The "Dialect" Hurdle

In recent years, I've seen changes in the attitude of Iloko speakers, particularly among the younger speakers and the attitudes toward the regional languages are changing. Just recently, the Philippine department of education institute Mother-tongue-based multilingual education, MTB-MLE. (I think that there is some redundancy in the name of the program.) In short, when children start school they are taught in the language of the region (NOTE: language). Only later in their scholastic careers are they taught in Tagalog and/or English.

Although, the early Spanish missionaries recognized Iloko as a language, it has been dubbed a dialect. Since when? I don't know. From some of the responses that I've received when pointing out the fact that Iloko is a distinct language, Tagalog is seen as the language of which Iloko is a dialect or regional variation. They see Tagalog as the language because it is the basis of Filipino, the national language. I would conjecture that because they are not national and official, the other languages are dialects, therefore not as important. So, goes the logic.

I ran into opposition to the fact that Iloko was a language in the Facebook group "NATIVES OF LA UNION". I must say that to find such a mindset in a group allegedly composed of people born in the Ilokandia (ethnically Ilokano provinces) is dismaying. In fact, San Fernando, La Union is the regional capital.

In a back and fourth with two of the members, I finally proved my point: Iloko is a language.

From the beginning comment, it is obvious that the idea that Iloko is not a distinct, separate and mutually unintelligible language from Tagalog is expressed by two of the members. And, one of them uses her "authenticity" as proof otherwise and that "...Ilocano is a dialect, Philippines has only language which is Tagalog. And Iloko is a place derived from Ilocano region! I should know Ilocano ako dear! (I am Ilocano, dear!)"... To which I just have to add a big-ole [SIC] to. 

My response, "You are all wrong."

Later on in the conversation, I decided to use just Iloko because the only responses from Sikan were in Tagalog and English. I was about to ask which languages he was fluent in. Instead, I decided to empirically test my hunch that he was not a fluent Iloko speaker.

My hunch was correct! After responding in Iloko, he replied with "I do no understanding what you saying Joseph Maza. [sic]" and proved my point. Iloko is not a dialect of Tagalog. If Iloko were a dialect of Tagalog, he could have comprehended a good portion of what I wrote. I can understand British or Australian English regardless of the fact that I see "cheque", "tyre" or "gaol (jail)". Portuguese speakers on either side of the Atlantic have about the same amount of comprehension. I take it that he understood the Tagalog after the English part of my penultimate post.

Because he could NOT understand, it made those two challenge their notions of what Iloko is and is not: 

1. Iloko is a language.
2. It is not a dialect of Tagalog.
3. It will always be that way.