On Thursday, the right to use one’s mother tongue made headlines when academics and language advocates stood up against two National Taiwan University professors who on July 30 shut down a student representative who spoke Hoklo (also known as Taiwanese) in a university Cooperative Shop board meeting.
The professors insisted that only Mandarin be used and in a previous meeting motioned that people using any other language would not be allowed to speak, and their words would not be recorded in the minutes.
From a practical perspective, it is reasonable to question the point of speaking in a language not understood by everyone at a meeting. Even before the Japanese colonial government and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime imposed Japanese and Mandarin respectively on Taiwanese, not everyone in Taiwan spoke Hoklo, as Hakka and Aboriginal languages were also spoken.
Unfortunately, due to oppressive language policies, many Hoklo people, who comprise the nation’s majority, do not speak their native tongue or speak it poorly.
The government must do all it can to remedy this situation through language education and other policies, such as the National Languages Development Act (國家語言發展法), and promote native languages in the media and other cultural avenues so that people can once again be proud of speaking them.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be applauded for amending the Enforcement Rules of the Passport Act (護照條例施行細則) earlier this month to allow people to romanize their names in Hoklo, Hakka or Aboriginal languages in their passports. Previously, only Mandarin names could be romanized.
However, the point of holding a meeting is communicating ideas. Mandarin, like it or not, is the lingua franca in Taiwan, spoken fluently by everyone except some elderly people and new immigrants.
Even if there were interpreters, using different languages would bog down a meeting and could lead to misunderstandings.
And what happens when an interpreter cannot be found? It might be easier to find a Hoklo interpreter, but that might not be the case for Aboriginal languages, which, for example, are spoken by few people in Taipei.
It is not that Mandarin must be used, but it is the most efficient way to conduct a meeting. Nevertheless, the use of other languages should warrant a conversation on how to proceed without trampling on people’s right to speak their mother tongue.
The main problem is the professors’ attitude. Silencing the student and insisting that Mandarin be used without allowing any room for discussion is indeed disturbingly reminiscent of past governments’ oppression of Taiwanese culture that continued up to just a few decades ago.
Even worse, agricultural economics professor Jerome Geaun (官俊榮) justified his motion by comparing speaking Hoklo to smoking cigarettes.
That is simply not acceptable. It is blatantly discriminatory, and a huge insult to those who have suffered government oppression as well as to government officials who have been making great efforts to promote the use and survival of these languages.
Mandarin is indeed the most-spoken language in Taiwan, but it is by no means superior to any other language and there is no place for this type of cultural bullying in today’s society.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has its chairperson election tomorrow. Although the party has long positioned itself as “China friendly,” the election is overshadowed by “an overwhelming wave of Chinese intervention.” The six candidates vying for the chair are former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), former lawmaker Cheng Li-wen (鄭麗文), Legislator Luo Chih-chiang (羅智強), Sun Yat-sen School president Chang Ya-chung (張亞中), former National Assembly representative Tsai Chih-hong (蔡志弘) and former Changhua County comissioner Zhuo Bo-yuan (卓伯源). While Cheng and Hau are front-runners in different surveys, Hau has complained of an online defamation campaign against him coming from accounts with foreign IP addresses,
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The