written by Chago Lim at the Discussion Board of Ulupan na Pansiansiya'y Salitan Pangasinan Facebook Page:
Pangalatok is a combination of the 2 Filipino words "Pangasinan na katok." It was thought to have emanated from the Kapampangans during the Spanish period although it was neither them who invented it nor them to be blamed. Spanish colonizers feared that when unity is established among its colony it could spark an uprising against them. So they devised a lot of internal warfare (physical, mental and psychological) among their colonies here. They instigated hate, people against people among neighboring provinces. Pangasinan was on their cross-hairs as it is the biggest province and the one of the most populous (up to now). Spaniards invented, taught and used this derogatory word to effectively instigate hatred and racism from both neighboring provinces of Tarlac and Pampanga against Pangasinan so as to divide the people. Although this inter-provincial mudslinging didn't last long, eventually the Spaniards were given the boot and the rest, as they say, is history!
Letter to Proponents who state that Pangalatok is a Derogatory Word:
ReplyDeleteGood day everyone. As I am too busy with my personal life, I am writing this letter to once and for all present my answers to proponents who says that Pangalatok is a derogatory word. I do not want to waste my precious time debating on this topic, debating on people who do not even present support or evidences of their allegation. But I am pressed to present my following arguments, against those who are pushing for the abolition of Pangalatok:
Arguments:
1. First, THERE IS NO DIRECT AND SOLID EVIDENCE IN HISTORY TO PROVE THE ALLEGATION THAT PANGALATOK IS A DEROGATORY AND INSULTING WORD. The allegation that Pangalatok was used in history as derogatory and insulting word is a mere conjecture. THE PROPONENTS DO NOT HAVE DIRECT AND SOLID EVIDENCES TO PROVE THE ALLEGATION THAT PANGALATOK WAS USED IN HISTORY AS A DEROGATORY AND INSULTING WORD. It is futile to proceed and a very waste of time debating on a topic that is not true at all, and worst no evidence at all. To Proponents, please provide direct and solid evidence to prove your allegation. There is no need to continue reading my succeeding arguments unless this first argument is debunked. The burden of proof lies to the proponents (emper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit) who state that Pangalatok is a derogatory and insulting word.
2. Second, the imposed definition of Pangalatok is variable or inconsistent. There is no point in debating if the definition is not truly identified or pinned down, or else we are debating on different pages. One alleged definition says that Pangalatok means “Kasla kayo nga agtogkik nga manok no agsasao” or Pangasinan +kasla+ togkik +manok= Panga-la-tok. Another one says that Pangalatok means “Pangasinense sira tuktok”. Another definition states “"Pangasinan na katok." The definitions are variable and inconsistent. Furthermore, there is no evidence to prove that these definitions really existed in history. These definitions are mere conjectures and no evidence at all. All of these definitions are unsubstantiated.
Yet, please go back to my FIRST argument declaring that there is no solid and direct evidence to prove that Pangalatok was once used in history as a derogatory and insulting word. It is futile and a very waste of time to debate on the allegation that Pangalatok is a derogatory word as the proponents have no evidence at all.
3. Assuming that Pangalatok is derived from “Pangasinan+kasla+togkik+manok”, this unsubstantiated derivation of Pangalatok is not insulting and is not even derogatory. The proponents who tell that this definition is derogatory and insulting are just over-reacting (OA) and are alarmist.
Yet, please go back to my FIRST argument declaring that there is no solid and direct evidence to prove that Pangalatok was once used in history as a derogatory and insulting word. It is futile and a very waste of time to debate on the allegation that Pangalatok is a derogatory word as the proponents have no evidence at all.
(Pls see Second Part for Arguments #4-5 and Third Part for Arguments #6-7)
Second part (Please see First Part for Arguments #1-3 and Third Part for Arguments #6-7)
ReplyDelete4. Assuming that Pangalatok was once used in history as a derogatory and insulting word but still you continue to promote that "Pangalatok" is derogatory and offensive, it means that you continue and continue until forever to promote the history of difference/conflict that Ilocano and Pangasinan had in the past. History is history, especially if it is a bad history. I rather be called myself Pangalatok and forget the difference that Ilocano and Pangasinan had in the past, than go against the flow and maintain to call myself Pangasinan thinking that Pangalatok is a derogatory word due to a shameful history of conflict.
Yet, please go back to my FIRST argument declaring that there is no solid and direct evidence to prove that Pangalatok was once used in history as a derogatory and insulting word. It is futile and a very waste of time to debate on the allegation that Pangalatok is a derogatory word as the proponents have no evidence at all.
5. If the allegation is true that Pangalatok is a derogatory and insulting word, most Pangasinan people are not aware of it. If Pangasinan people are not even aware of this alleged derogatory connotation, then it is more true that other people of the Philippines are also not aware. Furthermore, the word Pangalatok terminology has been widely utilized by the people throughout the country and even abroad, not only Pangasinans. In this case, abolishing the term “Pangalatok” means going against the terminology being utilized throughout the country and abroad.
The audiences of this issue are not just the Pangasinan people, but all the people who utilizes the term Pangalatok. Tagalog, Bicolano, Bisaya, and all other citizens of the country are exposed to the word Pangalatok. Thus, if the proponents wanted to abolish the term “Pangalatok”, then the proponents should understand that their audiences are not just the Pangasinans, but all other people throughout the country and abroad utilizing the term Pangalatok.
Yet, please go back to my FIRST argument declaring that there is no solid and direct evidence to prove that Pangalatok was once used in history as a derogatory and insulting word. It is futile and a very waste of time to debate on the allegation that Pangalatok is a derogatory word as the proponents have no evidence at all.
(Please see First Part for Arguments #1-3 and Third Part for Arguments #6-7)