Language Ideologies in the Filipino Diaspora
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examined language ideologies in the Filipino diaspora, specifically those concerning Filipino language nationalism, the dominant language ideology of the Philippines. Language ideologies are understood to be the ways that people think of and value their languages, especially through the lens of the politically dominant group in society which naturalizes their ideology as hegemonic. The Filipino diaspora refers to the international community of Filipinos who have migrated out of the Philippines or those descended from such immigrants. The study investigated language ideologies in diaspora Filipinos living in Alberta and California by using semi-structured interviews and a mix of thematic and discourse analysis. The study found that participants alternatively reproduced and resisted Filipino language nationalism in their memories and discussions of the Philippines. Participants supported Filipino language nationalism by neglecting to mention the presence of other Filipino languages in the Philippines and assuming that all Filipinos in the Philippines, and even the diaspora, speak only Tagalog. They also positioned Tagalog as the cornerstone of authentic Filipino identity, calling it “Filipino” and casting Spanish and Chinese languages as foreign. The state paradoxically promotes English learning as a path to national wealth while fostering Filipino language nationalism to cultivate devotion to the state. Participants’ talk reflected this tension, as English acceptance came in the form of its naturalization in the Philippines and acknowledgement of its utility; conversely, they denaturalized it by characterizing English as forced upon them by the state and incommensurable with a Filipino identity. Finally, participants directly opposed Filipino language nationalism by pivoting towards Philippine multilingualism, describing the country as split into different ethnolinguistic regions. Even though participants ostensibly resisted the dominant language ideology, they did so by reproducing the logic of language nationalism, asserting that regional languages are the only languages spoken in their respective regions. The discussion connects these themes to the literature on the dynamics of language and language ideology in the Philippines as well as language ideological research more broadly. I explain that, even though diaspora Filipinos reside outside of the Philippines, they may still uphold language nationalist attitudes in order to build an ideal Filipino homeland to which they can orient and build their identities. I conclude with a summary of the thesis, how the study contributes to extant research on Filipino heritage languages and language ideologies, and future directions for research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".