Letter:

One world, one system

As any junior high school student knows, English spelling is a mess. There is a myriad of rules, a myriad of exceptions to each rule, silent letters, letters that can have many different sounds, letters that show up in words for no apparent reason.

Perhaps a group of Taiwan scholars could sit down with a list of illogically spelled words and come up with a better system of spelling English. It would not be a very daunting task. "Fight" could change to "fite," "phone" could change to "fone," "knife" could change to "nife."

If such a project were undertaken, how would it be received in the English-speaking world? Would people begin using the new spellings? Who would adopt the new system? The answer, of course, is a resounding "no one."

The reason no one would switch to the new system would not be because it would be inferior to the old system, or because the new system was proposed by Taiwan scholars, and Taiwan is unduly ignored in international circles. The new system would be ignored simply because the old system is already firmly entrenched, right or wrong, and works just fine.

The same reasoning holds true in the Romanization battle currently being carried out between Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and the Ministry of Education. Ma has correctly argued that we should use the Hanyu Pinyin (漢語拼音) system developed by China and used in nearly every university throughout the world where Chinese is taught. The ministry feels that its Tongyong (通用拼音) system is superior and has mandated that it be taught instead of Hanyu.

Is the Tongyong system superior to the Hanyu system? The question is as irrelevant as the question, "Is `nife' superior to `knife'?" No one is going to start spelling it "nife" and no one, at least outside of Taiwan, is going to start using Tongyong. Hanyu, right or wrong, is already firmly entrenched, and works just fine.

As a long-term Taiwan resident, I must say the opposition to using the Hanyu system smacks of the Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) era "battle-the-Communist-bandits-on-every-front" type mentality. So what if Hanyu was developed in China? If it simplifies and unifies the learning and pronunciation of Mandarin for foreigners, and at the same time gives us one more thing in common with China, so why not adopt it?

A year or so ago, the local newspapers were lamenting the demise of Taiwan as a popular destination for learning Chinese. Enrollment at Chinese language schools, such as the Mandarin Training Center, was down, with a good percentage of students choosing China over Taiwan. If Taiwan is truly interested in regaining its place as a center for Chinese study, wouldn't it be logical to get in step with, rather than step away from, the way Chinese is taught abroad?

Kevin Quinn

Kaohsiung