"A case for Formosan DNA" (Letters, Dec. 30, page 8) is a sad case of a political agenda triumphing over science and reason.
Its source article reports that the research of Mackay Memorial Hospital's Mari Lin (林媽利) found that the DNA of 85 percent of Taiwanese Hoklo and Hakka speakers has "Aboriginal ancestry" ("Most Hoklo, Hakka have Aboriginal genes, study finds," Nov. 21, page 8).
In his letter, Professor Francis Lai has turned this around to mean something like "85 percent of these people's DNA is aboriginal." I say "something like" because I frankly don't understand what this "critical part of the genome" is that Lai refers to. In any case, saying something about 85 percent of the people and something about 85 percent of their genome are two completely different things.
The original report does not say what percentage of these subjects' DNA is the same as that of Taiwan's Aborigines; it only states that most of them showed evidence of Aboriginal ancestry. My own DNA would show evidence of Irish ancestry, but that certainly isn't the same as saying all or even most of my ancestors were Irish.
If the DNA of Hoklo and Hakka speakers were 85 percent Aboriginal, then the vast majority of Taiwanese would look nearly the same as the Aborigines. In fact, they look very much like the people across the Strait in Fujian and other places.
We may assume that much of the Aboriginal DNA found in these test subjects came from centuries of occasional intermarriage with Taiwanese Aborigines; however, evidence was also found for Vietnamese-related DNA. It is well-known that ancestors of today's Vietnamese lived thousands of years ago in the Fujian area. The Austronesian-speaking Aboriginal population of Taiwan may also have ultimately come from southern China; linguistic evidence is much stronger for a spread from Taiwan southward, not the opposite.
In this case, one may wonder whether these traces of Aboriginal DNA in the Hoklo/Hakka population might also be found among the southern Chinese people living across the Strait. There are plenty of recent immigrants from across the Strait that Lin could test to clear up this issue. I wrote to her last month with this suggestion, but received no reply.
Professor Lai's letter has some other strange notions: "the invasion of minority Mandarin speakers from 1945." As I understand Taiwanese history, most of these postwar immigrants were from Shanghai and other areas where Mandarin was not spoken. The switch to Mandarin was not a result of their influence but the political will of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). These recent immigrants merely supplied the large force of unqualified Mandarin teachers whom the Taiwanese unfortunately had to learn from.
Lai's letter ends with "We, Formosans, are all Aborigines." When US president John F. Kennedy went to Berlin, he proclaimed, in incorrect German, "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner). His statement was 100 percent politics, zero percent science. The same goes for Lai's words.
Assoc. Prof. Jakob Dempsey
Department of Foreign Languages and Applied Linguistics
Yuan-ze University
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
I wrote this before US President Donald Trump embarked on his uneventful state visit to China on Thursday. So, I shall confine my observations to the joint US-Philippine military exercise of April 20 through May 8, known collectively as “Balikatan 2026.” This year’s Balikatan was notable for its “firsts.” First, it was conducted primarily with Taiwan in mind, not the Philippines or even the South China Sea. It also showed that in the Pacific, America’s alliance network is still robust. Allies are enthusiastic about America’s renewed leadership in the region. Nine decades ago, in 1936, America had neither military strength
The Presidential Office on Saturday reiterated that Taiwan is a sovereign, independent nation after US President Donald Trump said that Taiwan should not “go independent.” “We’re not looking to have somebody say: ‘Let’s go independence because the United States is backing us,’” Trump said in an interview with Fox News aired on Friday. President William Lai (賴清德) on Monday said that the Republic of China (ROC) — Taiwan’s official name — and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are not subordinate to each other. Speaking at an event marking the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Lai said