For HARDBOUND

1
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
Introduction
A sentence is a group of words that are put together to mean something. A
.
sentence is the basic unit of language which expresses a complete thought It does this by
following the grammatical rules of syntax. A sentence is a set of words that needs to be in
a correct order (word order) in order to make a complete thought. In linguistic, word
order is the study of the order of the syntactic constituents of a language, and how
different languages can employ different orders. Correlations between orders found in
different syntactic sub-domains are also of interest. It is the sequence of words in a
sentence, especially as governed by grammatical rules and as affecting meaning.
Word order gives meaning to the sentence. The words in a sentence may
sometimes be arranged in a different order to give another meaning. (H. Thompson
Fillmer, 1980). The order of words in a sentence depends on the right placement of the
subject and verb in a sentence. Subject- verb agreement is very vital in language and
consequently, in communication and depicts the extent to which a user of the language in
both speaking and writing media has internalized the rule. In linguistic typology, subject–
verb–object (SVO) is a sentence structure where the subject comes first, the verb comes
second, and the object comes third. Languages may be classified according to the
dominant sequence of these elements in unmarked sentences (i.e. sentences in which an
unusual word order is not used for emphasis).
Tagalog, a free word order language, is typologized as a VSO language. Tagalog,
an Austronesian language spoken in the central part of Luzon and the basis of the
2
national language Filipino, has been typologized as having a free word order, i.e., any
arrangement or rearrangement of words in a sentence has no effect on its linguistic
meaning. Tagalog is the Philippines’ most widely spoken language. Filipino, the
officially recognized national language of the Philippines, is based chiefly on Tagalog
and can be considered a variety of Tagalog. Tagalog serves as the lingua franca
throughout the country and throughout the world in communities of the Philippine
diaspora. Tagalog has 28 million native speakers in the Philippines, but almost the entire
country’s population of 95 million can speak it as a first, second, or third language
(Lewis et al., 2013 as cited by Labitigan, 2013). Tagalog sentence structure can be quite
flexible compare to English. It also follows a grammatical rule in order to express a
complete thought or make a correct sentence. Filipino grammar does not have to be as
difficult as some make it out to be. Taking your learning slowly and finding ways to
compare and contrast the differences with English can help you learn and gain knowledge
so you can speak the language fluently.
English language is a West Germanic language that was first spoken in early
medieval England and is now a global lingua franca. English is the third most widespread
native language in the world, after Standard Chinese and Spanish. It is the most widely
learned second language and is either the official language or one of the official
languages in almost 60 sovereign states. There are more people who have learned it as a
second language than there are native speakers.
The English language is at present considered one of the three leading languages
of the world; the other two leading languages are Spanish and French. However, there are
indicators that English is moving forward into prominence faster than the other two and
the general opinion, at present, is that it will soon outstrip Spanish and French, especially
in East Asian countries where English has generally been adopted as a second language.
3
(Serrano, et al; 1999) English is the first choice of foreign language in most other
countries of the world, and it is that status that has given it the position of a global lingua
franca. It is estimated that about a third of the world’s population, some two billion
persons, now use English.
The importance of this research is to study the placement of the subject, verb and
object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English language, to find out students’
expertise in translating Filipino sentence to English sentence and vice versa using Subject
– Verb – Object order, and to spread awareness for them to improve their ability to
translate simple sentences in both language. In this way, the study may help the students,
teachers and Filipinos to comprehend what they are reading with ease.
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework
This study focuses on the word order: The Placement of Subject-Verb-Object in a
simple sentence between Filipino and English language. Since the major claim of this
study is all about the correct order or placement of words, we relate our study to the study
of (Gibson et al., 2013) when using gestures to represent an event with an actor, a
patient, and an action, in many cases people convey first the actor (the ‘Subject’), then
the patient (the ‘Object’), then the action (the ‘Verb’), even if this specific word order is
not present in any language they know. The findings from gesture studies also suggest a
motivation for verb-medial word orders. The prevalence of SVO order (about 40% of
languages) might arise because that order conveys the separate roles of the Subject and
Object in a way that is more robust to noise.
The basic assumption is that grammatical relations such as subject and object are
syntactic notions, and must be identified on the basis of syntactic properties, rather than
4
semantic roles or discourse functions. It shows that a large number of syntactic processes
in Tagalog uniquely select the argument which bears nominative case. On the other hand,
the data which has been cited as showing ambiguity of subject hood, or indicating that the
Actor is always the subject, is best analyzed in terms of semantic rather than syntactic
constraints. In English grammar, there is a strong alignment between the grammatical
notions of the subject. The semantic notion of the Actor, and the pragmatic notion of
Topic. This pattern is often taken to be the canonical or universally unmarked alignment.
But the Tagalog facts force us to recognize these three notions as being fully
independent, since in basic transitive clauses the subject is neither the Actor nor a Topic.
Data from the Tagalog and other typologically similar languages thus provide unique
opportunities to investigate the defining properties of and interrelationships among these
three concepts (Kroeger, 1991).

5
DEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
VARIABLE
 Proficiency of
 Word Order in Grade 11 Senior
terms of Subject- High School
Verb-Object both students using
English and Subject-Verb-
Filipino Object pattern in
a simple sentence
INTERVENING
VARIABLE
 Age
 Gender
 Strands
.
Figure 1 Schematic Diagram of the Study
6
Statement of the Problem
This study aimed to determine the differences of the placement of the Subject –
Verb – Object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English language.
Specifically, the study sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:
1.1 Age;
1.2 Gender;
1.3 Strand?
2. What is the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students in
translating simple sentences between Filipino and English language, using the:
2.1 Subject – Verb – Object pattern?
3. What are the common patterns used by the respondents in translating English sentences
to Filipino sentences?
4. Is there any significant relationship in knowing the different placement of the S-V-O
pattern between the Filipino and English Language when paired according to profile?
Hypothesis:
HO1 - There is no any significant relationship in knowing the different placement of the
s-v-o pattern between the Tagalog and English Language when paired according to
profile.
7
Significance of the Study
This present study would bring benefits to the following:
Students. This study would encourage the students to know the different
placement of Subject, Verb and Object between Filipino and English language.
Teachers. This study will help the teachers evaluate and improve their teaching in
terms of the correct usage of words in a sentence.
School. This study helps the school to be aware on the placement of the Subject –
Verb – Object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English language.
Department of Education. This will help the Department of Education to
encourage the faculty and staff to improve their grammatical structure in terms of
sentence construction.
Filipino Citizens. This study helps the Filipino citizens to improve and broaden
their English and Filipino language acquisition.
Scope and Delimitation of the Study
This study was focused on the analysis of the placement of Subject – Verb –
Object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English Language in order to
comprehend why the placement of Subject – Verb – Object in Filipino language is
different from English language. The chosen research subjects were specified as Grade
11 Senior High School students enrolled in the academic year 2017-2018 from Jose Rizal
Memorial State University, Dipolog Campus, Dipolog City.

8
Operational Definition of Terms
For reasons of clarity and for better understanding, certain terms used in the study
were defined conceptually and operationally.
ABM. Accounting Business and Management. A strand in Senior High School
that is designed as an introductory course in accounting and business and management
(usjr.edu.ph., 2018).
English Language. This is the primary language of several countries (including
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and a
second language in a number of multilingual countries (including India, Singapore, and
the Philippines) (Thought.Co, 2017).
Filipino Language. This is defined as the national language of the Philippines
and is the term used for a person who is from the Philippines (YourDictionary.com,
2017).
GAS. General Academic Strand. A strand in Senior High School that is
purposively designed for those students ho are still indecisive of what course or degree
thaty want to pursue in college (usjr.edu.ph., 2018).
HUMSS. Humanities and Social Sciences. A strand in Senior High School that
covers a wide range of disciplines that delve into the investigation and inquiry of the
human conditions that uses empirical, analytical, and critical methods of studying
Object. The object of a sentence is the person or thing that receives the action of
the verb. It is the “who or what” that the subject does something to (Study.com, 2017).
9
A noun or noun phrase governed by an active transitive verb or by a preposition
(Oxford dictionaries.com).
Placement. It is the act of placing or putting in place, the act of locating or
positioning, the state of being placed (Your Dictionary.com, 2017).
Simple Sentence. This refers to a sentence with only one independent clause.
Though a simple sentence doesn't contain any subordinate clauses, it isn't always short. A
simple sentence often contains modifiers (Thought.Co, 2017).
STEM. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. A strand in Senior
High School that that develop the students’ ability to evaluate simple to complex societal
problems and be responsive and active in the formulation of its solution through the the
application and integration of scientific, yechnological, engineering, and mathematical
concepts (usjr.edu.ph., 2018).
Subject. The subject is generally the person or thing that the sentence is about.
It’s often the person or thing that performs the action of the verb in question and it
usually (but not always) comes before the verb (Oxford Dictionaries, 2017).
Subject-Verb-Object. Is a sentence structure where the subject comes first, the
verb second, and object third (Wikipedia, 2018).
TECH-VOC. Technical – Vocational. This strand in Senior High School was
designed to prepare the students by arming them with skills for employment
Verb. Any member of a class of words that function as the main elements of
predicates, that typically express action, state, or a relation between two things and that
10
may be inflected for tense, aspect, voice, mood, and to show agreement with their subject
or object (Dictionary.com, 2017).
Word. It is a unit of language, consisting of one or more spoken sounds or their
written representation that functions as a principal carrier of meaning (Dictionary.com,
2017).
Word Order. In this study, this refers to the disposition of things following one
another, as in space or time; succession or sequence. It is a condition in which each thing
is properly disposed with reference to other things and its purpose; methodical or
harmonious arrangement (Dictionary.com, 2017).

11
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND STUDIES
The conceptual literature and studies pertinent to the present study are reviewed in
this chapter. This chapter presents foreign and local reports, articles and journal
publications that will support related literature and studies to the present study on the
word order: Subject-Verb-Object pattern in a simple sentence between Filipino and
English language.
Foreign Literature
In any language, words follow a definite order; otherwise the meaning is lost.
This word order is determined by the structure natural to the language. Like other
languages, English has basic sentence patterns and the student is believed to be proficient
in English when he can recognize and produce automatically the basic sentence patterns
of the language.
As cited by Seth Ronquillo (2016), English, on the other hand, does not have the
same syntactic freedom as Tagalog. English has a more fixed SVO word order structure,
which signals the grammatical function of DPs and supplements its deficient case
marking system (Matthews, Lieven, Theakston, & Tomasello 2005; Polinsky 2006). In
English, the agent of the verb is also commonly associated with the first noun of the
sentence, which corresponds to the subject in the default SVO structure (Kamide,
Scheeper, & Altmann 2003). Laughren (2002) notes in her analysis of the Australian
language Warlpiri that a specific set of case markers indicates grammatical functions in
the determiner phrase (DP) of languages that allow word order variation, such as
Tagalog.
12
Most V1 languages have SVO as a widely available alternative word order. We
would like to underscore that SVO in V1 languages is not derived uniformly for all
languages or even all structures within a given language. In particular, SVO may be only
apparent, with “S” actually being part of a nonverbal predicate (section 2.1.1). SVO can
also arise from the base-generation of a preverbal topic in a high clausal position, from
movement into that position, or in structures so small that verb movement is impossible.
In the discussion below, we will address some of the derivations of SVO under V1
(Clemens, et al., 2017).
Languages differ from each other in numerous properties, but this variation is not
completely random. For example, when uttering a sentence containing a subject, a verb
and an object, there are six logically possible orders in which one can put these
constituents into a sentence. However, not all of these word orders are as widely used
among languages. In fact, almost all languages put the subject or agent before the object
or patient in basic transitive sentences, resulting in so-called SOV, SVO or VSO word
orders in which „S‟, „O‟ and „V‟ are short for subject, object and verb respectively
(cited by Morwenna Hoeks, 2016; Greenberg, 1963). Word orders in which the object
precedes the subject are quite rare: only about 5% of all languages exhibit VSO, VOS or
OVS word order (cited by Morwenna Hoeks, 2016; Siewierska, 1988:15). An overview
of the occurrences of the dominant word orders is given in table 1 below (Dryer, 2013).
Note that the terms „subject‟ and „object‟, the „S‟ and „O‟ in the case of the
abbreviations above, are used here in a general semantic sense: their use must be defined
in terms of agent-like or patient-like properties respectively. Although there has been
discussion on the exact numbers of occurrence, it is evident that SVO and VSO word
orders are by far the most adopted among languages. (Morwenna Hoeks, 2016)
13
As cited by Morwenna Hoeks (2016), when it comes to preferences that are
related to syntactical structures, it is often argued that an SVO word order is easier for
speakers and hearers to produce and to comprehend than other word orders with another
syntactic configuration. For example, according to Kayne (1999), SVO is the underlying
structure of all languages and other word orders are derivations from this default order.
Kayne assumes that all languages essentially exhibit a specifier-head-complement
structure, because he argues that there is a link between linear and hierarchical word
order in the sense that complements ideally always follow their heads (Koster, 1999).
However, this account does not explain why derivations from this underlying word order
take place at all. Why typological word order variation exists in the first place and, more
specifically, where such large amounts of SOV word orders come from, then remains a
mystery within this account by examples taken from data collected at random. More
outstandingly, this research paper will cover the area concerning the word order of both
simple sentence patterns of the two languages and investigate the validity of the claim
that (SA) is (VSO) and (SE) is (SVO).
One of the most important areas of languages study and analysis is through
examining and investigating word order patterns and/or types that exist in simple
sentences structures. Consequently, in linguistics word order is referred to as the study of
the order of the syntactic constituents of a language. To simply put it, word order is the
order of subject (S), verb (V), and object (O) in a sentence. The primary word orders that
are of interest are the constituent of order of a clause – the relative order of subject,
object, and verb; the order of modifiers in a noun ohrase; and the order of adverbials. For
example, in English, the word order of a typical sentence is Subject-Verb-Object (SVO).
To English speakers seems obviously the only logical arrangement. Nonetheless, a lot of
languages have different word order, such as Arabic which is mainly recognized as being
14
VSO (Verb-Subject-Object), with an alternative SVO order. Hence, mainly this work is a
constrative study of the simple sentence structure of both standard Arabic (SA) and
Standard English (SE), where in both languages are introduced in brief, their simple
sentences structures are described, and then they are compared by examples taken from
data collected at random (Mounya, 2017).
The study of the order of the syntactic constituents of a language is the category
of word order typology. In reality, different languages have different word order in
organizing the sentence structure. The study of word order pays attention to the sub-
sentence domain, but the primary concern is the word order of the subject, verb and
object, the order of modifiers in a noun phrase, such as adjectives, demonstratives,
possessives, numerals and adjuncts, and the order of adverbials. The word order of some
languages is of grammatical property which is applied to convey important grammatical
function. Some inflectional languages allow more flexibility which can be used to encode
pragmatic information. However, most languages have some preferred word orders which
are used most frequently.
Based on the sequential arrangement of the basic constituents of most languages,
the word order can be classified into the following six types, namely, SVO, SOV, OSV,
OVS, VSO, and VOS. English and Chinese belong to the SVO type (Guodong Zhao and
Zuoyu Cao, 2011).
According to Wrongranu (2016), in Thailand, although the grammar-translation
method has long been used to teach foreign languages and many students use translation
as a mean to understand English, many students seem to have problems with translating
according to a number of studies (Chanasakulniyom, 2010, Pojprasat, 2007, Yodnil,
2006). Translating is a complicated skill. A translator has to interpret a source text, and
then put it in another language, keeping the meaning, style, and purpose of the source
15
text, and this requires proficiency in both foreign languages and the mother tongue, as
well as specialized and cultural knowledge. The causes of errors found in this study
included translation procedures, carelessness, low self-confidence, and anxiety. It is
recommended that more class time be spent to address the problematic points. In
addition, more authentic translation and group work should be implemented to increase
self-confidence and decrease anxiety. One assumption is that translation is a process that
requires a translator to be proficient in both the source language and the target language.
Many students, however, are less proficient in their second language, so they cannot
translate Thai texts into English correctly. The differences in grammatical structure are
also another possible reason (Wimonchalau, 2000). Many students are not aware of the
differences, so their English grammatical structures in target texts are made to match Thai
structures, resulting in many errors.
Local Literature
English has a relatively fixed word order. The basic arrangement of words in
English is generally the following: Subject + verb or subject + verb + object. If the basic
word order is not followed, the result may be an unintelligible sentence. (Baes et al.
2013). Ex1: The cat scratched the man. (Correct word order; meaning clear) Ex2: The man
scratched the cat. (Correct word order; meaning clear but different from number 1) Ex3:
The scratched man the cat. (Incorrect word order; no meaning) Ex4: Cat the man
scratched the. (Incorrect word order; no meaning)
As cited by Seth Ronquillo (2016), order is very important in English. Meaning
often depends on the position of words in a given sentence. There are a limited number of
basic sentence patterns in English; to speak and write good English. Sentence patterns are
like the framework of a house. To make the house more attractive and liveable, additions
16
and expansions have to be made with care. In the same way, basic sentence patterns are
generally expanded to give more life and significance to a sentence. (Serrano, et. al;
1999) Ex1: The man reads the newspaper. Ex2: The man is reading the newspaper
S V O S HV V O
As cited by Seth Ronquillo (2016), the Austronesian language Tagalog, spoken in
the Philippines, permits a relatively variable syntactic word order including the most
default word order verb-object-subject (VOS), verb-subject-object (VSO), and subject-
verb-object (SVO), the least common word order. To compensate for the potential
ambiguity presented by such syntactic alterations, each argument of the verb in a Tagalog
sentence receives a distinct case marker that indicates its grammatical function (De
Guzman 1976; Rackowski 1996). Segalowitz and Galang (1976) studied the acquisition
of word order in native Tagalog-speaking children, particularly with respect to the
comprehension of actor-focus and patient-focus sentences, which are respectively similar
to active and passive constructions in English. Segalowitz and Galang concluded that
Tagalog-speaking children have better mastery of patient-focus than actor-focus in VOS
structures, and that children would use the SVO structure most productively with actor-
focus sentences because they associate the first noun of the sentence with the agent of the
verb. Their study, however, does not provide much insight on the interaction between
syntactic word order and case morphology.
Foreign Studies
According to the study of Dryer (2011) in his study “Order of Subject, Object and
Verb”, many languages have a basic ordering of the subject (S), object (O), and the verb
(V), and among the languages of the world, all six possible basic word orders exist. Of
these six orders, SVO and SOV make up a large majority of the totality of languages.
17
As cited by Dryer’s study in 2011, Givon (1979) observes that SOV basic word
order is common among the languages of the world and that many other word orders can
be reconstructed back to an SOV stage. He speculates that the first basic word order for
human language was SOV, and other word orders appear to have descended from that
order. Newmeyer (2000) claims that the earliest human language had rigid SOV order.
Recently, Goldin-Meadow et al.’s experimental methodology was taken up to
investigate possible roles of SVO basic word order. It has been suggested that SVO order
arises because it is preferred by the computational module in human cognition (Langus &
Nespor 2010)
According to the study of Hall, Mayberry, and Ferreira (2013) in their study
entitle “Cognitive Constraints on Constituents Order: Evidence from Elicited
Pantomime”, they reported a similar preference for SVO ordering in reversible events,
but explained this in terms of cognitive constraints on production: when an event has a
human agent and patient (which is typically the case for reversible events), the gesturer
will often use the body-as-agent strategy. That is, they act out the agent and patient by
‘impersonating’ the participants. This strategy leads to confusion when a patient is
followed by an action (as it would be the case in SOV order).
Many of the world’s languages are sensitive to word order. In these languages, the
order in which words are spoken conveys a great deal of the sentence’s meaning. The
classic English example is the distinction between “dog bites man” and “man bites dog”,
which differ in terms of who is biting whom. The so-called “basic” word order of a
language is defined according to the order of three of the principal components of basic
transitive sentences: subject (S), verb (V) and object (O). This results in six logically
distinct word orders: SOV, SVO, VSO, VOS, OVS and OSV (e.g., English has SVO
18
basic word order). Curiously, the world’s order-sensitive languages make use of these six
possibilities in an uneven fashion. According to a survey of 402 languages, the majority
of languages are either SOV (44.78%) or SVO (41.79%). VSO (9.20%) is much less
frequent but still significant, and very few languages make use of VOS (2.99%), OVS
(1.24%) or OSV (0.00%) as their basic word order. Broadly speaking, the basic pattern
appears to be (SOV, SVO) > VSO > (VOS, OVS) > OSV. This non-uniformity is a
striking empirical finding that demands some explanation. Unfortunately, most of the
explanations that have been offered are either proximate explanations that simply shift
the question, or else are circular (Maurits, 2010).
A similar objection can be made against the proposal that all languages which are
alive today descend from a single common ancestor, and that this proto–language used
SOV word order, ex- 1 plaining the observation that SOV is the most common word
order today. If there is nothing special about SOV, why has random drift (this time in
language evolution, not human genetic evolution) not more significantly changed the
word order distribution from its ancient form? Furthermore, it is clear that ancient SOV
languages must have changed into SVO languages much more frequently into than, say,
VOS languages in order to arrive at the current state of affairs. Common descent from
SOV cannot explain this by itself (Maurits, 2010).
According to Ghourchaei et al, (2015), personality factors have been shown in the
literature to relate to language learning. In the Iranian EFL context, Kiany and Pournia
(2006) found no statistically significant relationship between risk-taking, syntactic
complexity and grammatical accuracy in either descriptive or expository writing.
Research studies show that males tend to behave in ways that are more risky than
females; also, younger males are more prone than females to take risks in relation to
conflict , and sexual behavior , as well as in such situations as car driving, accident risks ,
19
and gambling and financial decisions . Indeed, the interaction patterns are gender-related
only to some extent (Shomoossi, Amouzadeh & Ketabi, 2008). It is also shown that
gender differences in risk-taking occur even in simple everyday situations; for instance,
men are more likely to cross busy roads than females. Majority of such studies show that
men take more risks in stressful situations compared the risk-taking tendencies of male
and female participants and explored that in almost all aspects of risk-taking, male
participants are more willing to take risks than females. Gardner and Steinberg (2005)
also showed that males reported more benefits and fewer risks when asked about the
consequences of risky behaviours. Female learners tend to be more careful about what
they say; they try to use fewer sentences and less complex structure to reduce mistakes.
They tend to think before any oral production and "this conscientiousness can be a barrier
to effective communication in a foreign language, where rapid responses are necessary to
keep a conversation going. On the other hand, boys tend to follow their instincts and even
due to their self-confidence and risk-taking take part in an oral conversation without
preparation. Females may also be found more anxious in stressful situations such as
exams than males are.
According to the study of Wrongranu (2016) where in his study, the Thai English
major students made many errors in translating Thai texts into English texts. From his
study, he revealed that the major causes of errors in translations are the translation
procedures, carelessness, low self-confidence, and anxiety. Accordingly, a translator has
to interpret a source text, and then put it in another language, keeping the meaning, style,
and purpose of the source text, and this requires proficiency in both foreign languages
and the mother tongue, as well as specialized and cultural knowledge.
One assumption is that translation is a process that requires a translator to be
proficient in both the source language and the target language. Many students, however,
20
are less proficient in their second language, so they cannot translate Thai texts into
English correctly. The differences in grammatical structure are also another possible
reason since the grammatical structures of Thai sentences differ from the English
sentences. However, when it comes to the grammatical structures of Filipino and English,
the grammatical structures used of the English texts can be directly used in translating it
into Filipino texts because it can still keep the meaning, style and purpose of the text
being translated. Another reason is that Filipino students are introduce into the English
language earlier on primary levels until the learning of the second language in schools
moved into more complex lessons. This is the reason why Filipinos could rather easily
translate Filipino sentences to English sentences and vice versa. This explains the reasons
how the proficiency level of the Filipino students differ from those Thai students who are
even majored in English course.
Local Studies
As cited by Seth Ronquillo (2016), in addition, English is the second language for
Filipinos. It is used as a medium of instruction in most subjects. As future educators, we
provide learner a taste of grammar, its usage, function, and application of the skills in
speaking and writing (Bogayao, 1996).
As cited by Seth Ronquillo (2016), according to Alcantara and Cabanilla (1986),
they stated that it is not for a good speaker of English to have mastered grammatical
features of the English language. The student should likewise know the effective use of
words, their appropriateness and their acceptability in their grammatical construction.
Mastery of English Grammar, knowledge and understanding of its usage are basic in our
everyday communications with other people. A good knowledge 5 Grammatical

21
Competence of Fourth Year English Majors of Benguet State University / Jeanne A. Yan.
2007 of English grammar enables the Filipino to communicate better his ideas to others.
As cited by Seth Ronquillo (2016), Tagalog is a non-configurational language in
which the grammar subject does not occupy a unique structural position. Nevertheless,
the grammar of Tagalog makes crucial reference to the notion of grammatical subject
hood. This fact shows that grammatical subject hood cannot be defined in terms of
specified position in surface phrase structure. More phrase structure, semantic structure
and pragmatic functions, strongly supporting a conception of linguistic structure in which
these various kinds of information are modelled as independent subsystems of the
grammar (Paul Kroeger, 1991).
Tagalog has a relatively free word order complemented by a comparatively rich
case marking system on determiners (Rackowski 2002). One of the most discussed topics
in Tagalog syntax involves its verb focus system, analogous to grammatical voice in
English, which is indicated by verbal in fixation (Aldridge 2012)
Filipino has no definite word structure. Even the order of the words in a sentence
are place in different position, it still has the same meaning. The grammatical order in
Tagalog is malleable; the subject, verb and object in the sentence can be put in any
position of the sentence.

22
Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology in conducting this research. These are
presented in the following sections. (a) Research Methods (b) Research Environment (c)
Research Respondents (d) Research Instrument (e) Validation of the instrument (f) Data
Gathering Procedure.
Research Method
The researchers employed the qualitative research method in which test was
utilized. It aimed at analyzing the Subject-Verb-Object pattern in a simple sentence
between Filipino and English language among the Grade 11 students in Jose Rizal
Memorial State University – Senior High School (Dipolog Campus), Dipolog City. The
test became the basis of any process, observation, description and documentation of the
data gather about the present study.
Research Environment
This study was far extended inside the campus of Jose Rizal Memorial State
University- Senior High School (Dipolog Campus), Dipolog City as a venue of
conducting research regarding the problem being studied. The Jose Rizal Memorial State
University (Dipolog Campus) is a state university in the Philippines. It is mandated to
provide higher professional, technical, special instructions for special purposes and
promote research and extension services, advanced studies and progressive leadership in
education, agriculture, arts and sciences, engineering and other fields.

23
Figure 2. Map of Jose Rizal Memorial State University
Reference: www.googlemap.com
24
Research Respondents
The researchers chose the selected Grade 11 Senior High School students from Jose
Rizal Memorial State University (Dipolog Campus). Approximately 207 students from
Grade 11 were used to accomplish the study. The respondents underwent a test and
answered some questions were be analyzed by the researchers.
Table 1 Research Respondents
Grade11 Senior High

Population Respondents
School Students
ABM 50 24
GAS 52 25
HUMSS 103 50
STEM 54 26
TVL 170 82
Total 429 207
Table 1 shows the research respondents of the study to get the actual respondents
of the study; a 5% margin of error had been calculated by multiplying the total population
of the respondents by 0.05. From the total number of 429 Grade 11 Senior High School
students, it was reduced into 207 research subjects using the Slovin’s formula.
𝑁
Slovin’s formula: n = 1 +𝑁 (0.05)2
25
Research Instrument
To get the answer on the differences of Subject-Verb-Object pattern between
Filipino and English language in a simple sentence, a total of 90 items test was used in
gathering data. The sample question prepared by the researchers consisted of five simple
sentences in English and five simple sentences in Filipino language. The questionnaire
was divided into four parts. The first part of the questionnaire indicated the profile of the
students; the second part indicated the Filipino simple sentences to be translated into
English language; the third part indicated the English simple sentences to be translated
into Filipino language; and the last part was a selection that contained simple sentences
that were validated first by letting the panel did the corrections and recommendations and
was disseminated to respondents for accomplishments.
In assessing the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students,
the researchers used a rubric that was validated by the experts.
Validation of the Instrument
The sample questions in conducting the test underwent pilot testing. The pilot testing
was answered by five numbers of Senior High School students of Jose Rizal Memorial
State University, Dipolog Campus, Dipolog City specifically from Grade 11 students as
their sample respondents to answer questions in terms of their prior knowledge about the
Subject-Verb-Object pattern between Filipino and English language in a simple sentence.
Data Gathering Procedure
A total of 207 respondents underwent a test and answered the sample questions
prepared by the researchers regarding on the placement of Subject-Verb-Object pattern

26
between Filipino and English Language in a simple sentence. The researcher selected the
respondents who underwent a test.
Statistical Treatment of Data
The data taken from the questionnaire was classified, tallied, tabulated, and
statistically tested.
1. To get the profiles of the respondents, the simple percentage was used.
Formula:
𝑓
𝑃= 𝑥100
𝑛
Where:
P = the percentage
f = the frequency
n = the number of respondents

27
Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS and INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the gathered data from the total of 207 respondents broken
into 82 Technical-Vocational (Tech-Voc) students, 50 Humanities and Social Sciences
(HUMSS) students, 26 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)
students, 25 General Academic Strand (GAS), and 24 Accountancy, Business and
Management (ABM) students respondents of selected Grade 11 Senior High School
students of Jose Rizal Memorial State University, Dipolog Campus, Dipolog City.
Table 2 shows the respondents’ age. As shown in the table, there were 116 or
56.04% out of the total number of respondents belonged to the age bracket 18-20 years
old. Followed by 84 or 40.58% who belonged to 17 years old and below, while there
were only seven or 3.38% who belonged to the age 21 years old and above. This implies
that majority of the respondents belong to adolescence period
Table 2 Respondents’ Age
Age Frequency Percentage (%)

17yrs and below 84 40.58%
18yrs – 20yrs 116 56.04%
21yrs above 7 3.38%
Total 207 100%
Table 3 shows the respondents’ gender. Out of 207 respondents, there were 139 or
67.15% who were female students, while there were 65 or 31.40% who were male
students, and three or 1.45% of the respondents who belonged to the Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, an Transgender (LGBT) community. This means that majority of the
respondents are females.

28
Table 3 Respondents’ Gender
Age Frequency Percentage (%)

Female 139 67.15%
Male 65 31.40%
LGBT 3 1.45%
Total 207 100%
Table 4 shows the respondents’ strand. The data shows that there were 82 or
39.61% which belonged to Technical-Vocational strand, followed by HUMSS with 50%
or 24.15% out of the total number of respondents. Next to it was the STEM which had 26
or 12.56%, GAS with 25 or 12.08%, and ABM with 24 or 11.59%. The study implies that
the majority of the respondents ware Technical and Vocational students.
Table 4 Respondents’ Strand
Strand Frequency Percentage (%)

HUMSS 50 24.15%
STEM 26 12.56%
GAS 25 12.08%
TECH. VOC. 82 39.61%
ABM 24 11.59%
Total 207 100%
29
Table 5 The Proficiency Level of the Grade 11 Senior High School Students in
Translating Simple Sentences from Filipino to English using the
Subject – Verb – Object pattern.
Rating Scale F m fm
10 - below (Beginner) 12 5.5 66
11 – 20 (Developing) 23 15.5 356.5
21 – 30 (Progressing) 130 25.5 3,315
31 – 40 (Proficient) 42 35.5 1,491
Total N = 207 - Ʃ fm= 5,228.5
x̅ = 25.26 (Progressing)
Legend:
10 – below - Beginner
11 – 20 - Developing
21 – 30 - Progressing
31 – 40 - Proficient
Table 5 shows the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students
in translating simple sentences from Filipino to English using the Subject-Verb-Object
pattern. With a weighted mean of 25.26 which was verbally interpreted as progressing,
this implies that the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students are
close to be proficient in translating simple sentences in translating Filipino to English
language using the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. Therefore, the Grade 11 Senior High
School students need to improve their ability in translating simple sentences and broaden
their understanding on how to construct sentences correctly.

30
Table 6: The Proficiency Level of the Grade 11 Senior High School Students in
Translating Simple Sentences from English to Filipino using the
Subject – Verb – Object pattern.
Rating Scale F m fm
16 5.5 88
10 - below (Beginner)
40 15.5 620
11 – 20 (Developing)
101 25.5 2,575.5
21 – 30 (Progressing)
50 35.5 1,775
31 – 40 (Proficient)
N = 207 - Ʃ fm= 5.058.5
Total
x̅ = 24.44 (Progressing)
Table 6 shows the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students
in translating simple sentences from English to Filipino using the Subject-Verb-Object
pattern. With a weighted mean of 24.44 which was verbally interpreted as progressing,
this implies that the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students were
close to be proficient in translating simple sentences in translating English to FIlipino
language using the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. Therefore the Grade 11 Senior High
School students need to improve their ability in translating simple sentences and broaden
their understanding on how to construct sentences correctly.
This contradicts to the result of the study of Wrongranu (2016) where in his study,
the Thai English major students made many errors in translating Thai texts into English
texts. From his study, he revealed that the major causes of errors in translations are the
translation procedures, carelessness, low self-confidence, and anxiety. Accordingly, a
translator has to interpret a source text, and then put it in another language, keeping the
31
meaning, style, and purpose of the source text, and this requires proficiency in both
foreign languages and the mother tongue, as well as specialized and cultural knowledge.
One assumption is that translation is a process that requires a translator to be
proficient in both the source language and the target language. Many students, however,
are less proficient in their second language, so they cannot translate Thai texts into
English correctly. The differences in grammatical structure are also another possible
reason since the grammatical structures of Thai sentences differ from the English
sentences. However, when it comes to the grammatical structures of Filipino and English,
the grammatical structures used of the English texts can be directly used in translating it
into Filipino texts because it can still keep the meaning, style and purpose of the text
being translated. Another reason is that Filipino students are introduce into the English
language earlier on primary levels until the learning of the second language in schools
moved into more complex lessons. This is the reason why Filipinos could rather easily
translate Filipino sentences to English sentences and vice versa. This explains the reasons
how the proficiency level of the Filipino students differ from those Thai students who are
even majored in English course.
Table 7 The Common Patterns Used by the Respondents in Translating
Filipino Sentences to English Sentences.
Filipino – English Translation Frequency Percentage (%)

Subject – Verb – Object 207 100%
Verb – Subject – Object - -
Verb – Object – Subject - -
Subject – Object – Verb - -
Object – Verb – Subject - -
Total 207 100%
32
Table 7 shows the common patterns used by the respondents in translating
Filipino sentences to English sentences. As shown in the table, Subject – Verb – Object
pattern was the only pattern used comprising of 207 or 100% out of the total number of
sentences constructed by the respondents. This implies that the respondents prefer to use
the Subject – Verb- Object pattern based on what they have understood from the
sentences and translated it in a literal way.
This correlates to the study of Maurits, 2010, his study stated that the so-called
“basic” word order of a language is defined according to the order of three of the
principal components of basic transitive sentences: subject (S), verb (V) and object (O).
(e.g., English has SVO basic word order).
Below are the 207 sample sentences using Subject – Verb – Object pattern in
translating Filipino sentences to English sentences.
Given Sentences:
1. Kumain ng hinog na saging ang matandang lalaki.
2. Nagluto si Anna ng Adobo sa kusina.
3. Namimingwit ng isda si Anton sa tabing ilog.
4. Ang bag na dala ni John ay mabigat.
5. Si Ben ay nagdala ng aso sa bahay.

33
Table 8: Given Sentence No. 1: “Kumain ng hinog na saging ang matandang
lalaki.”
Correct answer/translation: “The old man was eating a ripe banana”.
Translation: The old man was eating a ripe banana.

article S HV V article O
Subject Verb Object

ABM (24 respondents)
eat
1. The old man a ripe banana.
(Correct answer: was eating)
eats
eats
eating
4. One man a ripe banana.
ate
eat
is eating
ate
eat the ripe banana.
9. The old man
(Correct answer: was eating) (Correct answer: a ripe banana)
is eating
eat
eat
eat the ripe banana.
13. The old man
eat
eat
eating
is eating ripe banana.
17. The old man
eat
ate a riped banana.
19. The old man
20. The old man eat a ripe banana.
34

eat
21. An old man a ripe banana.
ate the ripe banana.
22. The old man
is eating
ate
Table 8 shows the translation of sentence no. 1: Kumain ng hinog na saging ang
matandang lalaki. As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate sentence
no. 1 using the Subject – Verb – Object pattern without considering the correct grammar
of the sentence. This implies that the respondents followed the correct pattern in
constructing a sentence but do not have enough knowledge in grammatical structure since
they have committed errors in translating sentence no.1.
In the given sentence, the Filipino word “matandang lalaki” was translated into
the English word “old man”, “kumain” for “eating” and “hinog na saging” for “ripe
banana”. As shown in the sentence, the noun old man was used as the subject that was
followed by a helping verb was and a verb eating which shows the action for the subject.
On the last part of the sentence, the article a was followed by the word ripe banana
which acted as the object of the verb.
Table 9: Given Sentence No. 2: Nagluto si Anna ng Adobo sa kusina.
Correct answer/translation: “Anna cooked adobo in the kitchen”.
Translation: Anna cooked adobo in the kitchen.

S V O prep article N
Subject Verb Object

GAS (25 Respondents)
on the kitchen.
cook
25. Anna an adobo (Correct answer: in the
(Correct answer: cooked)
kitchen.)
35
on the kitchen.
cook
26. Anna an adobo (Correct answer: in the
kitchen.)
is cooking
27. Anna adobo in the kitchen.
is cooking
is cooking
an adobo
is cooking
30 Anna (Correct answer: in the kitchen.
adobo)
is cooking
an adobo
cook
32. Anna (Correct answer: in the kitchen.
adobo)
an adobo
33. Anna cooked (Correct answer: in the kitchen.
adobo)
-
cook
34. Anna (Correct answer: in the kitchen
adobo)
-
cook
adobo)
-
cook
adobo)
an adobo
cook
adobo)
an adobo
is cooking
adobo)
cook
an adobo
is cooking
adobo)
cook
an adobo
is cooking
adobo)
is cooking
is cooking
45. Anna cook adobo at the kitchen.
36
(Correct answer: cooked) (Correct answer: in the

kitchen)
46. Anna cooked adobo in the kitchen.
was cooking
48. Anna cooked adobo in the kitchen.
an adobo at the kitchen.
49. Anna cooked (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the
adobo) kitchen)
Table 9 shows the translation of sentence no. 2: Nagluto si Anna ng adobo sa
kusina. As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate sentence no. 2 using
the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. However, the respondents had committed errors
specifically in the verb “cook” and they were confused in locating the object of the
sentence. This implies that the respondents followed the correct pattern in constructing a
sentence but do not have enough knowledge in grammatical structure since the
respondents have committed errors in translating sentence no.2.
In the second sentence, the word “Anna” which pertains to a name of a person
was used in both languages, “nagluto” for “cooked” and “adobo” was also used in both
languages. As shown in the sentence, the noun Anna was used as the subject that was
followed by a verb cooked which shows the past action for the subject. On the sentence,
the word adobo which acted as the object of the verb was followed by a preposition in
and the article the.
Table 10: Given Sentence No. 3: Namimingwit ng isda si Anton sa ilog.
Correct answer/translation: Anton is catching fish in the river.
Other Possible Answer: Anton is fishing in the river.
Translation: Anton is catching fish in the river.

S HV V O prep article N
37
Subject Verb Object

HUMSS (50 respondents)
on the river.
-
50. Anton is fishing (Correct answer: in
(Correct answer: fish)
the river)
51. Anton is catching fish.
fishing at the river.
-
52. Anton (Correct answer: is (Correct answer: in
catching) the river)
-
53. Anton is fishing in the river.
catched
54. Anton (Correct answer: is fish -
catching)
at the side of the
catches
a fish river.
55. Anton (Correct answer: is
(Correct answer: in
catching)
the river)
-
56. Anton is fishing in the river.
was catching at the river.
fish
58. Anton is catching fish in the river.
-
59. Anton is catching
(Correct answer: fish) in the river.
at the side of the
fetches
- river.
(Correct answer: fish) (Correct answer: in
catching)
the river)
was fishing at the river.
-
beside the river.
-
the river)
is fetching beside the river.
a fish
fishing in the river site.
a fish
catch
a fish
65. Anton (Correct answer: is in the river.
catching)
at the side of the
was fishing
- river.
catching)
the river)
67. Anton catch fish at the river.
38
(Correct answer: is (Correct answer: in

fishing at the river.
-
at a river.
-
69. Anton is catching (Correct answer: in
the river)
goes fishing beside the river.
-
at the river.
71. Anton is catching fish (Correct answer: in
the river)
72. Anton is catching fish in the river.
was fishing at the river.
-
catching near the river.
a fish
at the river.
a fish
the river)
catching near the rivers.
a fish
-
77. Anton is fishing beside the river.
fishing in the river.
-
catching in the river.
a fish
catched near the river.
80. Anton (Correct answer: is fish (Correct answer: in
fishing in the river.
-
on the lake.
the river)
in the river.
-
the river)
in the river.
a fish
the river)
39
near the river.

the river)
sailing
a fish
catching)
in the river.
-
the river)
in the river.
a fish
the river)
get in the water.
the fish
in the side of the
a fish river.
90. Anton was catches
the river)
a fish
91. Anton is catching in the river.
beside the river.
the fish
the river)
catch in the near river.
93. Anton (Correct answer: is fish (Correct answer: in
catches in the river.
-
in the sideline river.
-
the river)
sailing
a fish
catching)
catches
in the river.
97. Anton (Correct answer: is fish
catching)
on the river.
fishes
the river)
on the river.
fishes
the river)
40
Table 10 shows the translation of sentence no. 3: Namimingwit ng isda si Anton
sa ilog. As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate sentence no. 3 using
the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. On the other hand, the respondents were not able to
provide the correct verb and object of the sentence. This implies that the respondents
followed the correct pattern in constructing a sentence but do not have enough knowledge
in grammatical structure since the respondents have committed errors in translating
sentence no.3.
In the third sentence, the word “Anton” was used in both languages,
“namimingwit” for “catching” and “isda” for “fish”. As shown in the sentence, the noun
Anton was used as the subject that was followed by a helping verb is and a verb catching
which shows the present action for the subject. The word fish which acted as the object of
the verb in the sentence was preceded by the verb catching.
Table 11: Given Sentence No. 4: Ang bag na dala ni John ay mabigat.
Correct answer/translation: “John brought a heavy bag.”
Translation: John brought a heavy bag.

S V article adjective O
Subject Verb Object

STEM (26 respondents)
carrying
100. John a heavy bag.
(Correct answer: brought)
101. The bag by John is heavy.
brought
(Correct answer: John) (Correct answer: a heavy bag)
102. John’s bag is heavy.
(Correct answer: John) (Correct answer: brought) (Correct answer: a heavy bag)
carried his heavy bag.
103. John
(Correct answer: brought) (Correct answer: a heavy bag)
104. The bag that John have is heavy.
105. The bag that John is bringing is heavy.
41
106. John’s bag that he carry is heavy.

107. A bag that John’s carrying is heavy.
carries
is carrying
is carrying
is carrying
112. The bag that John brought is heavy.
113. John’s bag is heavy.
114. The bag by John is heavy.
brought
(Correct answer: John) (Correct answer: a heavy bag)
115. John
is carrying
(Correct answer: the a heavy bag.
bag)
116. John
is carrying
(Correct answer: the a heavy bag.
bag)
117. John brought a heavy bag.
carried the heavy bag.
118. John
(Correct answer: brought) (Correct answer: a heavy bag)
brings
bringing
121. The bag that John brought is heavy.
122. The bag that holding John is heavy.
123. The bag that carried by John was heavy.
carries
carries
Table 11 shows the translation of sentence no. 4: Ang bag na dala ni John ay
mabigat. As shown in the table, the respondents were not able to translate sentence no. 4
using the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. The respondents were not able to provide the
correct subject, whether “the bag” or “John” in the sentence, as well as the verb
42
“brought” but they were able to provide the correct object “bag”. This implies that most
of the respondents did not follow the correct pattern in constructing a sentence and do
not have enough knowledge in grammatical structure since the respondents have
committed errors in translating sentence no.4.
In the fourth sentence, the word “bag” was used in both languages, “dala” for
“brought” and “John” was also used in both languages. As shown in the sentence, the
noun John was used as the subject that was followed by a verb brought which shows the
past action for the subject. The word bag which acted as the object of the verb in the
sentence was preceded by an adjective word heavy.
Table 12: Given Sentence No. 5: Si Ben ay nagdala ng aso sa bahay.
Correct answer/translation: “Ben brought a dog in the house”.
Translation: Ben brought a dog in the house.

S V article O prep article N
Subject Verb Object

TECH. VOC. (82 respondents)
126. Ben brought a dog in the house.
bring
128. Ben (Correct answer: a dog in the house.
brought)
in his house.
129. Ben brought a dog (Correct answer: in the
house)
brings to his house.
130. Ben (Correct answer: a dog (Correct answer: in the
brought) house.)
bring
brought)
bring in their house.
brought) house)
134. Ben bring a dog in their house.
43
(Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the

brought) house)
bring at home.
brought) house)
brings his dog in his house.
136. Ben (Correct answer: (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the
brought) a dog) house.)
bring the dog
137. Ben (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the house.
brought) a dog)
in their house.
house.)
was carrying
brought)
bring
brought)
was bring dog
146. Ben (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in house.
brought) a dog)
dog
147. Ben brought (Correct answer: in the house.
a dog)
the dog
in the house.
148. Ben brought (Correct answer:
a dog)
bring into his house.
brought) house.)
brought) house.)
is bring dog at their house.
bring in his house.
brought) house.)
154. Ben a dog
(Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the
44
brought) house.)
bring in his house.
brought) house.)
brought) house.)
in his house.
bring
(Correct answer: in the
157. Ben (Correct answer: a dog
house.)
brought)
brings
brought)
to the house.
house.)
brought) house.)
brought) house.)
brought) house.)
at in the house.
a dog
171. Ben brought (Correct answer: in the
house.)
at home.
house.)
at home.
house.)
is bringing
177. Ben (Correct answer: a dog in my house.
brought)
45
was brought in dog

178. Ben (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the house.
brought) a dog)
at the house.
a dog
182. Ben brought (Correct answer: in the
house.)
is bringing
brought)
bring
brought)
bring
brought)
bringing in my house.
a dog
188. Ben (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the
brought) house.)
bring
brought)
bring
brought)
at home.
house.)
bring
brought)
his dog in the house.
197. Ben brought (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the
a dog) house.)
is bringing in my house.
brought) house.)
a dog) house.)
200. Ben is bringing his dog in my house.
46
(Correct answer: (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the

his dog in my house.
201. Ben is bring (Correct answer: (Correct answer: in the
a dog) house.)
in my house
house.)
a dog) house.)
a dog) house.)
is taking at home.
brought) house.)
bring his dog in the house.
brings his dog in the house.
Table 12 shows the translation of sentence no. 5: Si Ben ay nagdala ng aso sa
bahay. As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate sentence no.5 using
the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. The respondents were able to provide the correct
subject in the sentence. In contrary some of the respondents were not able to provide the
correct verb in the sentence; also, most of the respondents were not able to give the
correct object. This means that the respondents were able to follow the correct pattern in
the respondents have committed errors in translating sentence no.5.
In the fifth sentence, the word “Ben” was used in both languages, “nagdala” for
“brought” and “aso” for “dog”. As shown in the sentence, the noun Ben was used as the
subject that was followed by a verb brought which shows the past action for the subject.
47
The word dog, which acted as the object of the verb in the sentence, was followed by the
preposition in and by an article the.
Table 13 The Common Patterns Used by the Respondents in Translating
English Sentences to Filipino Sentences
English – Filipino Translation Frequency Percentage (%)

Subject – Verb – Object 154 74.40%
Verb – Subject – Object 49 23.67%
Verb – Object – Subject - -
Subject – Object – Verb - -
Object – Verb – Subject 4 1.93%
TOTAL 207 100%
Table 13 shows the common patterns used by the respondents in translating
English sentences to Filipino sentences. As shown in the table, the most common pattern
used for the English to Filipino Translation is the Subject – Verb – Object pattern which
has a frequency of 154 or 74.40%. However, there are 49 0r 23.67% out of the total
number of sentences which uses the Verb – Subject – Object pattern. The least used
pattern in the Object – Verb – Subject pattern with only 4 or 1.93% out of the total
number of sentences constructed. The data gathered showed that in translating English
sentences to Filipino sentences, the Subject – Verb – Object pattern is the most prominent
pattern or most commonly used pattern.
Below are the 154 sample sentences using the Subject – Verb – Object
pattern in translating English sentences to Filipino sentences.
Given Sentences:
1. The driver was driving the car so fast.

48
2. The bird was eating a worm.
3. Eating provides energy.
4. The boy kissed the girl.
5. The lady is packing her things.
Table 14: Given Sentence No. 1: “The driver was driving the car so fast.”
Correct answer/translation: Ang drayber ay nagmamaneho ng sasakyan nang
napakabilis.
Other Possible Answers: Ang tsuper ay nagmamaneho ng kotse nang napakabilis.
Ang drayber ay napakabilis na nagmamaneho ng kotse.
Translation: Ang drayber ay nagmaneho ng sasakyan .

article S HV V determiner O
Subject Verb Object

ABM (17 out of 24 respondents)
ay napakabilis -
1. Ang magpatakbo (Correct answer: nang
ng sasakyan
drayber (Correct answer: ay napakabilis)
nagmamaneho)
ng sobrang mabilis
-
2. Isang (Correct answer: nang
ay nagmamaneho (Correct answer:
driver napakabilis)
ng sasakyan)
ng sobrang bilis.
3. Ang
ay nagmamaneho ng kotse (Correct answer: nang
tsuper
napakabilis)
ay mabilis na ang sasakyan. -
4. Ang pinatakbo (Correct answer: ng (Correct answer: ng
drayber (Correct answer: ay sasakyan ng napakabilis)
nagmamaneho) napakabilis)
sa sasakyan. -
5. Ang
ay nagmamaneho (Correct answer: ng (Correct answer: ng
drayber
sasakyan) napakabilis)
ang kanyang takbo. -
ay mabilis
6. Ang (Correct answer: ng (Correct answer: ng
(Correct answer: ay
driver sasakyan ng napakabilis)
nagmamaneho)
napakabilis)
7. Ang ng mabilis.
ay nagmamaneho ng kotse
drayber (Correct answer: ng
49
napakabilis)
ng mabilis.
8. Ang
ay nagmamaneho ng kotse ((Correct answer: ng
tsuper
napakabilis)
ng sobrang mabilis.
9. Ang
ay nagmamaneho ng kotse (Correct answer: ng
tsuper
napakabilis)
ng mabilis.
10. Ang
tsuper
napakabilis)
ng mabilis.
11. Ang
tsuper
napakabilis)
ng napakalakas.
12. Ang
ay nagmaneho ng kotse (Correct answer: ng
driver
napakabilis)
ng mabilis.
13. Ang
dayber
napakabilis)
ay malakas na -
14. Ang nagpatakbo (Correct answer: ng
ng sasakyan.
driver (Correct answer: ay napakabilis)
nagmamaneho)
- ng mabilis.
15. Ang
ay nagmamaneho (Correct answer: ng (Correct answer: ng
driver
sasakyan) napakabilis)
ng napakalakas.
16. Ang
ay nagmaneho ng kotse (Correct answer: ng
driver
napakabilis)
Mabilis
- (Correct answer: ng
17. Ang
ay nagmaneho (Correct answer: ng sasakyan ng napakabilis)
driver
sasakyan)
Table 14 shows the translation of sentence no. 1 “The driver was driving the car
so fast.” As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate sentence no.1 using
the Subject – Verb – Object pattern. The respondents were able to provide the correct
subject in the sentence. Nevertheless some of the respondents were not able to provide
the correct verb in the sentence; also, most of the respondents were not able to give the
correct object. This means that the respondents were able to follow the correct pattern in
the respondents have committed errors in translating sentence no.1.

50
In the first sentence, the English word “driver” was translated into the Filipino
word “drayber”, “driving” for “nagmamaneho” and “car” for “sasakyan”. As shown in
the sentence, the noun drayber was used as the subject that was followed by a helping
verb ay and a verb nagmamaneho, which shows the action for the subject. On the last part
of the sentence, the word sasakyan which acted as the object of the verb was preceded by
a determiner ng.
Table 15: Given Sentence No. 2: “The bird was eating a worm.”
Correct answer/translation: Ang ibon ay kumain ng uod.
Translation: Ang ibon ay kumain ng uod.

Subject Verb Object

GAS (20 out of 25 respondents)
18. Ang ibon ay kumain ng uod.
19. May isang
na kumakain
Langgam ng isang uod
(Correct answer:
(Correct answer: (Correct answer: ng uod)
ay kumain)
Ang ibon)
ay nagkakain
sa uod.
20. Ang ibon (Correct answer:
(Correct answer: ng uod)
ay kumain)
21. Ang ibon ay kumain sa uod.
uod.
25. Ang ibon ay kumain
(Correct answer: ng uod.)
ay kumakain-kain
27. Ang ibon (Correct answer: ng uod.
ay kumain)
ay lumipad
31. Ang ibon (Correct answer: ng uod.
ay kumain)
34. Ang ibon ay kumain ng bulate.
51

ng bulate.
ng bulate.
Table 15 shows the translation of sentence no. 2 “The bird was eating a worm.”
As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate sentence no.2 using the
Subject – Verb – Object pattern. The respondents were able to provide the correct subject
in the sentence. However, some of the respondents were not able to provide the correct
verb and object in the sentence. This means that the respondents were able to follow the
correct pattern in constructing a sentence but do not have enough knowledge in
grammatical structure since the respondents have committed errors in translating sentence
no.2.
In the given sentence, the English word “bird” was translated into the Filipino
word “ibon”, “eating” for “kumain” and “worm” for “uod”. As shown in the sentence, the
noun ibon was used as the subject that was followed by a helping verb ay and a verb
kumain which shows the action for the subject. On the last part of the sentence, the word
uod, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded by a determiner ng.
Table 16: Given Sentence No. 3: “Eating provides energy.”
Correct answer/translation: Ang kumain ay nakapagbigay ng enerhiya.
Translation: Ang kumain ay nakapagbigay ng eneherhiya

Subject Verb Object

HUMSS (30 out of 50 respondents)
sa akin ng enerhiya.
38. Ang kumain ay nakapagbigay
(Correct answer: ng enerhiya.)
39. Ang pagkain sa akin ng enerhiya.
ay nakapagbigay
(Correct answer: Ang (Correct answer: ng enerhiya.)
52
kumain)
40. Ang pagkain
(Correct answer: Ang ay nakapagbigay ng enerhiya.
kumain)
41. Ang pagkain ay nakapagdagdag
(Correct answer: Ang (Correct answer: ay ng enerhiya.
kumain) nakapagbigay)
ay nakakapagdagdag
42. Ang kumain (Correct answer: ay ng enerhiya.
nakapagbigay)
43. Pagkain
kumain)
44. Ang pagkain
kumain)
45. Ang pagkain
kumain)
46. Ang pagkain
kumain)
47. Ang pagkain
kumain)
48. Ang kumain ay nakapagbigay ng enerhiya.
50. Ang pagkain ay nakakapagdagdag
51. Pagkain
kumain)
52. Ang pagkain
kumain)
53. Pagkain
kumain)
54. Ang pagkakain
kumain)
ay nakakapagdagdag
nakapagbigay)
53

60. Kumakain
kumain)
ay nakakapagdagdag
nakapagbigay)
66. Ang pagkain
kumain)
Table 16 shows the translation of sentence no. 3 “Eating provides energy.”
As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate the sentence no.3 using the
Subject – Verb – Object pattern. However, some of the respondents were not able to
provide the correct subject in the sentence. In addition some of the respondents were not
able to provide the correct verb in the sentence; also, most of the respondents were not
able to give the correct object. This means that the respondents are able to follow the
no.3.
In the given sentence, the English word “eating” was translated into the Filipino
word “kumain”, “provides” for “nakapagbigay” and “energy” for “enerhiya”. As shown
in the sentence, the noun kumain was used as the subject that was followed by a helping
verb ay and a verb nakapagbigay which shows the action for the subject. On the last part
of the sentence, the word enerhiya, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded
by a determiner ng.
54
Table 17: Given Sentence No. 4: “The boy kissed the girl”.
Correct answer/translation: Ang lalaki ay humalik sa babae.
Translation: Ang lalaki ay humalik sa babae.

article S HV V prep O
Subject Verb Object

STEM (17 out of 26 respondents)
68. Ang lalaki ay hinalikan ang babae
(Correct answer: humalik) (Correct answer: sa babae)
75. Ang lalaki ay humalik
sa babae.
(Correct answer: humalik)
79. Ang lalaki ay humalik
sa babae.
(Correct answer: humalik)
80. Ang lalaki ay hinalikan ang babae.
55
Table 17 shows the translation of sentence no. 4 “The boy kissed the girl.”
in the sentence. In contrary, most of the respondents were not able to provide the correct
verb and object in the sentence. This means that the respondents are able to follow the
no.4.
In the given sentence, the English word “boy” was translated into the Filipino
word “lalaki”, “kissed” for “humalik” and “girl” for “babae”. As shown in the sentence,
the noun lalaki was used as the subject that was followed by a helping verb ay and verb
humalik which shows the action for the subject. On the last part of the sentence, the word
babae, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded by a preposition sa.
Table 18: Given Sentence No. 5: “The lady is packing her things.”
Correct answer/translation: “Ang babae ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit”.
Translation: Ang babae ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang gamit.

article S HV V determiner pronoun O
Subject Verb Object

TECH. VOC. (69 out of 84 respondents)
ng kanyang damit.
85. Ang babae ay nag-iimpake (Correct answer: ng kanyang mga
gamit)
86. Ang dalaga ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit.
ng kanyang gamit.
88. Ang dalaga ay nag-iimpake (Correct answer: ng kanyang mga
gamit)
90. Ang dalaga ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit
56
ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang gamit.

92. Ang dalaga (Correct answer: ng kanyang mga
gamit)
ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang damit.
gamit)
ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ay nag-impake
96. Ang babae (Correct answer: ay nag- sa kanyang mga gamit.
iimpake)
ng gamit.
gamit)
ng kanyang kagamitan.
98. Ang babae ay nag-impake (Correct answer: ng kanyang mga
gamit)
99. Ang babae ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit.
ay nag-liligpit ng kanyang gamit.
101. Ang babae (Correct answer: ay nag- (Correct answer: ng kanyang mga
iimpake) gamit)
ay nag-liligpit ng kanyang gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
103. Ang babae ay nag-iimpake sa kanyang mga gamit.
ay nag-liligpit
104. Ang babae (Correct answer: ay nag- ng kanyang mga gamit.
iimpake)
105. Ang ale ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit.
ay nag-impake
iimpake)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
111. Ang babae ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit
ng mga gamit.
gamit)
57
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
sa kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ay nag-iimpake ng gamit.
119. Ang isang
ay nag-iimpake (Correct answer: ng kanyang mga
babae
gamit)
ay nag-impake ng kanyang gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
sa kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ay nag-impake sa kanyang gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
ay nag-impake ang kanyang gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
ay nag-impake
iimpake)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
iimpake) gamit)
iimpake) gamit)
58
sa kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ay nag-impake
iimpake)
ay nag-impake
140. Ang babae (Correct answer: ay nag- ng kanyang mga gamit
iimpake)
iimpake) gamit)
ay nag-impake
142. Isang
(Correct answer: ay nag- ng kanyang mga gamit
babae
iimpake)
iimpake) gamit)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
ng gamit..
gamit)
ng gamit.
gamit)
iimpake) gamit)
ng kanyang gamit.
gamit)
iimpake) gamit)
ay nag-impake sa kanyang mga gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
iimpake) gamit)
ay inihanda ang gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
ay nagbalot sa kanyang mga gamit.
iimpake) gamit)
59
Table 18 shows the translation of sentence no. 5 “The lady is packing her things.”
in the sentence. In contrary, some of the respondents were not able to provide the correct
verb and object in the sentence. This means that the respondents are able to follow the
no.5.
In the given sentence, the English word “lady” was translated into the Filipino
word “babae”, “packing” for “nag-iimpake” and “things” for “gamit”. As shown in the
sentence, the noun babae was used as the subject that was followed by a helping verb ay
and a verb nag-iimpake which shows the action for the subject. On the last part of the
sentence, the word gamit, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded by a
pronoun kanyang and a determiner ng.
Below are the 49 sample sentences translated by the respondents using Verb –
Subject – Object pattern in translating English sentences to Filipino sentences.
Table 19: Given Sentence 1:“The driver was driving the car so fast”.
Correct answer/translation: Minamaneho ng drayber ang sasakyan nang napakabilis.
Translation:
Minamaneho ng drayber ang sasakyan nang napakabilis.

V ligature S article O adverb of manner adjective
Verb Subject Object

1. Nagmaneho ang drayber - ng mabilis.
(Correct answer: (Correct answer: (Correct answer: ang (Correct answer:
Minamaneho) ng drayber) sasakyan) nang napakabilis.)
2. Mabilis na -
minamaneho (Correct answer:
ng drayber ang sasakyan.
(Correct answer: nang napakabilis.)
Minamaneho)
3. Minamaneho ng drayber ang kotse nang napakabilis.
60
4. Pinatakbo ang sasakyan ng mabilis.

(Correct answer: ng drayber (Correct answer: ang (Correct answer:
Minamaneho) sasakyan) nang napakabilis.)
5. Minamaneho ng drayber ang kotse nang napakabilis.
6. Malakas na -
ang isang drayber ng sasakyan.
nagpatakbo (Correct answer:
(Correct answer: (Correct answer: ang
(Correct answer: nang napakabilis)
ng drayber) sasakyan)
Minamaneho)
ng napakalakas
7. Minamaneho ng drayber ang kotse (Correct answer:
nang napakabilis.)
8. Mabilis na -
ang tsuper ng sasakyan
nagmaneho (Correct answer:
Minamaneho)
9. Mabilis na -
ang tsuper ng sasakyan.
nagmaneho (Correct answer:
Minamaneho)
10. Pinapatakbo ng mabilis.
(Correct answer: ng drayber ang kotse (Correct answer:
Minamaneho) nang napakabilis.)
11. Pinatakbo ang kotse ng mabilis.
(Correct answer: ng drayber (Correct answer: ng (Correct answer:
Minamaneho) drayber) nang napakabilis.)
12. Pinatakbo ng -
ang sasakyan.
mabilis. (Correct answer:
- (Correct answer: ang
sasakyan)
Minamaneho)
13. Mabilis ang -
sa sasakyan.
pagdrive (Correct answer:
ng drayber (Correct answer: ang
sasakyan)
Minamaneho)
14. Mabilis na -
ang sasakyan.
pinatakbo (Correct answer:
ng drayber (Correct answer: ang
sasakyan)
Minamaneho)
Table 19 shows the translation of sentence 1 “The driver was driving the car so
fast.” As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate the sentence using the
Verb – Subject – Object pattern. Some of the respondents were able to provide the correct
verb in the sentence. In contrary, only few of the respondents were able to commit error
in providing the correct subject but most of the respondents were not able to provide the
correct object in the sentence. This means that the respondents are able to follow the
61
no. 1.
In the first sentence, the English word “driver” was translated into the Filipino
word “drayber”, “driving” for “minamaneho” and “car” for “sasakyan”. As shown in the
sentence, the noun drayber was used as the subject after a determiner ng and a verb
minamaneho, which shows the action for the subject. On the last part of the sentence, the
word sasakyan, which acted as the object of the verb, was followed by an adverb of
manner nang and an adjective napakabilis.
Table 20: Given Sentence 2: “The boy kissed the girl.”
Correct answer/translation: “Humalik ang lalaki sa babae”.
Other Possible Answer: Hinalikan ng lalaki ang babae.
Translation: Humalik ang lalaki sa babae.

V article S prep Object
Verb Subject Object

15. Hinalikan ng lalaki ang babae.
24 Hinalikan ng lalaki ang babae.
62

Table 20 shows the translation of the sentence “The boy kissed the girl.” As
shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate the sentence using the Verb –
Subject – Object pattern. Most of the respondents were able to provide the correct pattern
in translating the sentence and the respondents were able to give the correct translation of
the sentence. This means that the respondents are able to follow the correct pattern in
constructing a sentence and have enough knowledge in grammatical structure in terms of
using the Verb – Subject – Object pattern in translating sentence no. 2.
the noun lalaki was used as the subject followed by a preposition sa. The verb humalik
which shows the action for the subject, was followed by an article ang. On the last part of
the sentence, the word babae, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded by a
preposition sa.
Table 21: Given sentence 3: “The lady is packing her things.”
Correct answer/translation: “Nag-iimpake ang babae ng kanyang mga gamit”.
Translation: Nag-iimpake ang babae ng kanyang gamit.

V article S determiner pronoun O
37. Nag-impake siya ng gamit

(Correct answer: Nag- (Correct answer: (Correct answer:
iimpake) ang babae) sa kanyang mga gamit)
38. Inimpake ng babae ang kanyang mga gamit
ng kanyang gamit.
39. Nag-iimpake ang babae (Correct answer:
sa kanyang mga gamit)
63
40. Niligpit ng dalaga ang kanyang gamit.

ng kanyang gamit.
42. Inimpake ng dalaga ang kanyang gamit
43. Inimpake ng babae
(Correct answer: Nag- (Correct answer: ang kanyang mga gamit.
iimpake) ang babae)
44. Nag-impake ng kanyang gamit.
(Correct answer: Nag- ang babae (Correct answer:
iimpake) sa kanyang mga gamit)
ng kanyang gamit.
46. Inimpake ng babae
(Correct answer: Nag- (Correct answer: ang kanyang mga gamit.
iimpake) ang babae)
47. Nag-impake Siya ng gamit.
Table 21 shows the translation of the sentence, “The lady is packing her things.”
As shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate the sentence using the Verb
– Subject – Object pattern. However, some of the respondents were not able to provide
the correct translation of the sentence. This means that the respondents are able to follow
the correct pattern in constructing a sentence but do not have enough knowledge in
grammatical structure in terms of using the Verb – Subject – Object pattern since the
respondents have committed errors in translating the sentence.
In the given sentence, the English word “lady” was translated into the Filipino
word “babae”, “packing” for “nag-iimpake” and “things” for “gamit”. As shown in the
sentence, the noun babae was used as the subject that was followed by a determiner ng
and the verb nag-iimpake was used as the action of the subject. On the last part of the
64
sentence, the word gamit, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded by a
pronoun kanyang and a determiner ng.
Table 22: Given Sentence 4: “The bird was eating a worm”.
Correct answer/translation: “Kumain ang ibon ng uod”.
Translation: Kumain ang ibon ng uod.

V article S ligature O
Verb Subject Object

48. Kumain ang ibon ng uod.
49. Kumain ang ibon ng uod.
Table 22 shows the translation of the sentence, “The bird was eating a worm.” As
shown in the table, the respondents were able to translate the sentence using the Verb –
Subject – Object pattern. The respondents are able to provide the correct translation of
the sentence. This means that the respondents have enough knowledge in grammatical
structure in terms of using the Verb – Subject – Object pattern in the sentence.
In the given sentence, the English word “bird” was translated into the Filipino
word “ibon”, “eating” for “kumain” and “worm” for “uod”. As shown in the sentence, the
noun ibon was used as the subject that was followed by a determiner ng and a verb
kumain which shows the action for the subject. On the last part of the sentence, the word
uod, which acted as the object of the verb, was preceded by a determiner ng.
Below are the 4 sample sentences translated by the respondents using Object –
Verb – Subject pattern in translating English sentence to Filipino sentence.
Table 23:Given sentence 5: “The boy kissed the girl .”
Correct answer/translation: “Sa babae humalik ang lalaki”.
Translation: Sa babae humalik ang lalaki.

determiner O V article S
65
Object Verb Subject

1. Ang babae ay hinalikan ng lalaki.
(Correct answer: sa babae) (Correct answer: humalik) (Correct answer: ang lalaki)
2. Si babae (Correct ang hinalikan ni lalaki.
answer: sa babae) (Correct answer: humalik) (Correct answer: ang lalaki)
3. Sa babae humalik ang lalaki.
4. Kay babae humalik si lalaki.
Table 23 shows the translation of the sentence, “The boy kissed the girl”. As
shown in the table the respondents were able to translate the sentence using the Object –
Verb – Subject pattern. Most of the respondents were not able to provide the correct
object of the sentence as well as the verb and the subject. This means that the respondents
were able to use the Object – Verb – Subject pattern in the sentence but do not have
enough knowledge in grammatical structure since the respondents have committed errors
in translating entence no. 5.
the noun lalaki was used as the subject that was preceded by an article ang and the verb
humalik which shows the action for the subject was preceded by the object babae.
Languages differ from each other in numerous properties, but this variation is not
completely random. For example, when uttering a sentence containing a subject, a verb
and an object, there are six logically possible orders in which one can put these
constituents into a sentence. However, not all of these word orders are as widely used
among languages. In fact, almost all languages put the subject or agent before the object
or patient in basic transitive sentences, resulting in so-called SOV, SVO or VSO word
orders in which „S‟, „O‟ and „V‟ are short for subject, object and verb respectively
(Greenberg, 1963). Word orders in which the object precedes the subject are quite rare:
only about 5% of all languages exhibit VSO, VOS or OVS word order (Siewierska,
1988:15). An overview of the occurrences of the dominant word orders is given in table 1
below (Dryer, 2013a). Note that the terms „subject‟ and „object‟, the „S‟ and „O‟ in the
66
case of the abbreviations above, are used here in a general semantic sense: their use must
be defined in terms of agent-like or patient-like properties respectively. Although there
has been discussion on the exact numbers of occurrence, it is evident that SVO and VSO
word orders are by far the most adopted among languages. (Morwenna Hoeks, 2016)
Table 24 Significant Relationship in knowing the different placement of the
S-V-O pattern between the Filipino and English Language when
paired according to Profile
Factors Compared Different Placement of the S – V – O

Compute
Respondents’ Profile df TV d (x2) Interpretation Action
Significant Ho was
Age 0.05 2.0 5.991 10.47 Difference rejected
Significant Ho was
Gender 0.05 2.0 5.991 11.013 Difference rejected
No Significant Ho was
Strand 0.05 4.0 9.488 0.963 Difference accepted
Table 23 shows the significant relationship in knowing the different placement of
the S – V – O pattern between the Filipino and English language when paired according
to profile. Applying the chi-square test, both the respondents’ gender and age were
interpreted as having significant relationship in knowing the different placement of the
Subject – Verb – Object pattern between Filipino and English language translation. The
respondents’ age having the chi-value of 10.47 was greater than the tabular value of
5.991 and the respondents’ gender having the chi-value of 11.013 was also greater than
its tabular value of 5.991. Both suggest the rejection of the hypothesis. For the strands,
the tabular value of 9.488 is greater than the chi-value which was only 0.963, that suggest
67
the acceptance of the hypothesis which implies that there is no significant relationship
between the strands where the respondents belong in knowing the significant relationship
in knowing the different placement of the S – V – O pattern.
This correlates to the study of Ghourchaei et al, (2015) entitled “Risk Taking,
Gender and Oral Narrative Proficiency in Persian Learners of English” which was
shown in their study that personality factors such as gender do not have significant
relationship that would affect the students in their English proficiency. It was believed
that males are more willing to accept risky behaviours which can take the idea to
language education and claim that men are more willing to venture to speak or show their
language proficiency in front of others. But just like in the present study, it doesn’t
support the idea that gender differences can show how each of them can vary in their
English proficiency levels.

68
Chapter 5
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the restatement of the problem, the summary of the findings,
the conclusions, and the recommendations based on the findings of the study.
Restatement of the Problem
This study aimed to identify the commonly used pattern for word order in
translating simple sentences between Filipino and English language and to find out the
students’ expertise in using the Subject – Verb – Object pattern in a simple sentence in
terms of translating Filipino language to English language and vice versa.
Specifically, the study sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:
1.1 Age;
1.2 Gender;
1.3 Strand?
2. What is the proficiency level of the Grade 11 Senior High School students in
translating simple sentences between Filipino and English language using the:
2.1 Subject – Verb – Object pattern?
3. What are the common patterns used by the respondents in translating English sentences
to Filipino sentences?
4. Is there any significant relationship in knowing the different placement of the S-V-O
pattern between the Filipino and English Language when paired according to profile?
69
Summary of Findings
The study revealed to answer the following findings:
1. Majority of the respondents were female adolescent who took up Tech. Voc strand.
2. In terms of the proficiency level, the respondents were progressing.
3. The common patterns used by the respondents in translating Filipino sentences to
English sentences and vice versa, was Subject – Verb – Object pattern.
4. There was a significant relationship between both age and gender in knowing the
different placement of the Subject – Verb – Object pattern between the Filipino and
English language. However, it yielded no significant relationship between the strand
and in knowing the different placement of the Subject – Verb – Object pattern.
Conclusion
On the basis of careful evaluation analysis of the findings, the following
conclusions are drawn: that the commonly used pattern for word order in translating
English sentences to Filipino sentences and vice versa is the Subject – Verb – Object
pattern. In addition, the proficiency level of the respondents in translating English
sentences to Filipino sentences and vice versa show that they are in the process of
improving their ability to translate and are closed to being proficient. Moreover,
some of the respondents are not able to use Subject – Verb – Object pattern in
translating English to Filipino sentences, instead they use the Verb – Subject –
Object pattern and the Object – Verb – Subject pattern. The result shows that the
respondents are not proficient in translating simple sentences that are expected of
them.
70
Recommendations:
1. Students should read and study more about the correct pattern of a particular
sentence to avoid difficulties in translating sentences between the two languages.
2. The teacher should give more activities that involve translation between the two
languages for them to distinguish the different placement, since knowing the correct
pattern of a sentence is very important in constructing a sentence, and should spend
more class time to address the problematic points in translation procedures such as
carelessness, low self-confidence, and anxiety. In addition, more authentic
translation and group work should be implemented to increase self-confidence and
decrease anxiety.
3. This study recommends that the department of education should encourage
students to develop and improve their proficiency in translating simple sentences
between Filipino and English language.

71
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baes, A. P., Bagalanon, R. B., Sieras, V. S., Recamara, J. T., Saguin, C. S., Campiseño,
E. R., Balbuena, E. S. (2013). Communication Arts and Skills 2 Modules and
Workbook. St. Andrew Publishing House. Culianin, Plaridel, Bulacan.
Clemens, L. E. Polinsky, M. (2017) Verb-Initial Word Orders, Primarily in Austronesian

and Mayan Languages. Retrieved on October 11, 2017, from file:///C:/Users/Ad-
min/ Downloads/clemensEtAl_17_Verb-Initi.6%20(11).pdf
Dryer, M. S. (2011). Order of Subject, Object, and Verb. In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspel-
math (Eds), the world atlas of language, 33(6), 715-736. Retrieved on July 14,
2018 from https://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://
www.researchgate.net/profile/Pablo_Bernabeu3/post/What_are_the_cognitive_fac
tors_affecting_the_prevalence_of_SOV_and_SVO_word_orders_cross-
linguistically/attachment/59d63302c49f478072ea1e9a/AS%253A2736388408320
05%25401442251991222/download/1-s2.0-S0010027714000432-
main.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiKNirxJ3cAhWZZt4KHQTvAaQQFjAAegQIAxAB&u
sg=AOvVaw1b9TASJVeQnjEh-J3wP21O
English Oxford Living Dictionaries Retrieved on July 1, 2018 from: https://en.oxford

dictionaries.com/definition/object
Ghourchaei B., Majidifard E. and Shomoossi N. (May 12, 2015). Risk Taking, Gender
and Oral Narrative Proficiency in Persian Learners of English. Retrieved on June
23, 2018 from: https://www.academia .edu/30835772/Risk_Taking_Gender_and_
Oral_Naarrative_Proficiency_in_Persian_Learners_of_English
Gibson, E. (2013) A Noisy-Channel Account Of Crosslinguistic Word-Order Variation.

Psychological Science, 24(7). Retrieved on July 14, 2018 from https.www.google
.ph/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ww.researchergate.net/profile/Pablo
_Bernabeu3/post/What_are_the_cognitive_factors_affecting_the_prevalence_of_
SOV_and_SVO_word_orders_crosslinguistically/attachment/59d63302c49f47807
2ea1e9a/AS%253A273638840832005%25401442251991222/download/1-s2.0-
S0010027714000432main.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiKNirxJ3cAhWZZt4KHQTvAaQ
QFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw1b9TASJVeQnjEh-J3wP21O
Google Maps Retrieved on June 25, 2018 from: https://www.google/com/maps/place/

Jose+Rizal+Memorial+State+College/@8.5835633,123.3492044,17.5z/data=!4m
8!1m2!2m1!1sjrmsu+dipolog+city!3m4!1s0x0:0x8330223e675a8e4b!8m2!3d8.5
830369!4d123.3507156
Hall, M. L.,Mayberry, R. I., %Ferreira, V. S. (2013). Cognitive Constraints on Constitu-

Uent Order: Evidence from Elicited pantomime. Cognition, 129 (1), 1 – 17.
Retrieved on July 14, 2018 from 2018 from https.www.googleph/url?sa=t&source
=web&rct=j&url=https://ww.researchergate.net/profile/Pablo_Bernabeu3/post/W
hat_are_the_cognitive_factors_affecting_the_prevalence_of_SOV_and_SVO_wo
rd_orders_crosslinguistically/attachment/59d63302c49f478072ea1e9a/AS%253A
273638840832005%25401442251991222/download/
72
Hoeks, Morwenna (2016) From SOV towards SVO Explaining the Word Order Distribu-
tion in terms of changing preferences. Retrieved on June 21, 2018 from:
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/ELAGOR/My%20Documents/Downloa
ds/scriptie_compleet_laatsteversie.pdf
Hohle B., Horing R., Weskott T., Knauf S. and Kruger A. (2013.) Effects of Focus and
Definiteness on Children’s Word Order: Evidence from German Five-year-olds’
Reproductions of Double Object Constructions. Journal of Child Language.: 1-31.
Retrieved on September 10, 2017 from: http://www.brighthubeducation.com/lear-
ning-spanish/29390-tagalog-grammar-a-basic-understanding/
Thompson, F.H. (1980) Patterns Language. Retrieved on July 14, 2018 from https:///ww
w.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/Pat
terns-language Level/dp/B0006YSASY&ved=2ahUKEwj6_cXdy53cAhUKQd4K
Qd4KHQCzDhMQFjAGegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw1oy2_o5c9a0EYKDDGRizj
Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.), (2013). Ethnologue:
Languages of the World, Seventeenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International.
Online version. Retrieved on September 10, 2017 from:
http://ling.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/alumni%20senior%20essays/Labitigan
%2C%20Lorenzo%20-%20Senior%20essay.pdf
Maurits, L. (2010) Why are some word orders more common than others? A uniform
information density account. Retrieved on June 21, 2018 from:
https://papers.nips.cc/paper/4085-why-are-some-word-orders-more-common-
than-others-a-uniform-information-density-account.pdf
Mounya, S. (2017) Comparative Study of Word_Order Patterns of Simple Sentences in

English and Arabic. Retrieved on June 21, 2018 from:
http://journals.rudn.ru/semiotics-semantics/article/download/16360/14686
Nationmaster. (2008). Encyclopedia: Tagalog language. Retrieved October 14, 2008,

Retrieved from: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Tagalog-language.
O’Shannessy, C. (2011). Competition between word order and case-marking in

interrupting grammatical relations: a case study in multilingual acquisition.
Journal of Child Language. 38(4): 763-792. Retrieved from September 10, 2017
from: https://search1.cnet.com/intl/search?q=tagalog%20sentence%20to%20eng-
lish&ssibid=ah7860049&ach=AdNetA_CNET_31&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI24Xzq
IGc1gIVlCu9Ch1wkg_vEAMYASAAEgJYqfD_BwE
Plunkett, B.,Westergaard.M. (2011). The acquisition of word order: Micro-cues,

information structure, and economy. Journal of Linguistics. 47(3): 756-753.
Retrieved from September 10, 2017 from: http://autocww.colorado.edu/~toldy3/
E64ContentFiles/LinguisticsAndLanguages/AmericanEnglish.html
73
Ronquillo, Seth (2016). Interference of Second Language in the Acquisition of Tagalog

Word in Children: A Case Study Retrieved on Octover 11, 2016, from:
http://aleph.humanities.ucla.edu/2017/05/16/interference-of-second-language-in-
the-acquisition-of-tagalog-word-in-children-a-case-study/
Serrano, Josephine B., Rustia, Erlinda F. (1999). Effective English for College Freshmen:
Book 1. Rex Printing Company,inc., Florentino St., Quezon City.
Wongranu, Pattanapong (2016). Errors in translation made by English major students: A

Study on Types and Causes. Retrieved on June 23, 2018 from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452315117300851
Internet Sources
(Retrieved on September 11, 2017)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language
https://www.britannica.com/topic/English-language
https://search1.cnet.com/int/search?q=tagalog%20sentence%20to%20english&ssi
bid=ah7860049&ach=AdNetA_CNET_31&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI24XzqIGc1gI
VlCu9Ch1wkg_vEAMYASAAEgJYqfD_BwE
http://www.brighthubeducation.com/learning-spanish/29390-tagalog-grammar-a-
basic-understanding/
(Retrieved on October 9, 2017)

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/word
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/order
https://www.thoughtco.com/simple-sentence-english-grammar-1692099
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-the-english-language-1690652
http://www.yourdictionary.com/tagalog
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/verb
(Retrieved on October 9, 2017)

https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=E8tApLUNy94C&pg=PA62&lpg=PA62&
dq=differences+between+tagalog+and+english+sentences&source=bl&ots=UrM6
TFTmRV&sig=-
5j6eC_NDiBePZuD95HszGXIF40&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxhJrU15zWA
hXDVLwKHRj7DlMQ6AEISjAG#v=onepage&q=differences%20between%20ta
galog%20and%20english%20sentences&f=false
http://news.mit.edu/2012/applying-information-theory-to-linguistics-1010
http://www.languagesoftheworld.info/syntax/parametric-theory-of-word-order-
language-acquisition-and-historical-change.html
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.387.6852&rep=rep1&t
ype=pdf
74
APPENDIX A
Letter to the Research Adviser
Republic of the Philippines

JOSE RIZAL MEMORIAL STATE UNIVERSITY
The Premier University in Zamboanga del Norte
Dipolog Campus, Dipolog City
OFFICE OF THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
October 11, 2017
PROF. ROCHEL A. RANES

Research Professor
Madam:
Greetings!
We, Princess Mae S. Bucol, Alpha Faith A. Tigulo and Delcar G. Vidal, would humbly
ask you to be our Research Adviser. We believe that your knowledge and expertise in the
research field can help us a lot in accomplishing our undergraduate thesis entitled “An
Analysis on Word Order: The Placement of Subject-Verb–Object in a Simple
Sentence Between Filipino and English Language”.
Thank you so much for your time and consideration.
Sincerely Yours,
PRINCESS MAE S. BUCOL ALPHA FAITH A. TIGULO DELCAR G. VIDAL

Researcher 1 Researcher 2 Researcher 3
Approved by:
PROF. ROCHEL A. RANES

Adviser/Research 32 Professor
75
APPENDIX B
Letter to the School Principal

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
March 27, 2018
IVO MATHEW M. SIATON, M.A.PEd.
Greetings!
The undersigned are the Third Year BSED – English students of Jose Rizal Memorial State
University, Dipolog Campus undertaking a research entitled “An Analysis on Word Order: The
Placement of Subject – Verb – Object in a Simple Sentence between Filipino and English
Language”.
In connection thereof, we humbly ask approval from your good office to allow us to conduct our
study to 207 Senior High School Students: 50 HUMMS students, 26 STEM students, 25 GAS
students, 24 ABM students and 82 Tech-Voc students. Rest assured that the data gathered will be
strictly for research purposes only and will be kept with outmost confidentiality.
We are looking forward with your positive response on this regard.
Thank you and God bless.
Respectfully yours,
PRINCESS MAE S. BUCOL ALPHA FAITH A. TIGULO DELCAR G. VIDAL

Researcher 1 Researcher 2 Researcher 3
Approved/Disapproved:
IVO MATHEW M. SIATON, M.A.PEd

Principal, Senior High School
JRMSU-Dipolog Campus, Dipolog City
76
APPENDIX C
Survey – Questionnaire of the Study
Part I. Personal Information

Directions: Supply the information needed in the study. Please check the space that
corresponds to your answer.
Name (Optional): _______________________ Year/Grade Level: __________
Age: ( ) 17 below ( ) 18 - 20 Years ( ) 21 above
Gender: ( ) Female ( ) Male ( ) LGBT
Strand: ( ) HUMSS ( ) GAS ( ) ABM

( ) STEM ( ) TECH. VOC
Part II.
Directions: Translate the following Filipino sentences into English sentences and identify
the Subject, Verb, and Object in each sentence.
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
2. Nagluto si Anna ng adobo sa kusina.
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Subject –
Verb –
77
Object –
3. Namimingwit ng isda si Anton sa ilog.
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
78
Part III.
Directions: Translate the following English sentences into Filipino sentences and
identify the Subject, Verb, and Object in each sentence.
1. The driver was driving the car.
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Simuno –
79
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Translation: ___________________________________________________
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
Subject –
Verb –
Object –
Translation: _________________________________________________
Simuno –
Pandiwa –
Layon (Object) –
80
APPENDIX D
Answer Key to the Questionnaire
Part II.
Subject: matandang lalaki
Verb: kumain
Object: hinog na saging
Translation: The old man was eating a ripe banana.
Subject: old man
Verb: eating
Object: ripe banana
2. Nagluto si Anna ng adobo sa kusina.

Subject: Ana
Verb: nagluto
Object: adobo
Translation: Anna cooked adobo in the kitchen.
Subject: Anna
Verb: cooked
Object: adobo
3. Namimingwit ng isda si Anton sa ilog.

Subject: Anton
Verb: namimingwit
Object: isda
Translation: Anton is catching fish in the river.
Subject: Anton
Verb: catching
Object: fish

Subject: John
81
Verb: dala
Object: bag
Translation: John brought a heavy bag.
Subject: John
Verb: brought
Object: bag

Subject: Ben
Verb: nagdala
Object: aso
Translation: Ben brought a dog in the house.
Subject: Ben
Verb: brought
Object: dog
Part III:
1. The driver was driving the car so fast.
Subject: driver
Verb: driving
Object: car
Translation: Ang drayber ay nagmamaneho ng sasakyan nang napakabilis.
Subject: drayber
Verb: nagmamaneho
Object: sasakyan

Subject: bird
Verb: eating
Object: worm
Translation: Ang ibon ay kumain ng uod.
Subject: ibon
Verb: kumain
82
Object: uod

Subject: eating
Verb: provides
Object: energy
Translation: Ang kumain ay nakapagbigay ng enerhiya.
Subject: kumain
Verb: nakapagbigay
Object: enerhiya

Subject: boy
Verb: kissed
Object: girl
Translation: Ang lalaki ay humalik sa babae.
Subject: lalaki
Verb: hinalikan
Object: babae

Subject: lady
Verb: packing
Object: things
Translation: Ang babae ay nag-iimpake ng kanyang mga gamit.
Subject: babae
Verb: nag-iimpake
Object: gamit
83
APPENDIX E
Levels of Proficiency Rubric
Beginner Developing Progressing Proficient

10 – below 11 – 20 21 – 30 31 – 40
-Translated only 10 -Translated 11 to 20 -Translated 21 to 30 -Translated 31 to 40
and below correct correct sentences correct sentences correct sentences
sentences with the with the use of with the use of with the use of
use of correct correct pattern. correct pattern. correct pattern.
pattern.
-With help applies -Applies the basic -With help applies -Independently
the basic knowledge knowledge and the basic and applies the basic and
and skills taught to skills taught to complex knowledge complex knowledge
situations in the situations in the and skills taught to and skills taught to
activity. activity. situations in the situations in the
activity. activity.
84
APPENDIX F
Certificate of Validation

Office for Research and Development
PHILOSOPHY
CERTIFICATION OF VALIDATION
Jose Rizal Memorial State FROM THE
University adheres to the LINGUISTIC EXPERTS
principal of dynamism and
cultural diversity in building a
just and humane society. We hereby certify that this undergraduate thesis
entitled “An Analysis on Word Order: The Placement of
VISION Subject – Verb – Object in a Simple Sentence between
Filipino and English Language” written by Princess Mae
A dynamic and diverse, S. Bucol, Alpha Faith A. Tigulo, and Delcar G. Vidal has
internationally recognized undergone thorough evaluation and we attest to its veracity.
university.
MISSION Given this 3rd day of July, 2018, at Jose Rizal

Memorial State University, Dipolog Campus, Dipolog
Jose Rizal Memorial State
City, Philippines.
University pledges itself to
deliver effective and efficient
services along research,
instruction, production and
extension. ROCHEL A. RANES, M.A. Eng.
Validator
It commits to provide advanced
professional, technical, and
technopreneurial training with
the aim of producing highly MIRIAM V. ICAO, M.A. Eng.
competent, innovative, and self- Validator
renewed individuals.
GLENDA A. TAMPON, M.A. Fil.

Validator
85
APPENDIX G
Certification of the English Editor

Office for Research and Development
PHILOSOPHY
CERTIFICATION FROM THE
Jose Rizal Memorial State ENGLISH EDITOR
University adheres to the
principal of dynamism and
cultural diversity in building a I hereby certify that this undergraduate thesis
just and humane society. entitled “An Analysis on Word Order: The Placement of
Subject – Verb – Object in a Simple Sentence between
VISION Filipino and English Language” written by Princess Mae
S. Bucol, Alpha Faith A. Tigulo, and Delcar G. Vidal has
A dynamic and diverse, undergone thorough analyzing and editing. I further
internationally recognized endorse its readiness for final printing, reproduction and
university. hard binding.
MISSION
Given this 3rd day of July, 2018, at Jose Rizal
Jose Rizal Memorial State
University pledges itself to Memorial State University, Dipolog Campus, Dipolog
deliver effective and efficient City, Philippines.
services along research,
instruction, production and
extension.
It commits to provide advanced ROCHEL A. RANES, M.A. Eng.

professional, technical, and English Editor
technopreneurial training with
the aim of producing highly
competent, innovative, and self-
renewed individuals.
86
APPENDIX H
Photo Documentation
87
CURRICULUM VITAE
Personal Information
Name: Princess Mae S. Bucol
Age: 19 years old
Date of Birth: May 8, 1999
Birthplace: Joaquin Macias, Sindangan, Zamboanga del Norte
Address: Joaquin Macias, Sindangan, Zamboanga del Norte
Civil Status: Single
Gender: Female
Height: 5’2
Weight: 45kg
Citizenship: Filipino
Father’s Name: Danilo P. Bucol
Mother’s Name: Flordeliza S. Bucol
Educational Background
School Year Graduated
Elementary: Dalongdong Elementary School 2011
Secondary: Dinasan National High School 2015
Tertiary: Jose Rizal Memorial State University
- Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in English

88
CURRICULUM VITAE
Name: Alpha Faith A. Tigulo
Age: 20 years old
Date of Birth: March 16, 1998
Birthplace: Dipolog City
Address: South Curvada, Galas, Dipolog City
Gender: Female
Height: 5’0
Weight: 42kg
Father’s Name: Florencio A. Tigulo
Mother’s Name: Regina A. Tigulo
Elementary: Laoy Olingan Elementary School 2011
Secondary: Galas National High School 2015

89
CURRICULUM VITAE
Name: Delcar G. Vidal
Age: 21 years old
Date of Birth: June 8, 1997
Birthplace: Baybay Barra, Dipolog City
Address: Bonifacio St. corner Martinez, Dipolog City
Gender: Female
Height: 4’7
Weight: 45kg
Father’s Name: Enemisio D. Vidal
Mother’s Name: Delailah P. Gumalap
Elementary: Miputak West Elementary School 2010
Secondary: Dipolog City National High School 2014

For HARDBOUND

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

For HARDBOUND

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

A sentence is a group of words that are put together to mean something. A

different syntactic sub-domains are also of interest. It is the sequence of words in a

sentence, especially as governed by grammatical rules and as affecting meaning.

sometimes be arranged in a different order to give another meaning. (H. Thompson

dominant sequence of these elements in unmarked sentences (i.e. sentences in which an

unusual word order is not used for emphasis).

Tagalog, a free word order language, is typologized as a VSO language. Tagalog,

arrangement or rearrangement of words in a sentence has no effect on its linguistic

officially recognized national language of the Philippines, is based chiefly on Tagalog

country’s population of 95 million can speak it as a first, second, or third language

flexible compare to English. It also follows a grammatical rule in order to express a

so you can speak the language fluently.

second language than there are native speakers.

persons, now use English.

This study focuses on the word order: The Placement of Subject-Verb-Object in a

Object in a way that is more robust to noise.

constraints. In English grammar, there is a strong alignment between the grammatical

opportunities to investigate the defining properties of and interrelationships among these

three concepts (Kroeger, 1991).

Statement of the Problem

Verb – Object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English language.

Specifically, the study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

2.1 Subject – Verb – Object pattern?

Significance of the Study

This present study would bring benefits to the following:

terms of the correct usage of words in a sentence.

Verb – Object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English language.

Department of Education. This will help the Department of Education to

their English and Filipino language acquisition.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

Object in a simple sentence between Filipino and English Language in order to

comprehend why the placement of Subject – Verb – Object in Filipino language is

Memorial State University, Dipolog Campus, Dipolog City.

Operational Definition of Terms

were defined conceptually and operationally.

ABM. Accounting Business and Management. A strand in Senior High School

that is designed as an introductory course in accounting and business and management

English Language. This is the primary language of several countries (including

second language in a number of multilingual countries (including India, Singapore, and

the Philippines) (Thought.Co, 2017).

Filipino Language. This is defined as the national language of the Philippines

GAS. General Academic Strand. A strand in Senior High School that is

thaty want to pursue in college (usjr.edu.ph., 2018).

A noun or noun phrase governed by an active transitive verb or by a preposition

Placement. It is the act of placing or putting in place, the act of locating or

positioning, the state of being placed (Your Dictionary.com, 2017).

simple sentence often contains modifiers (Thought.Co, 2017).

STEM. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. A strand in Senior

application and integration of scientific, yechnological, engineering, and mathematical

concepts (usjr.edu.ph., 2018).

Subject-Verb-Object. Is a sentence structure where the subject comes first, the

verb second, and object third (Wikipedia, 2018).

TECH-VOC. Technical – Vocational. This strand in Senior High School was

or object (Dictionary.com, 2017).

Word. It is a unit of language, consisting of one or more spoken sounds or their

written representation that functions as a principal carrier of meaning (Dictionary.com,

another, as in space or time; succession or sequence. It is a condition in which each thing

harmonious arrangement (Dictionary.com, 2017).

REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND STUDIES

word order: Subject-Verb-Object pattern in a simple sentence between Filipino and