2023/6

⽂献⽬録
フィリピノ語Shih, S. S., & Zuraw, K. (2017). Phonological conditions on variable adjective and noun word order in
Tagalog. Language, 93(4), e317-e352.
Zuraw, K. (2007). The role of phonetic knowledge in phonological patterning: corpus and survey evidence from
Tagalog infixation. Language, 277-316.
Carrier, J. L. (1979). The interaction of morphological and phonological rules in Tagalog: a study in therelationship between rule components in grammar (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Guevarra, K. (2015). Phonological Analysis of Tagalog.
Chen, R. K., Bernhardt, B. M., & Stemberger, J. P. (2016). Phonological assessment and analysis tools for Tagalog:
Preliminary development. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 30(8), 599-627.
Zuraw, K. (2006). Using the web as a phonological corpus: a case study from Tagalog. In Proceedings of the 2nd
International Workshop on Web as Corpus.
Umbal, P., & Nagy, N. (2021). Heritage Tagalog Phonology and a Variationist Framework of Language
Contact. Languages, 6(4), 201.
Bollas, A., & HERNANDEZ, V. (2013). Comparative analysis on the phonology of Tagalog, Cebuano andItawis. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman.
Wolff, J. U. (2001). The influence of Spanish on Tagalog. The Influence of Spanish on Tagalog, 233-252.
Baklanova, E. (2004). Interference in Tagalog as a Result of Borrowing. Pilipinas: A Journal of Philippine Studies,(42), 95-116.
Natividad, P. E. (1967). A taxonomic phonological analysis of Tagalog and Pampango (Doctoral dissertation,
University of British Columbia).
Sabbagh, J. (2014). Word order and prosodic-structure constraints in Tagalog. Syntax, 17(1), 40-89.

1Kaufman, D. (2007). Tagalog clitics and prosodic phonology. Unpublished manuscript.
Zuraw, K. (1996). Floating phonotactics: infixation and reduplication in Tagalog loanwords (Doctoral dissertation).
Anderson, S. R. (2008). Second position clitics in Tagalog. The nature of the word: Studies in honor of Paul
Kiparsky, 549-566.
Klein, T. B. (2005). Infixation and segmental constraint effects: UM and IN in Tagalog, Chamorro, and Toba
Batak. Lingua, 115(7), 959-995.
Wray, S., Stockall, L., & Marantz, A. (2022). Early Form-Based Morphological Decomposition in Tagalog: MEG
Evidence from Reduplication, Infixation, and Circumfixation. Neurobiology of Language, 3(2), 235-255.
Umbal, P., & Nagy, N. (2021). Heritage Tagalog Phonology and a Variationist Framework of Language Contact.
Languages 6: 201.
Kaufman, D. (2010). The morphosyntax of Tagalog clitics: a typologically driven approach.
Zuraw, K. (2010). A model of lexical variation and the grammar with application to Tagalog nasal
substitution. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 28(2), 417-472.
Gill, D. (1995). Speaking backwards in Tagalog. Journal of Modern Languages, 9(1), 165-176.
Stockwell, R. (2019). Emergence of the faithful by consonant copying in a Tagalog language game. PAPERS FROM
THE AUSTRONESIAN FORMAL LINGUISTICS ASSOCIATION 24, 68.
Gonzalez, A. (1970). Acoustic correlates of accent, rhythm, and intonation in Tagalog. Phonetica, 22(1), 11-44.
Kang, Y., George, S., & Soo, R. (2016). Cross-language influence in the stop voicing contrast in heritage
Tagalog. Heritage Language Journal, 13(2), 184-218.
Reid, L. A. (2005). A cross-generational view of contact-related phenomena in a Philippine language: Phonology.
Kaufman, D. (2005). Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog. The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: Somenew empirical studies, (571), 175-196.
Soberano, R. (1980). The dialects of Marinduque Tagalog. Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies,
The Australian National University.

2

Baklanova, E. (2006, January). Morphological assimilation of borrowings in Tagalog. In Tenth International
Conference on Austronesian Linguistics (pp. 17-20).
Kilgour, H., & Hendrickson, G. (1992). Bantoanon Phonology. Studies in Philippine Linguistics, 9(1), 111-136.
French, K. M. (1991). Secondary stress in Tagalog. Oceanic Linguistics, 157-178.
Pritchett, B. L. (1990). Insights into Tagalog: Reduplication, infixation, and stress from nonlinear phonology By
Koleen Matsuda French. Language, 66(1), 191-192.
Lim, R. K. (2014). Nonlinear phonological analysis in assessment of phonological development in
Tagalog (Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia).
Adelaar, K. A. (1994). Malay and Javanese loanwords in Malagasy, Tagalog and Siraya (Formosa). Bijdragen tot detaal-, land-en volkenkunde, (1ste Afl), 50-66.
Lesada, J. (2017). Taglish in Metro Manila: an analysis of Tagalog-English code-switching (Doctoral dissertation).
Baklanova, E. (2017). TYPES OF BORROWINGS IN TAGALOG/FILIPINO. Kritika Kultura, (28).
PHONOLOGY, V. I. How do constraint families interact? A study of variation in Tagalog and Hungarian.
Marinova-Todd, S. H., & Hall, E. K. (2013). Predictors of English spelling in bilingual and monolingual children in
Grade 1: the case of Cantonese and Tagalog. Educational Psychology, 33(6), 734-754.
Intlekofer, D. G. Prosodic conditioning: An instrumental production study of Tagalog o/u variation1.
Rackowski, A., & Richards, N. (2005). Phase edge and extraction: A Tagalog case study. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(4),565-599.
De Guzman, V. P. (1991). Inflectional morphology in the lexicon: Evidence from Tagalog. Oceanic
Linguistics, 30(1), 33-48.
Pizarro-Guevara, J. S., & Wagers, M. (2020). The predictive value of Tagalog voice morphology in filler-gap
dependency formation. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 517.

3

Billings, L., & Konopasky, A. (2002). The role of morphology in ordering verb-adjacent clitics: From syntax toprosody in Bulgarian and Tagalog. Linguistics in Potsdam, 19, 1-26.
Fortes, F. C. L. (2002). A constraint-based morphological analyzer for concatenative and non-concatenative
morphology of Tagalog verbs.
Travis, L. (2005). Agents and causes in Malagasy and Tagalog. The syntax of aspect: Deriving thematic andaspectual interpretation, 174-189.
Aldridge, E. (2006, January). Absolutive case in Tagalog. In Proceedings from the annual meeting of the chicago
linguistic society (Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 1-15). Chicago Linguistic Society.
Richards, N. (2018). The Tagalog copula.
McHale, M. L., & McHale, L. S. (1992). Tagalog: a null subject langauge with variant morphology. In Papers fromthe First Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society. Arizona State University, Program forSoutheast Asian Studies (pp. 257-270).
Voskuil, J. E. (1996). Aspects of verbal morphology in Tagalog. Klamer, ed, 51-67.
Potet, J. P. G. (1995). Tagalog monosyllabic roots. Oceanic linguistics, 345-374.
Butler, S. R. (2016). Infixer: A Method for Segmenting Non-Concatenative Morphology in Tagalog.
Bonus, D. E. (2003). The Tagalog Stemming Algorithms (TagSA). In the Proceedings of the Natural Language
Processing Research Symposium, DLSU, Manila.
Koch, K., & Matthewson, L. (2009). The lexical category debate in Salish and its relevance for Tagalog.
De Guzman, V. P. (1992). Morphological evidence for primacy of patient as subject in Tagalog. In Papers inAustronesian Linguistics No. 2. Pacific Linguistics.
Chen, V. (2021). Tagalog voice as four bundles of Agree relations: Insights from binding. In 38th West Coast
Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 94-104). Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Himmelmann, N. P. (2004). On statives and potentives in Western Austronesian (mostly Tagalog). ZAS Papers in
Linguistics, 34, 103-119.

4

Pizarro-Guevara, J. S., & Wagers, M. (2016). The role of voice morphology in processing Tagalog A-bar
dependencies. In AFLA! 23! The! Proceedings! of! the! 23rd! Meeting! of! the! Austronesian! Formal! Linguistics!
Association! (p. 228).
Andrei, A. L. (2014). Development and evaluation of Tagalog linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC)
dictionaries for negative and positive emotion. MITRE CORP MCLEAN VA MCLEAN.
Maclachlan, A. E. (1995). Aspects of ergativity in Tagalog.
Bation, A. D., Vicente, A. J., & Manguilimotan, E. (2017, November). Automatic categorization of Tagalog
documents using support vector machines. In Proceedings of the 31st Pacific Asia Conference on Language,
Information and Computation (pp. 346-353).
Aldridge, E. (2009). Minimalist questions for the nominalist analysis of Tagalog syntax.
Alonso-Ovalle, L., & Hsieh, H. (2017, October). Causes and expectations: On the interpretation of the Tagalog
ability/involuntary action form. In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (Vol. 27, pp. 75-94).
Ong, G. A., & Ballera, M. A. (2022, January). A Multi-level Morphological and Stochastic Tagalog Stemming
Template. In 2022 IEEE 12th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC) (pp.
0960-0965). IEEE.
Kroeger, P. (1993). Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Center for the Study of Language(CSLI).
Wray, S., Stockall, L., & Marantz, A. (2022). Early Form-Based Morphological Decomposition in Tagalog: MEG
Evidence from Reduplication, Infixation, and Circumfixation. Neurobiology of Language, 3(2), 235-255.
Alonso-Ovalle, L., & Hsieh, H. (2018). Overcoming the unexpected: The Tagalog ability/involuntary action form.
In Proceedings of the 35th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Somerville, MA. Cascadilla Proceedings
Project (pp. 59-68).
Bondoc, I. P., & Schafer, A. (2019). The role of Tagalog voice information on sentential argument order inproduction and gaze patterns in comprehension. In Poster presented at the 32nd Annual CUNY Conference on
Human Sentence Processing. Boulder, CO.

5

Rackowski, A. (2002). The structure of Tagalog: Specificity, voice, and the distribution of arguments (Doctoral
dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Kaufman, D. (2009). Austronesian nominalism and its consequences: A Tagalog case study.
Milambiling, L. (2011). Null object constructions in Tagalog. In Actes du congrès annuel de l‟ Association
canadienne de linguistique 2011. Proceedings of the 201 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association.
Nie, Y. (2019). Raising applicatives and possessors in Tagalog. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 4(1).
Garcia, R., & Kidd, E. (2020). The acquisition of the Tagalog symmetrical voice system: Evidence from structural
priming. Language Learning and Development, 16(4), 399-425.
Garcia, R., & Kidd, E. (2020). The acquisition of the Tagalog symmetrical voice system: Evidence from structural
priming. Language Learning and Development, 16(4), 399-425.
Yambao, A. N., & Cheng, C. K. (2020, December). Feedforward Approach to Sequential Morphological Analysis in
the Tagalog Language. In 2020 International Conference on Asian Language Processing (IALP) (pp. 81-85). IEEE.
Kess, J. F. (1976). Reconsidering the notion of focus in the description of Tagalog. In Southeast Asian linguistic
studies, Vol. 2. Pacific Linguistics.
Baklanova, E. (2016). On marginal gender in Tagalog: A case study. In ЯЗЫКИ ДАЛЬНЕГО ВОСТОКА, ЮГОВОСТОЧНОЙ АЗИИИ ЗАПАДНОЙ АФРИКИ (pp. 25-33).
De Guzman, V. P. (1997). Verbal affixes in Tagalog: Inflection or derivation. In Proceedings of the seventhinternational conference on Austronesian linguistics (pp. 303-325).
Maclachlan, A., & Nakamura, M. (1997). Case-checking and specificity in Tagalog.
Cena, R. M. (1977, December). Patient primacy in Tagalog. In LSA Annual Meeting, Chicago (pp. 28-30).
See, S. L. (2006). A Tagalog morphological analyzer using example-based approach.
Cheng, C., Adlaon, K. M., Aquino, M., Fernandez, E., & Villanueva, K. (2018). MAG-Tagalog: A Rule-Based
Tagalog Morphological Analyzer and Generator.

6

Tolentino, L. A., & Borra, A. (2018). An Exhaustive Rule-Based Affix Extraction for Stemming in Tagalog. no.
Pcsc.
Fortes-Galvan, F. C., & Roxas, R. E. (2006, November). A constraint-based morphological analyzer forconcatenative and non-concatenative morphology. In Proceedings of the 20th Pacific Asia Conference on Language,
Information and Computation (pp. 273-279).
Garcia, R., Roeser, J., & Höhle, B. (2020). Children's online use of word order and morphosyntactic markers in
Tagalog thematic role assignment: an eye-tracking study. Journal of Child Language, 47(3), 533-555.
⼭本恭裕. (2017). 枠付け類型論における様態の種類が与える構⽂選択への影響 ̶ タガログ語のデータから .̶ ⾔語記述論集, (9), 95-114.
⼤上正直. (2004). タガログ語の可能表現: 意味論的・語⽤論的視点からの形式・意味・⽤法の分析. ⼤

阪外国語⼤学論集, 30, 51-71.
⻑屋尚典. (2018). タガログ語の所有と存在のあいだ. 東京⼤学⾔語学論集= Tokyo University linguistic
papers (TULIP), 39, 223-242.
吉村近男. (1988). タガログ語指⽰詞とその指⽰構造. ⼤阪外国語⼤学学報, 75(1-2), 25-47.
⼩野原信善. (1996). フィリピン英語の特徴—タガログ語からの⾔語⼲渉—. ⾹川⼤学教養教育研究, 1,
137-152.
森⼝恒⼀. (1977). < 資料・研究ノート> タガログ語のアクセントに関する覚え書き: 物理アクセントと⼼理アクセント. 東南アジア研究, 15(1), 79-94.
吉村近男. (1990). タガログ語の動詞派⽣接頭辞 maki-/makipag-について (I). ⼤阪外国語⼤学論集, 4, 111136.
Scontras, G., & Nicolae, A. C. (2014). Saturating syntax: Linkers and modification in Tagalog. Lingua, 149, 17-33.
Law, P. (2016). The syntax of Tagalog relative clauses. Linguistics, 54(4), 717-768.
Culwell-Kanarek, N., & Shields, R. (2005). Word order and the syntax of ang in Tagalog. Proceedings of WIGL, 4050.

7

Nagaya, N. (2007). Information structure and constituent order in Tagalog. Language and Linguistics, 8(1), 343372.
Culwell-Kanarek, N. (2005). Pre-verbal pronouns in Tagalog syntax. Heinz and Nthlitheos, eds. UCLA Working
Papers in Linguistics, (12).
Gil, D. (1993, June). Tagalog semantics. In Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 19, No. 1, pp.
390-403).
Aldridge, E. (2004). Antipassive and specificity in tagalog. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 34, 1-14.
Dery, J. E. (2007). Pragmatic focus and word order variation in Tagalog. 語⾔暨語⾔學, 8(1), 373-402.
Asarina, A., & Holt, A. (2005). Syntax and semantics of Tagalog modals. Austronesian Formal Linguistics
Association (AFLA), 12.
Richards, N. (1999, January). Complementizer cliticization in Tagalog and English. In Proceedings of AFLA (Vol. 6,
pp. 297-312).
Sabbagh, J. (2016). Specificity and objecthood in Tagalog 1. Journal of Linguistics, 52(3), 639-688.
Aldridge, E. (2018). Event existentials in Tagalog.
Dionisio, M. (2012). The syntax and semantics of the Tagalog plural marker mga (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio
State University).
Tanaka, N., O’grady, W., Deen, K., Kim, C. E., Hattori, R., Bondoc, I. P. M., & Soriano, J. U. (2014). Acquisition of
Tagalog relative clauses. In BUCLD 38: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development (pp. 463-470). Cascadilla Press Somerville, MA.
Sabbagh, J. (2005). Non-verbal argument structure: evidence from Tagalog (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology).
Bird, S., Fais, L., & Werker, J. (2005). The phonetic rhythm/syntax headedness connection: Evidence from
Tagalog. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 117(4), 2457-2457.

8

Peralta-Pineda, P. B. (1967). Tagalog transformational syntax: a preliminary statement (Doctoral dissertation,
University of British Columbia).
Baker, M. C. (2009). On some ways to test Tagalog nominalism from a crosslinguistic perspective.
Kroeger, P. R. (1993). Another look at subjecthood in Tagalog. Philippine Journal of Linguistics, 24(2), 1-16.
Sabbagh, J. (2009). The category of predicates and predicate phrases in Tagalog: Commentary on Kaufman's article.
Maclachlan, A. (1997). Conjunction reduction and the syntax of case in Tagalog. In Proceedings of the SeventhInternational Conference on Austronesian Linguistics: Leiden 22-27 August 1994 (p. 443). Rodopi.
Adams, K. L., & Manaster-Ramer, A. (1988). Some questions of topic/focus choice in Tagalog. Oceanic
Linguistics, 27(1/2), 79-101.
Abenina-Adar, M., & Angelopoulos, N. (2016, October). On root modality and thematic relations in Tagalog andEnglish. In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (Vol. 26, pp. 775-794).
Aldridge, E. (2005). Phase theory account of absolutive extraction in Tagalog. MIT working papers inlinguistics, 49, 1-28.
Sabbagh, J. (2006). The Syntax of Existential Sentences in Tagalog. Ms., McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Richards, N. (2009). Nouns, verbs, and hidden structure in Tagalog.
Himmelmann, N. P. (2009). Notes on Tagalog nominalism.
Dery, J. (2007). Focus and Constituent Order in Tagalog. In International Conference on Role and Reference
Grammar, Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan ROC.
Richards, N. (2021). Immobile wh-phrases in Tagalog. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 6(1).
Van Valin Jr, R. D., Latrouite, A., & Düsseldorf, H. H. U. (2015, July). A Role and Reference Grammar account of
the information structure-syntax interface in Tagalog. In Talk at the International Conference on Role and Reference
Grammar (RRG), Düsseldorf.

9Bondoc, I. P., Deen, K., Or, E. M., & Hemedes, M. C. (2019). Reflexives in Adult and Child Tagalog.
In Proceedings of the 43rd Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. Megan M. Brown andBrady Dailey (pp. 82-93).
Sabbagh, J. (2009). Existential sentences in Tagalog. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 27(4), 675-719.
Travis, L. (2000). The L-syntax/S-syntax boundary: Evidence from Austronesian. In Formal issues in Austronesian
linguistics (pp. 167-194). Springer, Dordrecht.
Hsieh, H. (2020). Beyond Nominative: a broader view of A'-dependencies in Tagalog. McGill University (Canada).
Fanning, K. (2013). Tenselessness in Tagalog.
De Guzman, V. P. (1996, January). Lexical categories in Tagalog. In Pan-Asiatic Linguistics: Procedings of the
Fourth International Symposium on Languages and Linguistics (Vol. 1, pp. 307-96).
Paul, I., Cortes, K., & Milambiling, L. (2015). Definiteness without D: The case of ang and ng in Tagalog. Canadian
Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique, 60(3), 361-390.
Fat, J. G. (2004). T2CMT: Tagalog-to-Cebuano machine translation.
Dell, F. (1981). On certain sentential complements in Tagalog. Cahiers de Linguistique-Asie Orientale, 10(1), 19-42.
Tanaka, N., O’Grady, W., Deen, K., & Bondoc, I. P. (2019). An asymmetry in the acquisition of relative clauses:
Evidence from Tagalog. First Language, 39(6), 618-632.
Cottman, D. Relevance of the Extended Projection Principle in Tagalog.
Klimenko, S. B. (2012). Motion verbs in Tagalog, Ilokano and Tuwali Ifugao. MA Diploma in Linguistics,
University of the Philippines Diliman.
Gil, D. (1995). Parts of speech in Tagalog. In Third Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (pp.
67-90).
An, J. S. (1993). A discourse-based analysis of subjecthood in Tagalog (Master's thesis, Arizona State University).

10

Pascasio, E. M. (1961). A Comparative Study: Predicting Interference And Facilitation For Tagalog Speakers In
Learning English Noun-Head Modification Patterns.
Blust, R. (2001). Notes on the history of'focus' in Austronesian languages. In The history and typology of western
Austronesian voice systems. Pacific Linguistics.
Sauppe, S. (2017). Symmetrical and asymmetrical voice systems and processing load: Pupillometric evidence fromsentence production in Tagalog and German. Language, 93(2), 288-313.
Tangco, R. D., & Nolasco, R. M. (2002). ‘Taglish’verbs: How English Loanwords Make it Into the Philippine
Languages. In Tenth Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (pp. 391-406).
Carnie, A., Dooley, S. A., & Harley, H. (Eds.). (2005). Verb first: on the syntax of verb-initial languages (Vol. 73).
John Benjamins Publishing.
Latrouite, A. (2001). Linking in Tagalog: argument encoding determined by the semantic properties of arguments.
In Yearbook of Morphology 2000 (pp. 123-154). Springer, Dordrecht.
Ronquillo, S. H. (2015). Interference of English L2 in the acquisition of Tagalog L1 word order. Linguistic
Research, 32(1), 61-90.
Bisang, W. (2006). Widening the perspective: Argumenthood and syntax in Chinese, Japanese and Tagalog.
In Datives and Other Cases (pp. 331-381). John Benjamins.
Manguilimotan, E., & Matsumoto, Y. (2011, December). Dependency-based analysis for Tagalog sentences.
In Proceedings of the 25th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (pp. 343-352).
Lim, J., & Borlongan, A. M. (2011). Tagalog particles in Philippine English: The case of ba, na,‘no, andpa. Philippine Journal of Linguistics, 42, 59-74.
Hsieh, H. (2020). On the structure of Tagalog non-DP extraction.
De Guzman, V. P. (2000). Some remarks on the grammatical functions of the nonabsolutive agent in
Tagalog. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications, (29), 224-240.
Bautista, M. L. S. (1977). The Noun Phrase in Tagalog-English Code Switching. Studies in Philippine Linguistics,
Vol. 1, No. 1. Studies in Philippine Linguistics, 1(1), 2-16.

11

Ng, M. J. E., & Diliman, Q. C. Understanding Why Chinese Speak Tagalog the Way They Do.
Kaufman, D. A syntactic filter on second-position clitics in Tagalog.
Maclachlan, A., & Rambow, O. (2002, May). Cross-serial dependencies in Tagalog. In Proceedings of the Sixth
International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammar and Related Frameworks (TAG+ 6) (pp. 252-258).
Tanaka, N. (2015). Tagalog relative clause production: Data from adults and children.
Tanenbaum, R. (2020). Untangling the Tagalog Clitic Cluster. Creative Commons License, 80.
Reid, L. A. (1992). On the development of the aspect system in some Philippine languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 6591.
Blake, F. R. (1904). Differences between tagalog and bisayan. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 25, 162169.
Pizarro-Guevara, J. S., & Wagers, M. (2016). The role of voice morphology in processing Tagalog A-bar
dependencies. In AFLA! 23! The! Proceedings! of! the! 23rd! Meeting! of! the! Austronesian! Formal! Linguistics!
Association! (p. 228).
Himmelmann, N. P. (1999). The lack of zero anaphora and incipient person marking in Tagalog. Oceanic
Linguistics, 231-269.
Javier, J. R., & Or, E. M. T. Tagalog Linguistics: Historical development and theoretical trends. In The Routledge
Handbook of Asian Linguistics (pp. 33-46). Routledge.
Nagaya, N. (2017). On the nature of complementation in Tagalog. In Handout at the International Conference on
Role Reference Grammar.
Potet, J. P. (1988). SEMANTICS TRANSFERENCE IN TAGALOG. Cahiers de linguistique Asie orientale, 17(1),67-109.
Kierstead, G., & Martin, S. (2012, May). The hybrid status of the reportative evidential in Tagalog. In Semantics and
Linguistic Theory (Vol. 22).

12

Kierstead, G., & Martin, S. (2012, September). A multistratal account of the projective Tagalog evidential daw.
In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (Vol. 22, pp. 326-346).
Dery, J. E. (2007). Pragmatic focus and word order variation in Tagalog. 語⾔暨語⾔學, 8(1), 373-402.
Palmer, G. B. (2003). Talking about thinking in Tagalog.
Latrouite, A., & Naumann, R. (1999). On the interpretation of Tagalog voice affixes. Toronto Working Papers in
Linguistics, 16(2).
Klimenko, S. B., & Endriga, D. A. P. (2016). Semantic verb classes and regularity of voice paradigms in
Tagalog. Oceanic Linguistics, 480-499.
Naylor, P. B. (1995). Subject, topic, and Tagalog syntax. Subject, voice and ergativity, 161-201.
Naylor, P. B. (1975). Topic, focus, and emphasis in the Tagalog verbal clause. Oceanic linguistics, 14(1), 12-79.
Larson, B. (2011). Problems with a movement analysis of right node raising in Tagalog. Linguistic Inquiry, 42(1),163-171.
Palmer, G., Rader, R. S., & Clarito, A. D. (2009). The metonymic basis of a ‘semantic partial’: Tagalog lexicalconstructions with ka. In Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 111-144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Collins, J., & Abenina-Adar, M. (2019). How modal and non-modal implications of Tagalog free relatives
emerge. Handout from Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association, 26.
Sabbagh, J. (2009). Existential sentences in Tagalog. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 27(4), 675-719.
Kierstead, G. W. (2015). Projectivity and the Tagalog reportative evidential (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State
University).
Schwager, M. (2010). On what has been said in Tagalog: Reportative daw. Evidence from evidentials, 28, 221-246.
Palmer, G. B. (2014). Emotional, evaluative, and ideological subjectification in Tagalog and Shona. International
Journal of Language and Culture, 1(1), 5-20.

13

Latrouite, A., & Naumann, R. (2007, July). An Interpretation of Nominative Arguments, Voice-Affixes and Verb
Stems in Tagalog. In The Fourth International Tbilisi Symposium on Language, Logic and Computation, Batumi
1999 and Borjomi 2001 (Vol. 11).
Barrie, M., & Sung, M. (2020). Quasi PNI in Tagalog: Internal restructuring.
Cihlar, J. E. (2004, June). Compositional Interaction of Sub-event Aspectual Markers,-in-and reduplication, in
Tagalog. In Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 58-68).
Kess, J. F. (1977). " THE CASE SYSTEM OF TAGALOG VERBS", by Teresita V. Ramos. Oceanic
Linguistics, 16(2), 193.
Nagaya, N. Reciprocity in Tagalog dyad constructions.
Collins, J. N. (2016). Composition and definiteness without articles: A case study in Tagalog. North East Linguistics
Society (NELS), 46.
Alonso-Ovalle, L., & Hsieh, H. (2021). Causes and Expectations: On the Interpretation of the Tagalog
Ability/Involuntary Action Form. Journal of Semantics, 38(3), 441-472.
Law, P., & Gärtner, H. M. (2005). Post-verbal wh-phrases in Malagasy, Tagalog, and Tsou. UCLA working papers inlinguistics 12: The proceedings of AFLA XII, 211-226.
Tan Almazán, J. (2020). Evidentiality in Tagalog.
Latrouite, A., & Naumann, R. (2018). An interpretation of the voice affix/i-/in Tagalog.
Barrie, M., & Sung, M. (2021). 03. NI, PNI, and Quasi PNI: Tagalog and the Typology of Incorporation.
De Leon, K. D., & Parina, J. C. (2016). A study of Filipino complaints in English and Tagalog. 3L, Language,
Linguistics, Literature, 22(1).
Bundang, R. (1997). Spanish Loanwords in Tagalog.
Joaquin, J. J. (2014). Mga Piling Pangatnig Bilang mga Pangkawing Lohikal: Panimulang Pag-aaral ng Wikang
Filipino Gamit ang Semantiks na Modelo-Teoretik. Malay, 27(1).

14Klimenko, S. (2019). Criteria for establishing the inventory of semantic participants and voices in Tagalog. Studies
in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”, 43(1), 1-43.
Garcia, R., Sekerina, I., Dery, J., Roeser, J., & Höehle, B. (2015). Thematic role assignment in the L1 acquisition of
Tagalog. Poster presented at the Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing.
Ramos, K. K. (2012). Textual Meaning in Tagalog Texts: Biographies and Romance Narratives. University ofSydney.
Palmer, G. B., Rader, R. S., & Clarito, A. D. (2004). Every affix is an archipelago: Tagalog Ka-as a Semantic
Partial. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 23(1), 45-86.
Katagiri, M. (2014). Mermaid construction in Tagalog: Preliminaries. 岡⼭⼤学⽂学部プロジェクト研究報告書, 22, 1-14.
Mercado, R. (2004). Focus constructions and WH-questions in Tagalog: A unified analysis. Toronto Working Papers
in Linguistics, 23.
Law, P. (2018). A first look at Tagalog modals. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, 25(1).
Klimenko, S. B. (2021). Causal voice in Tagalog: how much do we really know?. CAUSAL CONSTRUCTIONS IN
THE WORLD’S LANGUAGES (synchrony, diachrony, typology), 43.
Labitigan, R. L. D. (2013). Tagalog-English code-switching: issues in the nominal domain. Unpublished Bachelor's
Thesis, Yale University.
Fox, B. A. (1985). Word-order inversion and discourse continuity in Tagalog. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the
Study of Discourse, 5(1-2), 39-54.
Rafael, V. L. (1993). Contracting colonialism: Translation and Christian conversion in Tagalog society under early
Spanish rule. Duke University Press.
Zorc, R. D. P. (1993). The prehistory and origin of the Tagalog people. Language—A doorway between humancultures: Tributes to Dr. Otto Chr. Dahl on his ninetieth birthday, 201-211.

15

Amora, K. K., Garcia, R., & Gagarina, N. (2020). Tagalog adaptation of the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for
Narratives: History, process and preliminary results. In New language versions of MAIN: Multilingual Assessment
Instrument for Narratives–Revised (pp. 221-233).
Constantino, E. (2019). Tagalog and other major languages of the Philippines. In Linguistics in Oceania (pp. 112154). De Gruyter Mouton.
Rafael, V. L. (1987). Confession, Conversion, and Reciprocity in Early Tagalog Colonial Society. Comparative
Studies in Society and History, 29(2), 320-339.
Lumbera, B. (1968). Tagalog Poetry During the Seventeenth Century. Philippine Studies, 16(1), 99-130.
Sales, M. J. (2019). Tagalog Missionary Grammars as a Translation Resource: Translation, Book History and theProduction of Linguistic Knowledge in the Spanish Philippines. Comparative Critical Studies, 16(2-3), 301-322.
Rafael, V. L. (2015). The war of translation: Colonial education, American English, and Tagalog slang in thePhilippines. The Journal of Asian Studies, 74(2), 283-302.
KAlJT, C. I. (1965). The principle of contingency in Tagalog society.
Parco-de Castro, M. E. (2010). Southern Tagalog Society in a Time of Transition, 1571-1671. The Journal of
History, 56(1), 1-1.
Woods, D. L. (2011). Counting and marking time from the precolonial to the contemporary Tagalog
world. Philippine studies, 59(3), 337-365.
Garcia, R., Rodriguez, G. G., & Kidd, E. (2021). Developmental effects in the online use of morphosyntactic cues insentence processing: Evidence from Tagalog. Cognition, 216, 104859.
Torres, J. M., Balasa, K. A., Ricohermoso, C., Alieto, E. O., Torres, J. M., & Balasa, K. A. (2020). Complimenting
strategies in sociolinguistic settings: The case of Ilocano and Tagalog pre-service teachers. The Asian ESPJournal, 16(5.1), 202-253.
Fonacier, E. C. (2010). Tagalog in the USA. Language Diversity in the USA, 96-109.
Reid, L. A. (2005). Tagalog and Philippine languages.

16Garcia, R., Dery, J. E., Roeser, J., & Höhle, B. (2018). Word order preferences of Tagalog-speaking adults andchildren. First Language, 38(6), 617-640.
Sabbagh, J. (2008). Right node raising and extraction in Tagalog. Linguistic Inquiry, 39(3), 502-511.
Torres, J. M., & Medriano Jr, R. (2020). Rhetorical Organization of Ilocano and Tagalog Pre-Service Teachers in
Their Argumentative Essays. Online Submission.
Reyes, S. S. (2008). Any attempt to understand texts written in Tagalog and decipher their significance has almost
always demanded a deep sense of the nation’s colonial history and the precise ways in which the native language
has functioned in a society where the majority have been denied real power and influence. In its history, Tagalog has
not only been a major language; it has also been a site for an examination which can yield insights into the nature of
discourse and power. Philippine Studies: Have We Gone Beyond St. Louis?, 144.
Gollan, T. H., & Acenas, L. A. R. (2004). What is a TOT? Cognate and translation effects on tip-of-the-tongue statesin Spanish-English and tagalog-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, andCognition, 30(1), 246.
Manuel, E. A. (1958). Tayabas Tagalog awit fragments from Quezon province. Folklore Studies, 17, 55-97.
Stoodley, B. H. (1957). Some aspects of Tagalog family structure. American Anthropologist, 59(2), 236-249.
Dyen, I. (1947). The Tagalog reflexes of Malayo-Polynesian D. Language, 227-238.]
Woods, D. L. (2015). Out of the silence, the men of Naujan speak Tagalog texts from the seventeenth
century. Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints, 63(3), 303-340.
Cui, X. (2012). Hokkien Chinese Borrowings on Cookery in Tagalog. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(3).
Samonte, M. J. C., Lopez, J. A. V., & Santiago, J. L. C. (2017, December). Comparative analysis of SMT and DSA
on Tagalog corpus. In 2017IEEE 9th International Conference on Humanoid, Nanotechnology, Information
Technology, Communication and Control, Environment and Management (HNICEM) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
Mabanglo, R. E. S. (2013). The classics of Tagalog literature. In The Canon in Southeast Asian Literature (pp. 6167). Routledge.

17Torres, J. M. (2019). Sociolinguistics Inquiry on the humor production of Tagalog tertiary students. Available at
SSRN 3622068.
Llamzon, T. A. (1968). On Tagalog as dominant language. Philippine Studies, 16(4), 729-749.
Lorente, B. P. (2000). Revisiting Taglish na naman: A congruence approach to Tagalog-English codeswitching. Philippine journal of linguistics, 31(1), 25-37.
YRAOLA-WESTALL, E. (1987). TAGALIZATION OF SPANISH AND ENGLISH-A CASE STUDY OF
CODE-SWITCHING AND MIXING (PILIPINO, FILIPINO CULTURE, TAGALOG, SOCIOLINGUISTICS,
LINGUISTIC FIELD RESEARCH APPROACH).
Gonzalez, A. (1985). Sociolinguistics in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Social Science, 13(1), 52-60.
Bautista, M. L. S. (2004). Tagalog-English code switching as a mode of discourse. Asia Pacific Education
Review, 5(2), 226-233.
Tanaka, N., O'Grady, W., Hattori, R., Bondoc, I. P. M., Deen, K., Kim, C. E., & Soriano, J. U. (2015, July). Relative
clause asymmetry: The case of Tagalog. In The Thirteenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics(13-ICAL) (Vol. 8, p. 34).
van Engelenhoven, A. (2006). Central Tagbanwa: a Philippine language on the brink of extinction; Sociolinguistics,
grammar, and lexicon.[Special Monograph Series 48.].
Lim, J. (2012). The changing bilingual grammar: A quasi-diachronic investigation of the syntactic constraints of
Tagalog-English code-switching using a grammaticality judgment test. TESOL Journal, 7, 58-69.
Borlongan, A. M., Lim, J., & Roxas, R. E. (2012). University students’ attitudes towards English-Tagalog codeswitching in classroom instruction. TESOL Journal, 7, 70-77.
Asuncion, Z. S., & Rañosa-Madrunio, M. (2017). Language Attitudes of the Gaddang Speakers towards Gaddang,
Ilocano, Tagalog and English. Language, 5(4).
Munalim, L. O., & Genuino, C. F. (2019). Subordinate’s imperatives in faculty meetings: Pragmalinguistic
affordances in Tagalog and local academic conditions. The New English Teacher, 13(2), 85-85.

18

Guinto, N. (2019). The place/s of Tagalog in Hong Kong’s Central district: Negotiating center-peripherydynamics. Linguistic Landscape, 5(2), 160-178.
Guinto, N. (2019). The place/s of Tagalog in Hong Kong’s Central district: Negotiating center-peripherydynamics. Linguistic Landscape, 5(2), 160-178.
Cunanan, R. P. (2021). Sosyolingguwistikong paglalarawan ng varayti ng tagalog sa lungsod ng Lipa.
LaPolla, R. J. (2014). Constituent structure in a Tagalog text. Language and Linguistics, 15(6), 761-774.
Starr, N. (2015). Tagalog general number and incorporation. In 22nd Meeting of the Austronesian Formal
Linguistics Association.
Pittman, R. (1966). TAGALOG-um-and mag-. An Interim Report. In Papers in Philippine Linguistics No. 1. Pacific
Linguistics.
Dery, J. E. (2009, December). Temporal interpretation and tenselessness: The case of Tagalog. In Annual Meeting of
the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 83-94).
Blake, F. R. (1916). The Tagalog verb. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 36, 396-414.
Fanning, K. (2013). Tenselessness in Tagalog.
Reyes, E. V. (1969). Some problems of interference in the use of English verbs by native Tagalog
speakers. Language Learning, 19(1-2), 87-97.
CASTELO, L. Μ. (1972). A Study of Languages in Contact: Tagalog and English (with particular reference to verb
tense forms). STUF-Language Typology and Universals, 25(1-6), 20-27.
Ramos, T. V. (1973). The case system of Tagalog verbs. University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
Reyes, J. (2011). Secrets of Tagalog headlines revealed!: an examination of Tagalog headline grammar.
Dell, F. (1983). An aspectual distinction in Tagalog. Oceanic Linguistics, 22(1/2), 175-206.
Oco, N., & Borra, A. (2011, November). A grammar checker for Tagalog using LanguageTool. In Proceedings of
the 9th Workshop on Asian Language Resources (pp. 2-9).

19

Tanangkingsing, M. (2017, November). Modality Markers in Cebuano and Tagalog. In Proceedings of the 31st
Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (pp. 13-13).
Martin, J. R., & Cruz, P. (2021). 5 Interpersonal Grammar in Tagalog: assessment Systems. Interpersonal
Grammar: Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory and Description, 130.
Payne, T. Volitionality and Aktionsart in Kagayanen--a core Philippine language. In BOOK OF ABSTRACTS (p.
310).
Cabazares, J. R. T. (2016). A legal text with a single" Dapat": Looking for deontic modality in the Filipinotranslation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Social Science Diliman, 12(2).
French, K. M. (1988). Insights into Tagalog reduplication, infixation and stress from nonlinear phonology. The
University of Texas at Arlington.
Blake, F. R. (1917). Reduplication in Tagalog. The American journal of philology, 38(4), 425-431.
Lopez, C. (1950). Reduplication in Tagalog. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-en Volkenkunde, (2de Afl), 151-311.
Rackowski, A. (1999). Morphological optionality in Tagalog aspectual reduplication. Papers on Morphology and
Syntax, Cycle Two, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 34, 107-136.
Lumbera, B. L. (1968). Assimilation and Synthesis (1700-1800): Tagalog Poetry in the EighteenthCentury. Philippine Studies, 16(4), 622-662.
Lumbera, B. L. (1968). Assimilation and Synthesis (1700-1800): Tagalog Poetry in the EighteenthCentury. Philippine Studies, 16(4), 622-662.
Cena, R. M. 10 A unified account of the Tagalog verb and adjective affix systems. Asia-Pacific Linguistics, 197.
De Guzman, V. P. (1997). Verbal affixes in Tagalog: Inflection or derivation. In Proceedings of the seventhinternational conference on Austronesian linguistics (pp. 303-325).
Bonus, D. E. J. (2003). A Stemming Algorithm for Tagalog Words.
Schachter, P. (1977). The Case System of Tagalog Verbs.

20

Saclot, M. J. (2006, January). On the transitivity of the actor focus and patient focus constructions in Tagalog.
In tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Palawan, Philippines, January (pp. 17-20).
PEREZ, A. J. (2012). Common irregularities in Tagalog verbal affixes. More Morphologies: Contributions to theFestival of Languages, Bremen, 17 Sep to 7 Oct, 2009, 35, 53.
Ferrell, R. J. (1983). Intent and volition in Paiwan and Tagalog verbs. In Papers from the Third International
Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Vol. 4: Thematic variation. Pacific Linguistics.
Hoekstra, E. (1986). On the structural subject position in Tagalog. Lingua, 70(1), 41-55.
Katagiri, M. (2005). 7 Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages: perspective. The
many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 153.
Manguilimotan, E., & Matsumoto, Y. (2009, December). Factors Affecting Part-of-Speech Tagging for Tagalog.
In Proceedings of the 23rd Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, Volume 2 (pp.
763-770).
Rosero, M. W. I. Ang Liwanag ng Pantig na „si‟: An Analysis of a Potential Petrified Tagalog Affix.
Tanaka, N., O’Grady, W., Deen, K., Kim, C. E., Hattori, R., Bondoc, I. P. M., & Soriano, J. U. (2016). An agent
advantage in Tagalog relative clause comprehension. In Proceedings of AFLA (Vol. 22, pp. 191-201).
Yap, F. A. (1967). Synchronic analysis of tagalog phonemes (Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia).
Malabonga, V. (2009). Heritage Voices: Language-Tagalog. Retrieved May, 21, 2014.
Blake, F. R. (1906). Expression of case by the verb in Tagalog. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 27, 183189.
Gil, D. (1996, January). How to speak backwards in Tagalog. In Pan-Asiatic Linguistics, Proceedings of the FourthInternational Symposium on Language and Linguistics, January 8-10, 1996, Institute of Language and Culture for
Rural Development, Mahidol University at Salaya (Vol. 1, pp. 297-306).
Mesa, Q. J. B., & Kim, K. T. (2014, September). Development of Tagalog speech corpus. In Int. Conf. Multidiscip.
Trends Acad. Res (Vol. 1, pp. 29-30).

21

De Vos, F. (2011). Essential Tagalog Grammar.
Blake, F. R. (1908). The Tagalog Ligature and Analogies in Other Languages. Journal of the American Oriental
Society, 29, 227-231.
Conklin, H. C. (1956). Tagalog speech disguise. Language, 32(1), 136-139.
Bermudo, M. A. C., Abesamis, O. J., & Addawe, J. (2010). Isolated Tagalog Vowel Recognition using the WallStreet Journal Speech Corpus and Hidden Markov Models. C. 190 Spec. Probl. Dep. Math. Comput. Sci, 1-10.
Intlekofer, D. Vowel Raising in Tagalog Compound Reduplicants Background.
Urdas, N. J., Salvedia, J. R., Dolot, D., Sanchez, J. M., Chester, J., Usero, A. M. V., & Retnoningsih, D. Is There a
Philippine English Vowel Space?.
Verstraelen, E. (1960). An essay towards a historical description of Tagalog and Cebuano Bisaya. Philippine
Studies, 8(3), 491-514.
Melienia, I. (2021). Vowel Pronunciation of English Words By Filipino Speakers in “Everglow” Short
Movie. Jurnal DinamikA, 2(2), 62-80.
Reid, L. A. (2006). On the origin of Philippine vowel grades. Oceanic Linguistics, 45(2), 457-473.
Wolfenson, L. B. (1906). The infixes la, li, lo in Tagalog. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 27, 142-146.
Intlekofer, D., & Bishop, J. (2016). The role of prosody in conditioning Tagalog o/u variation. Speech Prosody 2016,1105-1108.
Garza-Prisby, E., Katz-Gershon, S., & Andruski, J. (2006). Does infant-directed speech in Tagalog resemble infantdirected speech in American English?. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120(5), 3296-3296.
Billings, L. A. Tagalog adverbial (not pronominal) clitics are phrasal affixes. National Chi Nan University.
Danao, G., Torres, J., Tubio, J. V., & Vea, L. (2017, December). Tagalog regional accent classification in thephilippines. In 2017IEEE 9th International Conference on Humanoid, Nanotechnology, Information Technology,
Communication and Control, Environment and Management (HNICEM) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

22

Zorc, R. D. (1993). Overview of Austronesian and Philippine accent patterns. Oceanic Linguistics Special
Publications, (24), 17-24.
Odulio, B., Cruz, K. A., Ariaso, J. R., Orjalo, M. I., Cruz, A. D., Rodriguez, R., & Octaviano Jr, M. (2019). A
Speaker Accent Recognition System for Filipino Language. In Proceedings of the 33rd Pacific Asia Conference on
Language, Information and Computation (pp. 511-515). Waseda Institute for the Study of Language andInformation.
Anderson, V. B. (2006). Lexical stress without postlexical head-marking: Evidence from Tagalog. The Journal of
the Acoustical Society of America, 120(5), 3092-3092.
Blake, F. R. (1950). Tagalog noun formation. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 70(4), 271-291.
Zorc, R. D. Bisayan group of Central Philippine languages, including Tagalog.
Santiago, V. C. A. Areal variation in Morong Tagalog intonation: an acoustic phonetic and dialectological approach.
Blake, F. R. (1919). Tagalog Texts with Grammatical Analysis.
Barrie, M., & Kim, G. (2018). Pseudo Noun Incorporation in Tagalog: Prosody and Structure. Academia Sinica,
Taiwan.
Naylor, P. B. (1995). Subject, topic, and Tagalog syntax. Subject, voice and ergativity, 161-201.
Rackowski, A. (2002). Subject and specificity: the case of Tagalog. In North East Linguistics Society (Vol. 32, No. 2,
p. 11).
Gerassimova, V., & Sells, P. (2008). Long-distance dependencies in Tagalog: The case for raising. In Proceedings ofthe 26th west coast conference on formal linguistics (pp. 190-198). Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Richards, N. (2005). Person-case effects in Tagalog and the nature of long-distance extraction. In Proceedings of thetwelfth annual conference of the austronesian formal linguistics association, UCLA working papers inlinguistics (Vol. 12, pp. 383-94).
Bondoc, I. P., O’Grady, W., Deen, K., & Tanaka, N. (2018). Agrammatism in Tagalog: Voice andrelativisation. Aphasiology, 32(5), 598-617.

23

Law, P. (2011). Raising in Tagalog. In Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp.
142-151).
Latrouite, A., & Riester, A. (2018). The role of information structure for morphosyntactic choices in
Tagalog. Studies in Diversity Linguistics, (21).
Wurmbrand, S. (2013). Tagalog infinitives: Consequences for the theory of phases, voice marking, andextraction. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Fung, S. Resolving the controversy over subject and voice in Tagalog.
Aldridge, E. (2002). Nominalization and wh-movement in Seediq and Tagalog. Language and Linguistics, 3(2),393-426.
Billings, L. A. (2003). Clitics and R-expressions in Tagalog: Actor-first and subject-last ordering. In Digests of thetenth meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association (Vol. 34, pp. 5-6).
Nuhn, P. (2017). Towards a Better Understanding of Peripheral Voice in Tagalog (Doctoral dissertation, Bachelor’s
thesis. Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf).
Richards, N., & Klamer, M. (1996). Subjects in Tagalog and Icelandic. Voice in Austronesian, 39, 31-49.
Nagaya, N. (2006, January). Topicality and reference-tracking in Tagalog. In 9th philippine linguistics congress.
Quezon City: University of the philippines diliman.
Manaster-Ramer, A. (1992). What's a topic in the Philippines. In Martha Ratliff and Eric Schiller, Papers from theFirst Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (pp. 271-91).
Nagaya, N. (2019). The Thetic/Categorical Distinction in Tagalog Revisited: A Contrastive Perspective. ⾔語研究(Gengo Kenkyu), 156, 47-66.
Latrouite, A. (2016, February). Word Order Choices, Information Structure and the Common Ground in Tagalog.
In Third International Workshop on Information Structure of Austronesian Languages, Tokyo.
Cortes, K., Milambiling, L., & Paul, I. (2012). On Tagalog determiners. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual
conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association.

24

Latrouite, A. (2013, December). Information Structure and Grammaticalization in Tagalog. In International
workshop on information structure of Austronesian languages.
Katagiri, M. Topicality of ‘Topic’in Tagalog.
杉浦まそみ⼦. (2001). タガログ語⺟語話者による引⽤表現の習得: ⾃然習得の場合. ⾔語⽂化と⽇本語教育, (22), 50-63.
林真⾐, & ハヤシマイ. (2021). タガログ語の連⽤修飾的複⽂. 語学研究所論集 (Journal of the Institute of
Language Research), (25), 301-307.
鈴⽊⼀徳, 浅野明代, & 平川眞規⼦. (2015). 中国語・タガログ語を⺟語とする⽇本語学習者のナラティ
ブ発達: ⽇本語⺟語話者との⽐較. ⾔語と⽂化, 27, 34-69.
林真⾐, & ハヤシマイ. (2021). タガログ語の他動性. 語学研究所論集 (Journal of the Institute of Language
Research), (25), 293-300.
Gallego, N. A. R. (2011). タガログ語を⺟語とする⽇本語学習者の産出に⾒られる⺟⾳の⻑短とアクセントの関係に関する研究. 国際協⼒研究誌, 17(1), 71-88.
森⼝恒⼀. (1975). タガログ語における “Linker” に関する⼀考察. ⾔語研究, 1975(68), 125-128.
⻑屋尚典. (2019). タガログ語における thetic/categorical 判断再訪――対照研究の観点から――. ⾔語研

究, 156, 47-66.
吉村近男. (1990). タガログ語の無動詞⽂の主語. ⾔語研究, 1990(98), 131-131.
江中⼋郎. (1994). 英語対照で学ぶやさしいタガログ語: ⼊⾨. 盛岡⼤学紀要, 13, 37-45.
⼤⾥泰弘. タガログ語・⽇本語の指⽰詞に関する考察.
⼩林由佳, & コバヤシユカ. (2016). タガログ語の⾏為者焦点使役動詞について―⽇本語との対照から―. 思⾔: 東京外国語⼤学記述⾔語学論集, (12), 97-104.
⻑屋尚典. (2012). タガログ語における⾏為者焦点動詞構⽂の統語的他動性について. 国⽴国語研究所論

集= NINJAL research papers, (4), 49-76.

25

原⽥⿓⼆. (1993). パーソナルコンピュータを⽤いたタガログ語語根解析の試み. ⼤妻⼥⼦⼤学紀要. ⽂系, 25, 33-45.
上⼭あゆみ. (1987). タガログ語の関係節構造と BARRIER. ⾔語学研究, 6, 114-114.
⽯⼭伸朗, & 原⽥⿓⼆. (1986). タガログ語の使役形態素 pa ⼀の意味構造. ⾔語研究, 1986(90), 228-229.
遠⼭千佳. (2003). ⾃然習得者による 「は」 の習得: タガログ語を⺟語とする学習者の発話から. ⾔語

⽂化と⽇本語教育, (25), 54-65.
上⼭あゆみ. (1988). タガログ語の代名詞移動について GB 理論による説明. ⾔語研究, 1988(93), 208-209.
中⾥彰. (1999). ⾔語政策に関する⼀考察--フィリピンにおけるタガログ語の国語化と教授⽤語との関連
で. 社会⽂化研究所紀要, (43), 77-96.
横⼭修. フィリピンの理数科教育と⼆重⾔語政策.
Nagaya, N. (2014). タガログ語の yung による名詞化の主節⽤法について. 東京⼤学⾔語学論集, 35, 177186.
塩原, & シオハラ,アサコ,SHIOHARA,Asako. (2008). タガログ語の 「動詞」 と 「名詞」 の区別--述語の談話的特性からの解釈 (特集 品詞分類の多様性). アジア・アフリカの⾔語と⾔語学 (Asian and
African languages and linguistics), 3, 97-115.
荒哲. (2002). タガログ語法廷通訳の問題点--偽装結婚事件を例に. 研究紀要, 34, 143-149.
⽚桐真澄. (2010). タガログ語の⼈⿂構⽂に関する展望. 岡⼭⼤学⽂学部紀要, (54), 109-122.
原⽥⿓⼆. (1993). θ 役割付与・格付与の⽅向性とタガログ語の語順. Otsuma review, 26, 79-86.
中原功⼀朗. (2006). フィリピンの社会・⾔語状況と同国における英語とフィリピノ語の将来. ⾃然⼈間

社会, 40, 33-50.
北野浩章, & キタノヒロアキ. (2014). フィリピンの複雑で悩ましいことば事情. Field+: フィールドプラ

ス: 世界を感応する雑誌/東京外国語⼤学アジア・アフリカ⾔語⽂化研究所 [編], (12), 8-8.

26

Castelo, L. M. (1966). Compounds in Tagalog. Phonetica, 14(1), 36-39.
Castelo, L. Μ. (1966). Derivation of Abstract Nouns from Adjectives in Tagalog. STUF-Language Typology andUniversals, 19(1-6), 373-378.
Zwartjes, O. Oyanguren de Santa Inés's grammar of Tagalog (Tagalysmo elucidado'1742): towards.

27