Tuesday, July 08, 2008 Tantingco: Kapampangans and Pampangueños By Robby Tantingco Peanut Gallery
HOW should we call ourselves, Kapampangans or Pampangueños?
The rule of thumb is, anyone born in Pampanga, at least one of whose parents is a Kapampangan, and who speaks the language called Kapampangan, is called a Kapampangan, while anyone who resides in the province of Pampanga is a Pampangueño.
That's the basic difference between Kapampangan and Pampangueño. Kapampangan is determined (a) by birthplace, (b) by lineage, and/or (c) by language. Pampangueño is based solely on residence.
But then it gets a little complicated when we consider the many applications of this rule and its many exceptions.
If you were born in Pampanga to Kapampangan parents but grew up outside the province, yet continue to speak Kapampangan, are you a Kapampangan? The answer is definitely yes, because you have the requirements of birthplace, lineage and language. But you cannot call yourself a Pampangueño anymore, because you don't have residence.
Now, if you were born in Pampanga but not to Kapampangan parents (let's say your parents are immigrants here from the Visayas), but you speak Kapampangan, are you a Kapampangan? I think yes, because you have two out of the three criteria (birth and language).
But if you were born in Pampanga, to Cebuano parents, and you speak very little Kapampangan, can you consider yourself a Kapampangan? Probably not, because that's only one out of three qualifications (birthplace).
I am almost tempted to conclude that the ability to speak Kapampangan should always be required regardless of the other two requirements. Kapampangans are Kapampangans because they speak Kapampangan. Language is what defines us -- or is it?
Consider the children of uprooted families from Pampanga, born in the places where their parents have chosen to live, who no longer speak Kapampangan but who still carry the surnames of their Kapampangan parents and who are constantly reminded of their Kapampangan heritage. Can we say they've stopped being Kapampangans, or they have lost their being Kapampangan? They have lineage but not birthplace and language.
In his 1732 Kapampangan dictionary, Fray Diego Bergaño, OSA wrote that the ancient Kapampangans did not consider lineage the basis of being Kapampangan. "You are proud," he wrote, "because you have Kapampangan blood" but he explained that it wasn't literal blood.
"Misangdaya ca ta" (We are of the same blood) was just a figure of speech that meant "You are my countryman," and "We are relatives even if we are not of the same blood."
Must these children of uprooted Kapampangans first learn their parents' language and reconnect with their parents' heritage before they can be called Kapampangans? Is being Kapampangan inherent or acquired?
What about those who were born in Pampanga to Kapampangan parents, who grew up somewhere else and have returned here to be Pampanga residents once more but no longer speak Kapampangan, should they still be categorized as Kapampangans or merely Pampangueños? They possess the criteria of birthplace and lineage, but not language.
And what about those whose only criterion they possess is the ability to speak Kapampangan? For example, those French and Japanese scholars who speak the Kapampangan language better than many of us; and all those foreigners who have adopted our culture and served our community and who love Pampanga better than those who claim to be Kapampangans -- shouldn't they be called Kapampangans, too? Is being Kapampangan just a matter of mastery of the Kapampangan language?
Or does being a Kapampangan require a fourth criterion: love for Kapampangan? You may be born here, have Kapampangan parents, speak Kapampangan, but have no love for Kapampangan as a race and culture; do you have the right to claim to be a Kapampangan? Does one criterion outweigh or cancel out the others, or is it really a combination of all or some of the criteria?
And then there's the issue of the province of Pampanga versus the larger Kapampangan Region, which includes those areas in Bulacan, Tarlac, Bataan and Nueva Ecija, which were once part of the colonial-era Pampanga Province. If you are a native, for example, of Tarlac, but speak fluent Kapampangan, what are you? You are, of course, a Kapampangan. To be more exact, a Kapampangan Tarlaqueño, in the same way that we Kapampangans who live here in Pampanga should be called Kapampangan Pampangueños, because there are many Pampangueños who are not Kapampangans and there are many Kapampangans who are not Pampangueños.
Lastly, even if we are now all Filipinos, we Kapampangans (and Cebuanos and Tagalogs and Ilocanos, etc.) should constantly assert our individual ethnicities, because that's what we really are. Filipino is what we have become, because of that historical evolution (or accident) that necessitated our unification as one nation, but Kapampangan is what we originally were, what we are and what we always will be. When God created us, He created us as islands, and He gave us our respective languages and our separate cultures.
It was our destiny that we eventually coalesced as one state under one flag, but our national leaders should never continue pushing their national agenda at the expense of our regional ethnicities. In fact, if they're smart enough, they should realize that if they want to produce a stronger republic, they should first strengthen the regions, because the condition of the whole relies on the condition of the parts.
Our motto at the HAU Center for Kapampangan Studies probably says it best: "Become a better Filipino by being a good Kapampangan."
