# Magluluto ang babae ng manok



## mylasalle

In what ways are the two sentences related,
and in what ways are they different:


1) Magluluto (will cook) ang babae (the woman) ng manok (the chicken).



2) Lulutuin (will be cooked) ng babae (by the woman) ang manok (the chicken). 



Embarrassingly, I do not have a definitive answer. These seemingly simple sentences almost cost me a grade. Help.


----------



## childoftheworld

mylasalle said:


> In what ways are the two sentences related,
> and in what ways are they different:
> 
> 
> 1) Magluluto (will cook) ang babae (the woman) ng manok (the chicken).
> 
> Magluluto - context is future tense, same as 'She will cook'. (Agentive Case)
> 
> Ang - the object here is the 'woman' and the indrect object is the 'chicken'.
> 
> 
> 2) Lulutuin (will be cooked) ng babae (by the woman) ang manok (the chicken).
> 
> Lulutuin - context is 'present participle' < is this the correct terminology?, same as 'She is going to cook'. In terms of context, the action stated (luto) denotes an action that is future & immediate. (Objective Case)
> 
> Ng - the object here is the 'chicken', the woman is the subject.
> 
> Honestly, maybe my explanation is very wrong. Go to this site and read the differecne between A, O and D.
> 
> Search Google: Tagalog Verb Context and select the Listing that says
> 
> JSTOR: The Case System of Tagalog Verbs
> 
> Read thru to the bottom of the document. It tells you of some of the cases of Tagalog Verbs.
> 
> 
> Embarrassingly, I do not have a definitive answer. These seemingly simple sentences almost cost me a grade. Help.


----------



## Qcumber

mylasalle said:


> 1) Magluluto (will cook) ang babae (the woman) ng manok (the chicken).
> 2) Lulutuin (will be cooked) ng babae (by the woman) ang manok (the chicken).


Hi, MyLaSalle.
Fortunately for you, the problem was solved decades ago by SIL Philippine language specialists. [SIL = Summer Institute of Linguistics] 
They introduced the concept of "focus".
Whatever your Tagalog clause, it has to be focused on one of the arguments of the verb, be it an actant or a circumstant.
In (1), the clause is focused on the subject: babáe.
In (2), the clause is focused on the direct object: manók.

As shown in your examples, the form of the verb depends on the focus.
A foreign student of Tagalog has to learn all the focal forms of a given verb. Generally three are enough: subject focus, direct object focus, indirect object focus / location.

Once we have a focal form, the conjugation is not hard because there are only four aspects, and the same aspectual form is used for all the persons;
e.g. lutúin, lúlutúin, nilútò, nilúlútò [focused on the direct object]

P.S. Do you make a difference between lutúin and ilútò?


----------



## childoftheworld

Qcumber said:


> Hi, MyLaSalle.
> Fortunately for you, the problem was solved decades ago by SIL Philippine language specialists. [SIL = Summer Institute of Linguistics]
> They introduced the concept of "focus".
> Whatever your Tagalog clause, it has to be focused on one of the arguments of the verb, be it an actant or a circumstant.
> In (1), the clause is focused on the subject: babáe.
> In (2), the clause is focused on the direct object: manók.
> 
> As shown in your examples, the form of the verb depends on the focus.
> A foreign student of Tagalog has to learn all the focal forms of a given verb. Generally three are enough: subject focus, direct object focus, indirect object focus / location.
> 
> Once we have a focal form, the conjugation is not hard because there are only four aspects, and the same aspectual form is used for all the persons;
> e.g. lutúin, lúlutúin, nilútò, nilúlútò [focused on the direct object]
> 
> P.S. Do you make a difference between lutúin and ilútò?


 
There! someone who has more knowledge of the Tagalog grammar in English Terminology.

He! He!

Lutuin natin - let us cook ...
Lutuin mo - cook this...
Lulutuin mo - you will be cooking this...
Lulutuin ko - I will be cooking this...

iluto mo - go and cook this... I think the prefix i- specifies a direct order in a very strong sense, i.e, go do this, go do that.

Both are used when giving orders. Iluto mo ito is more often used. It is like giving a direct order.

For Lutuin... it has also the same effect but the difference I believe is dependent on the person using it. You have to know Tagalog to know what to use. It's like the special conjugation for iregular French Verbs, you have to memorize and know.

I'm not a specialist in Tagalog Grammar Terminilogy.

Once, a professor at the Ateneo de Manila U. asked the whole class... give me the 9 verb forms of a word... One Japanese student who is specializing in Filipino studies flawlessly gave the 9 forms, while all the others (native Filipinos) were caught trying to remember all... 

Maybe a foreigner would understand my native language better than I do. He! He!


----------



## childoftheworld

mylasalle said:


> In what ways are the two sentences related,
> and in what ways are they different:
> 
> 
> 1) Magluluto (will cook) ang babae (the woman) ng manok (the chicken).
> 
> 
> 
> 2) Lulutuin (will be cooked) ng babae (by the woman) ang manok (the chicken).
> 
> 
> 
> Embarrassingly, I do not have a definitive answer. These seemingly simple sentences almost cost me a grade. Help.


 
??? E, native ka pala ng Pilipinas, e... 'di mo rin alam? We're sinking in the same boat. I nearly flunked Grade 7 Tagalog... and when my Philosophy course at Univ. was taught in Tagalog, I had extreme difficulty as well. Nearly failed.... ha ha!


----------



## kios_01

Guys, c'mon. Let's cut ourselves some slack. It's not like we learned how to speak Tagalog in the classroom. Our Filipino teachers just taught us how to improve on it. We're natives and we did not need to know all those technical stuff to be able to use it. The foreigners (who want to speak it) learn the technical stuff because they have to. It doesn't mean they're better than us. No offense, of course.


----------



## childoftheworld

kios_01 said:


> Guys, c'mon. Let's cut ourselves some slack. It's not like we learned how to speak Tagalog in the classroom. Our Filipino teachers just taught us how to improve on it. We're natives and we did not need to know all those technical stuff to be able to use it. The foreigners (who want to speak it) learn the technical stuff because they have to. It doesn't mean they're better than us. No offense, of course.


 

Yeah... I remember those days when English was the 'first langauge' in school and Tagalog was the 'foreign language'....


----------



## moonshine

kios_01 said:


> Guys, c'mon. Let's cut ourselves some slack. It's not like we learned how to speak Tagalog in the classroom. Our Filipino teachers just taught us how to improve on it. We're natives and we did not need to know all those technical stuff to be able to use it. The foreigners (who want to speak it) learn the technical stuff because they have to. It doesn't mean they're better than us. No offense, of course.



I agree, plus for some of us it's been years since we've had Filipino grammar lessons so it's understandable that we can't recall the correct terminologies in an instant when we have to explain stuff.


----------



## mylasalle

Wow! There's been so many replies the past days I was out. It just goes to show that work does take the fun out of life - and fun for me is defined as engaging in intelligent debates in this forum! 

Yes, Qcumber, I did remember coming across the SIL in the research. My instructor however wanted a deeper analysis past the surface structure. She did want to find out what motivates the shift of focus in the Tagalog language. 

I argued in the paper that words should not merely be described according to its category (i.e. subject, object) but according to its inherent features - its as if they had a life of their own. 

To illustrate, I used the English language in comparing the following sentences:


----------



## mylasalle

Sorry... pressed the wrong button...

As I was saying, to illustrate:

1) He might _______ to Paris
2) He is _________ to Paris
3) He has _________ to Paris

Apparently, the answer to the three blanks require the verb "to go." But the form of this verb is used differently in the three examples, with the answer, as I'm sure you all know, as follows:

1) GO
2) GOING
3) GONE

So I concluded that the three sentences each required a different form of the verb TO GO by virtue of the features the verbs carry (i.e. MIGHT has features that require a succeeding verb in the infinitive / IS has features that require a succeeding verb in the ING form / and HAS has features that require a succeeding verb in the perfect participle GONE).

Whew! To tell you the truth, I never thought the hardest course I have encountered relates to my very own native language! My apologies to my fellow Filipinos for I have failed our own unique language :0


----------

