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
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS