kanji typo contest

Red-faced typo tyros up for prize over Kanji clangers

Will the winner be the blunder that turned an “easy victory after five seasons” into “cockroach extermination,” or perhaps the gaffe that transformed a “regional athletic gathering” into a “tip-off meeting?”

Thanks to the quirks of the Japanese language, a single misplaced keystroke can totally transform the way a sentence reads depending on the kanji characters the writer selects.

And now, the Japan Kanji Aptitude Testing Foundation is holding a poll where competitors can vote for their favorite mistaken phrase that results from a mistyped sentence, with the winner to take home the Annual Typo Award.

Typing Japanese involves inputting simple hiragana characters and converting them into kanji. More people are now using computers to write and, unless watching the conversion closely, there is a possibility of the sentence coming out drastically different from the intended result.

Since July last year, the foundation has been seeking public submissions of wacky sentences created by conversion typos, awarding a monthly prize and a blunder prize from the 5,946 entries received.

The foundation has selected what it considers the best 22 entries — including the one that turned an “easy victory after five seasons” into “cockroach extermination” (both can be read gokiburi kaisho) — and has asked for votes from members of the general public on the entry they like best.

Voting is carried out on the foundation’s contest site until Aug. 31. Winners will be announced on the contest page on Sept. 15.

—————————

年間変漢ミスコン:「チクリ苦情大会?」愉快な変換ミス

 チクリ苦情大会を開き、ゴキブリ解消しました--?? 実はこれ、「地区陸上大会」と「5季ぶり快勝」の漢字変換ミス。日本漢字能力検定協会は、愉快な変換ミス作品の中から大賞の「年間変漢賞」を選ぶコンテストの投票を受け付けている。あなたも選んでみませんか。

 このコンテストは、パソコンで文章を書く人が増える中、漢字を正しく使うことの大切さを改めて確認するのが狙い。

 昨年7月から公募し、計5946作品が集まった。毎月、月間賞と次点を決めてきたが、今回は、その22作品から最もおもしろいと思うものをオンライン投票で選ぶ。投票は31日まで。

 投票には登録が必要。9月15日に大賞が決まり、ホームページで発表される。

source

some more on the romanization debate in Taiwan

I’ve fallen behind on posting lately. So to help make up for that I’ll post some pieces, though I’ll have to put off commenting on them until later.

是誰在扼殺台灣的羅馬字教育?(上)◎許極燉
台灣日報 2005-07-28 01:00

台灣四百年來,一直沒有自己的國家,因而也就沒能有過自己的語文政策、制度。以往羅馬字的教育幾乎操之在傳教士的手裡,教材多屬於宗教(尤以聖經)的東西,對於教化人心與台灣語言的保存自有其貢獻。戰前,教會人蔡培火曾經「賣命」地推廣教會羅馬字,戰後大轉向,當了國府的政務委員,全面否定教羅改用ㄅㄆㄇ出版了《國語閩南語對照常用詞典》(1969)。蔡培火的這種負面示範,對教羅以及羅馬字教育是一大棒喝!

台灣的羅馬字教育,華語方面完全乏善可陳,台語方面一直到十幾年前僅在教會圈內孤軍奮鬥,始終未能被廣大的社會所接受。推究其原因,諸如外來政權對母語的打壓,對漢字的獨尊而抵制羅馬字,以及羅馬字系統本身的缺陷問題等。所以,即使在母語教學開始(2001)以後,三大套台語羅馬字當中,教羅的被接受度每況愈下,而依恃教育部公佈的TLPA(1998),頭一年相當看好,豈料「後繼乏力」,眼看「後起之秀」的通用拼音系統人氣節節昇高,以至於跟兩派分庭抗禮,先前採用TLPA教學的母語教師紛紛「轉向」改採通用。市場門可羅雀的教羅不易立足小學的教室,除了跟TLPA在大專的教室發揮「威權」的專業之外,同時聯起手來兇狠地打擊共同的敵人通用拼音。於是在出版商(金安出版社)的「錢助」之下出版了《通用M通用》,又在網路流傳一篇〈破除通用迷思,成全母語教育〉(李勤岸),誣告通用拼音通中國,是「披台灣皮的中國狼」,是「江湖術士、是大騙子」,是「外行人、不是(語學)專業」….。

(二)連署中的整合案的假象

這幾天「南方快報」的網路正在流傳李勤岸氏發動的「破除自我,成全母語教育」的連署文件。昨天(7.17)自由時報的「星期專欄」作者向陽氏積極推介並呼籲整合羅馬拼音挽救台灣語文。向陽氏語重心長卻掉入了李氏的「陷阱」。蓋他在文的開頭對李氏耍弄障眼法魔術未能識破;先是引介李氏的語言﹃ 運用這套已整合成功的台灣羅馬拼音來編寫教材,以利母語教育的進一步推動﹄,然後呼籲說:﹃如果…坐下來就分歧之處加以整合取得共識…﹄。這前後顯然矛盾,先說已經整合成功,後說「呼籲」坐下來整合…。可見李氏的語言術如何高明了。

原來李勤岸是把先前在網路徵求連署的《打破通用迷思,成全母語教育》的「公開信」,換掉標題的前半,再把原文中佔45%的辱罵又誣告通用拼音的惡言惡語拿掉而已。經手術過的公開信清清楚楚地寫著:﹃最近教會羅馬字、TLPA、TLPA改良式已經捐棄成見,…整合出一套合乎語音學原理,易教易學的台灣羅馬拼音系統﹄,又說﹃呼籲教育部趕緊公布定案,運用這套已經整合成功的台灣羅馬字拼音來編寫母語教材…﹄。

(作者為日本台灣語言文化協會會長)

The above was followed a day later by this:

台語羅馬字教育的危機與轉機——台語羅馬拼音整合案的虛與實(下)◎許極燉
台灣日報 2005-07-29 00:40

顯然李氏在展示教羅、TLPA和TLPA改良式三者已經整合成功為「台灣羅馬拼音」了。向陽氏卻還在為文「呼籲」要整合!而且,尤甚者,據我打電話確認某些連署者,原來連署者未過目文件,只知要整合,不知已經整合成功。而連署大多是用電話確認,只贊成「要」整合而已。原來如此,莫怪連署者踴躍!

問題的嚴重性在於李氏所言之“整合成功”的內容並未見於連署文中,連署者知之者有幾人?如是觀之,連署者豈非有「受騙」的感覺囉。就我所知,所謂整合成功乃是教羅∕TLPA某些人,尤其是國語會有5名委員5月中在國語會提案要修正TLPA,一共有10項,其中5項仍須商榷,而且,所謂的整合是中途半端曖昧不明,即教羅和TLPA二派的主張形同「苟合」,實質上不能視為整合。惟有一項可以肯定者,教羅長期以來使用的複母韻(介母音o)如oa,oe改為 ua,ue是正確的。 (三)教羅∕TLPA「不自知之明」?

教羅是阿片戰爭前後英國傳教士為了在中國東南方言地區傳教,發明的羅馬拼音系統,王育德博士的評論是:﹃將英語的正字法適度加以編排而已…,似未採「精密的語音觀察→理論的音位分析→實際的正字法」﹄,又說:﹃教會羅馬字不過是對漢字很忠實地加以注音的發音符號而已﹄,然後斷言說: ﹃顯然是受到漢字的影響,淪落為漢字的奴隸,不是把語言當做語言來把握的態度﹄(見王著《台灣話講座》第五講)。

教羅自1837年梅得哈的《福建方言字典》(不是詞典)出現以來160多年,歷經多次修訂,還是在替漢字注音,雖然也用來拼寫閩南語廈門音,與其說是文字毋寧說是音標。因為它是按一個音節(即一個漢字)一個音節地拼注讀音,遇到多音節詞再在音節間加連號“—”,例如:Tai-oan- lang(台灣人,Taiwanese)是一個詞,偏要分割,顯然是替漢字注音,何不用「Taiuanlang」?聲調符號用法不僅標本調增加教學的負擔,又未能反映實際語音,況且有的不妥(跟華語對格)有的明顯錯誤,例如陽平調是略降後上昇,教羅卻認定為上昇後下降,把“ˇ”定為“〈”;台灣兩字均為 ˇ調,卻定成〈調。

教羅要否修訂是教會的代誌,可是TLPA人士奮勇挑戰而引起大反彈。其實過去不滿教羅而另起爐灶者頗不乏人。近則有通用拼音,竟然引來教羅TLPA兩派的敵對。

TLPA雖然修訂了教羅拼音,只進步了一丁點,而用數字標本調,更注定不適做文字(只做音標)的命運。而且這兩派對華語、客語的羅馬拼音幾乎置之不理,對於通用拼音關照華語,則說是「通中國」,甚至認為華語乃非法的語言(李勤岸語,見《通用M通用》)。其實語言本身無罪,會犯罪的是惡用語言的人。

(四)創造危機後的轉機

台語的羅馬字因為不滿意教羅的缺陷起而挑戰的,何止數十套(我就設計過2~3套),其中影響較大的是TLPA和通用。如今TLPA和所謂「TLPA改良式」(其實是金安出版社既要採用TLPA,又要吸取通用的優點湊成者)願和教羅整合值得肯定。祇是所謂的整合仍躊躇在「苟合」狀態,想必能有所克服實現真正的整合。

這麼一來就祇剩下兩套。惟現在面臨了另一個危機,即是李勤岸氏等人正在發動的連署整合案。表面上是說「要」坐下來整合,實則暗渡陳倉地在連署文中寫明已經整合完成,卻又不公開整合案,也未將文案在連署前先給連署者過目。結果,許多有識之士認為「要」整合,贊同不後人(我也會支持),哪知是要“接受”已經成胎形的整合案。這種「誘導」式的徵求連署不怕被質疑為「詐騙」?

通用拼音不但為台語的注音音標著眼,更為正字法做文字絞腦汁,所以是拼寫詞語,不是注漢字音,要標自然調(變調注變調,不變調注本調)。切實反映語言,直接教學避免變調的教學負擔,促進教學成效。字母方面ptk3字配合英語讀送氣音ㄆㄊㄎ。一方面關照華語與客語,尊重多族群的多元語言文化價值。教羅TLPA不曾為華客語仗義執言,難道要採用中共的漢語拼音?

(作者為日本台灣語言文化協會會長)

forthcoming book on Chinese psycholinguistics

Cambridge University Press is due to release an interesting-sounding title in April 2006: The Handbook of East Asian Psycholinguistics: Volume 1, Chinese. The editors are Ping Li of the University of Richmond, Virginia; Elizabeth Bates, of the University of California, San Diego; Li Hai Tan of the University of Hong Kong; and Ovid Tzeng, of National Yangming University, Taipei.

A second volume released at the same time will cover Japanese.

Here are the contents for the volume on Chinese:

  1. Language Acquisition:
    • “Actions and results in the acquisition of Cantonese verbs” — Sik Lee Cheung and Eve V. Clark;
    • “Chinese children’s knowledge of binding principles” — Yu-Chin Chien and Barbara Lust;
    • “Chinese classifiers: their use and acquisition” — Mary Erbaugh;
    • “Child language acquisition of temporality in Mandarin Chinese” — Chiung-chih Huang;
    • “Second language acquisition by native Chinese speakers” — Gisela Jia;
    • “Making explicit children’s implicit epilanguage in learning to read Chinese” — Che Kan Leong;
    • “Emergent literacy skills in Chinese” — Catherine McBride-Chang and Yiping Zhong;
    • “Basic syntactic categories in early language development” — Rushen Shi;
    • “Growth of orthography-phonology knowledge in the Chinese writing system” — Hua Shu and Ningning Wu;
    • “Interaction of biological and environmental factors in phonological learning” — Stephanie Stokes;
    • “The importance of verbs in Chinese” — Twila Tardif;
    • “Grammar acquisition via parameter setting” — Charles Yang;
    • “Early bilingual acquisition in the Chinese context” — Virginia Yip;
  2. Language Processing:
    • “Word form encoding in Chinese speech production” — Jenn-Yeu Chen and Gary S. Dell;
    • “Effects of semantic radical consistency and combinability on the Chinese character processing” — May Jane Chen, Brendan S Weekes, Danling Peng and Qin Lei;
    • “Eye movement in Chinese reading: basic processes and cross-linguistic differences” — Gary Feng;
    • “The Chinese character in psycholinguistic research: form, structure and the reader” — Douglas Honorof and Laurie Feldman;
    • “Perception and production of Chinese tones” — Allard Jongman, Yue Wang, Corinne B. Moore and Joan A. Sereno;
    • “Phonological mediation in visual word recognition in English and Chinese” — In-mao Liu, Jei-tun Wu, Iue-ruey Sue and Sau-chin Chen;
    • “Reading Chinese characters: orthography, phonology, meaning and the textual constituency model” — Charles A. Perfetti and Ying Liu;
    • “Processing of characters by native Chinese readers” — Marcus Taft;
    • “L2 acquisition and the processing of Mandarin tones” — Yue Wang, Joan A. Sereno and Allard Jongman;
    • “The comprehension of coreference in Chinese discourse” — Chin Lung Yang, Peter C. Gordon and Randall Hendrick;
    • “Lexical ambiguity resolution in Chinese sentence processing” — Yaxu Zhang, Ningning Wu and Michael Yip;
  3. Language and the Brain:
    • “The relationship between language and cognition” — Terry Kit-fong Au;
    • “Language processing in bilinguals as revealed by functional imaging: a contemporary synthesis” — Michael W. L. Chee;
    • “Specific language impairment in Chinese” — Paul Fletcher, Stephanie Stokes and Anita M.-Y. Wong;
    • “Brain mapping of Chinese speech prosody” — Jackson T. Gandour;
    • “Modelling language acquisition and representation in connectionist networks” — Ping Li;
    • “The manifestation of aphasia syndromes in Chinese” — Jerome L. Packard;
    • “Naming of Chinese phonograms: from cognitive science to cognitive neuroscience” — Dan-ling Peng and Hua Jiang;
    • “How the brain reads the Chinese language: recent neuroimaging findings” — Li Hai Tan and Wai Ting Siok;
  4. Epilogue: A tribute to Elizabeth Bates.

pro-Hanyu Pinyin Taipei mayor elected head of KMT

On July 16 Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou was elected KMT chairman by a wide margin. Ma was behind Taipei’s welcome switch from bastardized Wade-Giles to Hanyu Pinyin.

Most advocates of Tongyong Pinyin, which Taiwan’s central government has adopted but not made mandatory throughout the country, like to tout the made-in-Taiwan aspect of their system. This is simply another way to oppose China. And perhaps the KMT of today, with its relatively cozy good relations with Beijing, would indeed generally favor Hanyu Pinyin. But it’s important to remember that the KMT in the past opposed Hanyu Pinyin. The KMT government’s decision back in 1986 to come up with a new romanization system was a direct result of the growing popularity of Hanyu Pinyin elsewhere and an increased understanding in Taiwan of the failure — at least in implementation — of Gwoyeu Romatzyh. So MPS2 was devised in reaction to Hanyu Pinyin. Predictably, it received little attention or support despite its nominally official status. In the end MPS2 was used basically nowhere but on some street signs. And so Tongyong Pinyin replaced another system that was already made in Taiwan.

If the KMT had backed Hanyu Pinyin a long time ago, the romanization situation in Taiwan wouldn’t be such a mess.

I believe Ma’s support for Hanyu Pinyin is not the result of politics but a recognition that the system is what the majority of Taiwan’s foreign population wants.

A note here on Ma’s preferred spelling of his name. In hanzi it is 馬英九. In Hanyu Pinyin it would be Mǎ Yīngjiǔ. But the standard romanization of his name is “Ma Ying-jeou.” The “jeou” certainly evokes the Gwoyeu Romatzyh tonal spelling system. But in GR Ma’s name would be Maa Ingjeou. Very curious.

Singapore to begin new Mandarin curriculum

SINGAPORE : 25 primary schools will introduce the new [Mandarin] Chinese language curriculum from January next year.

The pilot programme will involve all students in Primary 1 and 2.

Anglo-Chinese Junior (ACS) hopes to be among the first to try out the new approach to learning Mandarin where emphasis will be on character recognition and oral skills.

All students will take a core module which makes up about 70% of the curriculum, with bridging modules for weak students and enrichment classes for those with ability and interest.

But the majority will take on, what the Ministry calls, a school-based module.

“Teachers can use part of the enrichment or bridging modules provided. They can also design their own school-based materials. This helps bring about better customization,” said Yue Lip Sin, Deputy Director of the Education Ministry.

Schools can break up the classes, so students can attend a separate [Mandarin] Chinese class with those of the same abilities through the year.

They can also teach the core curriculum as per normal and put certain students in the add-on modules for certain lessons each week.

Primary 1 students will be banded by their teachers only after they have finished learning “Hanyu Pinyin”.

Teachers at ACS expect about 20% to take up the bridging module and 10% for the enrichment class.

They add that the concept of ability banding is not new to them.

“When we group the pupils of similar abilities together, the teachers are able to design lessons that cater to their needs. They will be able to spark their interest in the learning of [Mandarin] Chinese,” said Lye Choon Hwan, Head of the Mother Tongue Department at ACS

Students will be assessed based on the core syllabus and schools have the autonomy to decide on the methods of assessment.

But the ministry emphasized that what is more important is helping students develop a love for the language, without making it unchallenging.

The ministry will announce the schools in the pilot scheme later this year and implement the new curriculum in all primary schools by 2007.

source: Channel News Asia

“Crazy English” and Chinese nationalism

Japan’s Asahi Shimbun has an article that includes a discussion of the “Crazy English” (Fēngkuáng Yīngyǔ / 瘋狂英語 / 疯狂英语) movement: Chinese patriots burn with English fever. Like so much else in China, the movement is infused with patriotism (or scary nationalism, depending on your perspective) and cultural chauvinism (tricky to pull off when the subject is learning a foreign language).

“English is merely a tool for earning money. It’s an inferior language that relies on an alphabet with just 26 letters. How can it even compare to our language, with a sea of Chinese characters?”

So cackled a loudspeaker recently on the grounds of a junior high school in a tiny town in China’s southern Hebei province.

Wild applause broke out from the crowd of 8,000 junior and senior high school students. A red banner across the basketball court proclaimed: “Never let your country down.”

The rousing speaker was Li Yang, purveyor of a unique method of English study: shouting. Using Li’s “Crazy English” method, devised about 10 years ago, students spout short sentences loudly and at rapid-fire speed, over and over again.

The author of well over 100 books, the charismatic Li gives about 300 lectures a year around the country. About 30 million people have taken his courses.

His motivational secret is a single, yet simple principle: “Mastering English and thereby enriching our country is an act of patriotism.”

The sentiment has proved popular. The darling of China’s English-teaching world, Li considers himself a patriot, first and foremost.

“I promote the love-thy-country angle because I don’t want our people to forget China after they acquire English,” he explains. “I want them to use English and spread Chinese as a world language.”

proposal to allow teaching in English in Taiwan high schools

Taiwan Headlines has a story taken from the Taiwan News: MOE to allow classes taught in English at senior high level.

The Ministry of Education has proposed that senior high schools here be allowed to offer courses taught in English, in an effort to help attract high-tech professionals back to Taiwan.

The policy is part of a draft amendment to the Senior High School Law that is scheduled to be sent to the Legislature for review by the end of this year.

If the Legislature passes the amendment, high schools are likely to hire an increasing number of foreign teachers….

While participating high schools could decide which courses are taught in English and which are taught in Chinese, they would still be required to submit the proposed curriculum to the ministry, which would have the final say, Chen said.

Bilingual courses have been implemented in some experimental elementary schools, junior high schools and universities in Taiwan. The extension of this kind of bilingual teaching to senior high schools would fill a gap in the local education system, the ministry said.

The existence of a consistent bilingual teaching program from the elementary to the university level would help attract sorely needed high-tech professionals, said Kuo Nein-hsiung, deputy director general of the Ministry of Economic Affairs’ Industrial Development Bureau….

“While we can fill some of the spots from our own education system, there will still be a shortage of about 5,000 people,” Kuo said. “As the educational environment for children is of concern to high-tech employees, building a bilingual study environment would be an incentive to attract people to work in Taiwan.”

One principal who was interviewed, however, noted that schools are unlikely to be able to afford to hire foreign teachers.