How strange it is that a war of words should break out just because new Executive Yuan spokeswoman Kolas Yotaka, who is an Amis, writes her name in romanized form, using Latin letters.
Taiwan really is an abnormal nation, especially when it comes to the way people think about language. Even the most apolitical and widespread way of writing — the Latin alphabet — can set off a big argument.
Writing consists of symbols that are used to record spoken language and its most important function is to accurately and efficiently express spoken sounds. The Latin alphabet, which has been tested in practical use over many centuries and is now used by more than two-thirds of the world’s countries, should be the best choice.
When researching languages that do not yet have any written form, most linguists use Latin letters to write them down. For example, the 1,200 Austronesian languages are all recorded using Latin spellings.
English, German, French, Spanish and countless other languages also use varieties of the Latin alphabet, as do most of the countries included in the New Southbound Policy, such as Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia.
Even in Japan, which has long had its own phonetic scripts called kana, the names of roads and stations are generally displayed in romanized form, which makes it easy to reach out and integrate with the international community.
It is hard to imagine what kind of writing could be more useful than Latin letters. If Taiwanese stick to only using Chinese characters while rejecting Latin letters, whether Taiwan wants to move toward China or the wider world could be questioned.
Latin letters, which gained widespread use in Europe under the influence of the Roman Empire, have not been valued in Taiwan since they arrived. Not only have the regimes that came from abroad and were heavily influenced by Chinese culture tended to suppress romanization, but many members of Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese) and Hakka-speaking groups who are accustomed to using Chinese characters also oppose it.
The earliest writing used in Taiwan was the Latin alphabet, not Chinese characters. In the 17th century, Spanish missionaries in northern Taiwan used Latin letters to write down the Aboriginal language spoken around Tamsui (淡水), while Dutch missionaries in the south did the same for the Sinkan language, a form of Siraya.
As the survival space of the Pingpu, or lowland Aborigines, became increasingly restricted, these written languages gradually disappeared along with the spoken ones.
In the 19th century, Protestant missionaries again brought romanization to Taiwan, and this time it lasted longer and was used over a wider area, with romanized forms of Hakka, Aboriginal languages and Hoklo. However, these writing systems were again suppressed.
It is sad that when people use internationally understood Latin letters to write their native languages and spell their names, they are not given the respect they deserve.
Newly appointed Minister of Education Yeh Jiunn-rong (葉俊榮) should think long and hard about this issue.
If Taiwan wants to reach out to the international community and establish a Taiwanese consciousness, Taiwanese will have to throw off the chains of the Han Chinese language and culture, and formulate language policies centered on indigenous and local languages, and they should use the form of writing that is most in line with the international community.
Chiang Jih-yingh is a board member of the Taiwanese Romanization Association and a teacher of the Hoklo language.
Translated by Julian Clegg
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS