Category: Experiences

Categories
Culture Experiences History Language Learning Science Theocratic

jǐngrán‐yǒuxù

jǐngrán+ (jǐng·rán neat; orderly · right; correct [→ [tidy; methodical; shipshape]] 井然)‐yǒuxù+ (yǒu·xù having · order; sequence [→ [methodical; systematic; in good order; regular]] 有序) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Notes: Tap/click on a Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to reveal its “flashcard”; tap/click on a “flashcard” or its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to hide the “flashcard”. 📖 📄 ➕ icons mean 📖 Reveal All, 📄 Reveal Advanced, and ➕ Reveal + Symbols re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

We in the Mandarin field should keep in mind that many Mandarin-speaking people were taught to believe in evolution, and thus tend to not believe in God. The Shēngmìng Láizì Chuàngzào Ma? ((Shēngmìng Life 生命) (Lái·zì Came · From 来自 來自) (Chuàng·zào Initiating · {Making, Creating} → [Creating] 创造 創造) (Ma [? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)? → [Was Life Created? (lc)]) (Was Life Created? (lc)) brochure and the Shēngmìng de Qǐyuán—Zhíde Sīkǎo de Wǔ Ge Wèntí ((Shēngmìng Life 生命) (de ’s 的) (Qǐ·yuán {Rising → [Starting]} · Source → [Origin] 起源/原)—(Zhí·de Worth · Getting → [Worth] 值得) (Sī·kǎo {Thinking About} · Examining 思考) (de ’s 的) (Wǔ Five 五) (Ge [mw] 个 個/个) (Wèn·tí Asking · Subjects → [Questions] 问题 問題) → [The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking (lf)]) (The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking (lf)) brochure were originally published back in 2010, but they are still considered current publications, and relatively recently, the English version of the Was Life Created? brochure was updated to the December 2022 Printing, and the Mandarin version of it was updated to the February 2023 Printing. So, it would be good for us to consider some of the expressions used in the Mandarin versions of the Was Life Created? and Origin of Life brochures, which can be so helpful when discussing the fundamentally important question of whether life was created.

In Good Order

This week’s MEotW, “jǐngrán (jǐng·rán neat; orderly · right; correct [→ [tidy; methodical; shipshape]] 井然)‐yǒuxù (yǒu·xù having · order; sequence [→ [methodical; systematic; in good order; regular]] 有序)”, occurs in paragraph 12 of the QUESTION 2 section of the Origin of Life brochure, which section is entitled, in English, “Is Any Form of Life Really Simple?”:

English:

Imagine that you have been allowed past the “security guard” and are now inside the cell. The interior of a prokaryotic cell is filled with a watery fluid that is rich in nutrients, salts, and other substances. The cell uses these raw ingredients to manufacture the products it needs. But the process is not haphazard. Like an efficiently run factory, the cell organizes thousands of chemical reactions so that they take place in a specific order and according to a set timetable.

Mandarin (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ 🔗):

📖 📄 ➕ Jiǎshè (Jiǎ·shè {being artificial} · {set up} → [suppose] 假设 假設) nǐ (you 你) dédào (dé·dào {have gotten} · {arriving at} 得到) “ménwèi (mén·wèi door/entrance · {guarding (person’s)} 门卫 門衛)” yǔnxǔ (permitting 允许 允許), kěyǐ (kě·yǐ {are able} · [suf] 可以) jìnrù ({to enter} 进入 進入) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) “gōngchǎng (gōng·chǎng work · factory → [factory] 工厂 工廠)” le ([(at the end of a phrase/sentence) indicates a change] 了). Nǐ (you 你) huì (will 会 會) fāxiàn (fā·xiàn {send out → [develop]} · {appearing of} → [find] 发现/见 發現/見) yuánhé+ (yuán·hé primitive · {pit (of a fruit) → [nucleus]} → [prokaryotic] 原核) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) nèi (inside 内 內) mǎn ({filled with} 满 滿) shì (is 是) xiàng (like 像/象) shuǐ (water 水) yíyàng (yí·yàng {(of) one} · form → [the same] 一样 一樣) de (’s 的) yètǐ+ (yè·tǐ fluid · {bodies → [substances]} → [fluids] 液体 液體), zhèixiē (zhèi·xiē this · {indefinite number of} → [these] 这些 這些) yètǐ (yè·tǐ fluid · {bodies → [substances]} → [fluids] 液体 液體) hányǒu (hán·yǒu {hold in the mouth → [contain]} · have 含有) fēngfù (fēng·fù rich · abundant 丰富 豐富) de (’s 的) yǎngfèn+ (yǎng·fèn supporting · components → [nutrients] 养分 養分), yán (salts 盐 鹽), hé ({(together) with} → [and] 和 和/龢) qítā (qí·tā them · otherwise’s → [other] 其他) wùzhì (wù·zhì matter · substances → [substances] 物质 物質). Xìbāo (Xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) yòng (uses 用) zhèixiē (zhèi·xiē this · {indefinite number of} → [these] 这些 這些) “yuán+ (original → [raw] 原) cáiliào (cái·liào {timber → [material]} · materials → [materials] 材料)” zhìzào (zhì·zào {to manufacture} · {to make} → [to manufacture] 制造 製造) suǒxū (suǒ·xū {those which} · {are needed} 所需) de (’s 的) dōngxi (dōng·xi easts · wests → [things] 东西 東西), dàn (but 但) guòchéng (guò·chéng {to be passed through} · {journey → [procedure]} → [process] 过程 過程) bìng (definitely 并 並/竝/并) bú (not 不) shì (is 是) záluàn+ (zá·luàn mixed · random → [disorderly] 杂乱 雜亂)‐wú (without 无 無/无)‐zhāng (sections → [structure] 章) de ({’s (process)} 的). Xìbāo (Xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) hǎoxiàng (hǎo·xiàng {well → [very much]} · {is like} 好像/象) yùnzuò (yùn·zuò transports · does → [operates] 运作 運作) shùnchàng+ (shùn·chàng {being following → [being suiting]} · {being smooth} → [smoothly] 顺畅 順暢) de (’s 的) gōngchǎng (gōng·chǎng work · factory → [factory] 工厂 工廠) nàyàng (nà·yàng that · {form → [way]} 那样 那樣), zài (in 在) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) li (inside 里 裡/裏) jìnxíng (jìn·xíng {are advanced} · {are walked → [are carried out]} 进行 進行) de (’s 的) wúshù (wú·shù without · number 无数 無數) huàxué+ (huà·xué {transforming → [chemistry]} · studying → [chemical] 化学 化學) fǎnyìng (fǎn·yìng {in the reverse direction} · respondings → [reactions] 反应 反應) quándōu (quán·dōu completely · all 全都) ànshí (àn·shí {according to} · {(particular) times} → [on schedule] 按时 按時) jìnxíng (jìn·xíng {are advanced} · {are walked → [are carried out]} 进行 進行), érqiě (ér·qiě and · moreover 而且) jǐngrán+ (jǐng·rán {are orderly} · {are correct} 井然)‐yǒuxù+ (yǒu·xù {are having} · sequence 有序).

In the above examples, “jǐngrán (jǐng·rán neat; orderly · right; correct [→ [tidy; methodical; shipshape]] 井然)‐yǒuxù (yǒu·xù having · order; sequence [→ [methodical; systematic; in good order; regular]] 有序)” is used to translate the English phrase “in a specific order”. In contrast, past MEotW “záluàn (zá·luàn miscellaneous; mixed · {in disorder}; chaotic; random; arbitrary → [disorderly; mixed; in a jumble/mess; chaotic] 杂乱 雜亂)‐wú ({not having}; without; no 无 無/无)‐zhāng (sections [→ [order | rules; regulation; constitution | composition; structure; system; pattern]] 章)”, which occurs earlier in the example paragraph above, is used to translate the English word “haphazard”.

Yes, in contrast to the haphazard mess that any system generated by random chance would be (if anything even resembling a system gets generated at all), the system inside our cells for manufacturing needed products actually operates with a very high degree of organization, orderliness, and efficiency. This is strong evidence that our cells were actually not produced by the random processes of evolution, but rather, by an organized and orderly intelligent Creator.

Not in Good Order, in Good Order

Of particular interest to Mandarin field language learners, if we look at Chinese characters, which were designed by imperfect humans, it would be fair to describe the way they were designed as being haphazard, even compared to other human-designed systems. For example, the book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, on page 111, says:

Comparatively speaking, the Japanese syllabaries are quite simple and efficient. Their forty-seven symbols do a reasonably good job of representing the sound system of Japanese with its mere 113 different syllables. In contrast, the Chinese syllabary, which must cope with a far more complex syllabic system (3,877 syllables in earlier Chinese and 1,277 in current standard Chinese if tones are included, 398 if tones are excluded), is not only appallingly large but also quite unstandardized and hence extremely inefficient—all this of course due to the fact that it has not been manipulated and refined like the Japanese syllabaries but throughout its history right down to today has evolved in a more or less haphazard manner.

One of the ways in which Chinese characters are relatively haphazard is in how they represent their pronunciations. Even though many characters have phonetic (relating to speech sounds) elements that supposedly relate to how they are to be pronounced, ultimately, there is no consistent, overall system such that if a character is like this, then its pronunciation must thus be that—if you bump into a Chinese character that you never learned, or that you learned but forgot (this character amnesia actually happens all the time, even to experienced native Mandarin speakers), then ultimately you can only guess at how to pronounce it!

Speaking of phonetic elements, characters are so old that the phonetic elements of characters that have them may actually be based on old pronunciations that are different from the modern day pronunciations that these phonetic elements appear to modern readers to indicate. So, even the supposedly phonetic elements of characters are not reliable indicators of the modern Mandarin pronunciations of these characters, adding to the overall haphazard nature of characters.

Another haphazard aspect of characters is the many homographs among them, that is, different words that are written with the same characters, but that have different possible pronunciations and meanings, such that one must examine the context to deduce which pronunciation and meaning are actually the intended ones in any given situation.

In marked contrast, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is a simple, elegant, consistent system of representing modern Mandarin speech, such that if Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expressions are written a certain way, then they must be pronounced a certain way—well-designed, neat, and orderly, not having “evolved in a more or less haphazard manner” like Chinese characters!

For convenience:

The direct link for the current-generation Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ resource for the Origin of Life brochure is:

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Origin of Life brochure is:

More Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ web material based on the Mandarin Origin of Life brochure will be made available in the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ web resource as time allows.

Categories
Culture Experiences Language Learning Science Theocratic

nándào

nándào+ (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say [→ [to suppose]] (that)} → [can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that] 难道 難道) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Notes: Tap/click on a Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to reveal its “flashcard”; tap/click on a “flashcard” or its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to hide the “flashcard”. 📖 📄 ➕ icons mean 📖 Reveal All, 📄 Reveal Advanced, and ➕ Reveal + Symbols re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

One of the publications that is now recommended to be used on Bible studies is the Yǒngyuǎn Xiǎngshòu Měihǎo de Shēngmìng—Hùdòng Shì Shèngjīng Kèchéng ((Yǒng·yuǎn Eternally · {Far (in Time)} 永远 永遠) (Xiǎng·shòu Enjoy · Receive 享受) (Měi·hǎo Beautiful · Good 美好) (de ’s 的) (Shēngmìng Life 生命)—(Hù·dòng {Each Other} · Moving → [Interactive] 互动 互動) (Shì (Type 式) (Shèng·jīng Holy · Scriptures → [Bible] 圣经 聖經) (Kè·chéng Lessons · Procedure → [Course] 课程 課程) → [Enjoy Life Forever!—An Interactive Bible Course (lff)]) (Enjoy Life Forever! (lff)) book. This week’s MEotW, “nándào+ (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say [→ [to suppose]] (that)} → [can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that] 难道 難道)”, appears in subtitle 35 of the video used in point 5 of lesson 15 of this book:

English:

[Jesus’] mother, Mary, lived in Nazareth.
Could he tell her while in the womb,
‘Please take me to Bethlehem because the scriptures say
I must be born there’?

Mandarin (Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ 🔗):

34
00:02:05,141 → 00:02:08,812
📖 📄 ➕ Yēsū (Jesus 耶稣 耶穌) de (’ 的) mǔqin (mǔ·qin mother · relative 母亲 母親) Mǎlìyà (Mary 马利亚 馬利亞) yuánběn+ (yuán·běn originally · {root or stem → [originally]} 原本) zhù (lived 住) zài (in 在) Násālè+ (Nazʹa·reth 拿撒勒).

35
00:02:08,812 → 00:02:12,882
📖 📄 ➕ Nándào+ (Nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say → [to suppose] (that)} → [could it be that] 难道 難道) Yēsū (Jesus 耶稣 耶穌) nénggòu (néng·gòu {was able} · enough 能够 能夠) zài (in 在) māma (mā·ma ma·ma 妈妈 媽媽) de (’s 的) dùzi+ (dù·zi belly · [suf for nouns] 肚子) li (inside 里 裡/裏) gēn (with 跟) māma (mā·ma ma·ma 妈妈 媽媽) shuō ({to say} 说 說/説),

Lesson 15 point 5 video subtitle 36

36
00:02:12,882 → 00:02:14,651
📖 📄 ➕ “Nǐ (you 你) yào (must 要) qù ({go to} 去) Bólìhéng (Bethʹle·hem 伯利恒 伯利恆) shēng+ ({to give birth to} 生) wǒ (me 我),

37
00:02:14,651 → 00:02:17,220
📖 📄 ➕ wǒ (I 我) cái ({only then} 才 才/纔) néng ({will be able} 能) yìngyàn+ (yìng·yàn {to respond to} · verifying (regarding) → [to fulfil] 应验 應驗) Shèngjīng (Shèng·jīng Holy · Scriptures → [Bible] 圣经 聖經) yùyán (yù·yán {in advance} · saying → [prophecy] 预言 預言)” ma ([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)?

It’s Hard to Say?

Over the years, I would occasionally encounter “nándào (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say [→ [to suppose]] (that)} → [can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that] 难道 難道)” in my Mandarin field activities, and I would find it hard to say whether my initial impression was correct, that its morphemes literally translated to “is (it) difficult” “to arrive at (that)”. When I finally got around to looking up this expression and analyzing it, it turned out that I was right about the first morpheme, but wrong about the second one—the first morpheme “nán ({[is] difficult}; {[is] hard} | difficultly | {make difficult/difficulties} 难 難)” is indeed the one that means “difficult” or “hard”, and that also appears in “nántí (nán·tí difficult · topic → [problem] 难题 難題)”, but the second morpheme is actually not the “dào ({arrive [at/in/etc.]}; reaching [→ [[up/out/etc.] to; until]] 到)” that means “to arrive at”. Rather, it is the “dào (way; path; road [→ [mw]] | say; speak; talk; chat | think; suppose 道)” that is used in “chuándào (chuán·dào spreading · way → [preaching] 传道 傳道)” and in “dàoli (dào·li way; path; road · reasoning; logic; doctrine [→ [principle]] 道理)”, where it means “way; path; road”. When it’s used in “nándào (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say [→ [to suppose]] (that)} → [can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that] 难道 難道)” though, it seems to have a different meaning that I was not familiar with before, that of “say; speak”.

When the morphemes of “nándào (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say [→ [to suppose]] (that)} → [can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that] 难道 難道)” are put together, then, they literally mean “is (it) difficult” “to say [or, to suppose] (that)”, and they can effectively mean “can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that”. As Pleco’s built-in dictionary says, this enigmatic expression is used for “giving force to a rhetorical question”.

A Usage Example From the Bible

Here is another example of “nándào (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say [→ [to suppose]] (that)} → [can/could it be that; is it possible that; do you really mean to say that; don’t tell me that] 难道 難道)” in use, from a familiar Bible account:

English:

You are not greater than our forefather Jacob, who gave us the well and who together with his sons and his cattle drank out of it, are you?”

Mandarin (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ 🔗):

📖 📄 ➕ Zhèi (this 这 這) kǒu ({mouth of a} → [mw for things with mouths/openings] 口) jǐng+ (well 井) shì (is 是) wǒmen de ((wǒ·men us · [pl] 我们 我們) (de ’s 的) → [our]) zǔxiān (zǔ·xiān forefather · {earlier (person) → [ancestor]} → [forefather] 祖先) Yǎgè+ (Jacob 雅各) liúgěi (liú·gěi {left behind} · {to be given to} 留给 留給) wǒmen (wǒ·men us · [pl] 我们 我們) de ({’s (well)} 的), tā (he 他) zìjǐ (himself 自己) hé ({(together) with} → [and] 和 和/龢) érzi (ér·zi {(his) children → [his sons]} · [suf for nouns] 儿子 兒子), jiāchù+ (jiā·chù (his) household · livestock → [his cattle] 家畜) dōu (all 都) hē (drank 喝) zhèi (this 这 這) kǒu ({mouth of a} → [mw for things with mouths/openings] 口) jǐng (well 井) de (’s 的) shuǐ (water 水), nándào+ (nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say → [to suppose] (that)} → [can it be that] 难道 難道) nǐ (you 你) bǐ ({compared to} 比) tā (him 他) hái ({still more} 还 還) dà ({are big} → [are great] 大) ma ([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)?”

A Question for the Mandarin Field

Here is a rhetorical question for Mandarin field language learners to consider:

English:

Is learning Chinese characters really the most important aspect of learning Mandarin?

Mandarin:

📖 📄 ➕ Nándào+ (Nán·dào {is (it) difficult} · {to say → [to suppose] (that)} → [can it be that] 难道 難道) xué (learning 学 學) Hànzì+ (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) zhēnde (zhēn·de {being real} · {’s (thing)} → [really] 真的) shì (is 是) xué (learning 学 學) pǔtōng‐huà+ ((pǔ·tōng common · {through(out) → [common]} 普通)‐(huà speech 话 話) → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)]) de (’s 的) zuì (most 最 最/㝡) zhòngyào (zhòng·yào weighty · important 重要) de (’s 的) yì (one 一) fāngmiàn (fāng·miàn {direction → [side]} · face → [aspect] 方面) ma ([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)?

For an answer to this question that’s based, not on human tradition or cultural pride, but rather on the Bible, The Watchtower, and linguistics (language science), check out the article “SPEECH is Top Priority, Not Characters”.

Here is an excerpt:

Just like it’s an established fact that the earth is round, according to modern linguistics (the scientific study of language) this is also an established fact: “Speech is primary, writing is secondary and is always derivative of speech.” This scientific truth about language, that Jehovah built us and wired us to primarily communicate meaning through speech, supports what 1 Corinthians 14:8–11 (quoted above) says about understandable speech being of prime importance to Christian evangelizers.

For convenience:

The direct link for the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ resource for the Enjoy Life Forever! book is:

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Enjoy Life Forever! book is:

More Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ web material based on the Mandarin Enjoy Life Forever! book will be made available in the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ web resource as time allows.

Categories
Culture Experiences History Language Learning

jī‐tóng‐yā‐jiǎng

jī‐tóng‐yā‐jiǎng+ ((jī chicken 鸡 雞/鷄)‐(tóng {together with} 同 同/仝)‐(yā duck 鸭 鴨)‐(jiǎng speaking 讲 講) → [people not understanding each other because of speaking different languages (from Cantonese)]) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[I’m still unusually busy with preparing musical notation + Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) songbook material for this year’s Mandarin conventions, and now, also with rolling out the next generation Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ format. (See this Links News post for more information on that.) So, here’s a repost of a post from a few years back, on a subject of basic importance to Mandarin field language learners.]

[Yes, this expression comes from Cantonese, but the above Mandarin version does appear in Mandarin dictionaries, so it qualifies as a Mandarin expression!]

Recently, while out to dinner with one of the first families to serve in the local Cantonese congregation, along with the circuit overseer serving the local Chinese circuit and his wife, the subject came up of how Mandarin and Cantonese are actually different languages, not just dialects of the same language.

Chickens Talking with Ducks

The wife of the circuit overseer asked what the difference is between a language and a dialect. So, I proceeded to explain something that is emphasized by American sinologist and University of Pennsylvania Professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations Victor H. Mair, that a primary way accepted by most linguists to distinguish a language from a dialect is mutual intelligibility, as is discussed in this excerpt from the MEotW post on “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)”:

It has been said that “a language is a dialect with an army and navy”, but in his article Professor Mair gives us a more linguistically correct and useful way to distinguish between a language and a dialect:

Regardless of the imprecision of lay usage, we should strive for a consistent means of distinguishing between language and dialect. Otherwise we might as well use the two terms interchangeably. That way lies chaos and the collapse of rational discourse. Mutual intelligibility [emphasis added] is normally accepted by most linguists as the only plausible criterion for making the distinction between language and dialect in the vast majority of cases. Put differently, no more suitable, workable device for distinguishing these two levels of speech has yet been proposed. If there are to be exceptions to the useful principle of mutual intelligibility, there should be compelling reasons for them. Above all, exceptions should not be made the rule.

What is mutual intelligibility? Simply put, in linguistics, two or more speech varieties are said to be mutually intelligible if they are “able to be understood by one another’s speakers”. For example, if one person only knows English, and another person only knows Spanish, they can’t really understand each other if they try to talk to each other—English and Spanish are not mutually intelligible, and are suitably recognized as being different languages, not just different dialects of “European”.

Similarly, if one person only knows Mandarin, and another person only knows Cantonese, they can’t really understand each other if they try to talk to each other—Mandarin and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible. So, while they may be “fāngyán+ (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · {(patterns of) speech} 方言)”, linguistically, Mandarin and Cantonese should really be considered to be different languages, not just different dialects of “Chinese”.

Indeed, I have heard people use this week’s MEotW, “jī‐tóng‐yā‐jiǎng+ ((jī chicken 鸡 雞/鷄)‐(tóng {together with} 同 同/仝)‐(yā duck 鸭 鴨)‐(jiǎng speaking 讲 講) → [people not understanding each other because of speaking different languages (from Cantonese)])”, to specifically describe Mandarin-speakers and Cantonese-speakers trying to talk to each other, and not understanding each other. 🐓 🦆

After I explained the gist of the above, one of the daughters of the family at the dinner—who had been labouring for decades under the misconception that Mandarin and Cantonese are just dialects and that someone who knows one can easily learn the other—said, “Now I don’t feel like an idiot.”

Uncommon Knowledge?

It could be said that ones such as this family and this circuit overseer and his wife, who have all worked so hard and served for so long in the Chinese language fields, should already have known such a basic thing about the Chinese languages. However, the following things are unfortunately true:

  • Even publishers who are learning a language to serve in that language’s field generally consider such linguistic (language science) knowledge to be specialized technical knowledge that is beyond what they need to learn, and possibly beyond what they could even comprehend.
  • Western-educated publishers learning a Chinese language may unwittingly go along with the Western worldly tendency to exoticize things related to China. (John DeFrancis, in his book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy (p. 37), calls this “Exotic East Syndrome”.) They may be content with—or even enjoy—the alluring veil of mystery and mystique surrounding certain things related to China and Chinese culture. Thus, they don’t seek to learn about and understand deeper truths about such things, that may pierce through this obscuring veil, and burst this bubble.—Compare 2 Corinthians 3:14, including the margin note.
  • The central ruling authorities of China have long actively promoted the scientifically incorrect idea that the different varieties of speech in China are just dialects of the one Chinese language. This idea is political propaganda supporting the idea that it’s good for there to be central ruling authorities in China.
  • Traditional worldly Chinese language instructors and others who are knowledgeable about Chinese languages and Chinese characters are eager to promote and perpetuate the traditional thinking about Chinese languages and characters, that they have invested so much time and effort in, and that they are so proud of.
  • Chinese-educated publishers who are already steeped in the traditional ideas about Chinese languages, Chinese characters, etc., and who are thus lauded and deferred to as experts by other publishers, may be eager to simply unquestioningly pass on the cultural knowledge and ideas that they were taught, and that they are lauded and respected for.
  • With so much misinformation “in the air”, including from trusted authority figures, “everyone knows” that there is one Chinese language, with dialects that include Mandarin, Cantonese, etc. Since “everyone knows” this, it’s easy to just go along with it, especially in an Eastern culture like the Chinese culture that emphasizes conforming to the group. As Eastern cultures, Japanese, Korean, etc. cultures are similar in this respect, so publishers from those cultural backgrounds may also generally tend to just go along with what “everyone knows” about there being just one Chinese language that has various dialects.—Ephesians 2:2.
  • The Bible makes it clear that Satan the Devil is “a liar and the father of the lie”. It also describes him as “the great dragon…who is misleading the entire inhabited earth”. So, while we can only speculate about the details of what strings are purposely pulled in the spirit realm by Satan and his demons as opposed to what human folly they simply passively observe, we can be sure that Satan is delighted with all the ways in which people are misled in and about the Chinese culture, in which the dragon is considered a positive, revered symbol.—John 8:44; Revelation 12:9.

So, for reasons such as the above, even the basic linguistic truth that Mandarin, Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc. actually function as different languages is unfortunately not yet common knowledge among those serving in the Chinese fields. As the saying goes, which some say is a Chinese proverb, “error will travel over half the globe, while truth is pulling on her boots”.

Jesus said, though, that true worshippers worship “with spirit and truth”, and that “the truth will set you free”. With regard to Chinese languages, Chinese characters, etc., the truth about them can even set one free from unnecessarily feeling like an “idiot”, as the sister mentioned above so eloquently put it, because of labouring under all the political propaganda, traditions, and other kinds of misinformation and wrong thinking that unfortunately surround Chinese languages, Chinese characters, etc.—John 4:23; 8:32.

Huge Worldwide Effects

In addition to being hugely freeing for individual language learners, spreading the truth about the Chinese languages, Chinese characters, etc. is also important on a larger scale, since the worldwide Mandarin field, for one, is the largest language field in the world, and probably the largest language field that has ever existed in human history. For comparison, according to Ethnologue, a resource on world languages, the worldwide Mandarin field (those worldwide whose mother tongue is Mandarin) is about twice the size of the second largest worldwide language field, the Spanish field, and it’s about two and a half times the size of the third largest worldwide language field, the English field. Allowing various untruths to continue to divert and bog down the language-learning efforts of those who come to help in the worldwide Mandarin field can have incalculable overall negative effects on the preaching work in this enormous field.

Chart: Languages by First-Language Speakers—2019

So, even as we hang on to Bible truth, let us also hang on to the linguistic truths that we learn, and let us do what we can to share them with our fellow workers in the vast worldwide Chinese fields.