Your editorial on Oct. 25 asked for suggestions on the use of Taiwan's Tongyong Pinyin Romanization system. I have two.
First, for transcribing that elusive initial consonant which is pronounced in Taiwan either as "f" or "h" depending on the speaker's mood, the obvious solution is contained in the question itself. Like the makers of local street signs, simply spell the word in question with an "f" or an "h" depending on your mood. No problem!
Second, for a solution to the entire problem of confusing, competing Romanization systems, I suggest that all Taiwanese students henceforth be taught and tested on all four of the main systems: Hanyu, Tongyong, Wade-Giles and Yale. When millions of Taiwanese students and their parents are subjected to such torture, I suspect a simpler way will be found -- rapidly.
The root cause of this problem is a pathological ignorance of Western-style phonetics, fostered unfortunately by Taiwan's insistence on the loathsome "KK yinbiao" for teaching English pronunciation, instead of the "phonics" approach used in the West. How else can we explain the sign now hanging over the eastern approach to the Huajiang Bridge, which boldly declares "BanQian" as the destination instead of "BanQiao"?
Taiwanese students are not taught in a way that promotes such understanding. Instead, English pronunciation is shoehorned into strings of "KK" symbols in a clumsy caricature of the Zhuyinfuhao symbols. English spelling is not learned, but memorized, with seemingly less attention to phonetic spelling rules than is given to the stroke-order rules for Chinese characters, which are simple by comparison.
The solution to Taiwan's Pinyin Predicament is to teach people how an alphabetic writing system actually works -- whether it's English or Pinyin -- by combining phonetic values and sometimes changing them, according to certain rules. Not only would this facilitate the learning of English or any other Western language, it would allow Pinyin to act as a bridge from the native language to this broader understanding of phonetic spelling.
It doesn't really matter which Romanization system Taiwan uses. As long as a phonetic approach is used in teaching, its adoption will be easy. But as long as Taiwan persists in not teaching any Romanization skills in schools, the Pinyin Predicament will remain.
John Diedrichs
Taipei
I was disappointed to learn that you are following in the footsteps of the Taiwan News and adopting the awful Tongyong system of Romanization. You say that the reason for this decision is to write Chinese place names in the way that most foreigners will be used to them. [Editor's note: the editorial did not say this; it said that names in the paper will correspond to local usage, even if the style is problematic.] If this is so, then the decision to use Tongyong for all place names is severely flawed.
Perhaps half of all Taiwan's foreign residents live in Taipei, and Taipei sensibly uses the Hanyu Pinyin system. It is also the only part of Taiwan I've been to which is now consistent in its naming. And now the Taipei Times -- note the "Taipei" -- is going to Romanize Taipei place names to make them different from what we see on Taipei street signs, MRT stops and government buildings. [Editor's note: No, we are not. We have adopted Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (
I suspect that like the pan-greens who have implemented Tongyong Pinyin, your motivation for this decision is actually based on politics rather than considerations of what is the best and most useful system. Now I am pro-independence, but I think it is utterly ridiculous to reject the only international standard of Romanization, the only option that makes sense, just because it happens to be the same system used in China.
Are we so cowardly that we have to care what China thinks when we make this sort of decision? Romanization has nothing to do with unification or localization. Perhaps we should also use different standards for the Internet, television and telecommunications, just to make sure we don't use the same system as China?
Your editorial said "we don't live in the world, we live in Taiwan," and this sums up the sort of parochial attitude that will help to even further distance Taiwan from the rest of the world, and in the long run only hurt the cause of Taiwanese independence.
Brian Rawnsley
Taipei
[Editor's note: Many of your points are based on a thorough misunderstanding of what we said. Readers are encouraged to carefully examine the editorial in question at www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/10/25/2003208361, bearing in mind that our use of Tongyong Pinyin applies only to those city or county jurisdictions that elect to use it -- unwisely or otherwise.]
That sinking feeling
As an American I am deeply saddened by US Secretary of State Colin Powell's remarks [about reunification and Taiwan having no sovereignty, "MOFA blasts US `betrayal,'" Oct. 27. page 1]. My heart actually sank when I heard about that and it was deeply regrettable that he said that.
I have always been a supporter of Taiwan and its independence and I always will be. I just want to reassure you that Powell's comments do not represent the view of the American people, who by and large support Taiwan.
Alex Cross
Seattle, Washington
There has been much catastrophizing in Taiwan recently about America becoming more unreliable as a bulwark against Chinese pressure. Some of this has been sparked by debates in Washington about whether the United States should defend Taiwan in event of conflict. There also were understandable anxieties about whether President Trump would sacrifice Taiwan’s interests for a trade deal when he sat down with President Xi (習近平) in late October. On top of that, Taiwan’s opposition political leaders have sought to score political points by attacking the Lai (賴清德) administration for mishandling relations with the United States. Part of this budding anxiety
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
On Nov. 8, newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Vice Chairman Chi Lin-len (季麟連) attended a memorial for White Terror era victims, during which convicted Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spies such as Wu Shi (吳石) were also honored. Cheng’s participation in the ceremony, which she said was part of her efforts to promote cross-strait reconciliation, has trapped herself and her party into the KMT’s dark past, and risks putting the party back on its old disastrous road. Wu, a lieutenant general who was the Ministry of National Defense’s deputy chief of the general staff, was recruited
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Nov. 5 recalled more than 150,000 eggs found to contain three times the legal limit of the pesticide metabolite fipronil-sulfone. Nearly half of the 1,169 affected egg cartons, which had been distributed across 10 districts, had already been sold. Using the new traceability system, officials quickly urged the public to avoid consuming eggs with the traceability code “I47045,” while the remainder were successfully recalled. Changhua County’s Wenya Farm — the source of the tainted eggs — was fined NT$120,000, and the Ministry of Agriculture instructed the county’s Animal Disease Control Center to require that
RSS