As a personal explanation (which lies somewhere in between inference and speculation) for why such a shift occurs, I find that these selective preferences are present not because of ‘affective qualities’ that are inherent in the languages themselves; it is not for the suggestion that English is necessarily inherently technical nor the suggestion that Filipino is necessarily inherently aggressively affective. After all, the inverse can be the case for others; it is entirely possible for an individual to find English (as one’s second or additional language) to be their language of choice for the more expressive and evaluative statements (as explained by this article) and, conversely, for another to find their native language to be their language of choice for constructing in-depth explanations. Aside from personal and cultural associations, the individual’s respective degrees of fluency in the languages in question are to be considered as possible explanations as well.

In my personal case, I find that Filipino is my language of choice for the more expressive and emphatic communicative goals because of how the language sounds. Because of how Filipino speech (a) places more emphasis on individual syllables rather than stress when it comes to enunciation and (b) makes use of phonemes that are less ‘audibly fluid’ compared to English phonemes—for instance, with how diphthongs and selective frequencies in consonant choices differ between the two languages—Filipino speech, to me, is more effective in ‘sounding’ more expressive and emphatic. This may even explain why Filipino bilinguals (and perhaps other bilinguals that make use of similar phonetic inventories in their native language as well) find that curse words in their native language are more emphatic, ‘harsh-sounding’, and powerful compared to English curse words. Again, it is not that Filipino is inherently more vulgar or crude nor is it the case that English is inherently pragmatically softer with its words. Rather, it is the differences in phonemes, the consonant and vowel inventories, between the languages that makes one ‘sound’ either softer or more expressively powerful than the other. In fact, this is evident even in the English language itself with how a lot of its curse words and slurs (which I am citing as prototypical examples because of their inherent quality of being powerfully ’emphatic’) take advantage of the use of plosives and fricatives (see ‘b-words’ and ‘f-words’) which make them sound more biting, abrasive, rough, and vitriolic (notice how the last four adjective choices also make use of plosives (e.g., /b/) and fricatives (e.g., /f/, /v/, /s/)). In a somewhat similar sense (obviously beyond just profanity), the phonetic nature of Filipino speech—with its emphasis on individual syllables rather than stress and its distinct consonant and vowel inventories—makes it more suitable, at least for me personally, as the language of choice for conversations that are more expressive and emphatic in nature.

As a personal explanation (which lies somewhere in between inference and speculation) for why such a shift occurs, I find that these selective preferences are present not because of ‘affective qualities’ that are inherent in the languages themselves; it is not for the suggestion that English is necessarily inherently technical nor the suggestion that Filipino is necessarily inherently aggressively affective. After all, the inverse can be the case for others; it is entirely possible for an individual to find English (as one’s second language) to be their language of choice for the more expressive and evaluative statements (as explained by this article) and, conversely, for another to find their native language to be their language of choice for constructing in-depth explanations. Aside from personal and cultural associations, the individual’s respective degrees of fluency in the languages in question are to be considered as possible explanations as well.

In my personal case, I find that Filipino is my language of choice for the more expressive and emphatic communicative goals because of how the language sounds. Because of how Filipino speech (a) places more emphasis on individual syllables rather than stress when it comes to enunciation and (b) makes use of phonemes that are less ‘audibly fluid’ compared to English phonemes—for instance, with how diphthongs and selective frequencies in consonant choices differ between the two languages—Filipino speech, to me, is more effective in ‘sounding’ more expressive and emphatic. This may even explain why Filipino bilinguals (and perhaps other bilinguals that make use of similar phonetic inventories in their native language as well) find that curse words in their native language are more emphatic, ‘harsh-sounding’, and powerful compared to English curse words. Again, it is not that Filipino is inherently more vulgar or crude nor is it the case that English is inherently pragmatically softer with its words. Rather, it is the differences in phonemes, the consonant and vowel inventories, between the languages that makes one ‘sound’ either softer or more expressively powerful than the other. In fact, this is evident even in the English language itself with how a lot of its curse words and slurs (which I am citing as prototypical examples because of their inherent quality of being powerfully ’emphatic’) take advantage of the use of plosives and fricatives (see ‘b-words’ and ‘f-words’) which make them sound more biting, abrasive, rough, and vitriolic (notice how the last four adjective choices also make use of plosives (e.g., /b/) and fricatives (e.g., /f/, /v/, /s/)). In a somewhat similar sense (obviously beyond just profanity), the phonetic nature of Filipino speech—with its emphasis on individual syllables rather than stress and its distinct consonant and vowel inventories—makes it more suitable, at least for me personally, as the language of choice for conversations that are more expressive and emphatic in nature.