Wednesday, July 28, 2010

POST 16

Same time & place as POST 0013

SONG BREAK (Time to buy your snack/merienda, smoke, or go to the CR)
or "THE MYSTERY OF HOW ART CAPTURES REALITY, PARTICULARLY, HUMAN REALITY" or "THE MEANING OF ART" or "ART & HISTORY" etcetc

Sin-cerely D-D-cated to any, every, & all FOREIGNER(S), who, through all these decades, have treated with understanding & compassion, individually or collectively, our nation & our people...
==============
BABALIK KA RIN
==============
Composed by Louie Ocampo
Performed by Gary Valenciano
Lyrics by Ulep

Saan ka man
Naroroon ngayon
Saudi, Japan, o Hongkong
Babalik ka rin (3X)

Anumang layo
Ang narating
Singapore, Australia
Europe o America
Babalik at babalik ka rin

REFRAIN
Kaytagal mo nang nawala
Babalik ka rin (2X)
Kaytagal mo nang nawala
Babalik ka rin (2X)

Saan man
Iyong pinagmulan
Sa iyong nakaraan
Babalik ka rin (3X)

Anumang layo
Ang narating
Iyong maa-alala
Mga dati mong kasama
Babalik at babalik ka rin

Repeat REFRAIN

Sa nakalipas
Na panahon
Sa iyong kahapon
Sa ala-alang
Naghihintay sa 'yo

Repeat REFRAIN
Background sound of gongs
& other native instruments
playing all together

------------------------
I only fully appreciated
the BEAUTY of this song
just this year, 2010!
Almost 3 decades after
it came out & became popular.
Better late than never!
------------------------

DIRECT WORD-FOR-WORD/ARTLESS TRANSLATION:

"YOU'LL (STILL) RETURN/COME BACK" [or "YOU'LL KEEP RETURNING/COMING BACK"]
Composed by Louie Ocampo
Performed by Gary Valenciano
Lyrics by Ulep

Wherever you may be today/now
Saudi, Japan, or Hongkong
You'll still return/come back(3X)
[OR You'll keep returning/coming back]

No matter how far/distant
(You've) reached/gone to
Singapore, Australia
Europe or America
Return & return you will
[or You'll keep returning/coming back]

REFRAIN
It's (been) so long
that you've been gone
You'll still return/come back (2X)
It's (been) so long
that you've been gone
You'll still return/come back (2X)
[or You'll keep returning/coming back]

Wherever
Your origin
To your past
You'll still return/come back
[or You'll keep returning/coming back]

No matter how far/distant
(You've) reached/gone to
You will remember
Your former companions
Return & return you will
[or You will keep on returning/coming back]

To the past times
To your yesterday/yesteryears
To the memories (that are)
waiting for you.

Repeat REFRAIN
Background sound of gongs
& other native instruments playing

BLAH-BLAH
---------
A nice combination of Western & Nusantaran music.
It is commonly-used as musical background by Filipino OFW's
to relate their personal stories in YOUTUBE video presentations.

The climactic part of the song is past halfway (2:37) near the end when Valenciano croons "sa nakalipas na panahon... sa ala-alang naghihintay sa 'yo" & then the native instruments play together with additional chorus. The song then tapers off to resolution gradually to the end, stressing through continued repetition its main phrase, "Babalik ka rin/You'll keep returning". My body hair stand on end when I realize, while listening to the song, how exactly- & perfectly-fitting the LYRICS & the MUSIC go together to present the core MEANING or IDEA of the song which is about SOUL-SEARCHING, seeking one's ROOTS & discovering one's HISTORICAL SELF-IDENTITY. HANEP! ANG GALENG!! To OCAMPO, VALENCIANO, & ULEP: KLAPKLAPKLAP!!

I ask myself:
Is this merely my own personal & private interpretation?
Did the song's creator(s) PLAN on purpose & WILL its creation?
Can ART be the subject or instrument of HUMAN WILL & INTENTIONALITY?
Or is it a product of pure INSPIRATION?

I DEFINE a typical "FILIPINO"
by how much she EMPATHIZES with
(or by the degree of her EMPATHY to)
this SONG.

If you don't FEEL in your BONES
the CORE MEANING or ESSENTIAL IDEA of this SONG,
the thoughts, feelings, sensations, sentiments
& memories evoked in you
by the gestalt of its melody & lyrics
-what it means to EXIST, to BE
to LIVE, to LIVE IN, to LIKE
to LOVE, & to LEAVE your COUNTRY,
your BELOVED HOMELAND,
your place of ORIGIN
behind,
to be forced to go away & work abroad,
compelled by grossly material
economic necessity
to take risks & even SUFFER its consequences
though your Heart & Soul
IS yearning to remain with
& stay beside your LOVED ONES...
THEN
YOU ARE NOT "ONE OF US" [HINDI KA ISA SA AMIN"]
- YOU ARE NOT A GENUINE "FILIPINO"...
["FILIPINO" with BOTH its INSULTING/DEROGATORY
& PROFOUND/NOBLE CONNOTATIONS]

I strongly recommend to OUTSIDERS
who are genuinely interested to learn
about this archipelago & its inhabitants &
who sincerely want to feel or EXPERIENCE
what it is to be "FILIPINO", meaning,
to INTERNALIZE the Filipino LANGUAGE,
to LEARN BY HEART this song
(MEMORIZEd as in automatically-recalled)
& try to (AT THE SAME TIME!)
develop the underlying FEELINGs
& UNDERSTAND the song's core MEANING.
Of course, I DOUBT
IF one can ARTIFICIALLY develop
or voluntarily invoke within oneself
through SCRIPTED behaviour or conditions
the feelings of NOSTALGIA
(its mixed, ambivalent feelings of gladness & sadness),
the innermost emotions evoked upon realizing
through one's own personal experience,
while living & working in a FOREIGN land,
the deep significance & intimate CONNECTION
of one's own FACTICITY
or individual, private & personal
(especially DIFFICULT) situation
to one's own PEOPLE,
to one's own NATION,
to the PAST,
& to HISTORY...

ART IS NOT ARTIFICE,
ART IS NOT ARTIFICIAL.
-sabidaku

MY RATING of this song:
Simply BEAUTIFUL
A certified work of ART
- HISTORICAL ART via the medium of MUSIC.
_______
Mga KAPATID, NAKS NAMAN ANO?!
INGGLESing TO-ITS, HAH!!!
@ RESTRUCTURED STYLISTIX A LA POETIX PA! WAW!
FORANGER ENGLISHMAN na ba KO-AKS???
PERO CUIDAO CAYO, HA!
dahil ang ganitong EMOTING
ang ine-eksployt ng KALABAN!
Ang "emotional & sentimental part
of the Filipino character" ni Badholtz (Pakatandaan ninyo ang nangyari kay PRES. MACSAK.

-------
Isa pang natatanging NOTA-BOL NOTA ni NOTY BOY (NB)

POST 0015

Same time & place as POST 0013
SONGING ALONG

----------------
TAYO'Y MGA PINOY
----------------
(Originally Composed & Performed by HEBER BARTOLOME & BANYUHAY)
Late 1970's or early 1980's
My preferred, because musically slightly-better, version: JUDAS

LITERAL TRANSLATION
REFRAIN: REFRAIN:
Tayo'y mga Pinoy We're Pinoy(s)
Tayo'y hindi Kano We're not American(s)
Huwag kang mahihiya Don't be ashamed
Kung ang ilong mo ay pango If your nose is flat

Dito sa Silangan Here in the East
Aku'y/Tayo'y isinilang I was/We were born
Kung saan nagmumula ang (From) Where originates
Ang sikat ng araw The rays of the Sun

Aku ay may sariling I have my own
Kulay Kayumanggi Brown color
Ngunit di ko maipakita But I cannot show
Tunay na sarili My true self

Kung ating hahanapin If we will seek
Ay matatagpuan (Then) We shall find
Tayo ay may kakanyahang We have the identity?capability?
Dapat na hangaan That should be admired

Subali't nasaan But where are
Ang sikat ng Araw? The Sun's rays?
Ba't tayo ang humahanga Why are we the ones admiring
Doon sa Kanluran? The West?

Bakit kaya tayo ay ganito? Why are we like this?
Bakit nanggagaya Why do we imitate
Mayroon naman tayo? When we have our own?

Ulitin ang REFRAIN Repeat REFRAIN

Mayroong isang aso There is a dog
Daig pa ang ulol Worse than mad
Siya'y ngumingiyaw It meows (&)
Hindi tumatahol Does not bark
Katulad ng iba Like some/others (who)
Pa-Ingles-ingles pa Keep speaking English
Na kung pakikinggan which when listened to
Mali-mali naman Turn out/are incorrect/full of errors
Huwag na lang Forget it/Never mind/Better not
(2X) (2X)

Hoy Hoy Ikaw ay Pinoy Hey Hey You are Pinoy
Hoy Hoy Ikaw ay Pinoy Hey Hey You are Pinoy

-----------
Nosi Bayasi (NB):
-----------
A POWERFUL NATIONALISTIC & ANTI-COLONIAL POP SONG WITH BEAUTIFUL MELODY though the lyrics are not perfect. I believe that the 4th to 6th lines from the last may be changed/improved & rewritten. Rating: Music 100% Lyrics 99%

One clearly-affected commenter in the website from where I downloaded the MP3, apparently unfamiliar with this old song, stated in Tagalog something like: "HEY, THIS IS DIFFERENT! ONLY STONED PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT THIS!" ["IBA'TO! BATO LANG ANG NAKAKAALAM NITO!"] HAR-HAR-HAR!

NOTE VERY WELL that a mere VERSION can be BETTER than the ORIGINAL.
This is in MUSIC. [e.g., Compare: Paul Young's EVERYTIME YOU GO vs. original HALL & OATES] The BARTOLOME brothers (graduates of U.P. SCHOOL OF MUSIC) have beautiful, really musical voices but the JUDAS version has a strange, unusual underlying background sound that permeates it & immediately sets the mood of the listener. Thus, for me, the JUDAS version is BETTER than the BANYUHAY original. And much better than either would be the imaginary THIRD version having BARTOLOME brothers' vocals combined with JUDAS's instrumentation. Is this state-of-affairs the consequence of ELECTRONIC sound & better sound-GENERATION, RECORDING & REPRODUCTION TECHNIQUES? Does it mean that objective SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY can & do affect & may even CHANGE subjective ART & HUMAN REALITY? - a potentially-controversial PHILOSOPHICAL TOPIC for further discussion.

The song expresses & elaborates on in musical language the MEANING of the following Tagalog saying:

"ANG HINDI MAGMAHAL SA SARILING WIKA AY HIGIT PA SA HAYUP AT MALANSANG ISDA." - Jose Rizal

TANONG: Sumusulat ba si aku (si N.B.) para sa kababayan o para sa dayuhan?
-------
(n) Ninakaw kay N.B.(Noty Boy)
(s) Stolen from N.B.(Noty Boy)

POST 0014

Same time & place as POST 0013

-------START OF COPIED ARTICLE-------
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleid=398995

Arts and Culture
The Mark of Sakay: The Vilified Hero of Our War with America
By Carmen Guerrero Nakpil (The Philippine Star)
Updated September 08, 2008 12:00 AM

Well-known Photo of Sakay & his men here

The mark of Macario Leon Sakay was the long, jet-black luxuriant hair that, uncut and un-trammeled, cascaded from the top of a head, always held high and audaciously, down to his shoulders. With it, Sakay left a large imprint on the annals of the Philippine Revolution against Spain of 1896 and the Filipino-American War of 1899, for the sight of him on his horse, riding against the wind, at dawn or the dead of night, his black mane streaming behind him in order to set right some urgent wrong, alarmed his people’s enemies but gave instant hope to their hapless cause.

He had begun life as a fatherless boy (Sakay was his mother’s surname) in congested, urban-poor, Tondo on Tabora St., earning a living doing odd jobs as a blacksmith or as occasional tailor, also as an actor in street theater and comedias, but mostly as a barber. When he made his commitment to Philippine Independence by joining his friend, Andres Bonifacio’s Katipunan, he made hair the symbol of resistance and vowed he would cut his only after he had defeated the Americans.

During his brief lifetime, Sakay became the scourge of all his country’s oppressors — the Spaniards, the Americans, the misguided half-bloods and compatriots — trying in every way he knew to secure freedom from injustice for his people. He was more determined than Rizal, more fortunate than Bonifacio, purer than Aguinaldo, more lyrically mysterious than Mabini. If Filipinos had won the war with America, he would probably have been our Simon Bolívar or our Ho Chi Minh.

Instead, because most history is written by the victors and their partisans and in the American years, Filipino schoolbooks and acceptable public opinion followed the black propaganda of the American annexation and “pacification,” several generations of Filipinos lived and died, believing that Sakay was a criminal with lunatic pretensions, a brigand and a ludicrous bandit. In the late 1930s Lamberto Avellana, my brother Leoni’s chum from the American Jesuit Ateneo, movie director and National-Artist-to-be, made a film about Sakay where he was portrayed as the villainous bandit, with the Philippine Constabulary officer playing hero and leading man (Leopoldo Salcedo.)

What a little research can undo. After Independence, scholars intent on writing history from a Filipino viewpoint began to review the colonial versions and examine old records. They came to the conclusion that Sakay was an authentic hero in the best tradition of Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto and Apolonio Samson who were his comrades-in-arms in the Katipunan. Far from being a bandit, he was a glorious die-hard, incredibly brave and tenacious, a heroic hold-out for Philippine Independence.

In 1952, Antonio K. Abad, a member of the Philippine Historical Society, published the definitive biography, General Macario L. Sakay: — the only President of the Tagalog Republic. Was He a Bandit or a Patriot? The foreword by Prof. Teodoro A. Agoncillo, read, “No Filipino has been so maligned in history as General Macario Sakay…Sakay and his men lived dangerously and thus invited the hatred of the early Americans who started a double-barreled campaign of imperialism and liquidation. The Americans called them bandits and outlaws… Mr. Antonio K. Abad has recreated the hero out of a mass of documents…His work is a vindication of the much maligned man who dared posterity to emulate his deep devotion to the ideals of independence.”

UP Prof. Renato Constantino also published his findings in the 1960s, demolishing the American colonial libel about Sakay. But colonial propaganda and its lies have a long shelf-life. Only last week I was painfully surprised when a couple of my Manileño friends, in reply to my remark that I was writing about Sakay, replied dismissively, “Oh, that bandit.”

After a hundred years, we still need the backstory of the Revolution against Spain in 1896 and our war with America in 1899 to understand Sakay and his generation.

The day Rizal was exiled to Dapitan, in July 1892, a group of middle-class Manileños met at a private residence on Azcarraga (now Recto) and founded the Katipunan (Ang Kataastaasang Kagalanggalangan Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan), the secret society that planned and initiated the armed struggle against Spain. In four years, the K.K.K.’s membership rose to almost 30,000: students, workers, merchants, farmers from the eight provinces that started the Revolution. Sakay was an early joiner.

After that disastrous first battle in San Juan in August, 1896, Sakay joined the forces that encamped in the hills of Marikina and Montalban and fought in the Katipunan battles, including the victory at San Mateo. After several reverses, the Manila Katipuneros retreated to Cavite where a new general, Emilio Aguinaldo, turned the tide, defeated Bonifacio in a power struggle (Aguinaldo’s Caviteño Magdalo vs. Bonifacio’s Manileño Magdiwang) and went on to win many encounters. The Spanish government called a truce and negotiated the Pact of Biyak-na-Bato.

The heads of the Revolutionary Army retreated to Hongkong, from where they spent the Spanish indemnity money on arms, befriended the US Consuls in Hong Kong and Singapore and resumed the Revolution in 1898 at the height of the Spanish-American War, assuming that the Americans were their allies and protectors. Aguinaldo proclaimed Philippine Independence in Cavite in June, 1898, with the revolutionary forces 80,000 strong, laid successful siege to Spanish Manila, proceeded to liberate Luzon and expected to enter the beleaguered capital and install a Philippine Independent Republic.

But the US had an altogether different agenda. It kept the Filipino forces from entering the city, signed a treaty of surrender with Spain and American troops entered Manila all by themselves, proclaiming the start of the US Occupation, on Aug. 13, 1898.

Dewey had destroyed the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay on May 1, and land troops, newly arrived under Gen. Wesley Merritt, took possession. They had to wait, however, for the Treaty of Paris in which Spain ceded a colony it no longer held to the US for $20 million, and started in February 1899, a first military encounter with Filipino troops holding the trenches around Sta. Mesa. The Filipino-American War was formally settled in 1902, after the capture of Aguinaldo in his mountain hideout in Palanan, Isabela, in 1901. But Filipino guerrilla action against the US forces did not end until 1907 when the first Filipino parliament was allowed by the US America spent $300 million more pacifying the Filipinos they thought they had bought at the bargain-basement price of $20 million.

Having survived the Revolution against Spain, Sakay was, at the beginning of the Philippine resistance to the US, an undercover man in Manila where he tried to reactivate the Katipunan, organizing commandos and intelligence and sabotage units. While head of the Dapitan section of the K.K.K., Magdiwang in Manila, Sakay was arrested and jailed by US authorities and released under the general amnesty of July 1902. He quickly took to the hills and organized huge guerrilla forces which operated in Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, and the foothills of Mt. Banahaw. No ragtag band, just one of Sakay’s commanders had 4,000 troops.

In his mountain lair, he proclaimed, on May 6, 1902 the establishment of the Kapuluang Katagalugan (The Tagalog Archipelago) with himself as president, Francisco Carreon as vice-president and Lt. Gen. Julian Montalan as chief of staff. The terms “Tagalog Archipelago” were chosen in contrast to the “Philippine Republic” of the rival Aguinaldo Magdalo.

In a second manifesto, a constitution was enacted and published in Tagalog and Spanish in newspapers edited by Lope K. Santos, proclaiming the Tagalog Archipelago as the “true revolutionists, with a government at Dimas-Alang,” beseeching the representatives of other nations “for help in acquainting the world with our true intent and aims for our unfortunate country.” Sakay’s government had a flag, a system of taxation, a disciplined army consisting of regular battalions and regiments of infantry, artillery, engineer and medical corps with separate commands in full uniform. It operated in total defiance of the hugely superior, first modern foreign army, infuriating and mocking US authorities in Manila. It was a hard state with strict laws impersonally and impartially executed, especially capital punishment and physical maiming imposed on informers, collaborators, and spies of the US government. It took the Americans 3,000 troops and two more years to think they had defeated Sakay. Although, “pacification” had formally ended, there was no let-up in the attacks of Sakay’s forces on US installations.

At last in 1905-06, the Americans devised a more successful trap. First, they passed a Brigand Act defining all forms of resistance to US rule as criminal acts deserving of capital punishment. American officials were able to wean many of the ilustrado elite from their anti-colonial advocacies. Men like T. Pardo de Tavera formed the Federalista Party that aspired to statehood in the US Union; the Paternos, Aranetas, Benitezes participated in other events; Epifanio de los Santos became a delegate to the US Exposition in St. Louis in 1904. Alongside with Sakay’s guerrillas, bands of highwaymen, robbers, cattle-rustlers operated in the Luzon countryside and, when caught, claimed to be Sakay’s troops. Sakay himself, a dashing, romantic figure, was rumored to have kidnapped the comely wife of a provincial governor who vowed revenge. One of the most charming, persuasive ilustrados, Dr. Dominador Gomez, was asked by the Americans to approach Sakay and discuss amnesty for his thousands of soldiers.

Gen. Leon Villafuerte later testified that Dr. Gomez had told Sakay and his officers that, “The American governor-general has promised to create a national assembly of our countrymen elected by the people where our leaders can be trained for eventual self-government. As soon as we prove ourselves capable, we shall be granted independence.” After long treks to Tanay and several visits by Dr. Gomez, Sakay, Carreon, Villafuerte, Montalan and de Vega came to Manila on a safe-conduct pass from the Americans. Dressed in rayadillo uniforms, carrying pistols and daggers, their long hair neatly combed, they came on foot with hundreds of overjoyed townspeople showering them with food and other gifts, guitar music and singing. People acclaimed them as celebrity heroes and they were feted at banquets and dances.

On July 17, they were invited to a town fiesta in Cavite by US Col. Van Shaick, the acting Cavite governor. An orchestra played dance music amid American flags and bunches of flowers. At 11:30 a.m., US officers, pistols in hand, walked in and although Sakay fought unarmed against “his giant attacker,” he and his officers were disarmed. The building was surrounded by Filipino Constabulary officers.

Gen. Villafuerte shouted, “We have been betrayed and we are trapped. Doctor, what is the meaning of this?” Dr. Gomez stepped forward: “There’s no use fighting.” Sakay’s eyes were bloodshot. He said, “Tell the Americans to face us in the open field, in honorable battle.” And to the Filipino Constabularios, he remarked, “Aren’t you ashamed of what you are doing?” Manacled, they were taken by boat to the Hotel de Oriente in Binondo and then to Bilibid Prison. Captain Rafael Crame presided over the preliminary investigation and the accused were charged under the Brigand Act. They were defended by Attys. Felipe Buencamino and Ramon Diokno (father of the great anti-Marcos militant Pepe Diokno).

In Bilibid, the prisoners were allowed visits by family and friends who were astoundingly numerous, bringing food, gifts, letters. Sympathizers who pleaded for clemency, included Aguinaldo, Gregorio Aglipay, the Iglesia Filipina Independiente, the Liga de Mujeres, the Union Obrera Democratica. The prisoners also witnessed prison atrocities (which today recall Guantanamo and Abu-Ghraib): 300 members of the Sakay forces were secretly hanged inside Bilibid and 100 more were injected with lethal serum. Many of them had surrendered because Sakay had told his troops they would not be harmed because the Americans had promised a congress of elected Filipino representatives who would rule the country if they abjured armed resistance.

At the trial at the Court of First Instance, using false witnesses, Sakay and his men were accused of robbery in band, murder, rape, summary executions, arson, kidnapping.

Dr. Dominador Gomez instructed them to plead “guilty” because they would then be pardoned. The public defenders, Attys. Buencamino and Diokno, advised them to plead “not guilty,” to show both innocence and non-recognition of US sovereignty. On Aug. 6, 1907, Judge Ignacio Villamor (who would become UP president) convicted them. Those who had pleaded not guilty, like Sakay and de Vega, were hanged. The others, who had listened to Dr. Gomez, had their death sentences commuted or were later released.

A discrepancy intrudes at this point. Just who was Dr. Dominador Gomez? The agent chosen by the Americans to lure Sakay into leaving his headquarters in the mountains of Tanay to come to Manila? From William J. Pomeroy and the National Historical Institute; we learn that he was a medical doctor, a graduate from the University of Sto. Tomas, who in 1903, at the beginning of the American regime, had taken over from Isabelo de los Reyes the leadership of the Union Obrera and had participated in a large anti-American rally. Gomez was arrested for sedition, tried and convicted to four years of hard labor and ordered to pay a fine. His case was on appeal to the Supreme Court (manned by US justices), his sentence un-served, when he began to negotiate Sakay’s surrender, going on arduous treks to Tanay for long discussions, showing a letter from the US governor-general that promised a Filipino assembly, “the door to freedom,” if Sakay and his generals laid down their arms.

The American betrayal in Cavite, Sakay’s and his men’s trial, and conviction have already been told in this article. What remains to be noted is that, two weeks after Sakay was hanged, Dr. Dominador Gomez’s pending case was summarily revived and quickly dismissed for “insufficient evidence.” Gomez then went on to become a representative for the First Philippine Assembly of 1907 where he was denounced and expelled by Sergio Osmeña and Manuel Luis Quezon, for having served as a surgeon in the Spanish army in Cuba and received a medal from the Spanish queen during the Spanish-American War. But in 1909, Gomez was re-elected to a second term because, despite his previous disgraceful expulsion, he was backed by the US authorities. The facts speak for themselves. Sakay was the plea bargain.

At 8:30 in the morning, on Sept. 13, 1907, Sakay and Col. Lucio de Vega were taken from their bartolina to the gallows. Reaching the platform, Sakay shouted at the top of his lungs, “I face the Lord Almighty calmly but we must tell you that we are not bandits and robbers as the Americans accuse us, but members of the revolutionary force that defended our country. Long live the Philippines! Adios Filipinas!” Sakay was 37.

The day before, a big crowd of Manila residents had gathered in front of Malacañang Palace in an unusual, emotional demonstration pleading for clemency, but the American governor-general refused to see them. Almost the same crowd, larger and more vociferous, was at the gates of Bilibid Prison asking to be allowed to wrap the bodies of Sakay and Col. De Vega in Katipunan flags before they were buried. They were refused.

The US Government kept their word about calling a Filipino assembly. In October 1907, the First Philippine Assembly of Filipinos elected (by men of property) was inaugurated at the Manila Grand Opera House on Calle Cervantes (now Rizal Avenue) by Secretary of War William H. Taft. Acting Secretary of the Philippine Commission Ferguson read the Spanish translation of Taft’s speech, followed by an invocation by Bishop Barlin. After the roll call, with names like Gabaldon, Gomez, Guerrero, Imperial, Osmena, Palma, Quezon, Velarde, De Veyra, roundly applauded, the session was adjourned till the afternoon. A young delegate from Cebu, Sergio Osmeña was elected Speaker by acclamation.

But Philippine Independence was granted by America only 40 years later, on 4 July 1946, after a devastating war, and on several conditions: equal rights to US citizens in the development of natural resources, US military bases in perpetuity, economic treaties including the onerous “free trade” (that denied industrialization to this country), also interventions in Philippine elections and in foreign and educational policies.

It was the kind of independence, Macario Leon Sakay, Katipunero and patriot, an “organization genius” as his American captors described him, never would have settled for or even considered. He would have chosen instead to die fighting America, if he had known the truth and seen the future of his adored Filipinas.

* * *
(The National Historical Institute and the University of the Philippines have erected a marker at the foot of Mt. Banahaw where General Macario Sakay and his troops operated. The Manila Historical Heritage Commission held a commemorative program last year at Plaza Morriones Tondo in honor of Macario Sakay. This year, on Sept. 13, 2008, a life-size statue of Sakay will be unveiled at Plaza Morga Tondo by the Manila Historical Heritage Commission.)

View previous articles from this author.
-------END OF COPIED ARTICLE-------
-----------
Nosi Bayasi (NB):
-----------
1) I do not know if Madam Nakpil was ever informed by anyone among her staff that I tried once to personally contact her sometime in the past to consult her about her writings. In fact, I visited the building in Salcedo Village, Makati which was a walking distance from the Indonesian Embassy where Muslims from different nations including the Philippines gather for Friday prayers. I remember now that it was the same building where I was employed briefly as a data encoder in a mini-computer station, working on graveyard shift in the 1980's. [This was years before the job of "call center agent" became popular.] I had read somewhere that her office or one of her offices was in that building. But I was told by the ground security officer that she was not around. I had also attended an event in the Fort Santiago de Vera where her daughter Gemma Cruz spoke to a mostly Muslim audience, including some "big-shots" & foreigners whom I knew personally. This was in the late 1990's or early 2000's just shortly before the ABU-ABU-SAYAP-SAYAP grabbed the headlines.

2) "purer than Aguinaldo"?? - EMI inFAMY AGUI was NOT & NEVER "pure"!! NO! Noble? NO. No-balls? YES! [Read DMACAPAGAL's own personal account how in the 1960's AGUI's side remark to him (while they were both seated at the Quirino grandstand watching the first June 12 celebration-parade) betrayed the latter's DESIROUS, OVERLY-AMBITIOUS, & ENVIOUS CHARACTER - for he even wanted to replace with his own RIZAL's metal figure at the Luneta!!! Pati REBULTO ng mismong PAMBANSANG BAYANIng si RIZAL eh TATALUNIN!! SUSMARYOPES!!! UNETHICAL na, IMMORAL pa! A REAL ROGUE! TSK TSK TSK TSK Ambisyoso, Duwag, Inggitero, Mapagkamkan, Oportunista, Tuso - pawang mga "UGALING-ASAL"!! Ganyan bang klase ng tau ang tinitingalang bayani ng mga taga-SANIPILIP??? LOK-BOOH!!! Kaya naman pala ganyan ang gobyerno ng Pilipinas, eh! I guess AGUI simply has to go & should be EXPUNGED from PHILIPPINE HISTORY or else this nation will ultimately end up a FAILED STATE. And time to declare ANDRES BONIFACIO as the TRUE NATIONAL HERO of the PHILIPPINES!!

3) I am quite sure that Sakay & his group were simply imitating the Macabebe Scouts who were the original long hairs of that historical period. [Or am I mistaken & it is the other way around? I saw first old photos of Macabebes sporting waist-length hair. According to historical accounts, the Macabebe mercenaries physically-imitated Sakay's REVOLUTIONARY group but preyed on civilians to discredit them. (I remember that my GRANNIES KNEW SAKAY.) Of course, they could have discovered it independently because when one is not living in the urban area with "straight people" of society (i.e., when one is in the BOONDOCKS), one tends to let nature take its own course & leave things as these are - including letting one's hair, even nails, beards, & mustaches grow uncut & untrimmed. Is it strange that JC the Chrst of Nzrth is universally-pictured as sporting long hair & beard? Even Nb Mhmmd bn bdllh of Mkkh sported long hair sometime in his career! Ask religious Middle Easterners (Arabs, Persians & Turks) & even those from the Indian subcontinent what uncut beards & hair signify. [But what about baldies or skinheads? Does this mean that they are NOT revolutionaries like JC, Mhmmd et al? Now, I would recommend that they just keep their shiny pates, which is so plainly ordinary nowadays, but simply use wigs as a form of "reverse" disguise. They can be very effective SPIES for revolutionaries. But it would be much better if they build or buy a wig factory first. Big business potential! Of course, there is the risk that if it succeeds financially, then they might just forget about revolution.]

3) Look closely at the S's gang photo & examine his face. I wouldn't be suprised if his Darwinist-racist detractors would claim that he looks simian (monkey-ish). He looks very like someone I know. But note that, according to some accounts, SAKAY's Yanqui captors considered him to be a wizard at organizing! So, apes can teach a course on "Theory of Organization" in Business Management school? [See my blog on GENETICS, RACE & RACISM]

4) S's "Filipinas" was actually Bonifacio's "Bayang Katagalugan".

Evening news on TV (072210) report a double murder of females in Cavite, one of whom is surnamed "Sac/kay"... CHANCE or CHOICE?

LALABAS AT LALABAS ANG KATOTOHANAN...
KAYA NGA SINABI NA "ANG KASAYSAYAN AY DAPAT KATAKUTAN"->(MY Preferred INTERPRETATION)

POST 0013

July 29, 2010
6:06 a.m. Manila Time

TAGALOG:
Marami sa inilabas ko dito sa aking BLOG ay galing sa ibang tau at kinopya lamang. Ni hindi aku talagang nag-react o nag-komento ng husto sa mga ito. Hindi ko rin talaga sinuri ang mga ito. Ipinakita ko lamang ang mga uri ng babasahin na dapat nabasa, naunawaan at natandaan ng aking bumabasa upang maunawaan niya ang aking
"kahulugan" o ang takbo ng aking kaisipan. Karaniwan kasi ay kailangan ng malawak na KONTEKSTO upang maintindihan o maunawaan ang mga pahayag o sinasabi ng isang tau. Kahit yung baliw kung mauunawaan ang BACKGROUND o konteksto ng pinagsasasabi nito ay malamang na may katuturan naman. Aku nga ay nakikipag-usap sa isang masasabing may
SAYYAD subali't mas nais ko siyang kausapin kaysa sa ibang matitinong taung nakapaligid sa kanya na wala namang alam at wala akung matututunan. Marami talaga siyang nalalaman na pinag-sikapan niyang alaming mag-isa at sa tingin ko ay medyo sumayad nga sa sobrang katalinuhan o dami ng naisip. Kung marunong ka lang sumakay ay marami kang matututunan sa kanya na hindi mo makukuha sa pagbabasa ng aklat o kahit sa pakikipag-usap sa matino! Ang delikado lang sa mga taung may TRA-LA-LA (kagaya ni SISA na ina nina Crispin at Basilio sa nobelang NOLI ni Rizal) ay yung may sayad na medyo bayolente a la JOHN DOE BALL CROST na sinusuotan na ng strait-jacket! (Kaya pala paborito niya ang curved jackets, eh!) Mayroon nga akung malayong
kamag-anak na nakapag-asawa ng may sayad (Hindi kadugo namin kundi yung napangasawa ng kapamilya namin ang may sira.) Wika daw nito: "All geniuses are mad but not every one who is mad is a genius." O lahat daw ng henyo/genio ay sira ang ulo pero hindi lahat ng sira-ulo ay henyo/genio. [Ang nasabing pahayag ay mainam na panimulang
talakayin sa larangan ng LOHIKA. Gamitin ang 1ST ORDER PREDICATE CALCULUS upang isimbolo ang pahayag, at suriin ang resulta. Maaari pang talakayin ang tinatawag na NECESSARY & SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS. Mahalaga kasi ang LOHIKA upang mabigyang linaw ang pinagsasasabi ng isang tau dahil may mas malalim na pakahulugan ang isang pahayag na hindi makukuha agad sa unang pagsipat o pagdinig dito... At ang tunay na may sayad ay wala nang lohika ang mga pinagsasasabi...

Bilang review sa mga ipinaglalagay ko dito:
-Una kong post ay yung kulang ang pera ko at sinimulan ko ang BLOG na ito sa presyong PP10. Bumati lang aku ng pagsalubong sa bumabasa.
-Ikalawa ay ini-upload ko ang LYRICS ng pambansang awit ng Pilipinas sa wikang Inggles (na mas nauna!) at sa wikang Tagalog. Marahil ay ididikit ko dito yung talagang wastong tugtog/tiyempo/tono nito na MARTIAL MUSIC. Medyo mabilis at hindi kagaya ng tinutugtog at inaawit ng mga bumibirit nating stariray songers sa mga boxing events. Siguro sa ibang pagkakataon o sa ibang BLOG ay tatalakayin at ipaghahambing ko ang iba pang MUSIKANG MAKABAYAN o national anthems ng ibang bansa. Kailangang aminin ko na PANGATLO (3rd) lamang ang ating pambansang awit sa pagandahan. Op kors, subjective judgment na ito...
-Sunod-sunod kong inilagay ang iba-ibang sinulat ng mga kilalang tau hinggil sa kasaysayan ng kapuluang ito. Patungo na aku mula sa nasyonal o lokal papunta sa rehiyonal at maging internasyonal o global na antas. Hindi kasi maiintindihan ang mga kaganapan sa isang lugar kung hindi mauunawaan ang iba pang mga kaganapan sa mas malawak na kinalalagyan nito. Dalawang perspektibo ang kailangang sipatin: LUNAN/LUGAR at PANAHON (time & place), Heograpiya at Kasaysayan... Sa pangkalahatan ay binibigyan ko ng pakahulugan ang kasaysayan ng kapuluang ito ayon sa aking mga natutunan at pinaniniwalaan na tutoo.

Subali't iisang katanungan lang talaga ang kailangang paka-alalahanin ng bumabasa: ANO ANG TUTOO O ANG KATOTOHANAN? - hinggil sa Pilipinas, sa mga Pilipino, sa kasaysayan atbp.

ENGLISH:
Most of the writings in this my BLOG came from other people & were simply copied & pasted. I did not really react or comment on these. Nor did I analyze these. I just wanted to give my readers an idea of the genre of reading materials that they should have read, understood & remembered for them to understand my "meaning" or the train of my thoughts. Normally, one needs to understand the broader CONTEXT in order to grasp the statements of a person or what she is saying. Even with a crazy person, if one understands the BACKGROUND or context of what he is saying, then his statements might make sense. I myself converse with somebody who can be considered SAYYADific but I prefer to talk to him instead of other normal people around him who do not know anything & from whom I won't learn anything. He really knows a lot of things that he learned all by himself & I believe he went nuts due to extreme intelligence or information overload. If you know how to handle him, then you will learn a lot from the person that you won't get from/by reading books or talking to ostensibly sane people! The dangerous ones among those afflicted with TRA-LA-LA (like SISA,
Crispin & BasilioS's mother in Rizal's novel NOLI) are the violent ones who require strait-jacket!(No wonder JOHN DOE BALL CROST's favorite outfit are curved jackets!) I myself have a distant relative who got married to a crazie (I am not related by blood to the nut but to her husband.) She stated once: "All geniuses are mad but not every one who is mad is a genius." [This particular statement is an excellent introductory topic in the field of LOGIC. One may use 1ST ORDER PREDICATE CALCULUS to symbolize the statement & analyze the resut. One may also discuss so-called NECESSARY & SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS. LOGIC is important in clarifying the statements of a person because a statement may contain something more than what meets the eye or ears & may not be grasped at first reading or hearing... And a real nut makes statements that do not have any logic...

To review what I have done so far in this BLOG:
-First, I started this BLOG on PP10 & posted the WELCOME greeting
-Second, I posted the Philippine National Anthem lyrics in English (which historically came first!) and in Tagalog. Maybe I shall add in this same posting the correct tune/rhythm/music of the anthem which is MARTIAL MUSIC. It is fast unlike those that are usually played or sung by Filipino starsingers in boxing events. Maybe here in the future or in another BLOG I shall present other NATIONALISTIC anthems of other nations or countries & compare these. I have to admit that our national anthem is 3rd in overall ranking in BEAUTY. Of course, this is a subjective judgment...
-I posted successively different writings of other persons about the heroes & history of this country. I am now moving from the local or national towards the regional & even the international & global level/scene. One cannot really grasp or understand the events in one place if one does not understand the other events in the broader space in which it is situated. Two perspectives must be considered:
TIME & PLACE, History & Geography... As a whole I am trying to present my own meaning or interpretation of the history of this archipelago based on what I have learned & what I believe in (as true).

But there really is only one question that should be kept in mind by the reader: WHAT IS THE TRUTH?- about the Filipinos, the Philippines, its history, etc.

POST NO. CONTENT
-------- -------
0001 WELCOME MAT.
0002 PHILIPPINE NATIONAL ANTHEM LYRICS
0003 NOSI BAYASI'S SANIPILIP HISTORY
0004 SAKAY MOVIE CLIP DIALOGUE
0005 E.R. SAN JUAN RIZAL ARTICLE
0006 EUGENE HESSEL RIZAL RETRACTION ARTICLE
0007 NOSI BAYASI'S HEBIGAT ISYUS ON
0008 NICK JOAQUIN TAGALOG-PAMPANGAN ARTICLE
0009 MILAGROS GUERRERO BONIFACIO & 1896 ARTICLE
0010 JUMAANI MORO HISTORY
0011 ZABOLOTNAYA ARTICLE ON RUSSIAN TAGALOG STUDIES
0012 DIVIDE & CONQUER ARTICLE
0013 THIS PRESENT POSTING: TABLE OF CONTENTS
0014 TAYO'Y MGA PINOY & BABALIK KA RIN: ART & IDEOLOGY
0015 NAKPIL ON SAKAY
0016 IMPERIALISM & COLONIALISM
0017 MARXISM: TWO ITEMS
0018 LINGGA TWO NATIONS
0019
Pagkatapos ng ilan pang mahalagang POSTINGS ay sunod ko namang tatalakayin ang IMPERYALISMO, KOLONYALISMO,

MARXISMO, DIGMAAN ng PAGPAPALAYA at REBOLUSYON.
Next, I shall tackle IMPERIALISM, COLONIALISM, MARXISM, WARS OF

LIBERATION & REVOLUTION - REVOLUTIONS & REVOLUTIONARIES IN HISTORY,

MARXIST-SOCIALIST REVOLUTION, ISLAMIC REVOLUTION, etcetc.

"A REVOLUTIONIST HAS TO BE A LITTLE LOCO."
-attributed to ERNESTO "CHE" GUEVARA, Latin American REVOLUTIONARY

"GENUINE EDUCATION IS LIBERATING."
"Ang TUNAY na EDUKASYON ay MAPAGPALAYA."
-Nosi Bayasi (sabidaku), LE CHE

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

POST 0012

KASABAY NG POSTS 0008-0011
Huwebes, Hulyo 15, 2010
Kalendaryong Gregorian
7:29 Manila Time

HINGGIL NAMAN SA TINAGURIANG "DIVIDE & CONQUER" O "DIVIDE ET IMPERE"

-------START OF COPIED ARTICLE-------
Call Toll Free 1-800-840 3683 or write CounterPunch, PO BOX 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Bastille Day
July 14, 2004
The Model for Iraq was Ireland, 1692
Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules

By CONN HALLINAN

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh's recent revelations that the Israeli government is encouraging Kurdish separatism in Iraq, Iran, and Syria should ring a bell for anyone who has followed the long history of English imperial ambitions.

It is no surprise that the Israelis should be using the tactic of "divide and conquer," the cornerstone policy of an empire that dominated virtually every continent on the globe save South America. The Jewish population of British-controlled Palestine was, after all, victim to exactly the same kind of ethnic manipulation that the Sharon government is presently attempting in Northern Iraq.

Following the absorption of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the British set about shoring up their rule by the tried and true strategy of pitting ethnic group against ethnic group, tribe against tribe, and religion against religion. When British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour issued his famous 1917 Declaration guaranteeing a "homeland" for the Jewish people in Palestine, he was less concerned with righting a two thousand year old wrong than creating divisions that would serve growing British interests in the Middle East.

Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a "Jewish homeland" in Palestine meant for the British Empire: "It will form for England," he said, "a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism."

Storrs' analogy was no accident. Ireland was where the English invented the tactic of divide and conquer, and where the devastating effectiveness of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between the colonial rulers and the colonized made it a template for worldwide imperial rule.

Divide and Conquer Revisited

Ariel Sharon and former Prime Minister Menachem Begin normally take credit for creating the "facts on the ground" policies that have poured more than 420,000 settlers into the Occupied Territories. But they were simply copying Charles I, the English King, who in 1609 forcibly removed the O'Neill and O'Donnell clans from the north of Ireland, moved in 20,000 English and Scottish Protestants, and founded the Plantation of Ulster.

The "removal" was never really meant to cleanse Ulster of the Irish. Native labor was essential to the Plantation's success and within 15 years more than 4,000 native Irish tenants and their families were back in Ulster. But they lived in a land divided into religious castes, with the Protestant invaders on top and the Catholic natives on the bottom.

Protestants were awarded the "Ulster privilege" which gave them special access to land and lower rents, and also served to divide them from the native Catholics. The "Ulster Privilege" is not dissimilar to the kind of "privilege" Israeli settlers enjoy in the Territories today, where their mortgages are cheap, their taxes lower and their education subsidized.

The Protestant privileges were a constant sore point with the native Irish; although in fact, most Protestants were little better off than their Catholic neighbors. Rents were uniformly onerous, regardless of religion.

Indeed, there were numerous cases where Protestants and Catholics united to protest exorbitant rents, but in virtually every case, the authorities successfully used religion and privilege to split such alliances. The Orange Order, the organization most responsible for sectarian politics in the North today, was originally formed in 1795 to break a Catholic-Protestant rent strike.

Ireland as Imperial Laboratory

The parallels between Israel and Ireland are almost eerie, unless one remembers that the latter was the laboratory for British colonialism. As in Ulster, Israeli settlers in the Occupied Territories have special privileges that divide them from Palestinians (and other Israelis as well). As in Ireland, Israeli settlers rely on the military to protect them from the "natives." And as in Northern Ireland, there are political organizations, like the National Religious Party and the Moledet Party, which whip up sectarian hatred, and keep the population divided. The latter two parties both advocate the forcible transfer of all Arabs_Palestinians and Israelis alike_to Jordan and Egypt.

Prior to the Ulster experiment, the English had tried any number of schemes to tame the restive Irish and build a wall between conqueror and conquered. One set of laws, the 1367 Statutes of Kilkenny, forbade "gossiping" with the natives. All of them failed. Then the English hit on the idea of using ethnicity, religion, and privilege to construct a society with built-in divisions.

It worked like a charm.

The divisions were finally codified in the Penal Laws of 1692, divisions that still play themselves out in the mean streets of Belfast and Londonderry. Besides denying Catholics any civil rights (and removing those rights from Protestants who intermarried with them), the Laws blocked Catholics from signing contracts, becoming lawyers, or hiring more than two apprentices. In essence, they insured that Catholics would remain poor, powerless, and locked out of the modern world.

The laws were, in the words of the great English jurist Edmund Burke, "A machine of wide and elaborate contrivance and as well fitted for the oppression, impoverishment and degradation of a people as ever proceeded from the perverted ingenuity of man."

Once the English hit on the tactic of using ethnic and religious differences to divide a population, the conquest of Ireland became a reality. Within 250 years, that formula would be transported to India, Africa, and the Middle East.

Sometimes populations were splintered by religions, as with Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in India. Sometimes societies were divided by tribes, as with the Ibos and Hausa in Nigeria. Sometimes, as in Ireland, foreign ethnic groups were imported and used as a buffer between the colonial authorities and the colonized. That is how large numbers of East Indians ended up in Kenya, South Africa, British Guyana, and Uganda.

It was "divide and conquer" that made it possible for an insignificant island in the north of Europe to rule the world. Division and chaos, tribal, religious and ethnic hatred, were the secret to empire. Guns and artillery were always in the background in case things went awry, but in fact, it rarely came to that.

It would appear the Israelis have paid close attention to English colonial policy because their policies in the Occupied Territories bear a distressing resemblance to Ireland under the Penal Laws

The Israeli Knesset recently prevented Palestinians married to Arab Israelis from acquiring citizenship, a page lifted almost directly from the 1692 laws. Israeli human rights activist Yael Stein called the action "racist," and Knesset member Zeeva Galon said it denied "the fundamental right of Arab Israelis to start families." Even the U.S. is uncomfortable with the legislation. "The new law," said U.S. State Department spokesman Phillip Reeker, "singles out one group for different treatment than others."

Which, of course, was the whole point.

Imperial Blowback

As the penal laws impoverished the Irish, so do Israeli policies impoverish the Palestinians and keep them an underdeveloped pool of cheap labor. According to the United Nations, unemployment in the West Bank and Gaza is over 50 percent, and Palestinians are among the poorest people on the planet.

Any efforts by the Palestinians to build their own independent economic base are smothered by a network of walls, settler-exclusive roads and checkpoints. It is little different than British imperial policy in India, which systematically dismantled the Indian textile industry so that English cloth could clothe the sub-continent without competition.

Divide and conquer was 19th and early 20th century colonialism's single most successful tactic of domination. It was also a disaster, one which still echoes in civil wars and regional tensions across the globe. This latter lesson does not appear to be one the Israelis have paid much attention to. As a system of rule, division and privilege may work in the short run, but over time it engenders nothing but hatred. These polices, according to Lt. Gen. Moshe Yaalon, foment "terror," adding, "In tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interests."

The policy also creates divisions among Israelis. Empires benefit only a few, and always at the expense of the majority. While the Sharon government spends $1.4 billion a year holding on to the territories, 27 percent of Israeli children are officially designated "poor," social services have been cut, and the economy is in shambles.

By playing the Kurds against Syria and Iran, the Israelis may end up triggering a Turkish invasion of Kurdish Iraq, touching off a war that could engulf the entire region. That Israel would emerge from such a conflict unscathed is illusion.

Divide and conquer fails in the long run, but only after it inflicts stupendous damage, engendering hatreds that still convulse countries like Nigeria, India and Ireland. In the end it will fail to serve even the interests of the power that uses it. England kept Ireland divided for 800 years, but in the end, it lost.

The Israelis would do well to remember the Irish poet Patrick Pearse's eulogy over the grave of the old Fenian revolutionary, Jeremian "Rossa" O'Donovan: "I say to my people's masters, beware. Beware of the thing that is coming. Beware of the risen people who shall take what yea would not give."

Conn Hallinan is a foreign policy analyst for Foreign Policy in Focus and a Lecturer in Journalism at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

WWW http://www.counterpunch.org
Keep CounterPunch Alive:
-------END OF COPIED ARTICLE-------

POST 0011

Same time & place as POSTS 0008-0010

BASAHIN KUNG GAANO KALALIM ANG NAGAWANG PAG-AARAL NG IBANG LAHI HINGGIL SA ATING BANSA. ALAM BA NG MGA GURO O PROPESOR SA PILIPINAS NA MAY MAHUHUSAY NA ISKOLAR MULA SA RUSYA HALIMBAWA ANG NAGSALIKSIK HINGGIL SA ATING WIKA? GINAGAMIT BA ANG MGA ITO SA MGA PAARALAN O DALUBHASAAN DITO?

-------START OF COPIED ARTICLE-------
Ito ang HTML na salin nghttp://web.kssp.upd.edu.ph/linguistics/plc2006/papers/FullPapers/III-A-3_Zabolatnaya.pdf.
Kusang gumagawa ng mga html na salin ang G o o g l e para sa mga dokumento na nahanap namin sa web.
Upang ma-link o i-bookmark ang pahinang ito, gamitin ang sumusunod na url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:zQ-QYxH14foJ:web.kssp.upd.edu.ph/linguistics/plc2006/papers/FullPapers/III-A-3_Zabolatnaya.pdf+nusantara+site:.edu.ph&hl=tl&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ph&client=firefox-a

Ang Google ay hindi konektado sa mga may-akda ng pahinang ito at hindi rin mananagutan sa mga nilalaman nito.
Ang mga salita na ito ay naka-highlight. nusantara
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1
PHILIPPINE LINGUISTICS STUDIES IN RUSSIA
Natalia V. Zabolotnaya
Moscow State University
natal71@yandex.ru

Abstract The Philippine linguistics studies in Russia trace its roots back to the 18th century when Peter S. Pallas (1741­1811), a member of the Saint Petersburg Academy of Sciences, published his famous work entitled Comparative Dictionaries of all Languages and Dialects in 1787. Although Russia had shown the interest in the Philippines a long time ago, however, until the middle of the 20th century Philippine linguistics studies in Russia were undertaken in fits and starts. During the post­war period, since the 1950s the research institutes under the Academy of Sciences and universities of the former USSR almost simultaneously have undertaken the regular and systematic research and teaching both of Philippine languages, first of all Tagalog, and Philippine literature. In 1960s the first important works on various problems of Tagalog as well as Philippine grammar, typology and comparative and historical studies of the Philippine languages by Philippine linguists in Russia such as V. Makarenko, I. Podberezsky, G. Rachkov, L. Shkarban and some others appeared. In 1980­s and 1990­s most works were dedicated to the history and the comprehensive language situation and language policy in the Philippines; the first Tagalog textbooks, manuals and dictionaries for students were published; and various reviews and essays on historical studies of the Philippine languages, literature and culture appeared, some of which were published abroad in English and Filipino. In recent decades 70 qualified Philippine specialists having good command of Filipino and several dozens of Indonesian specialists who studied Filipino as optional subject were trained in Russia. Today we have two Filipino groups and two PhD student­linguists in Moscow State University and one Filipino group in St. Petersburg State University. This is the keystone to further successful and prosperous development of Philippine linguistics in Russia. This paper also includes the bibliography of all Russian Philippine linguists and gives a brief account of their important works. The first descriptions of the Philippine languages were made by Spanish friars by the late sixteenth century when they arrived in the Philippine Archipelago after the Spanish conquest of the Islands. However, the most important and impressive Spanish works appeared in the 1700­s and 1800­s only. At the beginning of the nineteenth century their materials were used by the fathers of comparative and historical linguistics. As a result, by the early twentieth century 500 works by European, American and Filipino authors on Tagalog only, one of the most widely spoken languages in the Philippines, were produced. Various theoretical schools succeeding one another or existing simultaneously have contributed a lot to the development of the Philippine linguistics studies. The largest and the most influential in force of historical circumstances remains the American linguistics. The European schools exerted less influence, probably, except for universalism presented in the works by Spanish missionaries. The Philippine linguistics studies in Russia trace its roots back to the 18th century when Peter S. Pallas (1741­1811), a member of the Saint Petersburg Academy of Sciences,

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

published in 1787 his famous work entitled Comparative Dictionaries of all Languages and Dialects gathered by the right hand of Her Majesty1. Part I, including the European and Asian languages. This book has materials on Pampangan, or Kapampangan, Tagalog and Magindanao. However, out of 130 words of the Russian glossary 19 words only were translated into Tagalog. Although Peter Pallas did not provide the references, which he used to compile the Dictionary, we may assume that for the Filipino words he applied to Forster’s glossary.At the beginning of the 19th century Peter Dobell, the American who came over to the Russian service and who was appointed to the position of Russian Consul General in Manila in 1820, got acquainted with Tagalog in practice. In his very interesting book Voyages and the latest observations in China, Manila and Indo­Chinese Archipelago… published in translation from English2 by N. Grech in 1833 in St. Petersburg, you can find not only various observational data about the Philippine Archipelago, its inhabitants, their capital but also very remarkable information on Tagalog, its role and cultivation in Archipelago, cognation of this language with Malay a good command of which Dobell had and etc. As it said in the book, Dobell compiled the pocket Tagalog dictionary and on his return to Russia donated it to Count Nikolay Rumyantsev (1754­1826), Foreign Minister of Russia in 1807­1814 as well as the famous collector of books and manuscripts and founder of the Rumyantsev Museum and Library (today – the Russian State Library).At the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century Sergey Bulich (1859­1921), the famous Russian linguist and specialist in the Slavic languages, comparativist and historian of the national linguistics concept as well as professor of the Moscow State University, repeatedly applied to the Philippine and Austronesian languages. He wrote such articles as The Tagalog language (1901), The Filipino or Tagalog group of the Malay languages (1902) and some others for the popular Encyclopedia by F.A. Broghaus and I.A. Efron. The author used the works of Spanish and Filipino authors as Sebastian de Totanes, Pedro de Sanlucar, Juan Jose de Noceda and Pedro Serrano Laktaw to write the mentioned articles, compiled to the great extent by the terms of the edition. Some information about the Philippine languages, language and ethno­national situation, language policy and culture of the Philippines in the 19th century we can find in the articles of Vice­Admiral V.M. Golovin (1776­1831), the Russian navigator, captain of circumnavigation and corresponding member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences; in the book of Captain Otto Kocebu (1788­1846) written in cooperation with German writer­naturalist Adelbert fon Chamisso (1781­1838); in part 3 The Philippine islands in the travel notes Frigate Pallada by the Russian famous writer Ivan Goncharov (1855­1857) and some other publications. During the first years of the Russian post­revolution period Eugenie Polivanov (1891­1938), the talented Russian linguist, many times appealed to the facts of Tagalog. He is the author of the first course Introduction into Linguistics for the Institutes of 1 i.e. by the Russian Empress Katherine II, the patroness of Art and Sciences. 2 On the book jacket is mentioned that Dobel’s Voyages and latest observations… were translated by someone A. Gh. According to Makarenko’s surveys and supposition, A. Gh. is A. Ghunkovsky, a friend of P. Dobell.

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines2
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

Oriental Studies (1928) where he widely operated with Tagalog examples. Ten years before this book Polivanov using the Tagalog materials reconstructed the old Japanese forms and proposed the hypotheses on parent language cognation of Japanese and Austronesian languages. Unfortunately, in view of repressions and execution of the scholar his greatest and fruitful scientific effort was interrupted. Polivanov was posthumously rehabilitated at the end of 1960s only. Before the World War II the travel notes by various travelers on the Philippines and one of Jose Rizal’s novels and some others translated into Russian were published. In 1931­1940 the special articles on Linguistics and Ethnography by Roy Franklin Barton who lived and worked at that time in USSR appeared in different periodicals of Moscow and Leningrad (today St. Petersburg). Although Russia had shown the interest in the Philippines a long time ago, however, until the middle of the 20th century Philippine linguistics studies in Russia were undertaken in fits and starts. During the post­war period, since the 1950s the research institutes under the Academy of Sciences and universities of the former USSR almost simultaneously have undertaken the regular and systematic research and teaching both of Philippine languages, first of all Tagalog proclaimed by President Manuel Quezon in the middle of the 1930s the national language of the Philippines, and Philippine literature. Filipino emigrant Teodosio A. Lansang (1918­1993) – alias Manuel Cruz and Lina Shkarban (born in 1937) – the author of series of articles on Tagalog morphology worked in the Institute of Oriental Studies under the Russian Academy of Sciences (IV RAN). Together with M. Cruz they published the brochure The Tagalog language in 1966 in journal Narodi Azii i Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa).In the Institute of Asian and African Studies (IAAS, former Institute of Oriental languages, founded in 1956) attached to the Moscow State University (MSU) since the academic year of 1959/1960 Tagalog had been taught by Vladimir Makarenko as the second Oriental language for the students of Indonesian and Malay Department and since 1975 as the first Oriental language at Historico­Philological Faculty and since 1979 – at Socio­Economic Faculty. In 1985 the instruction of this language was interrupted and the anchor was weighed only in 1997 for philologists by the efforts of Mikhail Meyer, current Director (retiring in 2006) of IAAS attached to MSU. Nowadays we have two Filipino groups and two PhD student­linguists in IAAS, MSU. The first Filipino group is on the 4th year of its study at Socio­Economic Faculty, Professor Elena Frolova, and the second one is on the 1st year at Philological Faculty, Professor Ekaterina Baklanova, one of the University’s current PhD students on Filipino Linguistics.Since its establishment the intensive research and instructional work has been undertaken at the Department of Philology of South­East Asian Countries in IAAS. As a result a lot of programs, textbooks and manuals, student’s readers and collections of science­philological articles such as Voprosy filologii stran Jugo­Vostocnoy Azii (Philological Problems of SEA Countries), which collected surveys on comparative Tagalog­Indonesian linguistics, in particular word­formation and genetic cognation of Austronesian languages as well as some other works, in particular on the old Filipino script and etc. were produced. In the 1960­s the Center of Malay and Indonesian Studies headed by Alexander Guber (1902­71), a member of USSR Academy of Sciences and

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines3
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

specialist on history of South­East Asia and general problems of oriental studies, was established in the Institute of Asian and African Studies. Afterwards, in the late 1970­s the center was renamed after Nusantara. Today the Center assembles its members not regularly, annually holds readings on the problems of SEA countries and publishes its Journal once or twice a year. Next year on the occasion of the 30th Anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Russia and the Philippines it plans to organize Conference devoted to the Philippine studies in Russia. At the Moscow State Institute of International Relations attached to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MGIMO MID) of USSR (now MFA of the Russian Federation) Tagalog was taught by Manuel Cruz since 1956/1957 academic year and later on until the end of the 1970s – by Igor Podberezsky (born in 1937), one of the first graduates who had his language training at the University of the Philippines in 1970­1971. In 1980 he was succeeded by Elena Frolova (born in 1957) who graduated from IAAS attached to MSU. In 1976 Podberezsky published excellent Tagalog Textbook including Grammar and Tagalog­Russian Vocabulary for students of the 1st and 2nd year of study. Together with Prof. Frolova who also had very good language practice in the Philippines (in UP Diliman and DLSU) they produced in cooperation with the native speakers perfect language sound courses and other training aids. The Institute of International Relations prepared diplomats placing the high emphasis on Colloquial speech and giving pragmatic knowledge about the country without theoretical and special courses and seminars on Filipino Philology in contrast to IAAS attached to MSU. In the middle of the 1990s the instruction of Tagalog was stopped there in view of unclaimed personnel and lack of teaching staff.Initially for the training purposes some works of Filipino teachers and Filipino dictionaries were published in a small number of copies. However, in 1959 Tagalog­Russian Dictionary (of about 20 000 words with the potted Tagalog Grammar) by Manuel Cruz and Sergey Ignashev (1938­1998) who later immigrated to USA, appeared. The abovementioned also compiled Russian­Tagalog Dictionary in 1965 (about 23 000 words). Both dictionaries printed by the State Publishing House of Foreign and National Dictionaries in Moscow were edited by Vladimir Makarenko. At the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation itself till recently Natalia Zabolotnaya, the graduate of the Moscow State University and specialist on Filipino linguistics, held Filipino language courses for Russian diplomats. In view of the completion of the courses and assignment of the students, the instruction at MFA was also interrupted. In the 1960s the first important works on various problems of Tagalog as well as Philippine grammar, typology, comparative and historical studies of the Philippine andIndonesian languages by Philippine linguists in Russia such as V. Makarenko, I. Podberezsky, G. Rachkov, L. Shkarban and some others appeared. The following first Ph.D. theses by linguist­philippinists were defended: Morphological Word Structure in Modern Tagalog (1965) by V. Makarenko, Classification of the parts of speech in Modern Tagalog (1966) by I. Podberezsky and Verb in Modern Tagalog. Problems of Morphology (1967) by L. Shkarban. The translations of the works of classical and modern Filipino literature from Tagalog, English and Spanish were regularly published. The book English

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines4
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

outside England by Belyaeva T.M. and Potapova I.A. characterizes Philippine English and descanted upon the interinfluence of Tagalog and English in the Philippines. However, the book abounds with errors and slips for the authors used multifarious foreign sources, sometimes not relevant, that are hard to distinguish without knowing the Philippinelanguages. Nevertheless we can state the complete development of the Philippine philology in Russia by the end of the 1960s. Since the 1970s a great number of research works by Russian philippinists was dedicated to the history and contemporary language situation and language policy in the Philippines particularly in comparison with language policy and creation of new alphabets for some non­script nations in USSR in the 1920s­1930s. Among them are the following: Language situation in the Philippines: past and present (1970), Language situation and language policy in the Philippines (1977), Language question in the Philippines (1983) and some other works by Vladimir Makarenko, some of which were also published in Manila.In the 1970s the Institute of Asian and African Studies under MSU prepared several works on the theory of Tagalog, Tagalog teaching programs and theoretical and special courses on Filipino philology, published the first Filipino textbooks, dictionaries and reading­books for junior and senior students, recorded language sound courses and etc. Among them are Word structure in Tagalog (1970), Wikang Pilipino ­ Textbook on Filipino for students of the 3rd year, Textbook for II­IV year, article Evolution of modern Tagalog by V.A. Makarenko and some others as well as informational and encyclopedic articles Tagalog and The Philippine languages, which were published in Abridged Literature Encyclopedia in 1972. Vladimir Makarenko in cooperation with K. Meshkov from the Institute of Ethnography under Russian Academy of Sciences published the article entitled Main problems in researching of old Filipino script, which is based on Makarenko’s previous research work in English published in India in 1964. An analysis of works written and published by V.A. Makarenko in Russia and abroad shows the breadth of his interests: from sociolinguistics to the theoretical grammar of Tagalog in the broader context of languages of SEA and Austronesian languages in general. His great contribution to Nusantara studies in Russia,especially in the field of grammar, cannot be denied. His mentioned monograph Morphological Structure of Modern Tagalog was highly appraised both in Russia and abroad. According to a review in the journal Asian and African Studies (Bratislava 1974, vol. 10) the book was very valuable because of its innovative character. For the first time this problem was analyzed to such deep extent. Following the Moscow State University and the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) since the end of 1960s theinstruction of Tagalog was introduced at the Oriental Faculty of the Leningrad (today the St. Petersburg) University. Primarily, the Faculty used the textbooks and teaching programs of IAAS, MSU. The famous Russian orientalist and koreanist Gennady Rachkov (born in 1929) has been the Head of the Tagalog Department of the Oriental Faculty of the St. Petersburg University since its establishment. Today Rachkov gives both language classes and lectures on Philippine philology. Among the great number of the articles on Tagalog grammar he published his fundamental book entitled Introduction into morphology of modern Tagalog. The lectures delivered by Rachkov at the St. Petersburg University, which were devoted to the crucial problems of Tagalog morphology and word­formation, underlie the

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines5
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

abovementioned book. Now he is giving the final touches to his Filipino­Russian dictionary – the biggest dictionary of this kind in Russia, which he has been compiling for about 20 years. One of Rachkov’s firststudents Dr. Maria Stanyukovich, the ethnographer, several years ago spent the whole year among the Ifugaos who have terraced the central Cordilleran mountains of Luzon, to study, on the heels of R. Barton, their present life, traditions and language. Today she is the unique specialist in the Ifugao Hudhod epics. In 1980­s various reviews and essays on historical development and studies of the Philippinelanguages, literature and culture appeared in Russia, some of which were published abroad in English and Filipino. Some philological surveys by Russian philippinists began to be published abroad since that period (in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland, the Netherlands, Indonesia, the Philippines and etc.) as well as the works, which for various reasons were not published in Russia (in former USSR) such as A preliminary annotated bibliography of Pilipino linguistics (1604­1976) that includes about 2000 names. This work is simply unique because it is the first book of this kind. No wonder it was recommended as a reference book for Filipino students at some universities in Manila for a long time and underlies the latest Bibliography of Philippine Linguistics (1996) by Rex E. Johnson from Summer Institute of Linguistics published by the Linguistic Society of the Philippines, which, by the way,elected Makarenko its life member 14 years ago.Having started with the article Some problems of the history of the Philippine national linguistics in 1982, Vladimir Makarenko continues his surveys in this field in the context of sociolinguistics and maintains close connection and book exchange with his Filipino colleagues. His contribution to the comparative linguistics is also very essential too. His several articles shed light on the relationship among Austronesian languages, including Tagalog, Malay, and Indonesian. The Russian philippinists closely watch the development of contemporary linguistics and study of literature in the Philippines and promote the latest achievements of the Filipino philologists, in particular, in their reviews, bibliographic essays, articles and surveys since 1960­s, which, unfortunately, as most Russian research works are not known in Manila, first of all due to language barrier for they are published in Russian in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Most reviews and surveys you can find in Herald of Moscow University published by IAAS attached to MSU and in its St. Petersburg version, in bulletin New Books on Social Studies, which before the early 1990­s had been printed for decades by Publishing House Progress in scholarlyjournal Peoples of Asia and Africa (today Orient) and otherpublications as well as in philological referee journal of the Institute for Scientific Information on Social Studies (INION) under the Russian Academy of Sciences. A series of fundamental articles by L. Shkarban and her complete monograph Tagalog grammatical system are also worthy of notice. The monograph’s references consist of 85 works in Russian and 119 works in English, Spanish, German and Filipino. The description of Tagalog in the mentioned book is based on a research carried out with two main aims: 1). to reveal a set of implicative relations among specific features of Tagalog grammar observed at different levels of its structure, thus clarifying its internal systemic organization, and 2). to put to proof the validity of the following supposition: the

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 7
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

lowered degree of the Noun/Verb differentiation (manifesting itself in numerous striking similarities between Tagalog nouns and verbs) may serve a key to the abovementioned internal systemic integrity. The review of this book by V. Makarenko and G. Rachkov is published in the Vestnik Sankt­Peterburgskogo universiteta (Journal of the St. Petersburg University) in 1997. Needless to say that Igor Podberezsky, the famous literary critic and translator, bears the palm in the field of literature and culture in the Russian Philippine studies. He translated into Russian the works by Nocomedes Joaquin, Fr. Sionil Jose and some other Philippine writers, he is the founder of the Russian Rizaliana and the author of such brilliant books as Evolution of Jose Rizal’s work: Infancy of the Philippine Contemporary Literature (1982), The Philippines: Philippine Contemporary Cultural Studies (1984), Sampaguita, Cross and Dollar, Jose Rizal (1985) and some others. His keen interest in translating the best Philippine literary works has made them very popular in Russia. However, beside for Podberezsky’s very interesting books on literature and culture, he produced very important and fundamental works on Filipino grammar, some of which are still used both by students and scholars as reference books.The detailed information on the main Philippine languages, Filipino script and Philippine literature and culture are published in various encyclopedias, references and the recent universal linguistic editions of Russia. Thus, such articles as The Philippine languages, Bikolano, The Visayan languages, Ilokano, Pampangan, Pangasinan, Tagalog and others are featured in the Linguistic Encyclopedia (1990). A great number of materials on Filipino philology you can find in a nine­volume Abridge Literary Encyclopedia, Literary Encyclopedia (1987) and some other editions. In recent decades 70 qualified Philippine specialists having good command of Filipino and several dozens of Indonesian specialists who studied Filipino as optional subject were trained in Russia. Today we have two Filipino groups and two PhD student­linguists in Moscow State University and one Filipino group in St. Petersburg State University. This is the keystone to further successful and prosperous development of Philippine linguistics in Russia.

Appendix List of main Russian works on Philippine Linguistics
1. Cruz, Manuel, Ignashev, S.P. 1959. Tagal’sko­russky slovar (Tagalog­Russian Dictionary), ed. by Makarenko, V.A.. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo inostrannykh i natsional’nykh slovarey (State Publishing House of Foreign and National Dictionaries). 2. Cruz, Manuel, Ignashev, S.P. 1965. Russko­tagal’sky slovar (Russian­Tagalog Dictionary), ed. by Makarenko, V.A. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo inostrannykh i natsional’nykh slovarey (State Publishing House of Foreign and National Dictionaries).

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines7
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 8
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

3. Dobell, Peter V. 2002 (second edition). Puteshestviya i Noveishiye nablyudeniya v Kitaye, Manile i Indo­Kitayskom Arkhipelage (Voyages and latest observations in China, Manila and Indo­Chinese Archipelago), ed. by Makarenko, V.A. Moscow: Vostochny Dom. 4. Grigoriev I.V. 1987. Iz istorii izuchenia filippinskikh yazykov (bikolsky yazyk) (From the history of the Philippine languages studies (Bikol) Uchyenie zapiski (Works of scientists) No 29, 13­21. Vostokovedenie (Orientalists) No 13. Leningrad: LGU (Leningrad State University).5. Grigoriev I.V. 1994. Sistema uslovnykh konstruktsy v tagal’skom yazyke (System of conditional constructions in Tagalog) Malaysko­indoneziyskie issledovania (Malay and Indonesian studies) No 5, 62­70. Filippiny v malayskom mire (The Philippines in Malay world). Moscow.6. Grigoriev I.V. 1997. Uslovno­ustupitelnie konstruktsii v tagal’skom yazyke(Conditional and concessive constructions in Tagalog) In Kultura stran Malayskogo arkhipelaga (Culture of the countries of Malay Archipelago): Sbornik materialov (Collected materials),19­28. 7. Grigoriev I.V. 1998. Glagolnaya transformatsiya v tagal’skom yazyke (Verb transformation in Tagalog) Severo­Zapad­Yugo­Vostok (North­West­South­East): Abstracts and materials of Session, 52­58. Siberia. 8. Grigoriev I.V. 2000. Ispanoyazychnie pidzhiny na Filippinakh (chavakano) (Pidgin Spanish in the Philippines(chavacano) In Nusantara. YuVA: Sb. Materialov 1998/99 i 1999/2000 akademicheskogo godov (Nusantara. South­East Asia: Collected materials of 1998/99 and 1999/2000 academic year), 23­33. St. Petersburg. 9. Makarenko, V.A. 1964. Some data on Indian cultural influences in South­East Asia. To the history of the Origin and Development of the Old Filipino script. Tamil Culture 11(1), 58­91. Madras. 10. Makarenko, V.A. 1965a. O stepeni rodstva tagal’skogo i indoneziyskogo yazikov (About the degree of similarity among Tagalog and Indonesian). VoprosifIlologii stran Yugo­Vostocnoy Azii (Philological problems of SEA countries. Collection of articles), 25­46. Moscow: Moscow State University. 11.Makarenko, V.A. 1965b.Tagal’sko­indonezijskie slovoobrazovatel’nye paralleli (Tagalog­Indonesian word formation parallels). Voprosy filologii stran Jugo­Vostocnoy Azii(Philological problems of SEA countries. Collection of articles), 73­105. Moscow: Moscow State University. 12.Makarenko, V.A.1966. Tamil loan­words in some languages of Southeast Asia. In The International Association of Tamil Research News, 57­64. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 13.Makarenko, V.A. 1967. Izuchenie v SSSR filippinskih yazikov do i posle Oktyabrya (Studies on Philippine languages in the Soviet Union before and after October Revolution). Narodi Azii i Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa) No 6, 100­107. Moscow. 14.Makarenko V.A. 1968. Teaching Tagalog in Russia. In The Sunday Times Magazine Feb. 25, 26­27. Manila. Also repr. in Philippine Approaches Vol. I. N 4, 74­76, April 1968. N. Delhi. 15.Makarenko, V.A. July 1969. The Purists are wet (Special Report ‘The Philippine language dilemma’), 26­28. Graphic. Manila. 16.Makarenko, V.A. 1970a. Tagal’skoe slovoobrazovanie (Word Structure in Tagalog). Moscow: Publishing House Nauka. 17.Makarenko, V.A. 1970b. Razvitie sovremennoy yazikovoy situatsii v Filippinskoy Respublike i eyo osnovnie tendentsii (A Development of language situation in the

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines8--------------------------------------------------------------------Page 9
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

Philippine Republic and its main prospects). In Problemi izucheniya yazikovoy situatsii i yazikovoy vopros v stranah Azii i Severnoy Afriki (Problems of the studies of language situation and language question in Asia and North African countries), 156­170. Moscow. 18.Makarenko, V.A. 1970c. Yazykovaya situatsiya na Filippinakh v proshlom i nastoyaschem (Language situation in the Philippines: past and present). Narody Azii i Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa”), 5. Moscow,. 19.Makarenko, V.A. 1972. South Indian influence on Philippine languages. Philippine Journal of Linguistics 23(1­2), 65­77. Manila, Philippines: Linguistic Society of the Philippines. 20.Makarenko, V.A. 1973a. Printsipi stroeniya slovoobrazovatel’nikh sistem imyon suschestvitel’nikh v indoneziyskom i tagal’skom yazikakh (Principles of noun structures in Indonesian and Tagalog). Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta (Journal of Moscow University). Vostokovedenie (Orientalistics), 1, 68­78. Moscow. 21.Makarenko, V.A. 1973b. General characteristics of Filipino word formation. In Parangal kay Cecilio Lopez, 196 —205. Quezon City, Philippines.22.Makarenko, V.A. 1973c. Osnovnie problemi issledovaniya drevnefilippinskogo pis’ma (Main problems in researching of old Philippine writing). Sovetskaya etnografiya (Soviet Ethnography) 2, 42­50. Moscow. 23.Makarenko, V.A. 1977. Yazikovaya situatsiya i yazikovaya politika na Filippinakh: osnovnie problemi issledovania (Language situation and language policy inthe Philippines: Fundamental problems). In Yazikovaya politika vafro­aziatskikh stranakh (Language policy in Afro­Asian countries), 150­172. Moscow. 24.ed. by Makarenko V.A. 1978. Wikang Pilipino (Textbook on Pilipino). Moscow: MGU.25.Makarenko, V.A. 1979. Evolutsiya sovremennogo tagal’skogo yazika (Evolution of modern Tagalog). Narodi Azii I Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa) No 3, 114­122. Moscow.26.Makarenko, V.A. 1979. Yazykovaya situatsiya. Filippiny: Spravochnik (Language situation. The Philippines: Reference book). Moscow: Nauka. 27.Makarenko, V.A., Demidyuk, L.N. 1980. Indonesian linguistics in the Soviet Union in the 60’s and 70’s. Bijdragen tot de taal, land­ en folkenkunde, 440­462. Leiden. Deel 136, 4­e Aflev. 28.Makarenko, V.A. 1981a. A preliminary annotated bibliography of Pilipino linguistics (1604­1976,), XIV, ed. by Andrew Gonzalez, FSC, and Carolina N. Sacris. Manila. 29.Makarenko, V.A., Genzor, J. 1981b. The most recent phenomena in the evolution of contemporary Tagalog language and prognosis of its development. Asian and African Studies No 17, 165­177. Bratislava. 30.Makarenko, V.A. 1981c. Yazikovaya politika yaponskikh okkupatsionnikh vlastey na Filippinakh v 1942­1945 godakh (Language policy in the Philippines during the Japanese occupation 1942­1945). Voprosy yaponskoy filologii (Problems of Japanese philology) No 5, 113­123. Moscow: MGU.31.Makarenko, V.A. 1982a. Etnolingvisticheskie protsessi v stranakh avstroneziyskikh yazikov: lndoneziya, Malayziya, Filippiny (Ethnolinguistic processes in Austronesian countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines). In Natsional‘niy vopros v stranakh Vostoka (National question in Asian countries), 139­154. Moscow. 32.Makarenko, V.A. 1982b. Problemi razrabotki istorii filippinskogo natsional’nogo yazikoznaniya (Some problems of the history of the Philippine national linguistics).

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines9
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 10
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

Teoreticheskie problemi vostochnogo yazikoznaniya (Theoretical problems of Oriental linguistics) No 6, 115­123. Moscow. 33.Makarenko, V.A. 1983a. Yazikovoy vopros v Respublike Filippiny (Language question in the Philippines). Narodi Azii i Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa) No 2, 112­117. Moscow.34.Makarenko, V.A. 1983b. Soviet studies of the Philippines. Manila. 35.Makarenko, V.A. 1985. Izuchenie malykh filippinskikh yazykov (A study of minor Philippine languages). Referativniy zhurnal (Essay Journal). Obschestvennie nauki za rubezhom (Social sciences abroad). Ser. 6. Yazykoznaniye (“Linguistics’) No 6. Moscow: INION. 36.Makarenko, V.A. 1988. Spetsificheskie osobennosti yazika sovremennoy filippinskoy angloyazichnoy pressi (Specific features of the Philippine press language in English). Moscow: INION.37.Makarenko, V.A. 1990. Filippinskie yazyki; Bikol’skiy yazyk; Bisayskie yazyki; Ilokanskiy yazik; Pangasinanskiy yazyk; Tagal’skiy yazyk (Philippine languages; Bicol language: Bisayan languages; Ilokano language; Pangasinan language; Tagalog). In Lingvisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar’ (Linguistics Encyclopedia). Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya. 38.Makarenko, V.A. 1994. Yazykovaya situatsiya i yazykovaya politika na Filippinakh (Language situation and language policy in the Philippines). In Yazykovie problemy Rossiyskoy Federatsii i zakony o yazykakh (Language problems of the Russian Federation and laws of languages). Moscow: Scientific Council “Language and Society”, Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Science. 39.Makarenko, V.A., Pogadaev V.A. 1999. Yazikovaya situatsiya i yazikovaya politika v Yugo­Vostochnoy Azii: sravnitel’noe issledovanie (Language situation and language policy in the South­East Asia: comparative study). Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta (Journal of Moscow University). Seriya.13. Vostokovedenie (Series 13. Orientalistics) No 2. Moscow. 40.Makarenko, V.A., Pogadaev, V.A. 2000a. Language situation and language policy in Southeast Asia. Parangal kay Brother Andrew. (Festschrifl for Andrew Gonzalez on his sixtieth birthday), ed. by Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista, Teodoro Llamzon, Bonifacio P. Sibayan, 213­225. Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines. 41.Makarenko, V.A., Pogadaev, V.A. 2000b. The language policy in Malay­speaking countries as a paradigm of development. In Indonesia and Malay World in the Second Millennium: Milestones of Development, 138­150. Papers presented at the 11th European Colloquium on Indonesian and Malay Studies, Moscow 29 June ­ 1 July 1999. Moscow. 42.Makarenko, V.A. 2002. Izucheniye filippinskikh yazykov v Rossii (XVIII­XX) (Philippine language studies in Russia). Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta (Journal of Moscow University). Seriya.13. Vostokovedenie (Series 13. Orientalistics) No 1, 74­82. Moscow. 43.Podberezsky, I.V. 1966. Klassifikatsiya chastey rechi v sovremennom tagal’skom yazyke. (Classification of the parts of speech in modern Tagalog). Ph.D. dissertation, MGIMO MID SSSR (Moscow State Institute of International Relations attached to MFA USSR).44.Podberezsky, I.V. 1967a. Morfologicheskaya struktura slova v tagal’skom yazyke (Morphological word structure in Tagalog), 213­224. In Languages of South­East Asia. Moscow.

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines10
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 11
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

45.Podberezsky, I.V. 1967b. Sintaksicheskaya kharakteristika chastey rechi v tagal’skom yazyke (Syntactic characteristic of the parts of speech in Tagalog), 164­196. In Problems of philology: MGIMO. 46.Podberezsky, I.V. 1968. Udvoenie v sovremennom tagal’skom yazyke (Reduplication in Modern Tagalog), 155­171. In Problems of language and literature. Moscow: MGIMO.47.Podberezsky, I.V., 1971 vusostavnie predlozheniya v sovremennom tagal’skom yazyke (Two­part Sentences in Modern Tagalog). In Yazyki Kitaya i Yugo­Vostochnoy Azii. Problemy sintaksisa (Languages of China and South­East Asia. Problems of Syntaxes). Moscow.48.Podberezsky, I.V. 1976. Uchebnik tagal’skogo yazyka (Textbook on Tagalog). Moscow: "Nauka", Glavnaya Redaktsiya vostochnoy literatury (Main Publishing House of the Oriental Literature).49.Pozdeeva, T.A., Rachkov G.E. 1977. Benefaktivnie konstruktsii v tagal’skom yazyke (Benefactive constructions in Tagalog), 74­83. Vostokovedenie (Orientalostics) No 5. Leningrad. 50.Rachkov G.E. 1966. Sluzhebnoe slovo “ay” v tagal’skom yazyke (Linking word “ay” in Tagalog), 89­94. In Issledovania po filologii stran Azii i Afriki (Studies on philology of the countries of Asia and Africa). Leningrad. 51.Rachkov, G.E. 1967. Predikativy nalichia v tagal’skom yazyke (Predicate noun “to have” in Tagalog). Vestnik Leningradskogo Universiteta (Journal of the Leningrad University), No 2, 110­114. Leningrad. 52.Rachkov, G.E.1973. K kharakteristike tagal’skikh dvusostavnykh opredeleny (On characteristic of Tagalog two­word definitions). Vestnik Leningradskogo Universiteta (Journal of the Leningrad University), No 2, 132­138. Leningrad. 53.Rachkov, G.E. 1976. Imennie odnorodnie chleny v tagal’skom yazyke (Nounhomogeneous parts of sentences in Tagalog). Vostokovedenie (Orientalistics), No 2, 73­76. Leningrad.54.Rachkov, G.E. 1981. Vvedenie v morfologiyu sovremennogo tagal’skogo yazyka (Introduction to morphology of modern Tagalog). Leningrad.: Publishing House of the Leningrad University. 55.Rachkov, G.E. 1983. Fazovie glagoly i fazovie konstruktsii v tagal’skom yazyke (Phase verbs and phase constructions in Tagalog). In Kategoria glagola i struktura predlozheny (Verb category and sentence structure), 168­175. Leningrad.: "Nauka", Leningradskoye otdeleniye (the Leningrad branch). 56.Rachkov, G.E. 1988. Tagal’sky retsiprok (Tagalog reciprocal constructions) // LGU (Leningrad State University). Uchyenie zapiski (Works of scientists), No 422, issue No 30, 81­90. Vostokovedenie (Orientalists), No 14. Leningrad.57.Rachkov, G.E. Tagalsko­russky slovar (Filipino­Russian Dictionary). ­ in press. 58.Shkarban, L.I., Cruz, Manuel. 1966. Tagal’sky yazyk. Narody Azii i Afriki (Peoples ofAsia and Africa). Moscow. 59.Shkarban, L.I. 1967. Glagol v sovremennom tagal’skom yazyke. Problemy morfologii (Verb in modern Tagalog. Problems of morphology). Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation, Moscow.60.Shkarban, L.I.1974a. K semanticheskoy kharakteristike passivnykh zalogov v tagal’skom yazyke (On semantic characteristic of passive voice in Tagalog). In Problemy semantiki (Problems of semantics). Moscow.

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines11
--------------------------------------------------------------------Page 12
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

61.Shkarban, L.I. 1974b. Problemy uzuchenia kategorii zaloga v tagal’skom yazyke (Problems of studying voice category in Tagalog). In Yazyki Kitaya I Yugo­Vostochnoy Azii (Languages of China and South­East Asia), 224­245. Moscow: Nauka.62.Shkarban, L.I. 1975. Zamechania o tagal’skoy fonologii v svyazi s izucheniem morfologicheskoy sistemy tagal’skogo yazyka (On Tagalog phonology in connection with the studies of Tagalog morphological system). In Ocherki po fonologii Vostochnykh yazykov (Essays on phonology of Oriental languages), 240­259. Moscow: Nauka. 63.Shkarban, L.I. 1976. Tagalog Reference Grammar, [Rev.]: Paul Schachter, Fe Otanez. Linguistics No 182. 64.Shkarban, L.I. 1979. K tipologii sistem chastey rechi indoneziyskikh yazykov (On typological system of Indonesian parts of speech). In XIV Tikhookeansky nauchny congress. Tezisy dokladov (The 14th Pacific Academic Congress. Abstracts). Part 2. Moscow. 65.Shkarban, L.I. 1980. O kategorii zaloga i padezha v tagal’skom yazyke v svete sootnosheniya glagola, imeni I mestoimeny (On category of Tagalog voice and case in the light of the noun/verb/pronoun correlation). In Teoria i tipologia mestoimeny (Theory and typology of pronouns), 142­164. Moscow. 66.Shkarban, L.I. 1981. Chasti rechi (Parts of speech). In Materialy sovetsko­vietnamskoy lingvisticheskoy ekspeditsii 1981 goda. Yazyk chru (Materials of USSR­Vietnam linguistic expedition of the 1981. The Chru language). Manuscript. 67.Shkarban, L.I. K tipologii chastey rechi v yazykah Yugo­Vostochnoy i Vostochnoy Azii (On typology of the parts of speech of the languages of South­East and East Asia). Manuscript.68.Shkarban, L.I.1982. O semanticheskikh vidakh predikatov v tagal’skom yazyke (On semantic types of predicates in Tagalog). In Semanticheskie tipy predikatov (Semantic types of predicates). Moscow. 69.Shkarban, L.I. 1983. K sravnitelnomu izucheniyu morfologii indoneziyskikh yazykov (v svyazi s voprosom o kornevykh slovakh) (On contemporary morphological studies of the Indonesian languages (in connection with the question of root words). In Geneticheskie, arealnie i tipologicheskie svyazi yazykov Azii (Genetic, areal and typological ties of the Asian languages). Moscow.70.Shkarban, L.I. 1985a. K voprosu o tipologii sistem chastey rechi (na materiale yazykov Yugo­Vostochnoy Azii i Dalnego Vostoka) (On typology system of the parts of speech (by the example of the languages of South­East Asia and Far East). In Lingvisticheskaya tipologiya (Linguistic typology). Moscow. 71.Shkarban, L.I. 1985b. O sootnoshenii struktury slozhnykh slov i slovosochetany v tagal’skom yazyke (On correlation of compound words and word­combinations in Tagalog). In Yazyki Yugo­Vostochnoy Azii i Dalnego Vostoka. Problemy slozhnykh slov (Languages of South­East Asia and Far East. Problems of compound words). Moscow. 72.Shkarban, L.I. 1986. Filippiny (The Philippines). In Zarubezhny Vostok. Yazykovaya situatsiya i yazykovaya politika (Foreign East. Language situation and language policy). Moscow. 73.Shkarban, L.I. 1988. The Functional­Semantic Field ofAspectuality in Tagalog. In VICAL. Abstracts. University of Auckland. 74.Shkarban, L.I. 1989. Poryadok slov v tagal’skom yazyke (Word order in Tagalog). In Ocherki tipologii poryadka slov (Essays on word order typology), 75­108. Moscow.

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines1
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 13
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

75.Shkarban, L.I. 1990. Ponyatie “chast rechi” kak instrument sistemno­tipologicheskogo issledovaniya (Concept of the “part of speech” as the instrument of system and typological studies). In Vsesouznaya konferentsiya po lingvisticheskoy tipologii (All­Union conference on linguistic typology). Tezisy dokladov (Abstracts). Moscow. 76.Shkarban, L.I. 1992. Syntactic Aspect of Part­of­speech Typology. Pan­Asiatic Linguistics. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Language and Linguistics, Vol. 1. Bangkok. 77.Shkarban, L.I. 1995. Grammatichesky stroy tagal’kogo yazyka (Tagalog grammatical system). Moscow: Izdatelskaya firma “Vostochnaya literatura” (Publishing Company “Vostochnaya literatura (“Oriental literature”). 78.Shkarban, L.I. 1999. O roli slogovoy struktury v grammatike tagal’skogo yazyka (On role of syllabic structure in Tgalog grammar). In Obschee i vostochnoe yazykoznanie (General and Oriental linguistics), 239­252. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov, posvyashennykh 70­letiyu ch.­korr. RAN Solntseva, V.M. (Collected treatises on the occasion of the 70th Anniversary of Corresponding Member of Russian Academy of Sciences V.M. Solntsev). Moscow.79.Shkarban, L.I. 2002. O sootnoshenii morfemy i sloga v filippinskikh yazykakh v kontekste integralnoy lingvisticheskoy tipologii (On morpheme and syllable correlation in the Philippine languages in the context of integral linguistic typology). Nusantara. YUVA: Sb. Materialov (Nusantara. South­East Asia: Collected materials), issue No 3, 7­16. St. Petersburg. 80.Shkarban, L.I. 2003. O nekotorykh parametrakh opisania sintaksisafilippinskikh yazykov v kontekste integralnoy lingvisticheskoy tipologii (On some methods of the description of the Philippine syntax in the context of integral linguistic typology). In Vostochnoe yazykoznanie: k 80­letiyu Yu.A. Rubinchika (Oriental linguistics: on the occasion of the 80th Birthday Anniversary of Yu.A. Rubinchik), 322­341. Moscow.81.Shkarban, L.I. 2004. On Tagalog morphology in the context of parts­of­speech typology (in English). Malaysko­indoneziyskie issledovaniya (Malay and Indonesian studies), issue No 16, 314­323. Moscow. 82.Stanyukovich, Maria V. 2001. Filippinistika v Evrope (Philippine studies in Europe). In Kyunerovskiye chteniya (Cuner readings (1998–2000): Krat. soderzh. dokl. (Argument of papers), 198–201. St. Petersburg. 83.Stanyukovich Maria V. 2003. Language and cultural identity in Ifugao, Philippines. In Proceedings of the II International Research Conference “Language and culture”, Presidium RAS, Institute of Foreign Languages, Moscow, September 17­21 2003. Moscow. (In English). 84.Stanyukovich Maria V. 2003. The Wording of Gender: Ifugao Women’s Epics and Male Ritual Performances. In A.K. Ogloblin et al, eds. Languages and Literature of Nusantara, 68­73.. Academic session 24­25 April 2003 (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, East Timor). St. Petersburg: State University of Saint Petersburg, Faculty of Oriental Studies. (In English).85.ed. by Stanyukovich Maria V. 2006. Yazyki i kul’tury avstroneziyskikhnarodov i ikh sosedey (Languages and cultures of Austronesian peoples and their neighbours). In honor of Elena V. Revunenkova and Alexander K. Ogloblin. St.Petersburg: MAE RAS Publication. (In press).86.Studenchik, Yu. I. 1990. Leksicheskaya interferentsiya i natsional’noye samosoznanie v mnogoyazychnom gosudarstve (Lexical interference and national self­consciousness in the multilingual state (by the example of the Philippines). Problemy funktsionalnogo
9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines13
--------------------------------------------------------------------Page 14
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

opisaniya yazykovykh yedinits (Problems of functional description of the language units). In Tezisy mezhvuzovskoy konferentsii (Abstracts of intercollege conference), 196-197. Sverdlovsk. 87.Studenchik, Yu. I. 1991a. O lingvisticheskikh ogranicheniyakh dvuyazychnogo pereklyucheniya kodov tagal’sky­angliysky (On linguistic limitations of bilingual Tagalog­English code­switching). Deposited in INION AN USSR.88.Studenchik, Yu. I. 1991b. O meste pereklyucheniya kodov v sisteme yazykovykh kontaktov (On code­switching part in the system of language contacts). Deposited in INION AN USSR. 89.Studenchik, Yu. I. 1991c. O ponyatii “pereklucheniya kodov” (On concept code­switching). In Aktual’niye problemy lingvistiki (Actual problems of linguistics). Tezisy chetvyertykh fevral’skikh chteny (Abstracts of the 4th February readings). Sverdlovsk. 90.Studenchik, Yu. I. 1995. Tagalog vs. Taglish (K probleme razgranicheniya zaimstvovany i leksicheskoy intereferentsii (On problem of differentiation of loan words and lexical interference). In Sbornik materialov po kul’ture Nusantary (Collected articles on Nusantara culture), 11­17. St.Petersburg. REFERENCES1. Dobell, Peter V. 2002 (second edition). Puteshestviya i Noveishiye nablyudeniya v Kitaye, Manile i Indo­Kitayskom Arkhipelage (Voyages and latest observations in China, Manila and Indo­Chinese Archipelago), ed. by Makarenko, V.A. Moscow: Vostochny Dom. 2. Forster J.R. 1778. Observations made during a Voyage round the World. London.3. Makarenko, V.A. 1964. Some data on Indian cultural influences in South­East Asia. To the history of the Origin and Development of the Old Filipino script. Tamil Culture 11(1), 58­91. Madras. 4. Makarenko, V.A. 1967. Izuchenie v SSSR filippinskih yazikov do i posle Oktyabrya (Studies on Philippine languages in the Soviet Union before and after October Revolution). Narodi Azii i Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa) No 6, 100­107. Moscow. 5. Makarenko V.A. 1968. Teaching Tagalog in Russia. In The Sunday Times Magazine Feb. 25, 26­27. Manila. Also repr. in Philippine Approaches Vol. I. N 4, 74­76, April 1968. N. Delhi.6. Makarenko V.A. Aug. 24,1974. A Russian consulate in Manila (at the beginning of the 19th century). Focus Philippines Vol. II, 4­5. Manila. 7. Makarenko, V.A., Demidyuk, L.N. 1980. Indonesian linguistics in the Soviet Union in the 60’s and 70’s. Bijdragen tot de taal, land­ en folkenkunde, 440­462. Leiden. Deel 136, 4­e Aflev. 8. Makarenko, V.A. 1982. Ang Unyong Sobyet at Ang Pilipinas: Kahapon at Ngayon. Manila. 9. Makarenko, V.A. 2002. Izucheniyefilippinskikh yazykov v Rossii (XVIII­XX) (Philippine language studies in Russia). Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta (Journal of Moscow University). Seriya.13. Vostokovedenie (Series 13. Orientalistics) No 1, 74­82. Moscow.

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006) Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines14
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 15
Zabolotnaya/Philippine Linguistics Studies in Russia

10. Shkarban, L.I. 1995. Grammatichesky stroy tagal’kogo yazyka (Tagaloggrammatical system). Moscow: Izdatelskaya firma “Vostochnaya literatura” (Publishing Company “Vostochnaya literatura (“Oriental literature”). 11. Rachkov, G.E. 1981. Vvedenie vmorfologiyusovremennogo tagal’skogo yazyka (Introduction to morphology ofmodern Tagalog). Leningrad.: Publishing House of the Leningrad University.

9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (25­27 January 2006)Organized by the Department of Linguistics, University of the Philippines15

-------END OF COPIED ARTICLE-------

PAHABOL: Hindi tulad ng mga Amerikano at Espanyol sa Pilipinas, Inggles sa Malaysia, Olandes sa Indonesia, at Pranses sa Vietnam, ang mga Russo ay walang naging papel ayon sa KASAYSAYAN bilang COLONIZER o MANANAKOP sa ating teritoryo sa NUSANTARA/MALAY WORLD/DUNIA MALAYU/OCEANIA/SOUTHEAST ASIA. Marahil, dahil sa hindi nila tayo direktang nakalaban (maliban sa proxy COLD WAR kung saan kakampi natin ang U.S.A.), ay iba ang kanilang pananaw o pagtingin sa atin, di-tulad ng mga ibang nabanggit na lahi na malamang ay may pagkamuhi (HATRED) o poot (ANGER) sa kanilang mga sinakop, at pinag-aralan lamang ang mga ito sa tanging mithi na malaman kung paano ang mga ito ay magagapi.

SUSUNOD: COLONIALISM/IMPERIALISM, REVOLUTION, WAR OF LIBERATION