The regular Filipino may know the term agham. Even fewer may have heard of sipnayan. But while these direct translations of science and mathematics are more familiar as subject titles, their concepts rarely find a home in the Philippine vernacular.
Although long-time English-centric education, particularly in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), positions the country on the global stage, how does science resonate among a linguistically diverse Filipino population that speaks nearly 200 distinct languages across the archipelago?
Our languages are not “dumb”
The late Bonifacio Sibayan, a distinguished Filipino linguist, describes an intellectualized language as one “that can be used for giving and obtaining a complete education in any field of knowledge from kindergarten to the university and beyond.”
An intellectual language must be writable, accessible, and capable of producing new knowledge in governance, education, and mass media. Despite thriving in literature and media, Filipino and other local languages are yet to be intellectualized.
As such, native tongues and vernacular languages are treated merely as auxiliary tools that support and nurture our national language, particularly in our education. This explains why mother tongue subjects are emphasized only in primary school before instruction shifts to Filipino and English in higher levels of education.
Filipino, therefore, remains a developing language that can be intellectualized through the creation of specialized registers for various professional domains. Achieving this demands greater support and infrastructure for the institutional use to produce localized resources and materials, alongside a gradual shift toward Filipino adaptation and translation.
It’s more fun in Filipino
Our country still operates on a “colonial” system that heavily relies on English as a mode of instruction (MOI). This benefits a small English-fluent elite while excluding fluent speakers of indigenous languages from learning. Likewise, misconceptions that English’s global dominance makes the Filipino language less “useful” and that translating scientific terms causes errors and inconsistency hinder its chances of intellectualization, when that is not the case.
Adapting vocabulary is a natural aspect of language evolution, making the standardization of Filipino scientific vocabulary possible. Countries like Japan, Germany, and Finland follow this example, exhibiting the great science capacity of their native languages without losing global competitiveness.
To illustrate, the Tagalog word laman can be used to refer to “contents,” and the Ilokano word lasag can be used to refer to “muscle.” Other techniques, such as using affixes, joining words or syllables, shifting accents, and honorific intent, can be used to coin new terms. For example, the Fallopian tube, the tubes connecting the ovaries to the uterus, was discovered by Gabriele Falloppio. In Filipino, it can potentially be called the Tagasang Fallopius—building on the word Tagas, “to leak or flow” and affixing “-ang” to indicate a passage.
A balance between Filipino and major regional languages as the primary MOI can significantly improve literacy and learning outcomes. When topics are introduced in a student’s native tongue, they are more likely to actively participate in class and grasp complex topics. As a result, students treat unfamiliar concepts with more scientific wonder rather than a “nosebleed” experience.
For the world, but not for Filipinos?
Becoming the predominant MOI for most of the 20th century, the 1974 Philippine Bilingual Education Policy revived the use of Filipino as a language of instruction. The policy mandates the use of the English language for Mathematics and Science subjects only, and Filipino for the rest.
The Tagalog language served as the foundation for Manuel Quezon’s Executive Order No. 134, which proclaimed it as the basis for the country’s national language. Over time, Filipino distinguished itself from Tagalog as more native and foreign words became incorporated into the vernacular. Thus, Filipino was formally recognized as the national language in 1987.
Despite efforts to revive the Filipino language, education has remained an issue for the country’s non-Tagalog speakers. In the context of today’s population, non-Tagalog speakers account for three in every five Filipino households. Persistent issues with language-related learning gaps gave rise to mother tongue-based multilingual education (MTB-MLE) programs. These programs mandate the use of the mother tongue in a specific region as the primary language of instruction, which promises the promotion of oral fluency and literacy, builds upon social and cultural knowledge and experience, and encourages collaboration and innovation.
The MTB-MLE program has significantly reduced linguistic gaps between a child’s mother tongue and their language of instruction, but it still has its own gaps, like insufficient teacher training and a lack of resources. Moreover, the Congress’ recent moves to consider junking the MTB-MLE program and reverting to the Filipino-English bilingual curriculum could further leave non-Tagalog speakers behind, something particularly worrying amid the country’s recent subpar performance in the Programme for International Student Assessment.
Concrete evidence has also quantified educational gaps that arise when instruction is delivered predominantly using non-native languages. In Malaysia, when the language of instruction for science and mathematics was changed between students’ primary and secondary years, their test scores dropped significantly. At the tertiary level, scientists in Turkey found that students in a Turkish program scored higher grade point averages than those who took the same program in non-native English.
Make it ours
The path to intellectualizing our languages, starting with STEM domains, is both achievable and urgent, but systemic barriers plague the road ahead. Teacher readiness is critical for a successful implementation of effective MTB-MLE science teaching.
By creating science materials rooted in our native tongues and shared experiences, we can offer culturally relevant examples that make learning more relatable and engaging. The DOST-PHIVOLCS’s DANAS Project, for example, publishes sourcebooks written in local languages that guide local geological hazards for better disaster preparedness.
Strengthening and expanding these programs—backed by economic and cultural incentives—can integrate Filipino and regional languages into academia, the workforce, and governance. This, in turn, challenges the outdated notion that English is the only path to professional success.
Our local languages are more than just academic subjects to be passed. They are messengers of our rich and colorful identities as Filipinos. To project our voice globally in the field of science and technology, we must first achieve native fluency to truly embody the discipline and make it ours.
This article was published in The LaSallian‘s October 2025 issue. To read more, visit bit.ly/TLSOct2025.
