On Oct. 7, the Ministry of Education (MOE, 教育部) convened a meeting to discuss the "Draft Guidelines for the Unification of Chinese Transliteration" (中文譯音統一規定草案). Both before and during the meeting, Lin Cheng-hsiu (林正修), director of Taipei City Council's Bureau of Civil Affairs made the following criticisms: That the Romanization policy had taken a sudden turn and the adoption of Tongyong Pinyin (通用) would be difficult in Taipei, incompatible with international usage and completely political.
This was all a little puzzling -- given that the notice announcing the meeting had clearly stated that the former KMT government had agreed at a meeting of the educational reform task force
In the wake of that decision, then vice premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) repeatedly requested the MOE submit new proposals, but the ministry dragged its feet until after the March elections. Was Lin unaware that in 1998, then mayor Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) announced that Taipei would adopt the Tongyong system?
Tongyong has been debated numerous times since 1996 and the final product takes into account such issues as theoretical consistency, compatibility with existing international systems and ease of use. Thus, Tongyong was neither hastily nor rashly conceived. It also enjoys the support of several professors at the National Taiwan University Graduate Institute of Linguistics (台大語言所). The new government has, moreover, used Hanyu far less frequently than it has Tongyong.
But Lin reportedly insists on making inaccurate statements such as: "The sudden shift in Romanization policy is arbitrary and reflects one-sided wishes." One might well suspect that a high degree of politicization is responsible for his conduct.
On Aug. 28, Lin sent an official letter to the Executive Yuan, requesting that "supervisory departments confirm as quickly as possible ... which form of Chinese Romanization system is to be selected." This letter also found its way to the Mandarin Promotion Council (
Council members spent long hours discussing the issue and considering the opinions of scholars and experts from Taiwan's four major ethnic groups. On Sept. 16, when Tongyong was finally approved by the council, chairman Tsao Feng-pu (曹逢甫) and the whole council collectively breathed a sigh of relief -- we had resolved a difficult issue which the KMT government had let drag on for three years.
In the end, however, Lin not only disapproved of our decision, but he reprimanded us for instigating a "sudden shift in policy." Quite honestly, I found that comment both laughable and sad.
Lin once declared, "In its policy of Chinese Romanization, the Taipei City Government will act in accordance with the policy of the central government." In 1998, when Ma Ying-jeou (
So isn't it then the city government who has engineered the "sudden shift" in policy? Tong-yong fits the two critiera demanded by the Taipei government. It has also won recognition from numerous scholars and experts -- so why should Lin feel the need to distort the facts?
Liang Jung-mao is a national policy advisor and a member of the MOE's Mandarin Promotion Council.
Translated by Scudder Smith
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS