Taipei’s MRT subway signs have recently been internationalized, with Japanese and Korean being added to the existing Chinese and English texts. Meanwhile, signage across China has gradually undergone “de-Anglicization” — the elimination of the English language — turning from bilingual to Chinese only, thus forming a sharp contrast between the two countries. While Taiwan is going international, China appears to be locking itself off from the world.
The decline in Chinese tourists has led the Taiwanese government to promote tourism to other countries. With the increase in foreign tourists, the Taipei MRT has been adding Japanese and Korean to the original Chinese and English signage to make travel more convenient for foreigners. This is a change that Taiwan has made as it tries to move from the Chinese market to the global market, so as not to fall into a tourism crisis due to a lack of Chinese travelers.
Meanwhile, China has changed its highway signs from bilingual to solely Chinese due to its leaders’ preferences. This change has also made its way into schools, where it has started reducing the influence of foreign languages such as English. From banning English as a subject from final exams in elementary schools to limiting elementary-school students’ maximum tutoring hours at English-language institutes, the traces of Beijing’s “de-Anglicization” is visible in almost every aspect of life. This has also led to the closure of online tutoring platforms in China, as they flee to other Chinese-speaking regions to make ends meet.
From these examples, it could be seen that Taiwan is moving toward internationalization and globalization, while broadening its vision to avoid the impact of a single market on its economic development.
The government has also strengthened bilingual education for children to cultivate an international outlook, and an understanding of various foreign cultures through language.
By contrast, China is moving toward “de-Anglicization.” Although the authorities claim that this is to enhance Chinese cities’ image and a sense of national identity among citizens, they are actually giving up the nation’s future competitiveness. In an era of diminishing demographic dividends, would China’s approach result in a more depressed domestic economy and an accelerated outflow of foreign companies from China? The impacts from this could be seen in China’s surging youth unemployment rate and the massive withdrawal of foreign firms. If Beijing persists with its “de-Anglicization” campaign, its economy might go from bad to worse.
Taiwan’s and China’s traffic signs also demonstrate the completely different policy thinking of the two countries. China has used official propaganda to cover up the crisis brought about by its “de-Anglicization” and exaggerated its people’s self-confidence. In doing so, its next generation might eventually lose its international competitiveness.
As for Taiwan, through bilingual education and bilingualization or multilingualization of signage, its next generation would be more accustomed to the use of foreign languages, and would be able to boost its national competitiveness. As a result, Taiwan and China would be on two very different paths, and the former is expected to achieve greater success.
Yang Feng-jung is an interior designer.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS