Li Ao on Tongyong Pinyin

Li Ao, a marginal Taiwan politician famous for his tireless mouth, penchant for off-the-cuff weirdness, and love of pissing people off, has been in China recently. At least at first, Beijing treated him like a visting dignitary of the highest order. But that cooled a little after he started talking.

Anyway, while there he touched briefly on the issue of Taiwan’s Tongyong Pinyin system.

Táiwān kǒukoushēngshēng shuō yào zǒuxiàng shìjiè, zěnme zǒu chūqu, biéren de xuélì nǐ dōu bù chéngrèn, zhè jiùshì Táiwān de bēi’āi. Xiànzài dàlù de Hànyǔ Pīnyīn shì Liánhéguó tōngguò zài yòng de, dàn Táiwān yòu zìjǐ gǎo le ge Tōngyòng Pīnyīn, shéi yàolǐ nǐ? Méi rén lǐ nǐ.

台湾口口声声说要走向世界,怎么走出去,别人的学历你都不承认,这就是台湾的悲哀。现在大陆的汉语拼音是联合国通过在用的,但台湾又自己搞了个通用拼音,谁要理你?没人理你。

He also had praise for Hu Shih, whose important accomplishments have been given short shrift in China since 1949.

I certainly wouldn’t call myself a fan of Li Ao, but I’m quite in agreement with both of these points.

source

Shanghai lawmakers propose statute restricting written usage

More from Shanghai:

Some Shanghai lawmakers think the Internet is pulling a PK on the Chinese language and fear that Mandarin will no longer shine like an MM.

Translation: Cyber argot and other languages are polluting standard Chinese, and if a draft law is passed by Shanghai People’s Congress, they will no longer be allowed in schools, official documents and business transactions.

So, Shanghai residents may soon be saying goodbye to Player Killer, which means competitor in online gaming parlance, and Mei Mei, or pretty girl.

“The new law aims to further standardize the use of the Chinese language and achieve better communication among people from different parts of the country,” Xia Xiurong, a member of the Standing Committee of Shanghai People’s Congress, said yesterday.

In her view, new phrases that haven’t been given an official definition by the language authority can lead to ambiguity, causing problems in school and at work.

The committee, which comprises the city’s top legislators, began discussing the draft law yesterday. It is expected to be adopted in the next two to three months.

If passed, schools, Chinese publishing houses and government departments will not be allowed to use non-standard phrases or abbreviations.

In addition, dialects and languages other than Mandarin cannot be used as the sole language employed by any city government department, school, social group or domestic company.

“Designating a foreign language or dialect as the only language deprives citizens of the right to learn and use the country’s language,” said Zhang Weijiang, director of the Shanghai Education Commission.

The draft also requires advertising companies to use only standard Chinese in their Mandarin promotions.

Standard Chinese constitutes the simplified characters that are found in official dictionaries, the draft said.

Offenders won’t be hauled off to jail, or even fined, however. The measure provides only that the government will seek an immediate correction.

source: City set to PK those who mess with lingo, Shanghai Daily, September 24, 2005

Peter Boodberg and the ideographic myth

I’ve been intrigued by Peter Boodberg since reading John DeFrancis’s account of the Creel-Boodberg debate. But only recently did I finally shell out the US$80 or so it currently costs to pick up a used copy of Boodberg’s selected works (compiled by Alvin P. Cohen).

But after receiving my book and doing some Web searches in preparation for this Pinyin News entry, I discovered that some of Boodberg’s works are available online (at least to some).

Jstor, an important online archive of scholarly journals, has all but the most recent editions of the Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, in which Boodberg published (between 1936 and 1957) several of his all-too-few works. While many do not have access to Jstor’s files, most of the sort of people who would be interested in reading titles like “Some Proleptical Remarks on the Evolution of Archaic Chinese” probably do — or at least know someone who does. (Try asking people at universities.) If you’re not sure if you have Jstor access or not, try any of the links in the list below.

Some works by Peter A. Boodberg available online:

Some of Boodberg’s closely argued points don’t make for easy reading, but his style should not be mistaken for dry, because he can be suprisingly direct. For example, have a look at how he introduces his refutations of some of Creel’s more naive points:

[A]s a philologist and teacher of Chinese, I am naturally perturbed by — and cannot remain indifferent to — the rise of a methodology which produces, not in comparatively innocuous special articles, but in text-books through which a new generation of sinologists is expected to be trained, puerilities such as the following….

Yeah! Alas, such puerilities still abound today, 65 years after he made those remarks.

I had wanted to post a link to the In Memorium on Boodberg by Y.R. Chao and others, but, oddly, the original page seems to have disappeared. It would be a shame if this were lost, so I’m posting a copy of the Google cache of the above page before even that is gone.

====================================

Peter Alexis Boodberg, Oriental Languages: Berkeley
1903-1972
Agassiz Professor of Oriental Languages and Literature, Emeritus

Peter Boodberg spent his boyhood in Vladivostok, where his father was commanding general of the Czarist forces. He left Vladivostok around 1920, made his way to California via Harbin and Japan, and enrolled at Berkeley as an undergraduate. When he received the Ph.D. in Oriental languages in 1930, he was already a humanistic scholar of unusual promise, superbly equipped with a knowledge of the principal ancient and modern Indo-European, Semitic, Hamitic, Altaic, Sinitic, and Malayo-Polynesian languages, with a broad acquaintance of major world cultures, with a mind that was both strikingly original and rigorously disciplined, and with a poet’s sensitivity to the nuances of language, and for the philological studies that he thought of as “the ability to conduct significant conversations with the dead.” During his early years on the Berkeley faculty, which he joined in 1932, he attracted wide professional attention with a series of erudite articles reflecting the three major areas of interest that became his permanent concerns–Sino-Altaica, early Chinese cultural history, and the classical Chinese script. By 1940 he was chairman of the Oriental languages department, which, during the entire decade, he gradually elevated to national prominence, stamping it in the process with his own passionate concern for scholarly discipline and integrity.

In the classroom, Boodberg was stimulating and provocative. His Great Books course was known throughout the University, his courses on Chinese characters and the Asiatic languages stretched the horizons of generations of undergraduate majors, and his impact on graduate students was profound and lasting. His courses were not closely organized; rather, his effectiveness as a teacher sprang from the power of his intellect, the breadth of his learning, and his ability to kindle the imagination of students and inspire them with his own scholarly ideals.

Boodberg loved the give-and-take of intellectual debate. In the 1940s, he took the lead in organizing the Colloquium Orientologicum, a faculty group with interests spanning the Asiatic continent. In the 40s and 50s the Colloquium attracted a surprisingly wide range of participants, but its prime movers were always Boodberg and a few other eminent humanists, mostly of European origin, whose far-reaching interests and lively wit made it a forum that was perhaps unique in Berkeley’s history.

Boodberg was a delightful conversationalist. The swift play of his imagination invested the most casual encounter with an aura of unpredictability, and he could usually be counted on for an amusing anecdote (typically at his own expense), delivered with his characteristic accent and high-pitched laugh. The elegance of his diction reflected what one Russian-speaking friend called “the artistic strain in Pjotr Alekseevich.” In the spacious chambers of his mind, there was room not only for the concerns of the philologist, but also for music and poetry. He had a great admiration for Gerard Manley Hopkins, whose techniques he borrowed for his own brilliant interpretations of Tu Fu; and to those who recall the delicacy and grace of his memorial tribute to Shih-Hsiang Ch’en, it will come as no surprise to learn that he composed verses in English and Russian.

Boodberg was not what is called a productive scholar. He discussed the fruits of his research in frequent public lectures, such as his presidential addresses to the American Oriental Society and its western branch (which he helped to found), and he produced, for limited distribution, numerous short technical papers, notably his “Cedules from a Berkeley Workshop in Asiatic Philology,” which are now collectors’ items, but the ambitious scope of his research projects, coupled with a certain innate diffidence, prevented what he referred to as “premature publication.” One of his long-term interests was a bold attempt to establish a complex of Western graphic symbols to represent each of the 30,000 characters of the classical Chinese script; another was a monograph on the life of Confucius, whose disciple he sometimes jokingly proclaimed himself. Despite the warmth of his personality, he had, indeed, a Confucian dignity and sense of decorum. Few people called him Peter. He was like Confucius, also, in his conviction that the proper concern of the scholar is “the meditative treasuring up of knowledge, the unwearying pursuit of wisdom, and the timeless instruction of others,” and in the affectionate respect he inspired in students and colleagues. We who knew him will not forget him or learn to bear his loss with indifference.

He leaves his sister Valentina, his wife Elena, and his daughter Xenia, a concert pianist of whom he was touchingly proud.

Yuen Ren Chao
Yakov Malkiel
Helen McCullough

Korea’s official seal

South Korea’s official chop has become cracked, worn, and should be replaced, according to government auditors there.

The 2.15 kg, 18-karat gold chop, commissioned to mark the nation’s 50th anniversary in 1998, is used to authenticate public documents and diplomatic papers, honorary certificates, and certificates of appointment.

The chop uses a “more modern font” than that of its predecessor. According to the report on this, “critics had complained that the old seal used Korean characters that looked too much like Chinese characters.”

(Emphasis added.)

Here’s the current seal:

source: Crack in seal, 6 years old, irks auditors (Joong Ang Daily, September 23, 2005)

meeting in Kunming on ‘national minority languages’

The Yunnan Ribao (Yúnnán Rìbào) reported on Wednesday that a gathering related to what in China are called “national minority languages” (i.e., non-Sinitic languages) recently concluded in Kunming.

Zuórì, quánguó shǎoshù mínzú wénzì jiàocái biānyì, shěnchá hé chūbǎn guǎnlǐ gōngzuò jīngyàn jiāoliú huì zài Kūnmíng jǔxíng. Láizì Xīnjiāng, Nèiměnggǔ, Qīnghǎi, Sìchuān děngděng 10 yú ge shěng, shì, zìzhìqū de mín wén jiàocái zhuānjiā xiānghù jiāoliú jīngyàn, wèi zhìdìng mín wén jiàocái “十一五” guīhuà jísīguǎngyì.

Jù liǎojiě, quánguó bāokuò Nèiměnggǔ, Xīnjiāng, Xīzàng jí Yúnnán děngděng 10 yú ge shǎoshù mínzú bǐjiào jízhōng de shěng jí zìzhìqū, réng zài shíxíng bùtóng chéngdu de shuāngyǔ jiàoxué, fùgài dà zhōng, xiǎo xuésheng dàyuē 600 duō wàn rén. Yǐ biānjí chūbǎn le 10 duō ge mínzú de 20 yú ge yǔzhǒng de mín wén jiàocái, měi nián chūbǎn de zhōng-xiǎoxué mín wén jiàocái yuē yǒu 3,000 duōzhǒng, zǒng yìnshù dá 1 yì duō cè. Zì 2001 nián zhì 2004 nián yǐlái, wǒ shěng cēn shěn mín wén jiàocái yǔzhǒng zhúnián zēngjiā, shěndìng zhìliàng zhúnián tígāo, gòng shěndìng 11 ge mínzú 14 ge yǔzhǒng de 151 běn mín wén jiàocái, chūbǎn 14 ge yǔzhǒng de 150 duō wàn cè mín wén jiàocái. Jīnnián, shěng Jiàoyùtīng hái jiāng duì 12 ge mínzú 15 ge yǔzhǒng de sānniánjí yǔwén xīnkè gǎi mín wén jiàocái jìnxíng biānshěn chūbǎn fāxíng. Mùqián, wǒ shěng yǐ shǐyòng yí, bái, Wǎ děng 14 ge mínzú 21 zhǒng mínzú wénzì zài mínzú dìqū zhōng-xiǎoxué kāizhǎn shuāngyǔ jiàoxué, yǒu 14 ge mínzú yòng 22 zhǒng mínzú wénzì huò pīnyīn fāng’àn jìnxíng sǎománg.

昨日,全国少数民族文字教材编译、审查和出版管理工作经验交流会在昆明举行。来自新疆、内蒙古、青海、四川等10余个省市自治区的民文教材专家相互交流经验,为制定民文教材“十一五”规划集思广益。

据了解,全国包括内蒙古、新疆、西藏及云南等10余个少数民族比较集中的省及自治区,仍在实行不同程度的双语教学,覆盖大中小学生大约600多万人。已编辑出版了10多个民族的20余个语种的民文教材,每年出版的中小学民文教材约有3000多种,总印数达1亿多册。自2001年至2004年以来,我省参审民文教材语种逐年增加,审定质量逐年提高,共审定11个民族14个语种的151本民文教材,出版14个语种的150多万册民文教材。今年,省教育厅还将对12个民族15个语种的三年级语文新课改民文教材进行编审出版发行。目前,我省已使用彝、白、佤等14个民族21种民族文字在民族地区中小学开展双语教学,有14个民族用22种民族文字或拼音方案进行扫盲。

source: Mínzú wénzì jiàocái zhuānjiā jù Kūnmíng jiāoliú (民族文字教材专家聚昆交流)

Taiwan gov’t publication in simplified characters

The Taipei Times reported on Tuesday that the recent printing of “Taipei’s Olive Branches,” a pamphlet highlighting Taiwan’s offers of goodwill toward China, marks “the first time that a [Taiwan] government publication has been issued in simplified Chinese characters.”

I’d be a little surprised if this is so. After all, for several years Taiwan has had some official government Web sites available in simplified characters, such as that of the Office of the President.

Regardless, this certainly doesn’t mean that Taiwan is about to switch to simplified characters. Most people here in Taiwan regard them as uncultured and downright ugly. On the other hand, plenty of people in China would be happy to be able to hang their signs in traditional Chinese characters.

source: MAC [Mainland Affairs Council] offers olive branches to Chinese visitors

Presbyterian Church in Taiwan

For many years, the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan has been an important voice for human rights in Taiwan, including the right of people to speak and worship in their native language.

Probably the best-established romanization system for writing Taiwanese (Hoklo, Hokkien, Minnan, etc.) is known as the “church system,” having been developed by Presbyterian missionaries. Publications are still being issued in this, as I intend to discuss in a later edition of Pinyin News.

Through the efforts of David Alexander, many writings and news releases from the church are available in English.

Articles that might be of interest to readers of Pinyin News include:

software designer on Chinese

Professor Myles Harding, inventor of the Talking Chinese Dictionary and Instant Translator, sounds like a nice guy, and heaven knows the world needs more and better programs for learning Mandarin, but I can’t let some of his statements in a recent newspaper article pass without comment.

It’s no wonder that students of Mandarin and other Sinitic languages often make so little progress, given how mistaken their teachers and the designers of their learning materials are about the nature of the Sinitic languages and Chinese characters. Let’s take a look.

The very first paragraph, short though it is, contains many serious errors.

‘Take the English word ‘jealous’,” Professor Myles Harding says. “In Chinese, it consists of four characters or pictographs that translate as ‘fighting the wind and drinking vinegar’.”

First, conflating Chinese characters and pictographs is seriously misleading. Contrary to popular belief, pictographs represent only about 1 percent of Chinese characters. Let me repeat that: a mere 1 percent. And the greater the number of characters created, the smaller that percentage gets.

Also, many of those characters that did begin as pictographs no longer particularly resemble the object they are supposed to picture. So, counting them as pictographs is not particularly relevant, especially because that is not how experienced readers see/read them. As John DeFrancis succinctly put it:
QUESTION: When is a pictograph not a pictograph?
ANSWER: When it represents a sound.

Even many of the original forms — i.e. those closest to true pictographs — would still leave most people guessing. Most people have to have the identity pointed out before they can recognize what the so-called pictograph represents.

And not in any language are words made of Chinese characters. Chinese characters are a script, not a language, just as the Roman alphabet is a script, not a language. By saying that a word “consists of four Chinese characters” Harding is voicing (most likely inadvertantly) the notion that somehow Chinese characters are the “real” language (some sort of Platonic ideal), and that what people speak to each other is a bastardization of this. The outstanding linguist Peter Du Ponceau exploded this myth nearly two hundred years ago; yet it survives. (The Chinese and Japanese seem to have picked up this myth from Westerners, such as Ernest Fenollosa.)

Some people might think I’m being a bit picky about the wording here. But I’m being that way only because people tend to hear what they expect to hear; and as long as the myths continue to thrive, that’s what people will have reinforced unless they’re given the truth. These distinctions do matter.

Although I’ve already gone on at some length about the problems here, we’re still not finished with the first paragraph.

In speaking of the “word” for “jealous,” Harding appears to be referring to zhēngfēngchīcù (爭風吃醋), a Mandarin term that in English means “fight for the affection of a man or woman” and “be jealous of a rival in a love affair.”

But that’s hardly the same thing as the Mandarin word for “jealous,” of which there are several, perhaps the most common of which is simply dùjì.

The Swinburne University mathematician chortles with delight: “Isn’t that a wonderful way of expressing jealousy? You could study Chinese for six years at school and four years at university and never learn that expression – but with my system you can.”

This points to the fact that zhēngfēngchīcù isn’t really the word for “jealous.” Can you imagine studying a language for ten years and not learning such a relatively common word as “jealous”? Similarly, people studying English wouldn’t necessarily learn “pushing up daisies” — but it’s extremely unlikely they wouldn’t have encountered and learned the English word “dead.”

Professor Harding has designed CD-ROM-based software that provides instant translation of complex character combinations in Chinese, one of the world’s most difficult languages.

The language is not necessarily “difficult” in itself. (And no language is difficult to its native speakers.) Rather it is Chinese characters that are difficult — damn hard, even. Making matters worse, most people misunderstand the nature of Chinese characters, which has warped people’s understanding of the language itself, making it much more difficult for students to learn.

“In Chinese, the words aren’t spaced, so I had to figure out a way of using the computer to split the stream of characters into words. My system does that, splits them up, colours the words and separates them so the student can put the mouse on them, click and get the meaning of the fragments in a sentence and piece it together.”

Devising a computer program to do this took Professor Harding 18 months, mostly working at night. Eventually, he developed a system he thought could be adapted to make an English-Chinese, Chinese-English dictionary.

But to look up a Chinese word can take a long time because more than 10,000 are commonly used.

Unlike English, the words don’t start with A or B or any of the other letters of the alphabet.

Unless the text is written in romanization, of course. And unless the dictionary is arranged completely alphabetically, like the entries in the ABC Chinese-English Comprehensive Dictionary, the fact of the matter is that Chinese dictionaries are relatively difficult to use, as even editors of such dictionaries have admitted.

Chinese people who have seen Professor Harding’s system are amazed: “They say things like, ‘Oh, I’ve been looking for that character for years and never been able to find it!’ ”

This statement provides an excellent anecdote on the difficulty of reading and writing characters — and, as above, of the difficulties of Chinese dictionaries.

“This system enables the student to start reading Chinese from day one. It takes the difficulty out of knowing the characters; it highlights them so you get used to the word order and learn how Chinese people think.”

Umm….

Then there are the millions of people in China who want to learn English. As Professor Harding says, for every student learning Chinese there are 1000 or more Chinese who want to learn English.

This, however, is quite true.