Hanyu no threat to identity
The Mandarin Promotion Council has shown political bias in abandoning the international standard of Pinyin in favor of Tongyong Pinyin (通用拼音) which is unlikely to be accepted by users. The chief architect of the unwelcome addition to Tai-wan's current tower of Babel, Yu Bor-chuan (余伯泉), even had the gall to claim that if his pet system is not adopted, "Taiwan will lose its unique cultural traits and national identity." Gimme a break! Equally biased are the (chiefly KMT) opponents who politicize the issue with their ludicrous claim that Tongyong will further isolate Taiwan from the international community.
Frankly, I cannot imagine that the global political community cares very much how we spell Keelung or Jilong here. Hooey! How Taiwan spells Dunhua or Tunhwa Road does nothing to its national identity, which is and will remain proud and independent. Let us not load what should be practical linguistic matters with such political baggage.
Please! Taiwan has a long history of cooking up home-grown Romanization systems which eventually end up collecting dust on the shelves, from Gwoyeu Romatzyh -- National Phonetic Symbols II -- in 1928, to the 1984 adoption by the Ministry of Education of a modified form of it. Both failed due to lack of public acceptance; it seems that the ministry has never understood the needs and opinions of the users of Romanization, foremost among whom are the foreign community, not some group of Academia Sinica linguists and certainly not some group of political appointees.
Weren't the complaints by the foreigners about Taipei's street signs what started this whole issue? But no foreigner I know was consulted on the adoption of a new standard, and none that I know of will be willing to use the new system. And what did Minister of Education Huang Jong-tsun (
Huang also claims no one will be forced to use the Tongyong system. This is absurd. First, if it is applied to street signs nationwide (except in protesting areas), everyone whose eyes fall upon the signs is being forced to use it. Second, if it is not taught in schools and applied consistently nationwide (ie, forced upon everyone), it is obviously nothing more than an addition to the current mess, making matters worse.
While the goal of having one system for all languages is admirable, the fact is that the main use for Romanization always has been and always will be to help foreigners pronounce and learn Chinese. There is simply no excuse for neglecting our opinions on the issue.
Kent M. Suarez
Taipei
As an English person who has been living in Taiwan for 18 months and learning Chinese for about the same amount of time, I support the adoption of Hanyu Pinyin (漢語拼音), though not necessarily because it is the best system. Although Hanyu is perfectly adequate, it is also flawed and it could well be that the Tongyong system could offer some improvements. But the fact remains that Hanyu is now the accepted standard around the world and you simply have to flow with the current.
By way of comparison, Eng-lish is now a world language, although its writing system is anything but perfect. Unlike other European languages, such as German and Spanish, which by and large spell words the way they are pronounced, there is no logical system in English and you simply have to memorize and accept the irregular spelling of many words without too many explanations.
When I was at primary school in England in the 1960s there were attempts to reform the English spelling system to make it more logical. The attempt was futile and all it did was put the student guinea pigs at a disadvantage compared with other students who had learned to read and write using traditional methods. As flawed as the Eng-lish writing system is, you simply have to accept it, warts and all.
Hanyu Pinyin has only been around for some 40 years or so, but it has now taken root and become the accepted standard throughout the world for the media, educational materials, maps, tourist guides, etc. I'm sure that the well-intentioned people who devised Tongyong Pinyin are convinced that their system is better and I wouldn't disagree with them, but I feel it would be much better for Tai-wan to adopt the international standard than to put students and the general public at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the world, and also marginalize Taiwan into the bargain.
Foreigners and Taiwanese alike who support Hanyu Pinyin do so not because they are "anti-Taiwan." On the contrary, they do so because they love Taiwan dearly and have the country's long-term interests at heart.
Stephen Rimmer
Taipei
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS