Recently, the Ministry of Education announced that it would adopt the term “Taiwan Taiwanese” (台灣台語), to replace the term “Minnanese” (閩南語, “Southern Min”), as a unifying name for the language spoken in Taiwan.
I discussed this issue with some friends.
“I went to Xiamen in China in 1990 and chatted with a local. I said that his Taiwanese sounded similar to mine. He told me he speaks the Xiamen dialect of Minnanese, not Taiwanese. Taiwanese is a term only people in Taiwan use to refer to the form of Minnanese they speak, but the original term is Minnanese,” one friend said.
“As I recall, the term ‘Taiwanese’ was first coined by Japanese officials during the Japanese colonial era. At that time, prospective educators from Japan studying at Taiwan Provincial Normal Institute [now National Taiwan Normal University] were required to take Taiwanese language classes, as they were to teach Taiwanese students. Japanese police officers were also required to learn the local language so they could communicate with Taiwanese under their jurisdiction. There are several Taiwanese dictionaries that retired Japanese police have compiled,” another replied.
However, semantically, Taiwanese refers to the language of Taiwan, but Taiwan has many languages.
“The early Austronesians in Taiwan spoke 10 to 20 distinct languages. Later, immigrants from Zhangzhou and Quanzhou in China’s Fujian Province brought Minnanese of various dialects to Taiwan. The Hakka were the next ethnic group to travel in large numbers to Taiwan, bringing their own Hakka language, of which the Hailu, Sixian, Raoping, Dabu and Zhao’an are dialects. These are all languages of Taiwan, so why is only Minnanese considered Taiwanese?” one of the friends asked.
“It is because descendants of Fujian immigrants make up the majority of Taiwan’s population today,” a friend answered.
“Then why is it not called ‘Taiwanese Minnanese?’” another person asked.
“Minnanese is a discriminatory term. The Chinese character for Min (閩) contains the character for insect (chong, 虫). It was a name the early Central Plains people in China used for surrounding ethnic groups. We should not use it,” a friend answered.
“True, but this term has already become commonplace. It is fine to just keep the original meaning in mind. More than 1,100 years ago, during the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period, one of the kingdoms was called Min. Are you saying they called themselves insects?” a friend asked.
“Taiwanese and Minnanese are different languages from different language families. They contain many different terms and pronunciations,” a friend answered.
“The Zhangzhou and Quanzhou dialects have pronunciation differences. Are they also of different language families? The Hailu and Sixian dialects of Hakka also have their differences. Are they not from the same family as well?” another person asked.
“I remember when the Chinese writer Lin Yutang (林語堂) moved to Taiwan in 1965. He said hearing locals speak Minnanese in Taipei made him feel at home. Born in Fujian, his mother tongue was Minnanese and he could understand what Taiwanese were saying. Are these from different language families?” a friend asked.
“Exactly. If I can effectively converse with someone from Xiamen, why are our languages considered different language families?” one asked.
“American English, Australian English and British English all have different accents. Even their word choices sometimes differ, such as ‘football’ and ‘soccer,’ but they are all known as being part of the English language,” a friend said.
“The language Americans speak could be called ‘Americanese,’” another said.
“Sure, but they probably would not call it ‘American Americanese.’ Using ‘Taiwanese’ is one thing, but why call it ‘Taiwan Taiwanese?’ Minnanese as spoken in Singapore is called Hokkien, the word derived from the Hokkien pronunciation of the Sinitic characters for ‘Fujian.’ Why do they hot call it ‘Singapore Singaporeanese?’” the person asked.
“I also think the inclusion of ‘Taiwan’ is illogical. Should we also start saying ‘Singaporean Taiwanese,’ ‘Xiamen Taiwanese,’ or ‘Quanzhou Taiwanese?’” another asked.
“It is to distinguish Taiwan Taiwanese from ‘Taiwanese Hakka,” another said.
“Then we can say ‘Taiwanese Hakka’ and ‘Taiwanese Minnanese,’” a friend said.
“However, ‘Minnanese’ is still a discriminatory term,” another said.
“Perhaps we can use the term ‘Hokkien’ or ‘Hoklo,’” the friend replied.
The discussion went round and round with everyone having their own opinions on what to call the language spoken in Taiwan. We did not come to a conclusion.
Lee Hsiao-feng is an honorary professor at the National Taipei University of Education.
Translated by Nicole Wong
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS