taigu "Henry Tan-Tenn"

taigu "Henry Tan-Tenn" 
[E-kha si goa tui Thong-iong e khoaN-hoat (Engbun), chhiaN chi-kau.]


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tony Chu
> To:  ; 
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 5:40 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: æ¯æåèªæ建議çè¯èªéç¨æ¼é³
>
>
> Hi, Henry, Kent, Kuei-Hsien, Wi-Vun and others:
> Henry and Wi-Vun pointed out the same website at the Academic Sinica.
It
> is great! I cannot believe that Tseng once said something pro-Tongyong.
I
> consider that his real thought was to adopt Hanyu for Mandarin as THE
> official language and its modification (what he called as the principle
like
> using Tongyong) for the other languages in Taiwan.
=========================

Mandarin *is* the official language by virtue of it being *the* National
Language.

> On the bargaining table, this deal is very possible to end up that two
> systems, Hanyu and Tongyong, depending on what language is used on what
> occasion, are accepted simultaneously. All the Mandarin-related goes to
> Hanyu and the others to Tongyong. This means that the use of Tongyong on
> Mandarin is likely to be dropped, unlike what some activists are voicing.
=========================

I am not sure how that conclusion is reached, but it seems that it does not
matter what people think, the Minister of Education is intent on having his
own way. This is analogous to the attempt to inject rational debate into
the planning for nuclear power plants: persuasive arguments are ignored to
protect vested interests.

> The crucial user group, in my concern, is not the Mandarin speakers.
> That group will simply stick with Han characters for a while even after
the
> official adoption of pinyin regardless of what system. Because of their
> inflexibility, they consider that pinyin is only for foreigners anyway.
The
> crucial groups are the users of the Taiwanese church romanization in
Hakka,
> Holo, or the native. If we take in Tongyong for our respective mother
> tongues, on popularity Tongyong in the future has chance to excel Hanyu.
In
> other words, Tongyong now can be served as the consensus reached among the
> non-Mandarin users' groups.
===========================

It's not clear to me how if Tongyong becomes the consensus among advocates
of non-Mandarin languages, Tongyong then has a chance to "overtake" Hanyu
Pinyin (in Taiwan).

If we temporarily withdraw from this debate among the elite (particularly
the academics with their reputation on line), and take a hard look at the
"spelling landscape" current in Taiwan, what we find is that the ROC Chuyin
Fuhao is by far the top spelling system regardless of language, while
lagging
far behind is the church alphabet and Hanyu Pinyin. Still farther behind is
Tongyong. Depending on the statistics you cite and the criteria for
spelling literacy, either the church alphabet or Hanyu Pinyin can claim
second place in terms of number of users. However, in terms of usage in
locally published works (as defined by syllables used), the church alphabet
probably has an edge because of its significant early lead coupled with a
post-martial law revival. (For a limited list of works, see
<http://203.64.42.21/iug/ungian>. This bibliography collects only Holo works,
however.)

In terms of actual users (to be distinguished from merely supporters), Hanyu
Pinyin's advocates belong to two groups: 1. the expatriate community, and
2. sections of the local academic elite. Tongyong's user-advocates are
restricted to : 1. the academic elite (but not in their own publications),
2. language advocates, particularly Hakka speakers. The church alphabet is
used by three groups: 1. Taiwanese Christians (including Catholics), 2.
language advocates (particularly Holo), and 3. sections of the academic
elite. The church alphabet arguably has a more substantial social base in
Taiwan than the other two. None are better established than Chuyin Fuhao.

In short, in the foreseeable years, either Hanyu Pinyin or Tongyong or
another alternative will have a difficult time ahead to replace the
inefficient (like nuclear power) but well-entrenched Chuyin Fuhao we all
learned as schoolchildren.

> Hasn't the church romanization, LMJ, served this purpose? I don't
think
> so in observing the interest of the public in Taiwan. English is the most
> attractive to the public across various groups in Taiwan. In the future,
> for saling any spelling system to supersede Hanyu in Taiwan, the
> morphological similarity to the English usage is absolutely the
> characteristic. This is the reason why we cannot simply do that "they use
> their Hanyu and we use our own good old LMJ" nor "You accept Tongyong for
> your Mandarin regardless of what we are taking."
==========================

Few people will deny the importance of the English language to a future
Taiwanese citizenry (assuming Taiwan does survive). For example, currently
various transnational corporations have their customer service done in the
Philippines by local college graduates. Among other advantages of English,
Taiwan can fight for this labor market in the future.

As I have noted in a prior message, what Tongyong advocates need to show is
that its so-called "English compatibility" is real. Instead, we have
vaguely worded claims which reflect, at a deeper level, more of the
Taiwanese elite's collective anxiety to learn English rather than a genuine
desire to promote mother tongues and their orthographies.

> I am a church user of LMJ, the system with 150 years history in Taiwan.
> The saling record of it to the people with our educational background,
> honestly speaking, is not good. As you have known, there has been a loud
> voice for improving LMJ to be close to the English alphabets for years.
> Tongyong is good on this to me. You may not agree all I say. We can
> discuss.
============================

As mentioned above, the church alphabet is either the second or third most
commonly used spelling after Chuyin Fuhao. The reasons why the church
alphabet has not prospered are varied, and short of a definitive study, we
can probably debate their relative importance for quite some time. But I
believe the following are some of the possible reasons:

1. Its identification with a "foreign religion": Since that religion has
not managed to dominate or transform the Taiwanese society, the script
associated with it also became restricted within its membership.
2. The cultural prestige of the Chinese character among the local elite
(even Christians).
3. Suppression by imperialist regimes: è¡å¹ç« spent many years lobbying the
Japanese administration to allow teaching of the church alphabet, to no
avail.
4. The measurable decline of Holo-Taiwanese across the board, but
particularly among the elite sectors.

If we throw in "incompatibility with English" (whatever that means), that
would be only one reason among the several I've listed. More important, all
four reasons existed *prior to* the public perception of English's
superiority in a world capitalist system. To attribute the current status
of the church alphabet to its lack of perceived englishness is to overlook
some of the broad patterns in Taiwanese languages. It would be akin to
arguing that the Siraya indigenous people of southwestern Taiwan, armed with
writing
from the Dutch colonists, disappeared as a viable, organic group *because*
it used
romanized writing -- surely an oversimplification if not simply wrong. In
short, these patterns are what the Taiwanese society should be discussing,
not how one expert in power will ultimately triumph over another in power.

Am I "just a foolish idealist"? Possibly, but these important questions
which need to be answered honestly if we are to adopt Tongyong or another
system.

--Henry

> Tony