There’s the Rub

What’s in a name?

A+
A
A-

It’s an interesting footnote to history, the effort of the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino to change the name of the country from “Philippines” to “Filipinas.”

It hasn’t been received well, certainly not by the denizens of social media, also called netizens. Some have wondered if the people populating the commission have so much time on their hands they have nothing better to do than to contemplate silly ideas like this. Others have wondered if the same people have considered the costs of embarking on such a venture. Can you imagine, they say, the cost alone of changing stamps, various legal documents, and tourism paraphernalia?

The idea of changing a country’s name per se, however, is not all that batty. The new name isn’t all that hard to accept after a decade or so notwithstanding its strangeness at first. Ceylon is now Sri Lanka, Burma is now Myanmar, and Cambodia became the Khmer Republic and then became Kampuchea and then became Cambodia again. Few now even remember Sri Lanka as ever having been Ceylon, though I’ve yet to hear people refer to “Ceylon tea” as “Sri Lanka tea.” The world has a way of factoring in things like this far more easily than is generally supposed.

There are various reasons for changing a country’s name, but bringing it closer to the way its inhabitants actually call it, or pronounce it, is chief of them. Cambodia is just a western mispronunciation of Kampuchea. Sri Lanka had been called variously Seilen, Seylan, Zeylan and Ceylan before, until its government just decided to call it what its people call it which is “Lanka.” Burma came from “Bama,” which was the country’s largest ethnic group, like the Tagalogs. Keeping the name meant something like calling the Philippines “Katagalugan,” which some Katipuneros actually proposed, or variations thereof.

This is by no means the first time a proposal was made to change this country’s name into something else. The closest thing we got to doing so was during martial law, when Ferdinand Marcos plugged for it, actively endorsing a bill in the Batasan that called for changing “Philippines” into “Maharlika.” His reasons for doing so were largely propagandistic. He took “maharlika”—wrongly—to mean the Filipino nobility, and presumed himself—even more wrongly—to be the noblest of them all, as suggested by various paintings of him in martial-law Malacañang.

More to the point, he paraded the notion that he headed a clandestine guerrilla group during the Japanese occupation called the “Maharlika.” Such were the group’s exploits he became the most decorated guerrilla in the country. Those exploits were later debunked as fake, smearing “Maharlika” with the same fakeness.

But not all the efforts to turn “Philippines” into “Maharlika” owed to vested, or self-, interest. I recall that George Canseco fervently believed in the same thing. I appeared with him in a talk show on Independence Day in the 1990s and he told me so. A true believer in originality, he argued that “Maharlika” conferred that merit on us. It was certainly better, he said, than the derivative “Philippines” which our colonial masters had imposed on us.

I’m glad though that the proposal of the National Language Commission, as it used to be called before it got its Filipinized name, has stirred up a tempest of sorts, if only in a teacup, or in social media, and if only because it has drawn curiosity about the name “Philippines.” There’s a generation out there, many of them Facebook users, that doesn’t know “Philippines” owes to King Philip II of Spain, the most powerful monarch of his time, who invented the phrase “an empire where the sun never sets” to refer to his dominion, three centuries before imperial Britain did to its own.

The fellow, in whose honor the adventurer Ruy Lopez de Villalobos named us, bankrupted Spain from waging almost perpetual war with his neighbors, quite apart from decimating populations in the name of fighting heresy. You look at the local Catholic Church that Cardinal Chito Tagle has inherited, and at least as far as attempting to stamp out heresy goes, you wonder whether we were not appropriately named.

But this is the part where you wonder why, if the commission wants to change the name of the country at all, it has to settle for “Filipinas.” Why should the original Spanish name of “Las Islas Filipinas” constitute a vast improvement over the Americanized “Philippines” or “Philippine Islands?” It’s just expressing a preference for one colonizer over another.

The way I see it, we can do one of two things.

One is to change “Philippines” to something more indigenous—and “Maharlika” isn’t such a bad deal—if only to stoke some national pride. Heaven knows if there’s one country that needs to assert a desire to lose its colonial bondage, it is us. Most other Asian countries, least of all the Thais in our neighborhood, once called the Siamese, don’t. They’ve always had national pride.

Two is not to change it at all, which should save us a pretty penny, but to use it consciously—which means educating the youth about its origins—with ironic pride. We have a talent for doing so after all. The Americans forced us during their occupation at the turn of the 20th century, specifically after Filipino revolutionaries attacked one of their camps in Samar using subterfuge, to wear transparent clothing so that we could not hide bolos underneath it. With a little imagination and a lot of irony we turned that into the barong Tagalog, which is now the formal national attire. From a badge of shame, it became a badge of honor.

Maybe we can do the same thing with “Philippines.” Maybe we can turn the one Asian country named after a Spanish despot into the one Asian country that doesn’t like despots. We do have People Power after all.

A rose by any other name smells just as sweet.

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • JosengSisiw1

    i think this “Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino” should just scratch their crotches & balls; it will be more cheaper, than what they are proposing.

  • Lakan Kildap

    Philip II only continued what Charles V (Carlos “Primero” in the Spanish court) started. Their mistake was giving the wars with the rebellious Dutch Provinces (who were Calvinists) and the English (who were Catholics until Henry VIII decided to secede) a religious color.

    As for the Philippines, we weren’t even one nation before the Spaniards came here. Let’s go retro, by all means. Each nation to its own. I’d love to see what the Cebuanos will do once they’re a country of their own.

  • apojay

    Mabuti pa marahil na kumilos muna ang Komisyon ng Wika upang ituwid ang pag-gamit ng ating wika sa telebisyon, pahayagan, awitin atbp.

    Komisyon ng Wika ang turing sa kanila at hindi na dapat pakialaman pa ang pangalan ng bansa; panibagong kunsumisyon lang iyon.

  • carpediem123

    comic relief…

  • AlzheimersC

    Huwag na daw magpakahirap pa sa pagpalit ng pangalan ng bansa natin kasi iyong mga Chinese na lang daw ang bahala…

    Tiyak lalong matutuwa pa si CDQ nyan.

  • josh_alexei

    This again reminds me when there were many who wanted to change the one word of our national song which goes this way>”true patriot love in all thy sons command” and the issue is why only sons? and the word suggested is ” of us command” instead of in all thy sons command, and the issue went all the way to Parliament and the Surveys results that majority, vast majority of the Population would rather let the sleeping dog has a peaceful rest. That beautiful phrase was written very long time ago and the word “sons” could mean eveyone, all Patriots. And it is resolved that the issue will forever rest and never shall be revisited.

  • vince_bugaboo

    Why not change it to “Palapunas” before Filipino bashers beat us to it? Self-deprecation is tolerable than insults from others.

  • Rusty Gomez

    We have to use Filipinas. Ang pangalang Filipinas ay ang gamit nang unang itatag ang ating bansa bilang isang nagkakaisa(Tribo) at malayang bansa. Our heroes, Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio fight for it in the name of Filipinas and not Pilipinas. Namulat ang mga Pilipino sa pagiging makabayan at patriotiko noong unang panahon sa pangalan ng ating bansa bilang Filipinas, hindi bilang Katagalugan(Tagalog), Maharlika(pre-Hispanic). Tayo ay mga Filipino at produkto na tayo ng mga Espanyol, eduakado, sibilisado at moderno. Wag nang ipilit na tayo ay mga natives, savages, headhunters na ipinilit na ihambing ng mga amerikano sa atin. Sibilisado at westernized na tayo bago pa man dumating ang mga americano. Don’t stick with your ABAKADA, gawa lng yan noong 1940’s, propaganda ng mga Americano para pagmukhain tayong mga hindi sibilisadong Asyano. Gamit na ang Abecedario ng mga Filipno bago pa man dumating ang mga Amerikano, kasama ang 26 letras ng Espanyol at kasama ang NG, at ginawa itong 20 letra noong 1940’s?

    FILIPINAS is the correct and proper name for our country. Hindi corrupted at tama ang pagkabaybay.

    This is how I view the thing. Filipinas (Pilipinas), Fernandez, (Pernandez), Flores (Plores),Francisco (Pransisko). If we view it as formal Filipino language it must have a proper spelling and use.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94

editors' picks

October 31, 2014

‘Wang-wang’ lives

advertisement
October 30, 2014

A heritage of dust

advertisement