The 4th of June Nest of Pigs Ouster
The following article is an attempt to fulfill this blog’s purpose at providing news analysis. However, news must be transmitted in a timely and expedient fashion, something that is beyond this writer’s capacity at the moment. Therefore, this is being published before interest on the issue wanes.
Toe the Mainstream Media Party Line
If you follow the mainstream media (MSM), you will already be familiar with scandal that occurred this week, when the Philippine Daily Inquirer published the following controversial comic strip (PDI filename “pug130406.jpg”) by veteran cartoonist Apolonio “Pol” Medina, Jr.
Controversial “Pugad Baboy” comic strip “pug130406″, published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer, 4 June 2013.
At first glance, the matter seems cut and dried:
- On Tuesday, 4 June 2013, Mr. Medina authors a tasteless comic storyline in which “Bop”, a generic gay character accuses Christians of being hypocrites in their dealing with homosexuals.
- The punch line actually names St. Scholastica’s College as a haven for lesbian activity and accuses the staff, the Missionary Benedictine Sisters of Tutzing of deliberately encouraging such activities.
- In essence, impugning the reputation of a century-plus-old academic institution as well as slander against the parents, currently enrolled students, and about eight generations of very wealthy and politically powerful alumni.
- Naturally, there is considerable anger as the extended St. Scholastica family spreads the news of this “singular” insult throughout the social media.
- In response, the Board of Trustees of St. Scholastica’s College threatens legal action against the Philippine Daily Inquirer “unless an inquiry is launched”.
- On Wednesday, 5 June 2013, the Philippine Daily Inquirer suspends Mr. Medina who then chooses to fall on his sword when he realizes the shame and loss of political capital he has his patron, Mrs. Letty Magsanoc.
- On Friday, 7 June 2013, the Philippine Daily Inquirer tearfully, but reluctantly accepts Mr. Medina’s letter of resignation .
Having arrived at the “facts” presented, the reading public is now encouraged by the MSM to express outrage against in order to perhaps defend freedom of speech, or freedom of the press or simply “show support” of the artwork of Mr. Medina which has garnered a quarter century of fans across the Philippines, now portrayed as yet another plucky journalist who has been silenced by powerful interests.
Already, a number of communities on the Internet are using the controversy to further their own political agendas.
However, upon closer inspection, a number of details seem to have been lost in the MSM whitewash, causing the Filipino libertarian community to express reasonable doubt on the entire chain of events presented.
Questions We are Not Supposed to Ask:
- Why was Mr. Medina the only person to be suspended by the Philippine Daily Inquirer?
- Mr. Medina is no stranger to editorial censorship and has had his work refused by the PDI before, (See Medina, A. Ink & Politics 1.) so why is there no mention of any disciplinary action against the editor of the Entertainment section who had the editorial authority to allow or disallow the printing of “pug130406.jpg”?
- Was Tuesday, 4 June 2013, the first time “pug130406.jpg” was published in the PDI?
- What was the Pugad Baboy story arc that began on Monday, 3 June 2013 and how did “pug130406.jpg” fit into it?
- Finally, who benefits from the controversy?
Analysis of PDI Internal File Numbering
On Monday, 3 June 2013, the Philippine Daily Inquirer published the first of the week’s series of Pugad Baboy comic strips featuring commentary by Adagulfo “Mang Dagul” Sungcal Jr. on the seeming resurgence of Kilusang Bagong Lipunan loyalists on the Internet. It is marked in the PDI Archive as “pug130603.jpg”.
The Philippine Daily Inquirer serializes filenames in it’s directory using a simple “pugYYMMDD” format, where “pug” represents “Pugad Baboy” accompanied by a six figure numbered date. YY = year, MM = month, and DD = day. This is to represent the date of publication. The other two remaining comics strips sharing the same storyline are, as expected, also internally serialized in the same manner.
Medina, A. (3 June 2013). Pugad Baboy “pug130603.jpg”. Intended date: 3 June 2013.
However, the comic strip identified as “pug130604.png” and originally intended for Tuesday, 4 June 2013 is mysteriously delayed until Thursday, 6 June 2013 and replaced by the now-infamous “pug130406.jpg”.
Medina, A. (6 June 2013). Pugad Baboy. Intended date: 4 June 2013.
When one reads the story arc in its intended order, (“pug130603.jpg” followed by ”pug130604.png”), you can get a sense of continuity of the narrative.
In “pug130603.jpg”, Mang Dugal is at his laptop, commenting on a number of pro-KBL posts on Facebook. Next to him is Polgas on a second laptop. The scene in “pug130604.png” remains the same. Two characters sitting side-by-side with laptops, talking about pro-KBL posts on Facebook. Even the clothing of the characters is the same, which gives one the idea that these two comic strips were drawn one after the other in rapid succession. In “pug130603.jpg”, Mang Dugal mentions posts, which could anywhere on the Internet, however, in in “pug130604.png”, Facebook is mentioned telling the reader that the previously mentioned posts were actually Facebook status updates. Again, a sense of continuity in the narrative.
Thus, “pug130605.jpg” also gives a sense of time, with Mang Dagul and Polgas conversing later in the day, but continuing the same narrative.
Medina, A. (5 June 2013). Pugad Baboy. Intended date: 5 June 2013.
If we were to follow the PDI’s actual publication order, Mang Dagul begins a rant about pro-KBL in ”pug130603.jpg” then the anti-Marcos story-arc suddenly shifts perspective to “pug130406.jpg”, after which the anti-Marcos arc returns with Mang Dagul in the kitchen, and finishes up with “pug130604.png” showing Mang Dagul having changed back into the same shirt as in “pug130603.jpg”.
The following chart shows this story arc discrepancy quite clearly.
|
PDI Filename |
Intended Publication Order |
Actual Date of Publication |
| pug130603.jpg | Monday, 3 June 2013 | Monday, 3 June 2013 |
| pug130406.jpg | Saturday, 6 April 2013 | Tuesday, 4 June 2013 |
| pug130605.jpg | Wednesday, 5 June 2013 | Wednesday, 5 June 2013 |
| pug130604.png | Tuesday, 4 June 2013 | Thursday, 6 June 2013 |
| (missing) | Friday, 7 June 2013 | - |
| (missing) | Saturday, 8 June 2013 | - |
A glance at the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s Pugad Baboy Archive confirms the anomalous placement of ”pug130406.jpg” in the publication order.
Pugad Baboy Archive, Page 1
What can be concluded from the evidence is that publication of “pug130406.jpg” required editorial authority, which Mr. Medina, as a contributor did not. A quick glance at the Management Team page of the PDI shows a certain Emy Velarde as the Editor for the Entertainment section.
As of this writing, there has been no mention of any censure or disciplinary action against her.
Origins of “pug130406.jpg”
On Thursday, 6 June 2013 at 9:32 am, Mr. Medina posted his version of events on his Facebook page:
Medina, A. (6 June 2013). Facebook post.
“if you zoom in on that particular strip that got me fired, you’ll see that the strip first appeared in MARCH. no reaction then. it was reissued after i made a series of anti-marcos strips, then BOOM! nag-trending sa twitter. interesting. i smell a consPIGracy….”
A close-up on panel 2 of “pug130406.jpg” shows Mr. Medina’s own production code, “PMJR-MM-YY”, where “PMJR” are his initials accompanied by a four figure numbered date. MM = month and YY = year. This is to represent the date the comic strip was created.
Close-up of panel 2 showing production code “PMJR0313″.
This more or less gives credence to the theory that publication of ”pug130406.jpg” on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 was an approved editorial decision, out of the hands of Mr. Medina.
However, a close-up on panel 1 of “pug130406.jpg” shows a second production code, marked as “PMJR0413″.
Close-up of panel 1 showing production code “PMJR0413″. Taken from the PDI Archive.
N.B.: As of this writing, this comic strip has been removed from the PDI Archive and Mr. Medina has not yet shown the original.
This second production code “PMJR0413″ tallies somewhat with the PDI’s archive code ”pug130406″. Comic strips “pug130603.jpg”, “pug130605.jpg” and “pug130604.png” all bear the production code “PMJR0613″.
N.B.: Without further information available, we speculate that Mr. Medina’s code not only acts as a batch production date, but also as an “editorial check” granting the PDI Entertainment Editor, Emy Velarde, express permission to reprint an old comic strip.
Another look at the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s Pugad Baboy Archive shows that the comic slated for Saturday, 6 April 2013 is actually missing. Further evidence of editorial involvement.
Pugad Baboy Archive, Page 5
There seems to be some discrepancy towards the employment status of Mr. Medina’s employment with the PDI as of Wednesday, 5 June 2013.
Diola, C. (2013, 6 June). Pugad Baboy creator claims ‘conPIGracy’ over suspended strip. Philippine Star. Retrieved from http://www.philstar.com/news-feature/2013/06/06/950848/pugad-baboy-creator-claims-conpigracy-over-suspended-strip
At this point in time, the official statement of the PDI says that Mr. Medina is “under suspension” but Mr. Medina claims to have been fired. He does retract his comments lightly later on.
“What? wait … Hindi pa pala ako fired. suspended lang hanggang magkaroon ng consensus na sipain ako. pero. Doon din siguro ang punta no’n. Sigh,”
This attitude is susprisingly in contrast to Mr. Medina’s resignation letter on Friday, 7 June 2013.
The resignation letter of Pol Medina, Jr., addressed to Philippine Daily Inquirer Editor-in-Chief Letty Jimenez Magsanoc. — Photo courtesy of Chiara Zambrano, ABS-CBN News
Questions We are Not Supposed to Ask:
- If what Mr. Medina says is accurate and that this code does in fact denote production date, (and what we speculate to be author consent), then why does “pug130406.jpg” not show a third production code “PMJR0613″?
- Is it possible that Mr. Medina did not choose to resign over the furor caused by “pug130406.jpg”, but was asked to quietly resign (was fired) over his Facebook postings?
[To be continued]
Bitcoin Debate 1
I mirror this article so that it may not fall down the memory hole.
Originally posted by studiesineconomics on April 10, 2013 at 4:02 pm
Is it really true that Bitcoin is a way to preserve private wealth or is it a new bubble that destroys wealth? Who are we going to believe, those who say that Bitcoin is the “solution” to fiat currency or those who argue that this new digital currency is basically flawed? Which camp has an accurate Austrian concept of money, the pros or the cons? Allow me to share my reading focusing on both the positive and the negative sides of this new electronic cash.
Let me start with Rick Falkvince’s “Why Bitcoin is Poised to Change Society Much More than the Internet Did”. He claims that as Bitcoin “matures, it will change society’s fundamental operations much more than the Internet did.” He then identifies Bitcoin as a new form of money operating without the need to trust any institution. In fact, it is outside the control of government and any financial institution; its chief goal is to make central banking obsolete. Falkvince further describes Bitcoin as “the Skynet of banking” due to its resiliency even if the government would attempt to shut it down. Though Falkvince accepts that Bitcoin has many weaknesses, he still considers “shortsighted and ignorant” to describe it as a “bubble”. He admits that “liquidity to state-issued money” is one of its problems, but sees the value of Bitcoin as “an economic agreement”.
Let’s proceed next to Jeffrey A. Tucker’s “Bitcoin for Beginners”. At the outset, Tucker argues that understanding Bitcoin is not easy and it requires humility to accept the limitation of our imagination about the future potential of the free market. He compared Bitcoin to emails and ebooks, which both replaced familiar and known utilities. By this word, Tucker implies that Bitcoin will eventually replace the present monetary system.
Tucker’s observation is accurate. He perceives that despite the fact that the entire world has been leaving the actual into the cyberspace, existing monetary system is still clinging to material paper under the control of the government. And that is why Bitcoin as a digital currency is necessary to take this control out of the hands of the government.
A certain anonymous “Satoshi Nakamoto” introduced this needed currency in 2008 that according to Tucker possessed the features required to address the present financial crisis. These features include anonymity, speed, preservation of property rights and scarcity. Among them, scarcity is the precise quality that is now violated both by governments and central banks through the printing of indefinite quantity of paper money. In the case of Bitcoin, its scarcity is proven by its present 11 M in quantity and fixed at 21 M by 2140.
Jeffrey A. Tucker introduced three other points in understanding this new monetary system. Bitcoin is decentralized, has value, and offers a promising field for investment. The system is designed free from the monopoly of any single institution. It is a monetary system where everyone is in charge. And because of this, we are told that any attempt on the part of the government to destroy or control the system would be an impossible task.
A Libertarian Solution to Bored, Unhappy and Rebellious Students
I mirror this article so that it may not fall down the memory hole.
Originally posted
by studiesineconomics on April 8, 2013 at 6:28 am
Existing education is a subtle way to keep children behind “prison bars” and we wonder why they find violence and drugs attractive to them. Students are unhappy and bored in “studying” disconnected and irrelevant “facts”. Rebellion is the inescapable outcome of such misrule. These are harsh realities that unless adults really see the situation of their children and do something about it, social deterioration is an inevitable consequence. This is the main thesis of Paul Graham in his 2003 article, “Why Nerds are Unpopular“.
Ron Paul, Thomas Woods, Gary North and other libertarians have realized long time ago such pointless pursuit of conventional education. In response to this situation, April 6, 2013 is a milestone not only in the history of libertarian movement, but in changing the direction of global economics and politics. Study what the Bible says about self-government and personal responsibility, which serve as the foundation of free enterprise. Add to it also the history of libertarian political economy and the Austrian school of economics. Moreover, approach these important subjects not by way of common schools’ textbooks, but by rigorous studies of primary sources. This is the kind of education Ron Paul Curriculum is offering the world.
Technolatry
I mirror this article so that it may not fall down the memory hole.
Originally posted by studiesineconomics on April 7, 2013 at 6:29 pm
I read one time a forum thread among theological educators about the 5 G’s that serve now as threats to Christian ministry. The first three are familiar – girls, gold and glory. The other two are new – guys and gadgets.
When we think of gadgets, we usually associate them with technology. A question comes to my mind, “Is it really possible for technology to be a form of idolatry?”
In the recent popularity of Bitcoin caused by Cyprus banking crisis, I notice two mottos attached on the coin – “Vires in Numeris” and “In Cryptography We Trust”. The first motto literally means “strength in numbers” and the second motto reminds us “In God We Trust” placed on US coins and paper currency. Atheists and humanists dislike such use.
With the current banking and monetary crisis, we now see that using the popular motto did not prevent man to craft a monetary system that serves legal theft. In a way, we can say that the name “God” has been used to hide institutional plunder. We cannot therefore blame those who call for the abolition of the existing monetary system to also hate the institutional religion associated with it. With an economic climate that we have, it is difficult now for people to distinguish the difference between genuine religion and a religion that fails to see the evil of a financial system that perpetuates currency debasement.
I think, contrary to the original intention of originators of the two Bitcoin mottos, I see an appropriate place for them. If we see them not as ultimate expressions of trust, that is, not as rivals of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, we can say that they are not idolatrous, but as expressions of appreciation given to free market advocates and human ingenuity.
The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Inflation
I mirror this article so that it may not fall down the memory hole.
Originally posted
by studiesineconomics on April 2, 2013 at 5:08 pm
I suspend my study of Bastiat’s “The Law” not only because the material is quite difficult to handle, but also because my reading interest shifted to Christian economics. The present article is a summary and reflection of Chapter 2 of Gary North’s “Introduction to Christian Economics”. North gave a very interesting title to this chapter, “The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Inflation”.
Chapter 2 is all about inflation. For North, this is a very important subject that every taxpayer has to understand. To him, inflation is “the most pressing economic question” (Gary North, An Introduction to Christian Economics, 1974, p. 20). In chapter 3, he also said among the dangers to free market economy, inflation is the greatest both historically and theoretically (p. 29).
In explaining inflation, North deals with 6 interrelated subjects, but I only want to focus on 4 of them – definition of inflation, basic properties of money, origin of modern banking and inflationary policies.
Meaning of Inflation
North started his essay with a working definition of inflation. He identified two basic definitions:
- An increase of the money supply; and
- An increase in the prices of goods and services
Number 2 is the definition known by the public, but North used the term in his essay using the first definition.
Money’s Properties
North then enumerated the basic properties of money. These are durability, transportability, divisibility and scarcity. Understanding the importance of the fourth property is critical to see the illusory foundation of existing monetary system, which violates this important basic property of money.
Origin of Modern Banking
Third, North narrated a brief history for the origin of modern banking. He started with ancient history and then proceeded to medieval period.
During ancient time, says North, the Roman Empire practiced inflation by counterfeiting the existing gold and silver coins. The Empire did this by “adding cheap metals into the molten gold or silver, yet calling the resulting coins pure” (p.21). Such deception resulted to the reduction of value of coins and the loss of their purchasing power.
In the Medieval Period, the role of the Roman Empire was replaced by goldsmiths and metalworkers who were later known as “bankers”. They are the ones who introduced the idea of storing precious metals. The people trusted them and so the silver and gold coins of the public were given to them for safekeeping. The people received IOUs as “money substitutes” for their coins in the vault. However, people became more interested with money substitutes than gold or silver coins. Bankers devised a scheme to maximize their profit. They issued more IOUs than what they actually possessed in their banks believing that people will not take their deposits simultaneously.
Such simultaneous withdrawal is described as “bank run”. Bankers fear such event. Such panic on the part of depositors is occasioned by the loss of confidence in the ability of the banks to meet their responsibilities. The 1930’s is usually referenced as a typical example of such panic where 9,000 banks collapsed (p.22).
Inflationary Policies
North then describes what he called as “the central flaw of all inflationary policies” particularly in relation to the development of paper money. He explains it as follows:
“…citizens decided to trade certain money metals for scarce consumer goods and services. They later consented to use paper claims to money metals as convenient substitutes. But paper and ink are in large supply, unlike gold and silver; it is far easier to print an IOU for a thousand silver dollars than it is to mine the silver, smelt it, and form it into the actual thousand coins.” (p. 22).
This development destroys the fourth basic property of money, which is scarcity. Such violation results to devaluation of existing monetary unit or the increase in the value of goods and services.
The sectors of society that suffer the most in inflating the money supply are those who depend on fixed salary while the groups that benefit from inflation are politicians, bankers and the suppliers of goods and services to the government.
To illustrate the economic destruction caused by inflation, North returned to Germany’s experience in the early 1920’s. Germany that time was operating “over 300 paper mills and 2,000 printing establishments” to print German marks, Germany’s money that time. We were told that the change in the value of Germany’s money that time was so fast that its original value in the morning was no longer the same in the evening. I think there is no worst case to illustrate how inflation destroyed Germany’s economy that time than the fact that a loaf of bread would cost 1.25 trillion marks. Unemployment became widespread, savings were wiped out and German marks turned worthless. Economic depression prepared the way for the rise of the Nazi dictator.
Personal Response
Do Americans learn from Germany’s experience? The existing economic situation of the US tells us that they did not learn from the past, but is actually heading towards similar path of economic destruction. When North wrote this essay, the price of gold was $41 per ounce and US national debt was $353 billion. After 44 years, gold now costs $1,598 per ounce and US national debt is closed to $17 trillion. I just wonder if Gary North’s analysis is correct, how come his predicted “economic collapse” is not yet taking place? Instead, we have been hearing from mainstream news that 2008 economic crisis has already been solved! Or maybe, “the day of reckoning” has just been extended due to Federal Reserve’s commitment to indefinite QEs.
Now, why am I interested in all of this? Why worry about American crisis whereas the Philippine economy is now experiencing a boom?
I am not an economist, but I am entitled to my own opinion. I suspect that our “economic boom” is not based on solid economic practices. It is a “spill out” of what’s happening both in the US and the EU. At least in their case, reality is setting in and I am hoping that economic illusion would gradually fade. But they are transporting such illusion into our shore and we welcome it with open arms.
I do not doubt that those at the top are ready to reap the financial rewards of living in economic illusion. But as all artificial “booms” end in “busts”, I think it is important that Filipinos should understand the role of “imported inflation” that drives the growth in our stock market for us not to be caught unprepared once this illusion starts to fade.
Statism or Anarchism?
I mirror this article so that it may not fall down the memory hole.
Originally posted
by studiesineconomics on March 27, 2013 at 7:58 pm
“The balance of earthly sovereignties between the one (the State or church) and the many (individuals, voluntary associations) is mandatory if we are to preserve both freedom and order. The Bible tells us that God is both one and many, one Being yet three Persons. His creation reflects this unity and diversity. Our social and political institutions are to reflect this. We are to seek neither total unity (statism) nor total diversity (anarchism). Biblical law provides us with guidelines by which we may achieve a balanced social order. We must take biblical law seriously” (Gary North, Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, 1984, p. 57).
Remembering Tagálog, Part 4: Forgotten Rules Concerning More Punctuation Marks
The following lesson on the use of punctuation marks when writing Tagálog is taken from:
Lesson 43 of the «Sálitikán ng̃ wikag̃ pag̃bansâ», authored in 1940 by José N. Sevilla y Tolentino, Rosa L. Sevilla de Alvero, and Aurelio Alvero y Sevilla; and printed by Imprenta Sevilla in Manila.
Please note that the original text makes use of the Tagálog letter ( g̃ ) which was expunged from the alphabet in 1940 by Lope Santos y Canseco. He found its similarity to the Spanish letter ( ñ ) to be uncomfortably reminiscent of foreign cultural influence and thus, unworthy for patriotic Filipinos to use.
For the sake of the modern reader unused to reading pure Tagálog, this has been transcribed as ( ng̃ ).
IKAAPAT NÁ PU’T TATLÓNG̃ PAGAARAL
UKOL SA DATIK (karugtóng̃).
May mg̃a ibá pang̃ datik ná katulong̃ ang̃ Palásulután at itó ay ang̃ mg̃a sumúsunód: Ang̃ kalwit ( ’ ), ang̃ gitlíng̃ ( ‐ ), ang̃ sagnáy ( ― ), ang̃ lutang̃ ( “ ” ), at ang̃ bang̃gít ( « » ), ang̃ kulóng̃ ( ), ang̃ pang̃sambitlâ ( ¡ ! ), ang̃ pang̃tanong̃ ( ¿ ? ), ang̃ talakdâ ( * ), at ang̃ talung̃kô ( ⁂ ).
GITLÍNG
- Gitlíng̃
Ang̃ gitlíng̃ ( ‐ ) ay isáng̃ datik ná ginágamit sa mg̃a hulí ng̃ talatà kung̃ ang̃ katagâ ay hindî nagkasya sa talatà at ang̃ gitlíng̃ ay hudyát ná nagbabalità ná ang̃ karugtóng̃ ay ná sa sumúsunód na talatà. Ginágamit din pasakásakâ sa loób ng̃ salitâ kung̃ ang̃ salitáng̃ pinagkang̃káp ay magbábago ng̃ kahulugan sakaling̃ waláng̃gitlíng̃ na magpapanatili ng̃ pagkakabahagi ng̃ pantíg sang̃ayon sa diwang̃ nasang̃ ibanság.
Hbw.:
Tagusugat. (¿ tagus-ugat o tag-sugat ?)
KALWIT
- Kalwit
Ang̃ kalwit ( ’ ) ay isáng̃ datik ná naghuhudyát ng̃ pagtakas doón ng̃ titik.
Hbw.:
Itó’y mainam. (ito ay mainam)
Bata’t matandâ. (batà at matandâ)
.
SAGNÁY
- Sagnáy
Ang̃ sagnáy ( ― ) ay isáng̃ datik ná naghuhudyát na ang̃ mg̃a pang̃ung̃usap na kanyáng̃ datikan ay nagbabalitang̃ ukol sa isa’t isang̃ naagsasagnayan.
Hbw.:
― “Kay gandá ng̃ lilok na iyaón, nákita mo ba?
― Talagáng̃ magandá, paano’y yari ni Tolentino.
.
LUTANG̃
- Lutang̃
Ang̃ lutang̃ ( “ ” ) ay isáng̃ datik ná kambál na ginágamit upáng̃ palutang̃in ang̃ salitâ o pang̃ung̃usap na nasang̃ papamukurín sa loób ng̃ salaysáy.
Hbw.:
Ang̃ “kuwán” ay isáng̃ pang̃halip na waláng̃ pinipilí.
.
.
BANG̃GÍT
- Bang̃gít
Ang̃ bang̃gít ( « » ) ay isáng̃ datik ná kambál na ginágamit upáng̃ ihudyát ang̃ salitâ o pang̃ung̃usap na sanhî ng̃ bang̃gít. Idinádatik itó sa simulâ at sa wakás.
Hbw.:
Wikà ng̃a ni Kayurò:
«Magasawa ay dî birò
Dî kaning̃ isúsubò
Ilúluwâ kung̃ mapasò.»
KULÓNG̃
- Kulóng̃
Ang̃ kulóng̃ ( ) ay isáng̃ datik na kambál na ikinúkulóng̃ sa mg̃a salitâ o pang̃ung̃usap na dî man basahin ay dî sísirà sa diwà ng̃ salaysáy, ginágamit itó sa mg̃a salitáng̃ nasang̃ liwanagin.
.
.
.
PANG̃SAMBITLÂ
- Pang̃sambitlâ
Ang̃ pang̃sambitlâ ( ¡ ! ) ay isáng̃ datik na kambál na ginágamit doón sa mg̃a pang̃ung̃usap na biníbigyán ng̃ gayóng̃ urì, kinúkulóng̃ ng̃ datik na itó ang̃ mg̃a pang̃ung̃usap na bigláng̃ sambit.
Hbw.:
¡Nakú! ¿Bakit mo akó ginitlá?
¡Hoy! Hindî gágawin iyón ni Binay.
¡Sé! Kung̃ anóano ang̃ pinagsásabí mo.
¡Oh, kay inam!
PANG̃TANONG
- Pang̃tanong̃
Ang̃ pang̃tanong̃ ( ¿ ? ) ay isáng̃ datik na kambál na ihinúhudyát sa sa mg̃a pang̃ung̃usap na may uring̃ paguusisa.
Hbw.:
― ¿Dumaló ka ba sa pulong̃?
― ¿Akó? Hindî akó magkukulang̃.
.
TALAKDÂ
Talakdâ
Ang̃ talakdâ ( * ) ay isáng̃ datik na ihinúhudyát na katagâ na nasang̃ bigyán ng̃ paliwanag sa ibaba ng̃ salaysáy.
.
.
.
.
TALUNG̃KÔ
- Talung̃kô
Ang̃ talung̃kô ( ⁂ ) ay isáng̃ datik na naghuhudyát na ang̃ salaysáy ay lumilipat sa ibáng̃ bugsô ng̃ isinásalaysáy.
.
.
.
.
References
- Pardo de Tavera, T. (1884). Contribucion para el estudio de los antiguos alfabetos Filipinos. Losana, Spain: Imprenta de Jaunin Hermanos.
- Signey, R. (2005). The evolution and disappearance of the “G̃” in Tagálog orthography since the 1593 Doctrina Cristiana. Philippine journal of linguistics, 36(1-2), 1-10.
- Sevilla, J., Sevilla, R., & Alvero, A. (1940). Sálitikán ng̃ wikag̃ pag̃bansâ. Manila, Philippine Islands: Imprenta Sevilla.
- Wolfenden, E. (1961). A re-statement of Tagalog grammar: Appended with José Rizal’s Nueva ortografía del lenguaje Tagálog. Manila: Summer Institute of Linguistics and Institute of National Language.
