Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages
Vol. 35:2 (2020) ► pp.253–292

Vowel system or vowel systems?

Variation in the monophthongs of Philippine Hybrid Hokkien in Manila

| University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, USA
| National University of Singapore, Singapore
The Manila variety of Philippine Hybrid Hokkien (PHH-M) or Lánnang-uè is a contact language used by the metropolitan Manila Chinese Filipinos; it is primarily comprised of Hokkien, Tagalog/Filipino, and English elements. Approaching PHH-M as a mixed language, we investigate linguistically and socially conditioned variation in the monophthongs of PHH-M, focusing on the extent to which the vowel systems of the three source languages have converged. This analysis draws on data gathered from 34 native speakers; Pillai scores are calculated to assess the degree of merger. Contrary to certain predictions of prior work on mixed languages, PHH-M is found to have a unified, eight-vowel inventory distinct from any of its sources. Older women use more stable vowels across source languages, suggesting that they have led in the development of PHH-M as a mixed code; however, signs of change among younger women suggest either the endangerment of the code or its evolution in response to the community’s shifting identity. We contextualize our conclusions in relation to the sociohistory and language ecology of metropolitan Manila’s Chinese Filipino community.
Keywords: mixed languages, language contact, language variation, sociophonetics, vowel systems, Philippine Hybrid Hokkien, Chinese Filipinos, Lánnang-uè, Lannang
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Mixed languages
  • 3.Philippine Hybrid Hokkien in Manila
    • 3.1Sociohistorical background of PHH-M
    • 3.2Structure of PHH-M
    • 3.3Vowels in PHH-M
  • 4.Methodology
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Inter-vowel contrast
    • 5.2Intra-vowel contrast
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 October 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.00061.won
References (56)
References
Ang See, Teresita. 1990. The Chinese in the Philippines: Problems and Perspectives (Volume 11). Manila: Kaisa Para sa Kaunlaran.Google Scholar
. 2004. The Chinese in the Philippines: Problems and Perspectives (Volume 31). Manila: Kaisa Para sa Kaunlaran.Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter. 1997. ‘A Language of our Own’: The genesis of Michif – the mixed Cree-French language of the Canadian Métis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. Mixed languages as autonomous systems. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 107–150. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Balukas, Colleen, & Koops, Christian. 2015. Spanish-English bilingual voice onset time in spontaneous code-switching. International Journal of Bilingualism 19(4): 423–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bautista, Lourdes S. & Bolton, Kingley. 2008. Philippine English: Linguistic and literary perspectives. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2017. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.0.31, Retrieved 21 August 2017 from [URL]
Chu, Richard T. 2010. Chinese and Chinese Mestizos of Manila. Leiden, the Netherlands & Boston, MA: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chua, Amy. 2003. World on fire: How exporting free market democracy breeds ethnic hatred and global instability. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Chua, Dorothy Ang. 2004. From Chinese to Filipino: Changing identities of the Chinese in the Philippines. Unpublished MA thesis. Vancouver: University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Deterding, David. 1997. The formants of monophthong vowels in standard Southern British English pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 271: 47–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The vowels of the different ethnic groups in Singapore. In David Prescott, Andy Kirkpatrick, Isabel Martin & Azirah Hashim (eds.), English in Southeast Asia: Literacies, Literatures and Varieties, 2–29. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar
Doeppers, Daniel F. 1986. Destination, selection and turnover among Chinese migrants to Philippine cities in the nineteenth century. Journal of Historical Geography 12(4): 381–401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 1989. The whole woman: Sex and gender differences in variation. Language Variation and Change 1(3): 245–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fabricius, Anne H., Dominic Watt, & Daniel Ezra Johnson. 2009. A comparison of three speaker-intrinsic vowel formant frequency normalization algorithms for sociophonetics. Language Variation and Change 211:413–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gijn, Rik van. 2009. The phonology of mixed languages. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 24(1): 91–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golovko, Evgenij V. 1994. Mednyj Aleut or Copper Island Aleut: an Aleut-Russian mixed language. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 113–121. Amsterdam: Uitgave IFOTT.Google Scholar
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong. 2016. Trilingual code-switching using quantitative lenses: An exploratory study on Hokaglish. Philippine Journal of Linguistics 471:109–131.Google Scholar
. 2017. Language contact in the Philippines: The history and ecology from a Chinese Filipino perspective. Language Ecology 11: 185–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Philippine Hybrid Hokkien as a postcolonial mixed language: Evidence from nominal derivational affixation mixing. Singapore: National University of Singapore thesis.Google Scholar
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong & Mie Hiramoto. 2020. Two Englishes diverged in the Philippines? A substratist account of Manila Chinese English. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 351(11): 127–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, Andrew. 1970. Acoustic correlates of accent, rhythm, and intonation in Tagalog. Phonetica 221: 11–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, François. 2010. Bilingual. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, François, & Joanne L. Miller. 1994. Going in and out of languages: An example of bilingual flexibility. Psychological Science 5(4): 201–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall-Lew, Lauren. 2010. Improved representation of variance in measures of vowel merger. Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 91: 1–10.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, Paul Warren, & Katie Drager. 2006. Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics 341: 458–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klöter, Henning. 2011. The language of the Sangleys: A Chinese vernacular in missionary sources of the seventeenth century. Leiden, the Netherlands & Boston, NY: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter & Keith Johnson. 2011. A course in phonetics. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Lesho, Marivic. 2017. Philippine English (Metro Manila acrolect). Journal of the International Phonetic Association: Illustrations of the IPA. 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron & Peter Bakker. 2003. The study of mixed languages. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 1–22. Berlin, Germany & New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Meakins, Felicity. 2012. Which mix – code-switching or a mixed language? – Gurindji Kriol. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 27(1): 105–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meakins, Felicity & Jesse Stewart. In press. Mixed Languages. In Salikoko Mufwene & Anna Maria Escobar (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mous, Maarten. 2003. The making of a mixed language: The case of Ma’a/Mbugu. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1994. Callahuaya. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 207–211. Amsterdam: Uitgave IFOTT.Google Scholar
Nycz, Jennifer & Lauren Hall-Lew. 2013. Best practices in measuring vowel merger. Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 201. 1–19.Google Scholar
O’Shannessy, Carmel. 2005. Light Warlpiri: A new language. Australian Journal of Linguistics 25(1): 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL [URL]
Schachter, Paul & Fe T. Otanes. 1972. Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley, CA, Los Angeles, CA, & London, the United Kingdom: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Schuchardt, Hugo. 1884. Kreolische Studien IV, Ueber das Malaiospaniche der Philippinen. Sitzungsberichte der Philosophisch-historischen der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften 105.Google Scholar
Siu, Phila. 2019. Why are Chinese workers so unpopular in Southeast Asia? South China Morning Post, 2 Jun, 2019. [Retrieved from [URL], 19 November 2019].
Smith, Ian. 1979a. Convergence in South Asia: A creole example. Lingua, 481, 193–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1979b. Substrata versus universals in the formation of Sri Lanka Portuguese. In Peter Mühlhäusler (ed.), Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics 21. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Starr, Rebecca L. & Brinda Balasubramaniam. 2019. Variation and change in English /r/ among Tamil Indian Singaporeans. World Englishes 38(4): 630–643. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Jesse. 2014. A comparative analysis of Media Lengua and Quichua vowel production. Phonetica 711:159–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Voice onset time production in Ecuadorian Spanish, Quichua, and Media Lengua. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 481(21): 173–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tayao, Ma. Lourdes G. 2004. The evolving study of Philippine English phonology. World Englishes 23(1): 77–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Erik R. & Tyler Kendall. 2007. NORM: The vowel normalization and plotting suite. [Online Resource: [URL]]
Thomason, Sarah Grey. 2003. Social factors and linguistic processes in the emergence of stable mixed languages. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker, (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 21–40. Berlin, Germany & New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Tsai, Huiming. 2017. A study of Philippine Hokkien language. Unpublished PhD dissertation: National Taiwan Normal University.Google Scholar
Uytanlet, Juliet Lee. 2014. The Hybrid Tsinoys: Challenges of Hybridity and Homogeneity as Sociocultural Constructs among the Chinese in the Philippines. PhD dissertation. Asbury Theological Seminary.Google Scholar
Watt, Dominic & Fabricius, Anne. 2002. Evaluation of a technique for improving the mapping of multiple speakers’ vowel spaces in the F1-F2 plane. In D. Nelson, ed. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 91:159–173.Google Scholar
Watt, Dominic & Anne Fabricius. 2011. A measure of variable planar locations anchored on the centroid of the vowel space: A sociophonetic research tool. Proceedings of the 17th ICPhS. Hong Kong, SAR, People’s Republic of China. 2102–2105.Google Scholar
Winford, Donald. 2009. The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances (review). Language 85(1):223–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Social factors in contact languages. In Peter Bakker and Yaron Matras (eds.), Contact languages: A comprehensive guide, 363–416. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Hafiz, Mohamed, Mie Hiramoto, Jakob R. E. Leimgruber, Wilkinson Daniel Wong Gonzales & Jun Jie Lim
2024. Sociolinguistic variation in Colloquial Singapore English sia. World Englishes DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2021. Interactions of Sinitic Languages in the Philippines: Sinicization, Filipinization, and Sino-Philippine Language Creation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Chinese Language Studies, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2021. Interactions of Sinitic Languages in the Philippines: Sinicization, Filipinization, and Sino-Philippine Language Creation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Chinese Language Studies, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2021. Filipino, Chinese, neither, or both? The Lannang identity and its relationship with language. Language & Communication 77 ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2022. Interactions of Sinitic Languages in the Philippines: Sinicization, Filipinization, and Sino-Philippine Language Creation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Chinese Language Studies, ► pp. 369 ff. DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2024. Mixed language in flux? The various impacts of multilingual contact on Lánnang-uè’s wh-question system. International Journal of Bilingualism DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2024. Advancing Sino-Philippine linguistics and sociolinguistics using the Lannang Corpus (LanCorp). International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 29:2 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2024. Philippine Englishes in the Sino‐Philippine Lannang context: Towards a concentric‐pluricentric interactional‐interplanar model of English. World Englishes DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2024. Spread, stability, and sociolinguistic variation in multilingual practices: the case of Lánnang-uè and its derivational morphology. International Journal of Multilingualism 21:3 ► pp. 1547 ff. DOI logo
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Wong
2024. Sociolinguistic Analysis with Missing Metadata? Leveraging Linguistic and Semiotic Resources Through Deep Learning to Investigate English Variation and Change on Twitter. Applied Linguistics DOI logo
GONZALES, WILKINSON DANIEL WONG
2024. When to (not) split the infinitive: factors governing patterns of syntactic variation in Twitter-style Philippine English. English Language and Linguistics ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.