Parochialism hurting Taiwan
After considerable debate the Ministry of Education has decided on Tongyong Pinyin (通用拼音) as the official Romanization system. It is disturbing, though not at all surprising, that what is essentially an academic concern has become so highly politicized.
While I'm not familiar with the Tongyong system, which I hear is perfectly adequate and can accommodate Hoklo and Hakka, it is clear that its biggest selling point is that it is seen to be pro-Taiwan. The Hanyu Pin-yin (漢語拼音) system is used throughout China and most of the Chinese-speaking world and is the official Romanization sys-tem of the UN. The Tongyong system, on the other hand, will be used widely throughout Taiwan (though probably not Taipei). So a parochial, local system has been favored over an almost universal standard.
Yu Bor-chuan (余伯泉) is quoted as saying ("Ma throws a spanner in the Pinyin works." July 12, page 1) that if the Hanyu system is adopted "Taiwan will lose its unique cultural traits and national identity." What rubbish! Are we to believe that national identity hinges on how a foreign alphabet is to be used?
The debate has become clouded by issues of nationalism and cross-strait relations. Most people in Taiwan couldn't care less how Mandarin is Romanized. Is it really necessary to have one system to cover all of Taiwan's languages? I don't see why. If Tongyong is so good for teaching Hakka and Hoklo then use it for that purpose, and keep Hanyu for Mandarin. That way we could also avoid the possibility of multiple Romanizations on street signs.
Richard K. Cotton
Tainan
T'an Ch'i or Tan Qi? No matter how you spell it, the Chinese word for "sigh" is all the response I can muster for this latest round in Taiwan's perennial and everlasting Pinyin Holy Wars.
In any event, patience is not a reaction that seems to flow naturally at this point, so forgive me for being blunt with whoever are in charge of this decades-long humiliation and debilitation of Taiwan's people.
Use Hanyu for Mandarin. Always. (I'll let other letter writers explain why, as I've done so myself already too many times over the years.)
Do not eliminate Zhuyin Fuhao (
Teach Hanyu in schools, not as a replacement for Zhuyin Fuhao, but simply as one of the essential "skills" needed for literacy in Mandarin.
Teach Tongyong in schools. Not for Mandarin, but for the other local languages it is designed to accommodate. The so-called "pro-Taiwan" activists who insist that the use of Hanyu would somehow amount to caving in to the unificationists are really missing the point. If their goal, as your article says, is to preserve Taiwan's "unique cultural traits and national identity" and if they see Hanyu as running counter to that goal, then it stands to reason that they see China's culture as distinct from Taiwan's. I couldn't agree more.
But that is precisely why the use of Hanyu actually affirms Taiwan's uniqueness. Because it acknowledges outright that Mandarin is an "imported, foreign" language, with only 50 years of history as a lingua franca in only limited portions of the country. First we had 50 years of Japanese, then another 50 years of Chinese.
Isn't it about time Taiwan gave all its languages equal status and respect? And isn't it about time the people of Taiwan stopped letting a few politically motivated academic hotheads make this entire country look like a worse-than-third-world intellectual backwater with their stubborn refusal to admit that Hanyu is the world standard?
John Diedrichs
Taipei
The debate about whether to use the globally accepted Hanyu system is one that continues to emphasize the silly and reactionary nature of the bureaucracy that exists in many ugly forms within Taiwan's government. More lucid and practical individuals like Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Students of Chinese no longer learn the Wade-Giles system and have never learned Bopomofo or Tongyong unless they have sought out such instruction once in Taiwan. These systems are as useless today as the bureaucratic institutions that continue to perpetuate and promote their usage.
This in its own should be reason enough to use Hanyu.
Hanyu is, granted, a rather confusing system to learn. But it can be learnt quite easily, because it is consistent. Why does the Academia Sinica consider Tongyong system -- concocted by diplomatic-minded professors -- a part of the "unique cultural traits and national identity" of Taiwan? This is an academic question regarding the Romanization of Mandarin Chinese, not a political issue of surrendering sovereignty to China.
Isn't the entire purpose of Romanization to accommodate foreign visitors? It is disheartening to see such bureaucratic buffoonery taking the reins in the promising democracy of Taiwan.
Ben Zoll
Seattle, Washington
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS