Category: Language Learning

nèijuǎn (nèi·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] 内卷 內卷/捲) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

I recently came across an interesting article on the website Sixth Tone*, about this week’s MEotW, “nèijuǎn (nèi·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] 内卷 內卷/捲)”.

The article briefly describes how this word is being used now by people in China:

Originally used by anthropologists to describe self-perpetuating processes that keep agrarian societies from progressing, involution has become a shorthand used by Chinese urbanites to describe the ills of their modern lives: Parents feel intense pressure to provide their children with the very best; children must keep up in the educational rat race; office workers have to clock in a grinding number of hours.

Involution can be understood as the opposite of evolution. The Chinese word, neijuan, is made up of the characters for ‘inside’ and ‘rolling,’ and is more intuitively understood as something that spirals in on itself, a process that traps participants who know they won’t benefit from it.

Regarding the “juǎn ({roll up}; {roll (n)} 卷 卷/捲)” in “nèijuǎn (nèi·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] 内卷 內卷/捲)”, dictionaries say that it means “roll up” when used as a verb, and that it means “roll” when used as a noun. For example, a “chūnjuǎn (chūn·juǎn spring · roll [→ [egg roll]] 春卷 春捲)” is a “spring roll” or “egg roll”.

Chinese “Rat Races”

It’s interesting that the above quote compares “nèijuǎn (nèi·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] 内卷 內卷/捲)” to the English term “rat race”. The Online Etymology Dictionary tells us that an early application of “rat race” often included literal rolls and turns:

A rat race is … a simple game of “follow the leader” in fighter planes. The leader does everything he can think of — Immelmanns, loops, snap rolls, and turns, always turns, tighter and tighter. [Popular Science, May 1941]

Of course, “rat race” also went on to refer to “fiercely competitive struggle”. Wikipedia describes it this way:

A rat race is an endless, self-defeating, or pointless pursuit. The phrase equates humans to rats attempting to earn a reward such as cheese, in vain. It may also refer to a competitive struggle to get ahead financially or routinely.

The term is commonly associated with an exhausting, repetitive lifestyle that leaves no time for relaxation or enjoyment.

Contrasting Cultures

Continuing on, the Sixth Tone article goes into an interview with anthropologist Xiàng Biāo, a professor at the University of Oxford and the director of the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology in Germany. The interview touches on various aspects of nèijuǎn (nèi·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] 内卷 內卷/捲) and on how this term can be applied to life in China, both past and present.

I especially found Mr. Xiàng’s comparisons of Chinese cultural attitudes and practices with those of other cultures interesting:

Because our culture traditionally encouraged having large families, population growth made labor extremely cheap and took away any incentive for technological innovation. This is a big difference between China and Europe. For example, the carrying pole was virtually nonexistent in Europe. However, every farming family in China had one. All heavy work in Europe was done almost entirely using animals. Once the steam engine was invented in Europe, machinery was then used to solve the problem.

…

In terms of the workplace, we can say that involution is being used to critique modern capitalism. But capitalism is too broad and imprecise a word. It first emerged in places like the United Kingdom, with modern capitalism then best developing probably in Germany, but the phenomenon of involution isn’t as evident in these countries. So, there’s something characteristically Chinese about it.

…

Everyone in China has the same goals: Earn more money, buy a home of more than 100 square meters, own a car, start a family, and so on. This route is very well marked, and everyone is highly integrated. People are all fighting for the same things within this market.

…

we don’t have horizontal differentiation. In Germany, there is a strong emphasis on apprenticeships, which are considered an important method of employment. One time in Germany, I went to get a haircut. I was a little nervous beforehand since Asian people have very different hair than Europeans. I didn’t know if the barber could deal with it, and yet it turned out to be the best haircut I’ve ever had. The barber was very focused and content with the work. My hypothesis is that hairdressers in Germany begin their training early on as apprentices; hairdressing is their career, and they are very devoted. It’s not like in Asia where if someone doesn’t do well at school, they’re left with no choice but to open a hairdressing salon to make some money. From then on, they feel unable to attend school reunions.

…

I don’t know much about undergraduates at Oxford University. But overemphasizing exam scores, as well as instrumentalizing everything, carefully pleasing authorities, and considering classmates potential competitors — I don’t think these issues exist there.

Firstly, this kind of GPA competition, or call it involution, is an exception in human history. In China it has only been around for the past decade. Of course, there’s also group pressure in the U.K. What is group pressure for undergraduates at Oxford? When you’re doing something, people expect you to say why you find it interesting. If you can’t explain why, your reputation will take a bit of a hit and people will think you’re not a very “authentic” person. It’s as if you’re doing something just to please people, or because others think it’s a good thing — then people will think you’re not interesting. So, you need to have a good narrative for why you do what you do. It’s a habit: When students write reports or research applications, you can see that they emphasize why they think something is of interest. Chinese students who study abroad have some difficulty in this respect and will write about the social significance of the project in their research proposals. The thing is, lots of things are socially important. Plus, this socially important topic has been done to death — so what new things can be done? These reports can sound empty and just parrot the conventional.

…

But Confucianism is also a very broad concept. For example, the experiences of involution in China and the high-pressure work and school life in Japan are not exactly the same. Japan does have karoshi — death from overwork — but this is more of a kind of group pressure. It’s closer to Confucianism, meaning there is a strong communal nature and highly uniform moral judgment. If your workmates don’t leave the office, neither should you; otherwise, you’ll feel you’re letting them down. In addition, there’s not so much of a desire to advance yourself in Japan.

Japan has a large number of homebodies who lack any desire to get ahead. Yesterday, I asked my wife (a Japanese sociologist) how she squares the fact that Japan has people dying from overwork, and yet no competitiveness. Japanese education is very equalitarian, and no one should be left behind. Classes are taught according to the least able, and everyone waits for them. That’s the opposite of China, where education is aimed at the top students. China has a Confucian foundation with extremely liberal market competition mixed in.

…

In Japan, I visited one restaurant where they only serve tempura. The chef there picks up a sea urchin and starts to tell you about the fisher who caught it, and then how they are transported from the Seto Inland Sea to Tokyo. This one sea urchin requires the work of so many hands. He treats the oil and flour with the same reverence. You’ll start to think about how you’re connected to all those people. So in this sense, the spirit of craftsmanship is a very deep devotion to the here and now, to that little corner of the world where you find yourself. I think this is a much better way to deal with your sense of worry and being adrift in the world.

Narrow-Minded, Inward-Rolling Language Learning

Re Mr. Xiàng’s comment that in China they “don’t have horizontal differentiation”, I believe that basically he means that people there often only recognize a very narrow range of top goals to strive for, and they often only recognize a very narrow range of ways to the top. From my own experience with people who were brought up in traditional worldly human Chinese culture, I tend to agree that such ones can be narrow-minded about what they consider to be the way to success, and dismissive about anything that is outside of that narrow range.

For example, when it comes to learning the Mandarin language, traditional Chinese culture has defined a narrow goal that involves focusing on learning Chinese characters. Thus, those who adhere to narrow-minded traditional Chinese culture are automatically dismissive of an alternate primary goal such as proficiency with Mandarin speech, and they are also automatically dismissive of an alternate means to that goal, such as Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音). Ignoring the facts that according to first principles of language science 1) speech is primary and 2) Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) qualifies as a full writing system for Mandarin, such Chinese culture traditionalists proudly and dogmatically stick to their narrow focus on Chinese characters.

Unfortunately for Mandarin field language-learners who listen to such ones, Chinese characters are so complex and haphazardly designed that trying to learn them (and also remember them) is for many a possibly decades-long exercise in grinding, relatively high-effort/low-reward nèijuǎn (nèi·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] 内卷 內卷/捲). Because of that, many more than necessary have dropped out, and the talented/stubborn few who persevere to attain some proficiency with Mandarin speech this way can be said to have done so in spite of the characters, at least as much as they have done so because of the characters.

“Everything Was Futile”

Those caught up in getting ahead in this human world ruled by Satan indeed experience the truth of Solomon’s words at Ecclesiastes 1:14:

I saw all the works that were done under the sun,
And look! everything was futile, a chasing after the wind.

Thankfully, God also inspired Solomon to record these words at Ecclesiastes 12:13 that tell us what actually does give meaning and purpose to our lives:

The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the true God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole obligation of man.