# filler



## latchiloya

I happen to read an article about one of the main languages in the Philippines and to my surprise I found this:

"filler 



a particle which adds to the seman- 
tic content of an utterance but 
performs no grammatical function. "

reference: http://archive.org/stream/HiligaynonLessons/HiligaynonLessons-CecileMotus_djvu.txt

I am wondering if there really is a thing as such for I've tried searching I don't find anything relevant in English Language specially the context in bold. If it does exist in Filipino Language, in any way possible, is there anyone who can offer or help give examples of context? 

I appreciate any response.


----------



## DotterKat

*Mmmmmmm*.....oo nga *ano*! Marami ngang salitang Tagalog na para bang... *ano* .... para bang *kwan*...yung kung tawagin sa English ay filler *ba*. Sa totoo lang, para lang silang panakip-butas pag di mo maisip yung....*kwan*...yung gusto mo talagang sabihin *nga* (at hindi yung panakip-butas sa kanta ni Hajji, *ha*). *Eh*, ano pa nga ba ang masasabi natin tungkol dito...*mmmmmm*. *Ay*! Muntik ko na ngang makalimutan na yung mga *kwan*.... yung mga filler na ito ay pwedeng mga salita tulad ng *nga*, *lang* at siempre *naman*, ay *naman*. Depende din *naman* sa pag-gamit nila dahil kung minsan ang *naman* ay isang pang-abay at hindi lang filler at ang *ano* ay pwedeng gamitin na panghalip. O kaya, ang mga filler ay pwede ding yung kung tawagin ay....*e*.....*a*.....ay oo nga, non-lexical filler, tulad ng napag-usapan na natin dito sa _kwan_.


The text above is infested by italicized filler words. Such words add nothing grammatically and in fact dropping them polishes the same text into a higher register of speech (plus of course the requisite alternate choice of words for the text phraseology matches the filler words for stylistic consistency). They do, however, alter semantics (the difference between _Oo_ and _Oo naman_). Filler words are useful in fictional prose to signal by manner of speech the demographic stratum a character inhabits, for instance their age, socio-economic status and educational background. Otherwise, they are best avoided unless such semantic mutability is...._like_..._ah_...._well_...._you know_....the point of it all, _right_?


----------



## latchiloya

Your swiftness in answering the thread is greatly appreciated, Dotterkat.  Yet, before we move on to your propositions let me make clarification to the original topic I created, not to change contextual elements, but to put some context in “bold” fonts to make emphasis and clarification (that I ask for an apology, if this was not done earlier).



latchiloya said:


> "*filler*
> 
> 
> 
> aparticle which adds to the seman-
> ticcontent of an utterance but
> *performs no grammaticalfunction*. "
> 
> I've tried searching I don't find anything relevant inEnglish Language speciallythe context in bold.


 
That you made me amazed you *cited*:



DotterKat said:


> *Mmmmmmm*.....oo nga *ano*! Marami ngang salitang Tagalog na para bang... *ano* .... para bang *kwan*...yung kung tawagin sa English ay filler *ba*. Sa totoo lang, para lang silang panakip-butas pag di mo maisip yung....*kwan*...yung gusto mo talagang sabihin *nga* (at hindi yung panakip-butas sa kanta ni Hajji, *ha*). *Eh*, ano pa nga ba ang masasabi natin tungkol dito...*mmmmmm*. *Ay*! Muntik ko na ngang makalimutan na yung mga *kwan*.... yung mga filler na ito ay pwedeng mga salita tulad ng *nga*, *lang* at siempre *naman*, ay *naman*. Depende din *naman* sa pag-gamit nila dahil kung minsan ang *naman* ay isang pang-abay at hindi lang filler at ang *ano* ay pwedeng gamitin na panghalip. O kaya, ang mga filler ay pwede ding yung kung tawagin ay....*e*.....*a*.....ay oo nga, non-lexical filler, tulad ng napag-usapan na natin dito sa _kwan_.
> 
> ...The text above is infested by italicized filler words. Such words add nothing grammatically




1.   *“Mmmmmmm*_.....”_
Wow! This is such a great example!

2.    _“oo nga, *ano*!”_
Wait… Is this right?

_3.    “kung tawagin sa English ay filler *ba*”_
But “ba” marks a distinction that a statement is in suggestive mood

_4.    “yung gusto mo talagang sabihin *nga*”_
But “nga” marks a distinction that a statement is in referential mood

_5.    “at hindi yung panakip-butas sa kanta ni Hajji, *ha*”_
But “ha” marks a distinction that a statement is in “affirmation” mood

_6.   _ _“para bang *kwan*/ para lang silang panakip-butas pag di mo maisip yung....*kwan*”_
 Do you wish to say “as a pronoun” a word that is used instead of a noun or a noun phrase? But “*kwan*” certainly has the thraits of a pronoun.
Reference: http://www.bohol.ph/kved.php?sw=kwan&where=hw. If so, has it no grammatical function then?

8_.   _ _“*Ay*! Muntik ko na ngang makalimutan”_
_ “ay!”_ –as an interjection; a sudden discovery of something that could have been forgotten_”_

9_.    “....*e.....a....”*_
Well these are right unless it is not in one of the following contexts below:

_(e.g. A! alam ko ang sagot.)_

_“a!”_ –as an interjection; a sudden excitement about a discovery as in _“Eureka!”_

(e.g. E, paano iyan.)

“e’ – as a function word that reinforce disagreement.

_10. _“*lang*”
Well, I have no objection to this. This is not clear to me for you cited “lang” in enumeration of sample of words as a part of your proposition, not as an element of a context.


That the original context above "filler" which is defined as "...performs no grammatical function" differs denotation from this
_“ filler" which is defined as "a sound, word, or phrase (as “you know?”) used to fill pauses in speaking”,_*with which you might refer to either(or worse, 'neither') but not both*_._
_Reference: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/filler_


Thus, in respect to the above propositions, I have the reasons not to agree to this:


DotterKat said:


> ..., _right_? <


 

*Note: *_that the above statements and/or inference enumerated, not inclusive the statements within quotations, from number one to number ten is cited without reference for it is a part of (original) research of this account owner__._


----------



## DotterKat

As I have indicated in P#2, drop the filler words and the text remains intact and appears a tad more polished:

Oo nga. Marami ngang mga salitang Tagalog na para bang kung tawagin sa English ay filler. Sa totoo lang para lang silang panakip-butas pag di mo maisip yung gusto mo talagang sabihin, (at hindi yung panakip-butas sa kanta ni Hajji). Ano pa nga ba ang masasabi natin dito? Muntik ko na ngang makalimutan na yung mga filler na ito ay pwedeng mga salita tulad ng......

Semantics, pure and simple. _I _wrote the text and therefore they _are_ filler words by _my _design. Look up intention-based semantics if interested, though a discussion about filler words does not merit this type of attention. So..._l__ike...actually..._I'm..._like...basically _done with this discussion, _right?_
Obvious _naman_, di ba?


----------

