Category: Language Learning

Categories
Culture Language Learning

miànzi

miànzi (miàn·zi face · [suf for nouns] [→ [reputation; prestige; esteem; honor]] 面子) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Many who are reading this English-language blog are undoubtedly familiar with the English expression “lose face”. What many may not know, though, is that this English expression is actually a semantic loan translation from the Mandarin expression “diūliǎn (diū·liǎn lose · face 丢脸 丟臉)”. In support of this, Wikipedia cites no less an authority than the Oxford English Dictionary (OED):

8f. to save one’s face: to avoid being disgraced or humiliated. Similarly, to save (another’s) face. Hence save-face adj. = face-saving … Originally used by the English community in China, with reference to the continual devices among the Chinese to avoid incurring or inflicting disgrace. The exact phrase appears not to occur in Chinese, but ‘to lose face’ (diu lien), and ‘for the sake of his face’, are common.

Some of the Many Chinese Faces of “Face”

Besides “liǎn ({face (n)} [→ [[self-]respect; reputation]] 脸 臉)”, as used in the expression “diūliǎn (diū·liǎn lose · face 丢脸 丟臉)” mentioned above, another Mandarin word used to mean “face” is “miàn (face [→ [surface; top | cover; outside | side; aspect | personal esteem; reputation | superficial | face-to-face]] | {[wheat] flour} | {noodles (made with wheat flour)} 面/靣)”, as used in this week’s MEotW, “miànzi (miàn·zi face · [suf for nouns] [→ [reputation; prestige; esteem; honor]] 面子)”. Yet another Mandarin word used to mean “face” is “yán (face; countenance [→ [prestige; dignity; reputation; honour]] 颜 顏/顔)”.

In its article on “Face (sociological concept)”, Wikipedia lists several Mandarin expressions based on the above-mentioned words.

Another way to see expressions based on the above-mentioned words is to use Pleco’s Wildcard Search. The excellent Sinosplice blog has a recent post about this handy feature of Pleco.

Face with Regard to Chinese Characters

Preoccupation with “miànzi (miàn·zi face · [suf for nouns] [→ [reputation; prestige; esteem; honor]] 面子)” in the eyes of worldly Chinese people can lead to a preoccupation with Chinese characters, since worldly Chinese people are so proud of these quintessential symbols of worldly Chinese culture, and many of them look down on those who don’t share this proud view of theirs. However, is focusing on Chinese characters really the key to glorifying Jehovah in the Mandarin field, as opposed to glorifying worldly human Chinese culture, or glorifying ourselves in the eyes of proud worldly Chinese people?

The Bible itself actually shows us that the key to glorifying Jehovah and reaching hearts in any language field, including the Chinese language fields, is actually understandable speech:

8 For if the trumpet sounds an indistinct call, who will get ready for battle? 9 In the same way, unless you with the tongue use speech that is easily understood, how will anyone know what is being said? You will, in fact, be speaking into the air. 10 It may be that there are many kinds of speech in the world, and yet no kind is without meaning. 11 For if I do not understand the sense of the speech, I will be a foreigner to the one speaking, and the one speaking will be a foreigner to me.
—1 Corinthians 14:8–11

In accordance with long-established Chinese tradition, many may assume that focusing on Chinese characters is the way to eventually master Mandarin speech. Actually, though, as a writing system, Chinese characters are technically one of the most difficult conceivable ways to represent Mandarin speech. True, Chinese characters are “everywhere”, but this ubiquity and cultural prevalence of theirs does not change the reality that they are so inherently complex and haphazardly designed, and thus exceptionally difficult and time-consuming to learn and remember.

As a tool for learning, reading, and writing modern Mandarin speech, simple and elegant Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) obviously works much better compared to the complex, convoluted Chinese characters. Historically, Plan A for modern mainland China was actually to eventually replace Chinese characters with Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音). Of course, that has not happened, but that’s not because Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) doesn’t work well as a writing system for modern Mandarin—it does. The reasons why modern mainland China has continued to mainly use Chinese characters have more to do with human pride, prejudice, apathy, and tradition than with the actual relative merits of Chinese characters compared to Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).

As for Chinese characters being “everywhere” in the Chinese world, this cultural dominance of Chinese characters in the wider Chinese world makes the current relative abundance of official and unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)-containing material based on the publications of Jehovah’s organization seem kind of miraculous. Considering the way that Jehovah and Jesus have directed the development of the worldwide Mandarin field, perhaps it is not so far-fetched to think that extensive practical benefits to the preaching work in the worldwide Mandarin field have been allowed to outweigh mere human pride, prejudice, apathy, and tradition.

_Enjoy Life Forever!_ Bk., Lesson 1 (WOL CHS+Pinyin)

_Enjoy Life Forever!_ Br., Lesson 1 (Pīnyīn Plus)

Considering the cultural dominance of Chinese characters in the Chinese world, it’s kind of miraculous that there is now so much official and unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)-containing material based on the publications of Jehovah’s organization.

(The official material shown above is spiritual food for helping people learn spiritual things; the unofficial material shown above is not spiritual food, but rather, language-learning material for helping people learn the Mandarin language, so that they can be more effective in the Mandarin field.)

Don’t Follow the Pharisees

Like many worldly Chinese people throughout history and down to the present day, many of the Jews in Jesus’ day were excessively concerned with what Jesus called “glory from men”:

41 I do not accept glory from men, 42 but I well know that you do not have the love of God in you. 43 I have come in the name of my Father, but you do not receive me. If someone else came in his own name, you would receive that one. 44 How can you believe, when you are accepting glory from one another and you are not seeking the glory that is from the only God?
—John 5:41–44.

As Jesus pointed out, unfortunately for those Jews, their preoccupation with “glory from men”, “glory from one another”, prevented them from ‘having the love of God in them’, and it prevented them from “seeking the glory that is from the only God”. So, rather than being preoccupied with miànzi (miàn·zi face · [suf for nouns] [→ [reputation; prestige; esteem; honor]] 面子) like many in Satan’s world are, let us instead be like Jesus in pursuing, not “glory from men”, but rather, glory from, and for, Jehovah God himself.

Categories
Culture Current Events Language Learning

nèijuǎn

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.

 

* According to Wikipedia,

Sixth Tone is an online magazine owned by the Shanghai United Media Group, a state media company controlled by the Shanghai committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is published in English from China, and its readership is intended for people in Western countries.

It appears, though, that Sixth Tone is not purely China-boosting political propaganda. Vincent Ni, a senior journalist at the BBC World Service in London, commented as follows:

Mainstream outlets such as the BBC often cite Sixth Tone as their source when reporting on Chinese social stories… For foreign journalists, it has also shown a diverse and authentic side of China that rarely received much attention elsewhere.

…

The success of Sixth Tone might be explained by the bigger change happening in China’s media scene over the past few years. Although the Communist Party has intensified its control, it has also allowed many forms of media entrepreneurship. Anecdotally, this is, in part, because of a lack of impact overseas by traditional Chinese party-owned newspapers.

…

Nowadays, an investment in media is not something that can solely be done by the government. Private capital has also joined the game, and these firms are making profits.

…

This is a significant change in China’s media scene. While few would be able to fight the Communist Party’s stringent and increasingly sophisticated censorship rules, the abundance of funding has liberated Chinese journalists who have long been complaining about a lack of freedom and resources. These days, journalists working in start-ups say they have greater freedom to report on topics that would not be possible in well-established traditional media

I have found information on Sixth Tone that helps us to understand some of the things that people in China are concerned about. Perhaps such information can help us as we talk to people from China in our ministry. ^

Categories
Culture Language Learning Theocratic

yǔjìng

yǔjìng (yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place; area] → [condition; situation; circumstances]} → [context] 语境 語境) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Appendix A2 of the English New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition), entitled “Features of This Revision”, discusses vocabulary changes that have been made in the current revision, words that have been translated differently than before. As noted in various entries in the excellent resource Referenced Theo. Expressions (RTE), Appendix A2 of the current Mandarin version of the New World Translation Bible (nwtsty) correspondingly discusses words that have been translated differently in the current revision of the Mandarin NWT Bible, compared to how they had been translated before.

Since we base what we say in Jehovah’s service on his Word the Bible, the vocabulary used in it—and the way those vocabulary words are translated—should be reflected in how we speak in our ministry, at our meetings, etc. So, it is beneficial for us Mandarin field language-learners to be familiar with the latest thinking from the organization on how Bible terms should be translated into Mandarin.

It Depends…

While discussing how the current Mandarin version of the New World Translation Bible (nwtsty) translates the Hebrew word shālóng (sha·lohmʹ 沙隆) and the Greek word yīléinèi (ei·reʹne 伊雷内 伊雷內) (which are translated as “peace” in the English New World Translation Bible), Appendix A2 of this current Mandarin version of the New World Translation Bible (nwtsty) explains that different Mandarin expressions may be used, depending on the “yǔjìng (yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place] → [situation]} → [context] 语境 語境)”, this week’s MEotW.

“Yǔjìng (Yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place] → [situation]} → [context] 语境 語境)” means “context”. For reference, another Mandarin word that means “context”, and that is fairly well-known, is “shàngxià wén ((shàng·xià {above → [preceding]} · {below → [following]} 上下) (wén writing 文) → [(textual) context])”.

The context must be taken into consideration when translating shālóng (sha·lohmʹ 沙隆) and yīléinèi (ei·reʹne 伊雷内 伊雷內) because these words can have broad and varied meanings. The entry in the English Insight on the Scriptures on “Peace” explains:

Sha·lohmʹ, the Hebrew word rendered “peace,” refers to the state of being free from war or disturbance (Jg 4:17; 1Sa 7:14; 1Ki 4:24; 2Ch 15:5; Job 21:9; Ec 3:8); it can convey the idea of health, safety, soundness (Ge 37:14, ftn), welfare (Ge 41:16), friendship (Ps 41:9), and entirety or completeness (Jer 13:19). The Greek word for peace (ei·reʹne) has taken on the same broad connotations as the Hebrew word sha·lohmʹ and may express the ideas of well-being, salvation, and concord, in addition to the absence of conflict. It occurs in the farewell exclamation “go in peace,” which somewhat corresponds to the expression ‘may it go well with you.’​—Mr 5:34; Lu 7:50; 8:48; Jas 2:16; compare 1Sa 1:17; 20:42; 25:35; 29:7; 2Sa 15:9; 2Ki 5:19.

Since “peace” is not always the exact equivalent for the original-language words, the context must be taken into consideration to determine what is meant.

The Insight book entry quoted above goes on to list how the English word “peace” is used to mean different things in different contexts in different scriptures in the English New World Translation Bible. It’s interesting to compare this to how Appendix A2 of the current Mandarin version of the New World Translation Bible (nwtsty) mentions that a few different Mandarin words may be used to translate shālóng (sha·lohmʹ 沙隆) and yīléinèi (ei·reʹne 伊雷内 伊雷內), depending on the “yǔjìng (yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place] → [situation]} → [context] 语境 語境)”, the context.

Context and Mandarin Writing Systems

Research into the importance of context turned up a couple of interesting sayings from the business world:

Content is king.
—Bill Gates

Content is king, but context is God.
—Gary Vaynerchuk

Mandarin field language-learners may hear the assertion from Chinese culture traditionalists that it is necessary to use Chinese characters to clarify the ambiguity that results from Mandarin having so many homophones, words that sound the same but that have different meanings. The insinuation, or even the outright accusation, is that the upstart Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) system is thus unusable as a writing system for Mandarin, that the Chinese characters writing system is still the rightful king. Besides, there is so much existing content written in Chinese characters, and content is king!

However, a little consideration of the yǔjìng (yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place] → [situation]} → [context] 语境 語境), the language situation or context, shows up the fallacy of this assertion. The Chinese characters writing system exists along with Mandarin speech, and if Chinese characters are truly required to clearly communicate meaning in Mandarin, then that would mean that Mandarin speech on its own, without the help of visible characters, is unusable as a means of communication. That, however, is obviously not true—people who are proficient in spoken Mandarin communicate clearly with each other all the time, undoubtedly pretty much as clearly as proficient English speakers communicate with each other.

The key reason why proficient Mandarin speakers can communicate clearly with each other despite all of the homophones in Mandarin is not that they are constantly referring to Chinese characters, although people do occasionally do that in the current characters-saturated cultural climate. No, the key reason why Mandarin-speakers routinely communicate clearly with each other is because they use sufficient context to clarify any potentially ambiguous homophones. And, since Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is a simple and direct representation of Mandarin speech, anything that is understandable when spoken in Mandarin is understandable when written in Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).—1 Corinthians 14:8–11.

So, while Chinese characters-based content may be so predominant in the Chinese world that it’s king there, context is God, relatively and metaphorically speaking, and Mandarin speech and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) rightly rely on context, not on Chinese characters, just like we rightly rely on God, not on merely human kings.