
knowledge about this topic so that they can adequately teach it to their students. If
the students will be used to the marks, the use of stress marks, especially to
Hence, the diacritic and accent marks may be useful in facilitating learning among
the young learners of the language but for practical purposes, only the marks used
learners, the diacritic and accent marks may also help in teaching the proper
pronunciation of the words since, after all, they are studying a foreign a language.
However, foreign students should not be used to texts with markers since majority
of the published works in Filipino do not have diacritic and accent marks. After some
time, they should also be trained to read texts without the help of diacritic and
accent marks.
Lastly, as part of the researchs objectives, the researchers also came up with
suggestions for KWF in terms of spreading knowledge and propagating the use of
diacritic and accent markers. First, they should clearly state what they are
Pambansa that only the marks needed to differentiate homographs will be used. A
researchers suggest that they provide sufficient training, seminars, materials, etc.
to the teachers who will be teaching them because it is important that the learners
be taught adequately since they will be the ones to use it in their writing. Lastly, if
KWF really wants to propagate the usage of these markers, they must also start
29
encouraging the media, especially the TV networks, newspaper companies and
internet users, to use these markers. Exposure to the diacritic marks will help
people to get used to them and at the same time, learn how to apply them
accordingly.
the respective authorities and organizations (including DepEd and KWF) together
with the teachers, and even the willingness of every Filipino to adopt the usage are
researchers to look further on the issue by analyzing other uses of diacritic markers
in other Philippine languages and identify afterwards what the most necessary
30