During the Lunar New Year holiday, social media users were engaging in a heated debate over whether to use the phrase “Chinese New Year” or “Lunar New Year” to refer to the festival.
The issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty is at the heart of this issue, and it has me thinking about why the US’ founders never had an issue with calling the language they speak “English.” The underlying reason could be a prevailing belief in kotodama.
The Japanese word kotodama derives from koto, meaning “speech” or “word,” and tama, meaning “spirit” or “soul.” It can be roughly translated as “word spirit,” and refers to the belief that words contain spiritual power.
Kotodama is the belief that positive words hold positive power, while negative words hold negative power.
These two powers can influence a person’s environment, circumstances and well-being, meaning that if someone curses someone and wishes them death, that person might actually die.
This is why Taiwanese tend to avoid saying the Chinese word for “death.” Another example is an avoidance of the number four, whether said aloud or written.
Since the number four in Mandarin sounds similar to the Chinese word for “death,” many buildings — especially hospitals — skip the fourth floor, going right to the fifth.
The debate about the name of the Lunar New Year festival is also deeply rooted in kotodama. Taiwanese might be afraid that if they keep calling something “Chinese,” then they could become Chinese as well.
Dropping the word “Chinese” is a wishful act by Taiwan to protect its sovereign identity.
This leads to the question of how much power spoken words can carry. Although Taiwan’s official name has “China” in it — the “Republic of China” — annexation has so far been kept at bay because of the nation’s military alliance with the US and Japan.
Poet Chiu Feng-chia (丘逢甲), among others, founded the Republic of Formosa (臺灣民主國) in 1895, but having failed to garner international support and recognition, the republic that was meant to resist the transfer of power to Japan soon fell apart.
There are evidently many more elements involved in defending one’s sovereignty than just kotodama.
Still, the atheistic left-wing intelligentsia does not want to discard the kotodama idea, but bolster their superstition for language and words.
Similarly, Western baizuo — white liberal leftists — whose ideology gave birth to the term “political correctness,” also believe that when certain “incorrect” terms leave people’s mouths, disasters are unleashed.
When kotodama meets political correctness, it becomes a potent hybrid. For example, homeless people are called “street friends” in Mandarin.
While there is only one “He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named” in the world of Harry Potter, society today has far too many taboo words.
Nevertheless, I believe in the wisdom of our ancestors. As kotodama is passed from one generation to the next, we must learn a thing or two from it.
Kotodama is merely looking after the interests of the speaker. In private, I let off steam by cursing the person that I hate, and in public I use the neutral expression “street friends” to feel good about myself.
What someone calls the Lunar New Year holiday is up to them. People can keep debating, but they should know that it is a matter of preference, not an epic battle over good and evil, like when Gandalf and Saruman clash in the Lord of the Rings.
Chang Jim-way is a junior-high school teacher.
Translated by Rita Wang
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS