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
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS