More on the Pinyin debate
Just a comment as a foreigner who has studied Mandarin for a number of years. Considering the amount of study material available in Hanyu Pinyin, it would be very counterproductive to miss a great opportunity to standardize the Romanization of Mandarin with the rest of the world. Hanyu Pinyin is consistent and easy to understand and pronounce from the spelling.
Vern H Platt
Fullerton, California
As the debate on Mandarin Romanization rages on, it has taken on an increasingly political tone. It is somewhat ironic that the lawmakers now debating this issue have probably never used these two systems in any practical sense and never will. Almost everyone here uses the Mandarin Phonetic Symbol system (MPS,
In my view, the problem in Taiwan is not Tongyong or Hanyu Pinyin, but the MPS system. Unless Taiwan switches completely to a Romanization system there is no need for people to learn both MPS and either Tongyong or Hanyu. The vast majority of people here will continue to use MPS on a daily basis, not Tongyong or Hanyu.
This being so, I think there is a strong argument for adopting the Hanyu system since most people from outside the country will be using it and many of them probably have been exposed to Hanyu rather than Tongyong. Even if Tongyong is better, it is unlikely that newcomers to Taiwan who have previously learned Hanyu will reject that widely-used system in favor of it.
If Taiwan really wants completely to phase out the MPS system, then I think the Tongyong-Hanyu debate is important. If the government can say with certainty that textbooks, dictionaries, computer keyboards and software will adopt the new Romanization system instead of MPS, then there it will be in Taiwan's interest that the best system be adopted.
The government should ask itself two questions. Does Taiwan need a substitute for MPS? And will people in Taiwan embrace such a substitute? If the answer is no, then use Hanyu in addition. If yes, then hold a debate about the merits of Tongyong and MPS, not Tongyong and Hanyu.
William Hoyle
Taichung
As a Taiwanese-American, I strongly oppose the usage of Hanyu over Tongyong. I learned Hanyu in high school and it can be quite confusing, especially for non-native speakers. Foreigners would have trouble figuring out how to pronounce words like "cai" (vegetable) unless they already knew what kind of sound the letter "c" symbolizes. At least with the traditional "tsai", they would be able to approximate the correct pronunciation. Hanyu still confuses those who are not familiar with Mandarin, as observed during coverage of the recent Olympics. Broadcasters butchered PRC athletes' names. Hanyu is not a cure-all, despite Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) claims. Perhaps he can start the Hanyu transition by changing the spelling of his name to Ma Yingjiu.
For advocates of Hanyu to say that the ROC needs Hanyu to be globalized is ridiculous. The international community is not going to establish diplomatic relations with the ROC just because they use the same pinyin that the PRC uses. As long as the ROC consistently uses one system, foreigners will learn, at least approximately, how to pronounce the words. Hanyu can be confusing as well, since the PRC has assigned new sounds to the English letters.
None of the systems, Wade-Giles, Yale, MSP II, Tongyong or Hanyu is perfect. The combination of "hs" from the Wade-Giles method is much better than the "sh/x/s(i)" of the other methods. Likewise, the "ts" of the Yale method is superior to the "c/cii/ci" and even "tz'u" of the other methods.
Linguists should invent a new system, incorporating the parts that work from each system. If they were to do so, no country would feel that it had to condescend to use another country's system (as some in Taiwan apparently feel abou the prospect of adopting China's Hanyu Pinyin, or the PRC might about the prospect of adopting any of the other methods).
Just as not every English-speaking country uses the same vocabulary, Mandarin-speaking countries should not feel obligated to conform to PRC usage. The international community is becoming more and more interconnected, but not at the expense of national and ethnic pride. If people believe that Hanyu would allow the ROC better to integrate into an increasingly globalized international community, perhaps every country should adopt a single language so that there are absolutely no language barriers. How's that for a plan?
Janet Lin
Los Angeles
No system for the Romanisation of Chinese is perfect. Tongyong may or may not be superior to the Hanyu system but Hanyu is widely recognized around the world. How many dictionaries or language textbooks have been published in Tongyong compared to Hanyu? Also how many computer programs can input Chinese characters using Tongyong?
The rest of the world has accepted Hanyu as the standard even though it's not perfect. If Taiwan wants to assert its identity in the international community then it must accept the need for a readily identifiable system of writing Chinese in the Roman alphabet. This is especially important in anything to do with computers. It is my experience that very few people in Taiwan can either read or write Chinese in any system of Romanisation.
How can Taiwan communicate with the rest of the world if most people can't even write an address in the Roman alphabet? I urge Taiwan to adopt the Hanyu system as a matter of urgency and carry out a public education campaign to ensure that it can be widely used and understood.
David Reid
Hobart, Australia
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
RSS