Today is UN Chinese Language Day, a celebration honoring the richness of the Chinese script. The date was chosen to coincide with guyu (“grain rain”), a traditional solar term (half-month seasonal division) starting on April 20 when ancient Chinese paid tribute to Cangjie (倉頡), the legendary figure credited with inventing Chinese characters about 5,000 years ago.
Legend has it that when Cangjie created the characters for writing, millet grains rained from the sky and the ghosts and gods wept at night — a poetic testament to the profound cultural significance of Chinese writing.
Yet, in English, this monumental writing system remains shackled to an inadequate term: “Chinese characters.” Unlike cuneiform (“wedge-shaped”) or hieroglyphics (“sacred carvings”) — names that evoke the distinct essence of ancient scripts — “Chinese character” is vague, impersonal and oddly detached from its cultural roots. The word “character” is ambiguous in itself — it could refer to a person’s traits, a fictional role, something’s characteristics, or a symbol used in writing or printing.
Chinese script deserves a term that reflects its uniqueness.
I propose a linguistic reclamation: Let us adopt “hanzi” as the standard English term, casting aside the imprecise placeholder we have tolerated for too long.
Japanese writing has its native terms — kanji (derived from hanzi, 漢字), hiragana and katakana. The Korean Hangul, although unique, was designed with hanja (hanzi) as its reference. Even cuneiform and hieroglyphics are named with reverence for their origins. Why, then, must the script that inspired them all remain obscured behind the generic veil of “Chinese character”? It is as if we insisted on calling kanji “Japanese symbols” or hieroglyphics “Egyptian letters” — a disservice to their cultural and historical significance.
This is also a question of identity. The term hanzi is direct, authentic and resonant — just as kanji and Hangul are for their respective scripts. An alternative, sinograph (from the Greco-Latin Sino for “Chinese” and graph for “writing”), exists in academic circles, but its clinical tone renders it ill-suited for everyday use. Hanzi, by contrast, carries the warmth of tradition and the clarity of linguistic pride.
I urge academics, translators and cultural advocates to join this call. Let “hanzi” stand as the primary term, with “sinograph” serving where academic precision is needed, and “Chinese character” fading into supplementary explanation.
Words shape perception. Let ours, at last, do justice to one of humanity’s greatest intellectual achievements.
Hugo Tseng has a doctorate in linguistics, and is a lexicographer and former chair of the Soochow University English Department.
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
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.
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
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
RSS