On June 6, Legislator Chen Pei-yu (陳培瑜) inquired about the suggestion that Taiwan Taiyu (台灣台語, Taiwan Taiwanese) be used alongside Minnanyu (閩南語, “Southern Min”) as the name for the language in government documents.
On July 18, the Ministry of Culture said at a conference that it would use “Taiwan Taiwanese.” The decision spurred a flurry of dissatisfied commentary by Hakka-language educators and social groups who were firmly opposed to using the term Taiwan Taiwanese in official government documentation.
Regarding how languages are legally referred to, Article 3 of the National Language Development Act (國家語言發展法) states that a “‘national language’ as referred to in this act shall mean the natural languages and sign languages used by the different ethnic groups in Taiwan.”
As for the naming conventions for a “national language,” apart from Mandarin and Taiwanese Sign Language, the issue of shifting from using the term Minnanyu in official documentation has been endlessly argued in the past few years due to political factors. Those who want to maintain the term Minnanyu prioritize preserving objective linguistic terminologies and the historical record.
The Ministry of Education has used Minnanyu for more than 28 years and its application has been used for 10 years in the naming of its Taiwanese Language Proficiency Test. Those opposed to using the term say it is tinged with a pejorative meaning.
The language’s localization in Taiwan over the past 400 years has produced noticeable differences between it and the other languages in the Southern Min language family. They say they should have the right to name their own language as they wish.
However, the crux of the debate is the government’s naming convention in official documentation, not the name of the language in a colloquial sense. If used colloquially, people of course have the right to call what they want.
However, when it comes to government documentation, Hakka speakers say that Hakka is also Taiwanese (台語, Taiyu). The common term Taiyu cannot be used solely by one population group within Taiwan and so they are opposed to the names Taiwan Taiwanese or Taiwan Taiyu.
Those who have ancestry tracing back to Fujian who speak Taiwanese say that the Chinese character for Min (閩) is a pejorative character composed of the simpler characters for a gate (門) — something to keep unwanted or uncivilized people out — and a worm or insect (虫). Therefore, they oppose the term Minnanyu.
As there is such fierce debate over the term, there is a possible solution: A third way between Taiyu and Minnanyu.
Hoklor Taiwanese (福佬台語) is problematic because while many Hakka speakers do not oppose using the term, the character “lor” (佬) has a pejorative connotation that refers to thievery, deception, blindness or being an uneducated country hick.
However, using the term “Hok Taiwanese” (福台語, Futaiyu) could be a solution. The character “hok,” or “fu” (福), has four basic contextual meanings or references:
It gives a historical reference to Taiwan’s first foreign name: Formosa (福爾摩沙); it provides a Hakka perspective: Hoklor Taiwanese (福佬); it provides a post-1949 Chinese emigres and Fujian Province perspective (福建); and it has connotations of being fortuitous (福氣).
“Hok Taiwanese” integrates ethnic perspectives and could be used by all groups in Taiwan without too much fuss.
Whenever the discussion does not involve interethnic arguments, many groups in Taiwan might use the shorter name “Taiwanese” internally to describe their own language. In 2005, during the 16th session of the education ministry’s National Languages Committee, a motion was proposed to switch to using Hok Taiwanese instead of Minnanyu.
However, proponents of Taiwanese phonetic spelling were adamant about using the term Minnanyu and were opposed to using the ingenious proposal, ultimately causing the motion’s failure to pass. Currently, the members are opposed to the use of Minnanyu in naming conventions, so perhaps now might be a suitable time to pass a proposal to use the term Hok Taiwanese in official government documentation.
Lai Chin-he is a former director of the New Taipei City Hakka Affairs Department and a former school principal. Boris B.C. Yu is president of the Taiwan Languages and Culture Association and convener of the Central Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Tim Smith
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS