Tag Archives: Filipino

Population Control or Effective Governance?

Mahirap aminin pero sa banyagang lupa ko lang naramdaman na importante ako bilang isang nilalang. Hindi sikat ang mga bansang napuntahan ko pero ang gobyerno nila, ginagawa ang lahat para sa kapakanan ng mga mamamayan. Maayos ang mga manggagawa mula opisina hanggang basura. Walang suhulan, walang kama-kamag-anak, walang kaibi-kaibigan, walang pakikisama o utang na loob system, walang kupit, walang suhol, walang tamad, walang nagmumura, walang basurang nakakalat kung saan saan, walang patayan at walang nakawan dahil sigurandong huli at mananagot sa batas. Kahit saan ka magpunta may resibo, may security camera, maayos na daan para sa mga matatanda o mga taong may natatanging pangangailangan at tamang sasakyan, may pila, may disiplina at may tulungan. Hindi man sila perpekto, nagnignibabaw pa rin ang salitang RESPETO sa bawat isa. DISIPLINADO ang mga tao dahil malupit ang batas. Walang angal ang mga tao at walang angal dahil maganda ang SERBISYO PUBLIKO. Naiiyak ako sa tuwa dahil ngayon ko lang naintindihan ang salitang HUMAN RIGHTS. Hindi ito paggamit ng ibang tao, paglikom ng kayamanan, matinding pagtitiis sa mabagal na sistema, malupit na karanasan sa maruming lipunan o pagbigay ng pera para makuha mo ang gusto mo o pagtakpan ang maitim mong budhi kagaya ng nakita ko sa sarili kong bansa na ipinapalabas araw-araw sa TV, pelikula at balita dahil yan lamang ang mga bagay na naiintindihan ng mga tao at alam nilang gawin.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

While family planning is a good way to improve the situation of Filipino families, i.e., parents will have the change to spend more quality time to each family member or decreased consumption (of food and other resources) due to less demand, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is the only way to solve the Philippine economic and social turmoil. I believe that effective governance and leadership by example are what we trully need. It pains me to think that the morality of Filipinos continuesly subsides since people are not given the services and rights they deserve. Instead, their living has become survival of the fittest because the government does not provide things and opportunities the people could enjoy but rather fight for everything to the extent of  expoliting the weak and violating other’s human rights. Therefore, if the nation’s population is not the source of problems, what are we missing? The article below provides us a clear understanding of why Filipinos don’t really need free condoms… but for the solutions, I beleive that positive change should really start from the leaders. It’s just hard to expect the citizens to do what a country really needs if the people who represent and govern it are providing misinformation and only showing injustices, unlawfulness, unfairness, lack of discipline, lack of transparency, lack of public concern, corruption, greed and selfishness.

 

The RH Bill Quackery

There are many myths and quackery being peddled by the pro-RH lobby. As Lagman, Santiago and company rehash the arguments for another useless tax-wasting welfare program – it’s good to spot the myths – and counter them with solid arguments based on empirical data, facts, and reason.

Daang matuwid to joblessness, hunger, and poverty for the many.

Review of Population, Population Density, Population Growth Rate – and GDP Per Capita Income

Prior arguments used population size, population growth rate, and population density – and were effectively demolished when it was shown that:

In terms of population:

1. There are countries with higher population than the Philippines and richer than the Philippines – Japan, USA, Indonesia

2. There are countries with lower population than the Philippines and poorer than the Philippines – North Korea, Haiti, Benin

In terms of population density:

3. There are countries with higher population density than the Philippines and richer than the Philippines – Singapore, HK, Monaco, Taiwan, Israel, South Korea, Mauritius

4. There are countries with lower population density than the Philippines and poorer than the Philippines – North Korea, Nepal, Liberia, Somalia

In terms of population growth rate:

5. There are countries with higher population growth rate than the Philippines and richer than the Philippines – Singapore, Bahrain, Qatar, Brunei, Israel, Australia, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates

6. There are countries with lower population growth rate than the Philippines and poorer than the Philippines – Guyana, North Korea, Bangladesh, Haiti

References to the country listings are provided further down below. As an exercise, feel free to add to the countries which meet the conditions enumerated above.

***

For the more scholarly readers – the study of Wong and Fumitaka on “The Relationship Between Population and Economic Growth in Asian Economies” concluded that

Generally, the results of the Johansen (1988) and Gregory and Hansen (1996) cointegration methods show that there is no long-run relationship between population and economic growth.

Nonetheless, the study finds that there is bidirectional Granger causality between population and economic growth for Japan, Korea, and Thailand.

For China, Singapore, and the Philippines, population is found to Granger cause economic growth and not vice versa.

For Hong Kong and Malaysia, economic growth is found to Granger cause population and not vice versa.

For Taiwan and Indonesia, there is no evidence of Granger causality between population and economic growth.

On the whole, the relationship between population and economic growth is not straightforward.

Population growth could be beneficial or detrimental to economic growth and economic growth could have an impact on population growth.

TFR (Total Fertility Rate): More RH Bill Quackery

The latest addition of the pro-RH quacks has been to use TFR or the Total Fertility Rate. Let’s see what trends we can find based on TFR.

7. There are countries with higher TFR than the Philippines and richer than the Philippines – Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Tajikistan, Mauritania, Vanuatu

8. There are countries with lower TFR than the Philippines and poorer than the Philippines – Pakistan, Laos, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Uzbekistan,

The trends in TFR follow the conclusions of Wong and Fumitaka – there is no straightforward relationship between TFR and economic growth.

A review of the TFR of the Philippines Vietnam, Singapore, and Thailand show that TFR has already been decreasing even without massive public spending.

More Misinformation by RH Bill Supporters

The latest misconception being peddled by the pro-RH is that decreasing TFR causes economic growth. While this allegation has been refuted above, it is still worth knowing the errant variants of the pro-RH position so that you will recognize it when you see it. Here goes

  • * Thailand and China decreased their TFR sharply and then they became gradually richer and continuing to be rich.
  • * Vietnam has been decreasing its TFR sharply to less than 2.1 and is now increasing its GDP per capita and will soon bypass the Philippines.
  • * Singapore’s GDP per capita increased sharply between 1960 and 2010 in the meanwhile that Singapore’s TFR dropped to less that 2.1 and continue to be below 2.1.

The Central Fallacy of the RH Bill Position: Correlation does not imply causation

The argument presented by the pro-RH is a logical fallacy called cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for “with this, therefore because of this”) and false cause. Just because two events occured together (decrease in TFR and increase in GDP per capita income) does not necessarily imply a cause and effect relationship.

A similar fallacy is that an event (increase in GDP per capita) that follows another (drop in TFR) was necessarily a consequence of the first event, is sometimes described as post hoc ergo propter hoc.

The general pattern of the faulty reasoning of the pro-RH supporters can be described as:

A occurs in correlation with B. Therefore, A causes B.

The reasoning is faulty because the conclusion about causality is done prematurely and it is taken for granted that A causes B, even when no evidence supports it.

The reasoning does not recognize that there are other possibilities such as:

1 – A third factor, C that may actually cause A and B.
2 – A may aggravate B or A may indeed cause B
3 – B may aggravate A or B may cause A
4 – There is a complex relationship between A, B, and C
5 – The “relationship” is mere coincidence.

For short, just because A and B occur at the same time – does not mean that one causes the other.

Establishing Causality

To establish causuality one uses the Granger causality test and convergent cross mapping. Wong and Fumitaka, for instance, used Granger causality.

Granger causality is a statistical concept of causality that is based on prediction. According to Granger causality, if a signal X1 “Granger-causes” (or “G-causes”) a signal X2, then past values of X1 should contain information that helps predict X2 above and beyond the information contained in past values of X2 alone.

While Granger causality has limitations when using three or more variables – it works quite well with two variables. Thus one can submit A (TFR, population, population density, population growth) and B (gdp per capita income, gdp growth, gdp) to Granger causality analysis and predict that if A happens then B happens or vice versa.

As we have shown in the prior review – the GDP per capita income cannot be predicted on the basis of TFR, population, population density, population growth rate – because GDP per capita can be low or high regardless of the population indicator. However, we can accurately predict, with certainty that as economic freedom increases GDP per capita income increases.

Addressing the Popular Misconceptions of RH Bill Supporters

Having laid down the conceptual basis for proving that the RH Bill position is severely flawed and totally erroneous, let us now look at the popular misconceptions peddled by its supporters.

Thailand

In Thailand – the main proponent was Mechai -aka Mr condom.

The experience of Mechai was that contraceptives were widely adopted when the grassroots themselves sold the contraceptives. In a nutshell – the people profited from the sales of contraceptives. By getting people themselves to generate revenue from contraceptives sales – there was widespread adoption of contraceptives.

Contrast that to the Philippines Rh Bill. The PHL government – proposes to pay for the contraceptives. This means people will not profit from it. The approach was tried in 1970 with an aggressive program implemented by the PopCom – the outcome was that:

1 – The government paid for the contraceptives.
2 – The people sold the government contraceptives to the boticas.
3 – Population remained high.
4 – Filipinos remained POOR.

Singapore

Just because the Philippines has TFR above 2.1 does not mean that TFR has not decreased. Philippines’ TFR is still decreasing even without government spending.

It has been noted that TFR decreases when economies transition from agrarian to industrial. Even if Singapore was not an agricultural country – it had levels of poverty akin to an agrarian economy. And therefore to hedge against poverty, Singaporeans had more children.

In the 1960s Singapore, like other ASEAN countries, had a mercantilist protected economy and its citizens had high poverty. During those times Singapore looked a lot like Divisoria – one big ghetto. Poverty came with high mortality rates – thus parents had more children to offset the losses due to mortality.

Singapore experimented with population control programs in the 1960s and 70s – but eventually repealed it in the mid 80s because the falling birth rates led to a demographic winter. Singapore reversed the Stop at Two policy, abolished the Family Planning Board and now encouraged larger family sizes of three or more. Go Chok Tong, Lee Hsien Loong exhorted Singaporeans to procreate.

The government also relaxed its immigration polices – leading to higher population growth! As of 2011, Singapore has yet to reach the replacement level of 2.

China

The poster boy of population control has been China and its one child policy.

History shows however Mao condemned birth control and importation of contraceptives. In 1949, Mao said that “Of all things in the world, people are the most precious”. Hu Yaobang, secretary of the Communist Youth League also said that “a larger population means greater manpower”.

The rhetoric was good – but the socialist economic policy of collectivism and centralized economic planning wreaked havoc leading to a massive famine that lead to the deaths of at least 30 million Chinese. Instead of opening the economy, China’s communists opted for the “Late, Long, and Few” which ended up in the one child policy. Well, China had lower population but the Chinese were still poor. The policy was also limited to the Han Chinese living in urba areas. Citizens living in rural areas and ethnic minorities are not subject to said law.

There is also a special provision which allows millions of couples to have two children legally. If a couple is composed of two people without siblings, then they may have two children of their own, thus preventing too dramatic of a population decrease.

It was during the time of Deng Xiaopeng when China actually experienced a change in living standards. Deng set the standards for the current Chinese leadership by shifting the focus from Maoist leftist rhetoric towards the Four Modernizations Era. The change was baed on the principle that it was more important to innovate, to improve efficiency of agriculture, industry, reasearch and development than to achieve the socialist objectives of Mao.

Today China faces a demographic winter, an aging labor force – a country that aged before it got wealthy. Many childless Chinese now face the grim prospect of getting old without having any children to take care of them. Those with one child aren’t any better as they face the “empty nest” syndrome – one or both parents living by themselves after the children have left the home.

As the new Chinese generation have more economic opportunities due to economic liberalization, more and more people in China prefer to have fewer children if none at all. There’s also the bleakness of Chinese males not being able to find wives as female fetuses were aborted leading to a gender imbalance.

Clearly China has not learned the lessons of Singapore and Japan and the Western economies who are also facing their own demographic winters.

The Philippines’ Prospects for Poverty Reduction and the White Elephant in the Room

Here’s an Engilish idiom that Noynoy Aquino and the RH Bill supporters ought to learn. “Elephant in the room” is an English metaphorical idiom for an obvious truth that is either being ignored or going unaddressed.

What can we learn from the experiences of China, Thailand, Singapore, the western economies – and Wong and Fumitaka?

If we truly wish to learn the lessons of history in order not to repeat the mistakes of the past, here are some points to think about:

The demographic transition can work for or against the Philippines.

In a previous blog post entitled “The Demographic Transition: Driven by RH Welfare Programs? Or Economic Transformation?”

a jobless if not underemployed large population ain’t exactly much of a consumption dynamo. Sure it can consume – but does it have the money to afford what it wants to consume? Is the economy conducive to generating jobs that allow said demographic to consume? Or shall it just lead to a young demographic – jobless, underemployed and hungry.

The Philippines TFR (and global TFR) is already decreasing – with or without public spending. The pro-RH lobby will point out that the Philippines TFR is not decreasing enough to get to 2.1 . But is the TFR really to blame for this poverty? Is it really the root cause?

Some would claim that the Philippines economic growth is “surging” – and yet TFR is still high. I say – is the “growth” really a “surge”?

The latest value for GDP per capita income (constant 2000 US$) in Philippines was 1,383.40 as of 2010. Over the past 50 years, the value for this indicator has fluctuated between $1,383.40 in 2010 and $691.68 in 1960 – barely 2-fold.

In the same 50 years the GDP per capita income (constant 2000 $US) has fluctuated between $32,536 in 2010 and $2,253 in 1960 – roughly 16 fold.

Is Growth Inclusive When there is High Income Inequality?

When we add the GINI coefficient we will find that the Philippines has high income inequality. The Philippines’ very own NSCB reported that:

Income inequality has been a long lasting development challenge for the Philippines. In a statement released by the National Statistical Coordination Board in 2005, it was recognized that the income gap between the rich and the poor was wider in the Philippines than in Indonesia and Thailand, indicating serious inequality in the distribution of the country’s economic gains.

Philippines has a Gini coefficient of 48 in 2000 – as compared to neighbouring developing countries in the ASEAN region like Thailand (43 in 2000), Vietnam (37 in 2002), Lao PDR (37 in 1997), and Indonesia (34 in 2002) – Philippines actually ranked as one of the worst income distributions compared with its neighbouring countries.

It is noted that the income of the Philippines’ richest ten percent of the population was in fact twenty times the income of the poorest ten percent.

What then could be the proverbial “white elephant” in the room? Was it contraceptives doleouts that led to the growth? Was a reduction in TFR the cause of the growth? Or was it something else?

Learning the Lessons of History

The empirical studies and indicators have shown that:

1. Economic policies which provide opportunities for women to have careers other than raising a family lead to an abrupt drop in the TFR. If Juan can’t get laid becaue Maria is working how exactly will Maria get “knocked out”?

2. Countries with higher economic freedom have higher GDP per capita income. In terms of economic freedom, in 2012 the Philippines is ranked 109 out of 187 countries – mostly unfree.

3. Countries that have agrarian economies have high TFR because children are seen as a source of “free labor”. The Philippines is still primarily an agricultural country with most Filipinos still living in rural areas and supporting themselves through agriculture. Farming, fisheries, livestock and poultry, and forestry employ 39.8 percent of the labor force and contribute 20% of GDP.

4. When countries shift from agrarian to industrial economies – children are seen as an expense and family sizes reduce abruptly within a generation.

What are we missing?

Noynoy recently increased the number of businesses included in the Foreign Investments Negative List.

Aquino has also declared that he is not in favor of removing the protectionist provisions of the constitution.

The investment policy of the Philipppines is quite clear – to foreign investors who are not willing to fork the 40% which will subsidize the 60% of Aquino’s cronies while using 100% of the foreign investors’ ideas – the door is closed. The door has been slammed in the face, by Aquino’s cronies – not just against  foreign investors but also to Filipino consumers and Filipino job-seekers.

Meanwhile, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, China continue to rake investments in. Their population growth is aided by the emigration of the Philippines best and brightest.

And the best option which the Philippines Congress can offer to alleviate poverty is a pathetic contraceptives doleout. And that’s without prejudice to a leaky CCT subsidy program and a bloated pork barrel whose outcomes are stagnant employment, widening underemployment and hunger.

It does not help that the opposition to the RH welfare program in the Senate is that of an effin Senatong who does not know how to recognize data sources and who inserted an online libel law into what otherwise would have been a handy piece of legislation that protects private property. It also does not bode well that the bulk of the opposition to this obviously flawed RH bill are the minions of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Opposing the RH bill boils down to this – do not control the population size with a taxpayer-funded contraceptives doleout whose supplies will be sourced from Aquino’s cronies. Open the economy instead and provide women with alternatives to raising a family.

To answer the question “what are we missing” – a whole lot!

***

References:

List of Countries by Population

List of Countries by Population Density

List of Countries by Population Growth Rate

List of countries by GDP Per Capita
List of Countries by Total Fertility Rate

Granger Causality

 

Source: http://antipinoy.com/the-rh-bill-quackery/

Advertisements

Mga Katutubong Laro ng Lahing Pilipino

MGA HALIMBAWA NG KATUTUBONG LARONG PILIPINO:

1. Luksong Tinik – gamit ang mga paa at kamay ng dalawang manlalaro, pagdudugtung-dugtungin nila ang mga ito na para bang gagawa ng bakod na siya namang lulundagin ng isa pa nilang kalaro. Kailangang hindi sasabit ang kahit anong parte ng katawan ng lulundag dahil kung hindi ay magiging taya siya. Maaari rin namang gumulong siya kapag nagkamali ng lundag. Susubsob ang mukha sa lupa at sisirit ang dugo. Ang saya!

2. Luksong Baka – ang taya ay siyang yuyuko na gagayahin ang itsura ng baka. Lulundagan naman siya ng mga nang-aatsoy sa kanya. Kailangang matibay ang mga buto ng siyang magiging baka dahil iba-iba ang pisikal na anyo ng mga tatalon sa kanya. Suwerte mo kung singbigat lang ng tissue paper ang tatalon sa yo dala na rin ng kakulangan sa nutrisyon pero kung singtaba ni Dabyana ang tatalon sa yo, siguraduhing may nakahandang ambulansya o hindi namay’y albularyo na syang manghihilot sa posibleng maging pilay mo.

3. Langit Lupa – habulang laro na kung saan, para makaligtas ka sa taya na siyang huhuli sa yo, kailangan mong maghanap ng isang mataas na bagay na siyang magsisilbin’g “langit”. Pero di ka pwedeng manatili habang buhay sa “langit” mo dahil kailangan mo ring humanap ng pwesto pagkatapos. At ang taya naman, bawal ang bantay sarado dahil tiyak na kakantahan ka ng “Bantay Suka, Doble Taya!”

4. Tumbang Preso – isang lata ang ipupwesto ng taya na siya nyang babantayan para hindi mapatumba ng mga nagbabalagoong sa kanya. Kapag nakatayo ang lata, maaari syang manaya ng mga manlalarong wala sa base. Pero sa oras na mapatumba ang lata gamit ang mga tsinelas na syang hinahagis ng mga manlalaro, kailangan nya itong itayo bago sya manaya. Iwasan lamang ang lata dahil maari itong tumama sa iyong pagmumukha at pagsimula ng pamamaga.

5. Patintero – tinatawag ding “harang-harang” dahil wala kang ibang gagawin kundi harangin ang mga magnanais makapasok. Maaring laruin ng tatlo hanggang limang manlalaro sa bawat koponan. Kailangan munang gumuhit ng dalawa o apat na parisukat dipende sa dami ng manlalaro sa bawat kuponan bago simulan ang laro. Ang bawat kalahok ng isang kupunan ay tatayo sa likod ng mga linyang ginuhit. Ang taya na nakatayo sa linya sa gitna ay maaring tumawid sa mga iba pang linyang ginuhit kaya’t napapadali ang pagkakataon na mahuhuli ang kalahok ng kabilang grupo. Dapat makatawid at makabalik ang mga kalahok ng kabilang grupo na hindi nahuhuli ng tayang grupo. Kapag mayroong nakatawid at nakabalik sa kupunan na hindi nahuhuli ng mga taya ay madaragdagan ng puntos ang kanyang kupunan. Ang mga tumatakbo naman ang magiging tayakung sakaling mayroon isa sa kanila ang mahuli ng kabilang kupunan. Ang unang kupunan na makakuha sa pinagusapang dami ng puntos ay siyang magwawagi.

Source:
http://emm-otions.blogspot.tw/2009/01/katutubong-laro_01.html

Alam Nyo Ba Na Buhay Na Buhay Ang Mga Larong Pinoy Sa Masa?

Akala ng marami, naglaho na ang mga Larong Pinoy sa panahong ito. Ngunit alam nyo ba na buhay na buhay ang mga Larong Pinoy sa buong Pilipinas? At naglaho lang pala ito sa paningin ng iilan?

Sa tutoo lang, di naman talaga nawala ang mga larong Pinoy, gaya ng madalas na sinasabi ng iba na “Nawala” na raw ang mga laro. Maniwala kayo… Buhay na buhay ang mga laro sa maraming lugar na pinuntahan ng Magna Kultura.

“Namatay” lang naman ito sa iilan — doon sa mga nasa “upper class” na sa ngayon ay puro malls at computer ang libangan. Pero doon sa mga lugar na kung saan ay walang computer ang mga mamamayan — buhay ang mga laro — Larong Kalye ang libangan ng mga bata. Yung mga lugar na pag nagawi ka sa mga kalye nila, ang hirap dumaan dahil parang may “factory ng mga bata doon”. Anong ginagawa ng mga bata? Aba, e di naglalaro sa kalye. Yun bang akala mo ay tila may fiesta —araw araw!

Kaya sa mga nagsasabing napag-iwanan na daw ang larong Pinoy… di totoo yun. Ang totoo ay iniwan na nila ang mga laro dahil sa mga magkabagong laruan nila — gaya ng computer, high tech na laruan, at mga DVD. At di na rin sila lumalabas sa mga bahay nila dahil doon. Bihira na sila nakikipag-laro sa mga bata sa kapit-bahay. Wala na rin silang “kababata” — ang mayroon na lang ay “Friendster” at “Pet Society” — puro virtual.

Ang isang dahilan din kaya medyo nawawala ang mga laro ay dahilang walang mga nagtatatag ng mga palaro sa eskuwela man o sa barangay. Pagkatapos ng sampung taong gulang, ang mga kabataan ay walang choice kungdi sumasali na sa mga liga na ino-organisa sa paaralan at barangay. At kadalasan, ang mga sports na ino-organisa ay basketball o volleyball. Kaya pag lumaki na ang bata, ang larong Pinoy ay napapag-iwanan sa kalye.

Ok lang naman mag-Western sports, gaya ng basketball, volleyball… o kahit na skateboard o touch ball… pero, ituro din natin ang mga laro ng lahi sa bagong kabataan. Pag natutunan nila yan, at minsan nilang laruin — tiyak na habang buhay na nila tataglayin ang alaala nila. At kahit papaano’y masasabi nilang, “nilaro ko rin yan”.

Ituro natin ang mga Larong Pinoy sa bagong kabataan. Maganda itong gamiting paraan upang ipamahagi sa kanilang katauhan kung papaano maging tunay na Pinoy. Maganda rin ito paraan upang magkaroon sila ng “bonding” sa kanilang mga tito at tita, lolo at lola — mapapag-kuwentuhan nila ito. At lalo namang magandang paraan ito para magkaroon sila ng “physical activity” at mga kababata sa kapit-bahay — sisigla na sila, mabubuhay pa ang komunidad sa kasiyahan ng mga naglalarong bata.

Buhayin natin ang mga Larong Pinoy. Ito ay kayamanan ng ating lahi.

________________________________________________________________________________

Ang Magna Kultura ay patuloy na nagtatatag ng mga “sports clinic” ng Larong Pinoy sa mga paaralan at sa mga Barangay.

Para makita ang mga larong Pinoy na nagaganap sa mga barangay, bisitahin ang LARONG PINOY HOMEPAGE @http://palarongpinoy.multiply.com.

“Eskwelaro” kung tawagin ang sports training. Tinuturo ang lahat ng mga laro sa mga bata, mula parintero, tumbang preso, siyato, luksong tnik, piko, sipa, trumpo, holen, saranggola —- at may mahigit apat-na-pung (40) uri ng mga laro. Ang dami! At kasing husay din ng mga pandaigdigang (Olympics) na palaro.

Ang kulang lang naman talaga ay “infrastractura” —- mga tournament, sports clinic, at pati paninda ng laruang Pinoy. Ito ang ino-organisa ng Magna Kultura: mga palaro, Eskwelaro, at pati livelihood upang ibenta ng mga sari-sari store ulit ang mga laruang Pinoy.

Buhay na buhay ang mga Larong Pinoy sa masang Pinoy. Sa mga lugar na walang kompyuter ang kapit-bahayan. Simpleng paraan, na di magastos, nakakapaglaro pa rin silang lahat.

Source:
http://palarongpinoy.multiply.com/links/item/15/Alam-Nyo-Ba-Na-Buhay-Na-Buhay-Ang-Mga-Larong-Pinoy-Sa-Masa

LARO NG LAHI (Filipino Indigenous Games)

The term �Laro ng Lahi� (Filipino Indigenous Games) had been popularized by the Samahang Makasining(Artist Club), Inc. The word “Laro ng Lahi” was conceptualized by the group and it was the first act to preserve the Filipino indigenous games like (syatong, patintero or harangtaga, taguan pong, dama, lusalos, holen butas, tumbang preso and others).

In 2001, the Samahang Makasining(Artist Club), Inc. made a proposal to National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) entitled �Laro ng Lahi� to support and subsidize the three day- actual playing of selected Filipino games. Actual playing of it, is one of the strategies of SM(AC)I to preserve these indigenous games.

Now, �Laro ng Lahi� is popular with the help of NCCA and being used by the other Philippine Local Government Unit, other organizations and other institution. Imparting of these Filipino games to the youth is one of the main objectives of the organization.

LARO NG LAHI

LISTAHAN NG MGA LARO
Play Now online
SULYAP SA SINING 2003
Funded by National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA)





Ang sagot sa ilang problemang paglalaho ng kulturang Pilipino ay ang paggunita at aktong paggawa ng mga ito. Ang katutubong laro ay maituturing na palatandaan ng isang lahi, kung kaya�t dapat na balikan, pangalagaan sa pamamagitan ng aktong paglalaro, pagpipinta at pagsusulat.

Ang ilang katutubong laro ay halos hindi na alam sa kasalukuyang panahon. Ilan dito ay ang Piko, Tansing, Putupong, Sundutan sa puno, Siring bulding, Lupa�t langit, Tumbang preso, Harantagang bilog, Siyatong, Holen Butas at Lusalos. Isinama rin ang ilang kilalang mga laro tulad ng Patintero at Dama upang mas maging masaya at makayang laruin ng ilan na hindi alam ang mga lumang laro.

Ang laro ng bawat lipi ay pagkakakilanlan ng isang pagkatao at pagkabansa. Humuhubog rin ito ng isang masining na kaisipan at masining na damdamin. Paghubog sa pag-uugali at paghahanda sa mga susunod pang mga karanasan ng pagiging propesyonal ay dulot rin ng kabataang paglalaro.

Ang proyekto ay pinamahalaan ng mga masisipag na pamunuan at miyembro ng Samahang Makasining (Artist Club) Inc., sa tulong na rin ng iba�t ibang sangay ng samahan. Ang mga namahala sa gayong gawain ay may sapat na kakayahan at kasanayan upang mapagtagumpayan ang layunin ng proyekto at ng samahan base na rin sa tagal na nila itong ginagawa na walang suporta sa ano mang ahensiya ng gobyerno o pribadong grupo.

Mas naging tagumpay pa itong nakaraang proyekto at nabigyang pansin pa ang ilang aspetong gawain sa sining sa dahilang ang gobyerno sa pamamagitan ng National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) ay naggawad ng pinansyal na suporta upang gamitin sa ilang pangangailangan ng samahan.

Source:
http://www.acpfi.org/?page=laro

Related links:

http://asiancenter.multiply.com/journal/item/11?&show_interstitial=1&u=%2Fjournal%2Fitem

http://busyok.com/press-release

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/larong-pinoy?before=1316669326

http://kidsahoy.multiply.com/journal/item/108/?&item_id=108&view:replies=threaded

http://definitelyfilipino.com/blog/2011/10/22/about-magna-kulturas-larong-pinoy-advocacy-in-the-philippines/

Filipino? Tagalog? Pilipino?

The basis for the Philippine national language is Tagalog, which had primarily been spoken only in Manila and the surrounding provinces when the Commonwealth constitution was drawn up in the 1930s. That constitution provided for a national language, but did not specifically designate it as Tagalog because of objections raised by representatives from other parts of the country where Tagalog was not spoken. It merely stated that a national language acceptable to the entire populace (and ideally incorporating elements from the diverse languages spoken throughout the islands) would be a future goal. Tagalog, of course, by virtue of being the lingua franca of those who lived in or near the government capital, was the predominant candidate.

By the time work on a new constitution began in the early 1970s, more than half the Philippine citizenry was communicating in Tagalog on a regular basis. (Forty years earlier, it was barely 25 percent.) Spurred on by President Marcos and his dream of a “New Society,” nationalist academics focused their efforts on developing a national language — Pilipino, by that time understood to be Tagalog de facto. Neologisms were introduced to enrich the vocabulary and replace words that were of foreign origin. A much-remembered example is “salumpuwit” (literally, “that to support the buttocks”) for “chair” to replace the widely adopted, Spanish-derived “silya.” Such efforts to nativize the Philippine national language were for naught, however, since words of English and Spanish origin had become an integral part of the language used in the everday and intellectual discourse of Filipinos.

This reality was finally reflected in the constitution composed during the Aquino presidency in the latter half of the 1980s. The national language was labeled Filipino to acknowledge and embrace the existence of and preference for many English- and Spanish-derived words. “Western” letters such as f, j, c, x and z — sounds of which were not indigenous to the islands before the arrival of the Spaniards and the Americans — were included in the official Filipino alphabet.

The aforementioned evolution of the Philippine national language is taught as part of the school curriculum in the Philippines, such that when you ask a Filipino what the national language of the country is, the response is “Filipino.” In the same way that there are English (composition, literature…) classes in American elementary, secondary and tertiary schools to teach the national language of the United States, there are Filipino classes (not Tagalog classes; Filipino literature classes, not Tagalog literature classes) in Philippine schools.

So what is the difference between Filipino and Tagalog? Think of Filipinoas Tagalog Plus. Filipino is inclusive of the contributions of languages other than Tagalog. For instance, it is quite all right to say “diksyunaryo” (from the Spanish diccionario) in Filipino, whereas a Tagalog purist (or someone stuck in the “Pilipino” era) might insist on a native Tagalog word like “talatinigan.” It is also more politically correct to refer to Filipino, not Tagalog, as the Philippine national language. For Filipinos from other parts of the country, Tagalog is not their first language; they learn to speak Filipino because it is constitutionally the national language and taught in schools.

In practical terms, most people, especially Filipinos overseas who have come to realize that foreigners favor “Tagalog” to refer to the Philippine national language, don’t strictly differentiate among the words Filipino, Pilipino and Tagalog, and have learned to adapt to how Americans or Canadians perceive the meaning of each word. That is why when you go to a bookstore in North America, for example, you are more likely to find a “Tagalog (or Pilipino) dictionary” than a “Filipino dictionary.”

Postscript: Philippino, Philipino and other such misspellings are unacceptable and are jarring to Filipino eyes. Remember: Filipino is the noun that refers to the Philippine national language and to the Philippine people (Filipinos); it is also an adjective to describe people, things and such from the Philippines (the other adjective being Philippine). The country itself is called the Philippines (currently the Republic of the Philippines; formerly, and actually still, the Philippine Islands) in English, Las Islas Filipinas or simply La/Las Filipinas in Spanish, and Pilipinas in Filipino (Tagalog).

Cultural Note: Although the word “Filipino” is acceptable in Filipino (the Philippine language), most Filipinos will still say Pilipino when referring to a Filipino person while speaking in Filipino/Tagalog.

For example: “Ako ay Pilipino.” (“I am Filipino.”)

Why? Primarily because a “p” sound is easier for a Filipino to pronounce than an “f” sound. In fact, even though the letters c, f, j, x, z, etc. have formally been included in the Philippine/Filipino alphabet, there is still an overwhelming tendency to transliterate foreign words into native pronunciation forms.

Examples: kompyuter, kwalipikasyon, okasyon, kendi, indibidwal, sipilis…

Source: 
http://tagaloglang.com/The-Philippines/Language/filipino-tagalog-pilipino.html

Sa Aking Mga Kabata / To My Fellow Children

Sa Aking Mga Kabata / To My Fellow Children 
ni Jose P. Rizal

Ito ang kauna-unahang tula na isinulat ng ating pambansang bayaning si Dr. Jose Rizal.Sa edad 8, isinulat  niya ito sa katutubong wika at pinamagatang “SA AKING  MGA KABATA”.

Kapagka ang baya’y sadyang umiibig
Sa kanyang salitang kaloob ng langit,
Sanglang kalayaan nasa ring masapit
Katulad ng ibong nasa himpapawid.

Pagka’t ang salita’y isang kahatulan
Sa bayan, sa nayo’t mga kaharian,
At ang isang tao’y katulad, kabagay
Ng alin mang likha noong kalayaan.

Ang hindi magmahal sa kanyang salita
Mahigit sa hayop at malansang isda,
Kaya ang marapat pagyamaning kusa
Na tulad sa inang tunay na nagpala.

Ang wikang Tagalog tulad din sa Latin
Sa Ingles, Kastila at salitang anghel,
Sapagka’t ang Poong maalam tumingin
Ang siyang naggawad, nagbigay sa atin.

Ang salita nati’y huwad din sa iba
Na may alfabeto at sariling letra,
Na kaya nawala’y dinatnan ng sigwa
Ang lunday sa lawa noong dakong una.

(Nagsalin sa Filipino di kilala.)

To My Fellow Children
translated by Fank C. Laubach

Whenever eople of a country truly love
The language which by heav’n they were taught to use
That country also surely liberty pursue
As does the bird which soars to freer space above.

For language is the final judge and referee
Upon the people in the land where it holds sway;
In truth our human race resembles in this way
The other living beings born in liberty.

Whoever knows not how to love his native tongue
Is worse than any best or evil smelling fish.
To make our language richer ought to be our wish
The same as any mother loves to feed her young.

Tagalog and the Latin language are the same
And English and Castilian and the angels’ tongue;
And God, whose watchful care o’er all is flung,
Has given us His blessing in the speech we claim,

Our mother tongue, like all the highest that we know
Had alphabet and letters of its very own;
But these were lost — by furious waves were overthrown
Like bancas in the stormy sea, long years ago.

Interpretation of the poem, “Sa Aking mga Kabata”

The first stanza speaks that Rizal wants us to love our own language and it is a gift from above that was given onto us to be grateful of. It is a blessing that like any other nationalities we were gifted of. We are aware that Rizal was motivated to write this poem during the time of Spanish supremacy because we were under their colony. He addresses us to love our language for it is our step towards liberty. As Rizal correlated it to a bird that can freely fly up in the sky, it has a will to fly wherever it wants to go and whatever it wants to do. But if this bird is in a howl like us, Filipinos, who cannot stand for what we believe is right, we will never experience independence.

The next stanza implies that a nation that loves a God-given language also loves freedom. “For language is the final judge and reference upon the people in the land where it holds and sway.” A Filipino who loves his native tongue will definitely fight for his freedom seemingly like a bird “lumilipad nang pagkataas-taas para sa mas malawak na liliparan”, a person who preserves the marks of its liberty, as man preserve his independence. Language is not merely a communication tool but as an expression of one’s identity, of one’s individual and social consciousness. Without a common identity, there could be no real sense of nationhood. Love and use of one’s native tongues was one of the badges of a true patriot.

In the succeeding stanza, Rizal compared the person who doesn’t love his native tongue from a putrid fish. Just like a fish which originally lives in water, stinks every time it goes out of its place. Like some of the Filipinos that we could observe, we could see that when they have reached a foreign country and adapted the foreign language and culture, they tend to forget their own. And as they have adapted that culture, they will be so haughty   to despise and scorn their own fellowmen. They hide and cover their identity for being a Filipino even though it’s very discernible. They just make themselves look foolish and shameful. And with the last two lines from the third stanza, Rizal addressed to us that our own language must be cherished and should not be forgotten because it’s a very valuable possession of our own country.

Fascination when we discovered that Rizal was just an eight-year-old lad when he wrote this poem. At a very young age and a boy who grew up speaking several languages, it is very inspiring to hear someone say these lyrics with such great nationalism with great love of his own tongue. Reflecting our past, we saw ourselves unconsciously patronizing foreign languages. We wanted to be those whites who have slang tongues. Where have our native tongues has gone? We were gaining colonial mentality without our awareness. The bad news is, we allow it to happen. And what Rizal was trying to resound is that even our very own Filipino is also a language to be respected and valued. It is also a language likewise with the angels and with the others. There should be no hierarchy that the Filipino is the least. For rejecting it is like denying ourselves of who we really are.

Finally, the last stanza implies that we, just like the other nations existing, have its own exceptional characteristics that we can be greatly proud of, those distinct qualities of being a Filipino such that the blood itself that runs through your veins, the culture, and your innate YOU is a certified Filipino that you can never obliterate. Sad to say, the cornerstones established by our forefathers to come up with a better country is now into annihilation…Annihilation caused by the influx of challenges doomed to spoil what we have. 

Sources:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/78511326/Sa-Aking-Mga-Kabata
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52679482/sa-aking-mga-kabata

Ang Alfabeto at Ortograpiyang Filipino

Kalikasan ng Leksikal na Korpus ng Filipino
Ang ortograpiya ay ang representasyon ng mga tunog ng isang wika ng nakasulat o nakalimbag na mga simbolo tulad ng alpabeto. Bago dumating ang mga Kastila ay may sarili nang alpabeto ang mga lumad sakapuluang ito. Ito ay tinatawag na Alibata o Baybayin na may 14 katinig o konsonant at 3 patinig o vowel. Pinalitan ito ng alpabetong Romano nang dumating ang mga Kastila.
Taong 1940 o tatlong taon matapos buuin ang Wikang Pambansa o Wikang PambansaBatay sa Tagalog ayon na rin sa nasasaad sa 1935 Constitution, isinilang ang kauna-unahang ortograpiya. Binuo ni Lope K. Santos, ang Abakada (15 katinig at 5 panitig) namay 20 letra: a b k d e g h i l m n ng o p r s t u w y.
Noong Oktubre 4, 1971 o labindalawang taon matapos palitan ng pangalan Pilipino angWikang Pambansa o Wikang Pambansa Batay sa Tagalog, ipinagtibay ng Sanggunian ng Surian ng Wikang Pambansa (ngayon ay Komisyon sa Wikang Pambansa), angortograpiyang Pilipino na tinaguriang “pinayamang alpabeto” na binubuo ng 31 letra:
a bc ch d e f g h i j k l ll m n ñ ng o p q r rr s t u v w x y z
Idinagdag sa 20 letra ng Abakadaang 11 letra at degrapo mula sa Kastila:
c ch f j ll ñ q rr v x z
Sa 1973 Constitution, nasasaad ang pagdevelop at pagkakaroon ng pambansang wikangtatawaging Filipino. Sa sumunod na taon, tinawag nang Filipino ang wikang pambansa.Taong 1987 ay ipinakilala ang tinaguriang ortograpiyang Filipino na tinaguriang”makabagong alpabeto” na binubuo ng 28 letra:
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n ñ ng o p q r s t uv w x y z
Inalis ang mga degrapong ch ll at rr.
Noong 2001, muling nagkaroon ng rebisyon sa alpabetong Filipino upang tugunan ang patuloy na development at/o istandardisasyon ng sistema ng pagsulat sa Filipino. Sarebisyong ito, sinasabi na pinaluwag ang paggamit ng mga letrang c f j ñ q v x z.Ipinagagamit ang mga ito sa ispeling ng lahat ng hiram na salita anuman ang barayti nitokasama ang hindi pormal at hindi teknikal na barayti, o iyong tinatawag na karaniwangsalita. Oktubre 9, 2006 nang pansamantalang ipinatigil ito at ang ikatlong ortograpiya.
Noong Agosto 2007, inilabas ng KWF ang draft ng Ortograpiya ng Wikang Pambansa na binuo ng KWF sa pamamagitan ng serye ng mga konsultasyon sa mga guro, dalubhasa sawika, superbisor sa Filipino at sa mga larangang ito sa buong bansa noong 2007. Wala pang pinal na bersyon ng patnubay na ipinalalabas ang KWF hanggang ngayon.
_______________

Lexical Nature of the Corpus Filipino

Orthography is the representation of sounds of a language by written or printed symbols such as the alphabet.

Before the Spaniards came alphabet is itself indigenous to the islands. It is called Alibata or Baybayin with 14 consonants and 3 vowel. The Roman alphabet replaced it when the Spaniards came.

Year 1940 or three years after integrating the national language or national language based on Tagalog as well as in terms of the 1935 Constitution, the first born orthography.

Created by Lope K. Santos, the ABC (15 consonants and 5 vowels) with 20 letters: a b k d e g h i l m n ng o p r s t u w y.

On October 4, 1971 or twelve years after the name change of the Philippine national language or national language based on Tagalog, adopted by the Council of the Institute of National Language (now National Language Commission), the Philippine orthography called “pina alphabet since ¬ “consisting of 31 letters: a bc ch d e f g h i j k l ll m n ñ ng o p q r rr s t u v w x y z. Added to the 20 letters of the ABC and the 11 letters from Spain degrapo (c ch q Ñ FJ ll rr vxz).

The 1973 Constitution, the terms of developing and gaining national language called Filipino. The following year, called the Filipino the national language. 1987 introduced the variety, Filipino orthography called called “modern alphabet” consisting of 28 letters: N of opqrstuvwxy abcdefghijklmn. Z. Degrapong removed the ch ll and rr.

In 2001, again had to Filipino alphabet revision to address the ongoing development and /or standardization of the writing system of Filipino. In this revision, the letters cfj Ñ qvx Z were used in spelling the borrowed words regardless of its varieties with no formal technical and varieties, or the so-called common words. October 9, 2006 when it was ordered to temporarily hold its revision including the third orthography.

In August 2007, released the draft of KWF Orthography National Language KWF developed through a series of consultations with teachers, language experts, supervisors in Filipino and in this field throughout the country in 2007. Under the final version of the guidelines shown the KWF has not released new guidelines until now.