As the Latin name of Taiwan’s premier academic institution, Academia Sinica, translates into “Chinese Academy,” some of its members are calling for a name change to avoid confusion, but media reports have said that all those being considered are English-language names.
While serving at the academy, my affiliation was always listed at the end of every research paper as “Institute of Mathematics, Academia Sinica.” The first half of the author affiliation was in English and the second half in Latin, a mix that really is neither fish nor fowl.
As not many of those in the academy’s institutes can translate the names of their institutes into Latin, it seems more convenient to translate the name of the academy into English.
Why was the academy’s name translated into Latin when it was established in 1928? The main reason was that Latin was the language of academia until the middle of the 19th century.
Great mathematicians, such as Carl Gauss and Georg Riemann, all wrote their papers in Latin.
Next, German became the dominant language in math, until World War II when its dominance was usurped by English — which shows that whichever language academia considers to be the international language is changeable.
Another reason the academy’s name was translated into Latin is that Latin was the common language of the ancient world.
Still, the status of international languages changes over time. French, which was the lingua franca until World War II, has been replaced by English — although French is still the language used for international exchanges on postal affairs.
Today, English is the world’s common language.
The UK used to be the “empire on which the sun never sets,” and the US has been a superpower since World War II. As the two nations have English in common, English has become today’s lingua franca, not without implying a certain hegemonic power.
During the Cold War era, countries in the Soviet Union used Russion as a common language, so, against this backdrop, the Latin translation of the academy’s name helped avoid hegemonic connotations, as Latin was by then a neutral language.
Unfortunately, the complexity of Latin grammar has led to its disuse, to the point that it has almost exclusively become the language of the Catholic Church, rendering inappropriate a Latinate name such as “Academia Taiwanica.”
In 1887, Polish ophthalmologist Ludwik Zamenhof created the language Esperanto, which he intended to be used as a universal lingua franca.
Esperanto is easy to learn, can be used for academic discussions, and is not the mother tongue of any country or people.
In the past few years, the number of Esperanto learners has sharply risen. Even the UN has used it. UNESCO published a book titled De ideoj al agoj, 70 jaroj de UNESKO to mark the organization’s 70th anniversary in 2015.
Esperanto has received little attention in Taiwan — fewer than 100 Taiwanese can speak it.
However, Wu Rwei-ren (吳叡人), an associate research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of Taiwan History, is one of them.
Esperanto is a developing, democratic language. As the US is one of the world’s primary democracies, many Americans are learning Esperanto.
The academy should adopt a name in Esperanto, such as “Tajvana Akademio” or “Centra Esplora Akademia Tajvana.” It could even be renamed “Centra Esplora Akademio, Tajvano” to avoid conflict between the pan-blue and pan-green camps.
Wang Ju-kwei is a retired professor of National Central University’s Department of Mathematics.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS