Controversy regarding sign language has once again broken out — just months after disability advocates slammed the use of fake sign language in parody videos of the Central Epidemic Command Center’s (CECC) daily news briefings.
While the use of mock interpreters is not acceptable, it is perhaps an understandable gaffe due to a lack of understanding about the deaf community. However, the latest problem is puzzling.
On Monday, the Taiwanese Deaf Alliance and 26 other hearing loss associations called on the government to feature Taiwan Sign Language (TSL) instead of signed Mandarin in a book planned for toddlers, saying that the two systems are distinct and most deaf people communicate using TSL.
The electronic book is being developed by the Social and Family Affairs Administration to teach sign language to children aged three and younger.
Signed Mandarin, which uses Mandarin syntax and morphology, is considered an impractical language for communication. Completely independent, TSL is a visual language with its own grammatical rules. It is not a word-for-word articulation of spoken language, and makes sense primarily to visual learners.
Critics say that Mandarin has compound words and metaphorical phrases that can cause confusion when individual characters are signed. For example, a TSL sign can be used to express the Mandarin idiom mamahuhu (“so-so,” 馬馬虎虎), but signed Mandarin, which signs individual characters, expresses the phrase as “horse horse tiger tiger,” which could be incomprehensible to a young signer.
It is unclear how the administration could make such a major mistake, unless it failed to consult experts or members of the deaf community before proceeding. It should be understood that educational material should use the language of the learners.
TSL is an integral part of the nation’s deaf community and should be respected. The community is similar to an ethnic group with a native language. Native languages have greatly suffered through centuries of colonization and oppression. To impose impractical sign language on people is reminiscent of how Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese) and Amis speakers were forced to use Japanese and Mandarin in the past.
This is representative of the myriad challenges hampering the nation’s pledge to preserve and promote its native languages. The government meant well with the Development of National Languages Act (國家語言發展法). While it was a symbolic move that gave official legitimacy to these languages, effectively implementing the act and ensuring a lasting impact continues to be a problem. The issues range from how to transliterate Hoklo to the effectiveness of having only one period of instruction per day and the serious issue that the languages are not being used in daily life.
However, TSL is alive and well — it is the only means of communication for many deaf people. It is used on live television and has gained much public attention since people began tuning in to the CECC’s daily news briefings.
There is no reason for a government agency to use a completely different system of signing in a series of electronic books, as it goes against the spirit of the act and is disrespectful to the community that uses it.
If the project pushes ahead with signed Mandarin after the backlash, it will reflect the sad state of a nation being unable to live up to its lofty ideals, and another utter waste of public funds.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
RSS