Facebook has been abuzz lately with the jejemon phenomenon. It appears that someone has finally decided to label those who use a local variety of leetspeak as “jejemons,” which, I believe is a blend of “jeje” (the variety’s phonologically-conditioned orthographic representation of the laugh “hehe”) and Pokemon (itself a blend of “pocket” and “monster”).

Since traditional media has now found social network trends newsworthy, the jejemon phenomenon (jejemonon?) warranted a writeup from Inquirer.net calling the so-called jejemons the new jologs.

So who are these jejemons anyway? I’d hate to cite UrbanDictionary.com but based on what appears to be Facebook consensus, the jejemons are the breed of computer-mediated communicators who use a hybrid code which draws from jologspeak, leetspeak, textese, and gamer language. The code is manifested through their use of media such as SMS and the Internet.

A cursory observation offers the following features:

1. Insertion of “h” (coming from jologspeak e.g. “Jhun”)
2. Alternating cases (coming from leetspeak later adopted by textese)
3. Substitution of numerals to similarly looking letters of the alphabet (coming from leetspeak)
4. Substitution of letter that also represent similar sounds (coming from leetspeak later adopted by gamer langauge e.g. “jeje” for “hehe”)
UPDATE: Lowell reminded me that “jeje” may also come from the Korean laugh in MMORPGs “keke.”

My history with my take on the jologs and prescriptive grammar has produced quite a few interesting (and quite scandalous) discussions. Now let me play devil’s advocate yet again. Why the sudden uproar? I believe it’s simply because someone found a witty label for this social group.

As a language teacher (which requires a bit of Grammar Nazism), it is quite alarming. How many job application emails have I encountered in my previous stint as headhunter suffer from such use of an informal (and context-inappropriate) register? Quite a few. Such instances highlight the problem of the use. It’s not in the way they flout the “rules” of standard grammar, it’s their disregard for contexts in which they can use such register.

While, as an applied linguist, I see this phenomenon as a manifestation of language-in-flux and an expression of linguistic creativity, the disregard for context appropriateness can be considered alarming. In a world where premium is given to those who can use language effectively in appropriate contexts, the over-use of the jejemon register works to their disadvantage.

Then again, as a critical discourse analyst, I would say this is also hegemonic. It boils down to the aesthetic appeal of standard language. Many Facebook users have decided to discriminate against these jejemons particularly because they situate themselves as part of the elite. Their access to better education and greater exposure to “beautiful” use of language have minimized their tolerance for those who express themselves differently.

One must not overlook the “mon” in the blend “jejemon.” It may seem so innocent but we must be reminded that “mon” in Pokemon means “monster.” Isn’t this a way of demonizing this social group? That they are of a lower species? That people need to “catch them all” and tame and train them to do one’s bidding? Language as a repressive state apparatus.

Just a thought. If it’s all about flouting the standards of syntax and orthography, then how about ee cummings? Anyone dare call him a jejemon?

Related posts:

1. On English, prescriptivism, Filipinos, and the Internet
2. Pledging allegiance to grammar fascism
3. On prescriptivism… again

I just recently heard from my good friend Randwin (a fellow MA student, former classmate, and instructor at UP Los Baños) that their administration has allegedly mandated their division to turn all English GE courses to large classes of 160 students or more.

Any ESL teacher would see the flaw in such an arrangement. The lower the student ratio is, the better. For starters, it allows for more interactions between student and teacher. The teacher will also be more capable of monitoring each student’s progress.

Grading 25 papers on the merits of the good old Content, Oragnization, Style, Grammar and Mechanics is already a huge task. Imagine doing that for 160.

Obviously, some people at Los Baños are not too happy about the matter. Here’s Randwin’s take on the matter.

On Large Class UPLB: A Resounding “No!”

In one of my MA classes in Diliman, I once shared this plan of the UPLB administration to convert Eng 1, Eng 2, and Eng 10 large classes. A large class has 160-250 students while the status quo lecture class has 30-40 students. My classmates, ESL teachers and Call Center trainers were shocked and appalled. My teacher, a student of Noam Chomsky and an initiator of key subjects in Diliman, chuckled because the plan was absolutely crazy.

(According to a DOH survey, 3 of 10 government employees suffer some form of mental condition. I can think of 2 way up in the UPLB administration who might belong to those 3.)

As early as a few months after Chancellor Luis Rey Velasco took office, there have been rumors that the GE subjects offered by the Department of Humanities will be converted to large class format. On September 4, 2006, Prof. Ruperta Asuncion, who was then the English Division head, called for an emergency meeting. The administration told her to tell us to alter the syllabus of Eng 1, Eng 2, and Eng 10 so that it can be taught as large class. The administration expected it the following day because large class was to be implemented next semester. (As if rewriting a syllabus was as easy as making a cup of coffee.)

Several concerns were raised in our meeting: first, because Eng 1 and Eng 2 are GE courses approved by the BOR shouldn’t the BOR be informed first; second, what was the reason for the implementation of this scheme; and third, because all existing studies on ESL claim that small classes produce more competent students, aren’t we sacrificing our quality of education?

Instead of a syllabus, we submitted position papers against the large class scheme. One of my sources later told me that the administration just laughed at our papers. “Pa-position-position paper pa kayo,” one of them reportedly said.

Every semester, the administration would tell us to convert to large class. Every semester, our division head would present our reasons against it. When Prof. Asuncion stepped down as head (and later retired), it was Prof. Emerita Cervantes’s turn. And she defended our cause just as her predecessor did. Someone form the administration reportedly said: “Sawang- sawa na kami dyan.” If I was there I’d tell that person: “Kung sawang-sawa na kayo, ba’t di nyo pa kami tantanana?”

January 2010. A memo from the chancellor reached the Department of Humanities and the Department of Social Sciences. The memo came with a verbal instruction: Large class will be implemented for all GE classes next school year. It also came with a verbal threat: Take it or leave. (In the case of temporary faculty it’s take it or no renewal.)

On January 18, 2010, 9AM, the faculty of the Department of Humanities will be met by RGEP council head Panopio and Vice- Chancellor for Academic Affairs Laude not to consult but to tell us that we can’t do anything about it. It’s curious why Laude would be there. She’s the one who endorses our renewal to the chancellor.

Technically, it is the administration that is proposing the large class scheme. But so far, we have not been provided the rationale for such a move. (The situation is a far cry from Velasco’s promise of transparency when he took over from Chancellor David.) The rumor is that it has to do with money. Large class means fewer teachers. Fewer teachers means more items. More items means more money in the bank. More money in the bank means more interest. More interest means more savings.

(What is an item? Each department has a set number of items. Items correspond to the number of teacher you can hire. I’m not sure, but I think the government budgets salary according to items and not necessarily according to actual number of teachers. Therefore, even though no one is being paid for that item, there is money being set aside for that item. If no one uses it, the money goes to the bank. It’s an elaborate version of the 15-30 scheme in baranggays.) This is the worst time to be a member of the Academic Personnel Committee. Because few teachers are needed, it pains me to know that I would be one of the people responsible for determining who among my colleagues will not be renewed next school year. (In our division alone, there’s some 20 faculty members. The Department of Humanities has some 60.)

If you ask me, only one person deserves the boot. If money is the problem, our Chancellor shouldn’t be squandering UP’s precious budget on sidewalk displays (those infamous three-coat painted solid concrete Oro can sized bangas littering the sidewalks), 60-foot Christmas trees, and life-size Nativity scenes. If money is the problem, our Chancellor should be creative enough to think of ways to tie up with international research institutions and earn money by simply being a university in the truest sense. Or have the balls to demand a bigger budget from the government. Elections is just around the corner anyway.

Fire Velasco and hire someone new. Preferably someone who understands that the one thing every UP student is proud of is quality education.

January 15, 2010
Los Baños, Laguna

Related posts:

1. A few new insights on blogging for literacy in the Philippine context
2. Challenges to e-learning continue
3. Will blogging for literacy work in the Philippine context?

Just last night, my younger university colleague, Raymond and I were sharing a few of the ideas that are quite interesting research areas for us language scholars. Then we came to the issue of access to the latest ideas and resources. How can one do relevant research when we’re still quoting 20 year-old materials.

Wikipedia is up-to-date but still questionable for most as a “citable” resource. But who needs Wikipedia if you can get the actual ebooks and book scans online for free? Sites like Gigapedia (which has been online for more than a year now, wonder why only very few UP people know about it) have a better catalog for recent books than local libraries.

Writing my thesis has been one expensive ride. Wanting to do it not only the right but ethical way, I’ve invested in software licenses and books and ebooks. The running total of my thesis-related expense is somewhere double what a UP instructor gets in a month.

But who else has that money to spend on academic books? Probably not your undergrad (though if UP undergrads can drive BMWs, maybe they can). If you’re an undergraduate working on a thesis where even the printing costs can drain your allowance, would you even bother with buying books or resort to other means of getting the same information without the expense?

Now we come to the more sensitive issue of ethics. Leaked ebooks and scans definitely violate intellectual property. Any self-respecting academic should respect IP.

And how different is it over photocopying – something that has been part of the UP culture for a very long time now? But if you’re in the third world where just one book costs thousands of pesos (and you need like 20-40 to work on a study) and it would take years for the university library to even get a copy, putting on that scholarly eyepatch really is the most viable action.

To paraphrase former UP President Dodong Nemenzo, piracy is the revenge of the third world. But should it also be the way forward for third-world academics? Talk about post-colonial.

Arr!

Related posts:

1. What’s this? Syntactic Structures free for download?
2. Book loot
3. The Web 2.0 versus authority

Makes you wonder how difficult it really is to write a dissertation these days. I consider myself pretty well-read given my age for my field locally. And yet there’s still a lot of material that I am aware of and have not read, and material that that I haven’t even thought existed despite the thousands of bibliographic entries I’ve browsed. I hate to admit it but I’ve just recently come across Steven Pinker who is, by specialization a psychologist, but anchors many of his arguments on language.

And boy, how I hate myself for only reading about him just now. Quite a lot of my interests in language studies are actually dealt by his works – game theory, pragmatics, and even physics in language. Yes, physics! (Check this video of his talk at Google where he discusses ideas from his book The Stuff of Thought.)

That had me thinking about that joke I had in our graduate class in Semantics about establishing a field on “quantum linguistics.” I argued that deixis and tense can be related to the concepts of space and time. When I was joking about it, I wondered if that was an original idea. Turns out, it isn’t. According to Pinker there’s “space in our prepositions, matter in nouns, time tenses, and causality in verbs.” Humble pie for me.

Still, this has me thinking. How much original and world-changing thought can be conjured up by an ordinary mind? Perhaps that’s the reason why God only sends a genius like Einstein once a century. Maybe the world won’t just be able to deal with such revolutionary ideas if they come plenty and quick in between. The rest of us are just plain bound for mental mediocrity.

Related posts:

1. Computational linguistics in the Philippines, anyone?
2. Critical discourse analysis and blogging
3. On prescriptivism… again

The list includes words in popular use right now such as “unfriend,” “tweet,” and “sexting.” The list continues to argue in favor of prescriptivism. Promoting a standard language to address miscommunication is one thing. “Banishing” words is something else.

What I don’t understand is that LSSU has an English program which I expect would at least acknowledge language change as part of linguistic development.

It’s interesting for such an institution to offer a totally different stance compared to institutions that acknowledge linguistic creativity like Oxford with its Word of the Year.

And guess what was 2009′s Word of the Year?

Related posts:

1. Thou craven rough-hewn hedge-pig
2. Another take on prescriptivism
3. Why bother with Internet Data?

I wanted to pick out a podcast kit so that I can finally start working on a few projects that I’ve been meaning to do since a couple of years back. Too bad audio stores just don’t carry decent podcast kits. Behringer offers the components of the package individually but it’d still set me back twenty grand. My second choice was a brand new acoustic guitar but kuripot struck me again and just decided to get me some new strings for my electric guitar.

A bit frustrated, I just settled to get some books. And it’s not like they’re for leisure reads either. God knows when was the last time I’ve read something just for kicks. All of them are somehow related to current and future writing projects. And boy books are just so expensive these days. Any paperback will set you back Php 500 easy. Can’t wait for my credit card bill next month.

PS. Oh, any idea where I can order these books? Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis [2009], Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis and Text, Discourse and Corpora. Forgot to ask Fully Booked if they can. For some reason, I don’t want to risk Amazon.

Related posts:

1. What’s this? Syntactic Structures free for download?
2. Pirated scholarship
3. The originality of thought

But I do acknowledge the role of prescriptivism today especially in language teaching. I know that some colleagues in fields such as literature and creative writing do swear by the masterful and artful use of the language. Most have minimal to zero tolerance for grammar errors and lapses. And I do acknowledge their points. In my opinion, if even only for the basis of achieving mutual intelligibility, there is premium to teaching and learning a “standard” English.

And I do concern myself with this thought as of late. I need to bone up on my academic writing. I’ve been trying to write my thesis for the past couple of months only to find myself lacking the patience and discipline to write longer stretches of academic discourse. Years doing web content writing have transformed my writing style from being clear and concise to curt, disorganized, and fluffy.

And I concede that I have to go with a prescriptivist if only to remedy my writing style for the purposes of my thesis. I have to revisit Strunk and White and the MLA Handbook. I even grabbed a few books on style and usage including a couple of Mr. Carillo’s books which I know are excellent local materials on the subject while at the bookstore earlier.

While my position as a language scholar will always be descriptivist, I do maintain that it’s not about choosing one over the other but selecting which one is apt given the context.

Oh. Interesting that I found several David Crystal titles available at National Bookstore. And it was funny to see them located next to Lynne Truss books.

Related posts:

1. On prescriptivism… again
2. On English, prescriptivism, Filipinos, and the Internet
3. Pirated scholarship

In a nutshell, the idea goes that to achieve mutual understanding in a conversation, communicators often follow abide by four maxims and these are:

• Quantity – be informative
• Quality – be truthful
• Relation – be relevant
• Manner – be clear and concise

The thing is, reality has it that even by flouting (breaking) these maxims, we are able to achieve creating all sorts of meaning and to some extent a mutual understanding because of our ability to interpret conversational implicatures. Sarcasm for example (though we have to admit that not all people are “sensitive” enough to interpret this).

As far as online discourse go, many constantly flout most if not all of these maxims (some all at once). Take social media and blogging for example. How much information do we convey to our audience? How truthful are we? How relevant is our message? How clear and concise are these messages? Survey the statuses of friends on Facebook or people’s tweets and you’d struggle to make sense of most of them. And still, the Web thrives with our discourses.

Sure there are quite a lot of cases of misunderstanding because of varying interpretations but we just have to deal with understanding’s evil twin.

Related posts:

1. Another take on prescriptivism
2. On English, prescriptivism, Filipinos, and the Internet
3. Jejemon nation

Keele University researchers studied the relationship of cursing with pain tolerance and they found that those who curse can endure pain nearly 50% longer than those who don’t. This result gives everyone who gets hurt some good reason to belt out expletives.

On average, the students could tolerate the pain for nearly two minutes when swearing compared with only one minute and 15 seconds when they refrained from using expletives.

Researchers have yet to explain the link but they believe that it has something to do with the human beings’ flight or fight response. For a more detailed, check out this article on BBC.

Anyway, at least this gives me a bit of license to skip the PC bullcrap and curse whenever I want. I’ll just pretend that I stubbed my toe or bit my tongue.

Related posts:

1. On prescriptivism… again

Makes me want to shift all of a sudden…

Talagang nakapangungulila din naman kung bakit laging Inggles na lang ang gamit kong wika upang magsulat sa aking blog. Hindi naman pawang mga banyaga lamang ang mambabasa nitong blog ko na ito. Karamihan pa rin naman ng mga bumibisita dito ay mga mga kaibgan at mga dating kamag-aral na makiintindi ng aking pagsusulat.

Piff. Maybe that sounded like I was trying too hard. Amazingly, I didn’t struggle but I’m sure folks from the Filipino department would frown at that bit. Just like riding a bike, I guess. Rusty but you never unlearn it. Maybe I should try it out again one of these days when I finally step into that mood.

Related posts:

1. A new blog for learning English language and literature
2. How does one delimit a blog post?
3. Heeey… my sis finally puts up her own blog