Category: Technology

Categories
Culture History Language Learning Technology Theocratic

jiùsuàn

jiùsuàn (jiù·suàn {even if} · {figuring → [considering]} 就算) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

I have long especially liked 1 Corinthians 13. It contains counsel on what really does and doesn’t matter in life, an extensive description and definition of the most important kind of love, and a sublime discussion about the need to become complete, mature, as a person. As these apply to life in general, so too do they apply to our lives as Mandarin field language learners.

As Mandarin field language learners, it can benefit us greatly to consider what we can learn from 1 Corinthians 13, and along the way, we can also consider some of the Mandarin expressions used in that chapter in the current version of the Mandarin New World Translation Bible (nwtsty).

“If…”

The second Mandarin expression that occurs in verse 1 (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus) of 1 Corinthians 13 (after “Wǒ (I 我)”) is this week’s MEotW, “jiùsuàn (jiù·suàn {even if} · {figuring → [considering]} 就算)”.

Screenshot of “jiùsuàn” in 1 Co. 13:1 (nwtsty, CHS+_Pīnyīn_ WOL)

(Dark mode for the Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY (WOL) website, as shown in the above image, can be enabled in the Safari web browser by using the Noir Safari extension.)

“Jiù (then; already | exactly | regarding | immediately | merely | {move towards} | {engage in} | accomplish; make | accommodate | {go with} | {even if} 就)” can mean many different things, as can be seen from its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus information. The meaning that seems to apply in “jiùsuàn (jiù·suàn {even if} · {figuring → [considering]} 就算)” is “even if”.

Calculating…

As for “suàn (calculate; compute; figure | count (v) [→ [consider/regard as]] 算)”, one of its meanings is “calculate”. (In fact, a “jìsuàn jī ((jì·suàn computing · calculating 计算 計算) (jī machine 机 機/机) → [computer | calculator (Taiwan)])” is a computer, or a calculator.)

There certainly is a long history of calculating done in the long history of China, such as all the calculating done to save face, advance ambitions, and acquire status in the official bureaucracy and in the imperial court. Perhaps because of Chinese cultural tradition or out of habit inherited from the world, some may have a tendency to do similar calculating in the Mandarin field. Rather than focusing on the work of praising Jehovah and preaching to and teaching Mandarin-speaking ones, some might be focusing on ways to receive “glory from one another”.—John 5:44.

1 Corinthians 13:1–3 admonishes us though, that jiùsuàn (jiù·suàn {even if} · {figuring → [considering]} 就算) this is done, even if such calculating is done to figure in things like ‘speaking in the tongues of men and of angels’, ‘understanding…all knowledge’ (perhaps, for example, knowledge of Chinese characters), various boastworthy deeds, etc., if one does not have love, then all those other things mean nothing:

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love, I have become a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal. 2 And if I have the gift of prophecy and understand all the sacred secrets and all knowledge, and if I have all the faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give all my belongings to feed others, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I do not benefit at all.

Let us, then, examine our hearts to make sure that we avoid letting pride be our motivation. Instead, let us cultivate love for Jehovah and for our Mandarin-speaking neighbours, so that love is what motivates us in our efforts to learn the language and serve in the Mandarin field.

Categories
Culture Language Learning Technology Theocratic

Yēsū Xīshēng Jìniàn Jùhuì

Yēsū (Jesus’ 耶稣 耶穌)
Xīshēng (Xī·shēng {Sacrifice (n)} · {(as with a) Domestic Animal} → [Sacrifice] 牺牲 犧牲)
Jìniàn Jùhuì ((Jì·niàn Remembering · {Thinking Of} → [Commemorating] 记/纪念 記/紀念) (Jùhuì Meeting 聚会 聚會) → [Memorial]) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

This year’s Memorial is scheduled for this week, so this week’s MEotW is “Yēsū (Jesus’ 耶稣 耶穌) Xīshēng (Xī·shēng {Sacrifice (n)} · {(as with a) Domestic Animal} → [Sacrifice] 牺牲 犧牲) Jìniàn Jùhuì ((Jì·niàn Remembering · {Thinking Of} → [Commemorating] 记/纪念 記/紀念) (Jùhuì Meeting 聚会 聚會) → [Memorial])”. This is currently the official way to translate “the Memorial of Jesus’ death” into Mandarin, as can be seen by comparing the English and Mandarin pages for the Memorial on jw.org.

It’s worth noting that this is a simple, straightforward, functional translation, free of unnecessary sentimentality or ceremony. As one dictionary puts it, “ceremony”, in this case, refers to:

The formalities observed on some solemn or important public or state occasion in order to render it more imposing or impressive: as, the ceremony of crowning a king, or of laying a foundation-stone; the ceremony of inaugurating the President of the United States.

Indeed, for those of us who appreciate Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, the Memorial is about this appreciation, not about ceremony or empty or showy rituals.

What Price Ceremony?

The matter of unnecessary ceremony reminds me of something I heard in a podcast a while ago:

Here is a clip of the podcast referred to in the tweet above, in which Mr. Cohen speaks of the core goal to make Swift ceremony-free:

As the above tweet also mentions, Chinese characters have oodles and gobs of unnecessary, time-and-energy-consuming ceremony, especially compared to the simple, straightforward, and elegant Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) writing system. And, echoing Mr. Cohen’s observation that ceremony can weigh programmers down and rob them of the joy that they could otherwise feel when coding, many have found that the unnecessary, traditionally mandated complexity and ceremonial baggage of Chinese characters can weigh down Mandarin learners and take away much of the joy that they should be able to feel from learning how to really communicate with Mandarin-speaking people.

Is it appropriate for us to look at the Chinese characters writing system through the same lens that we use to look at a technological system like the Swift programming language? It really is, because while the Chinese characters writing system is indeed a matter of culture, all writing systems are simultaneously technologies, applications of skills and knowledge for practical purposes.

Categories
Culture Language Learning Languages Science Technology

fā yǔyīn

fā ({send out} 发 發)
yǔyīn (yǔ·yīn {language → [speech]} · sounds → [voice message] 语音 語音) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

While doing research for the MEotW post on “tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)‐wàng (forget 忘)‐zì (character 字)”, I came across the web article “Why is character amnesia in China considered problematic?”. One of the points it makes involves this week’s MEotW, “fā ({send out} 发 發) yǔyīn (yǔ·yīn {language → [speech]} · sounds → [voice message] 语音 語音)” (send voice message):

Another feature that has gained huge popularity in China recently is that of ‘sending voice messages’ (发语音, fā yǔyīn). Chinese Whatsapp equivalent ‘WeChat’ was the first in the world to introduce this feature in its app. Social media research by University College London has shown that Chinese WeChat users find voice messaging convenient because it eliminates the need to text. Informants have reported that sending written messages always takes more time, and that inputting Chinese characters was a struggle (Wang & McDonald, 2013). With voice messaging, or even with pinyin input, people do not need to memorize the exact order of each stroke of a character when typing a text. They can just rely on knowing the pronunciation and recognizing the character. The prevalence of typing and texting on cellular devices has been correlated to reduced active-character knowledge by Chinese natives, leading to the tibiwangzi-phenomenon (Williams, 2016).

Sending, Language, Sounds

The “fā ({send out}; issue; emit [→ [deliver | utter; express | become rich]] 发 發)” in “fā ({send out} 发 發) yǔyīn (yǔ·yīn {language → [speech]} · sounds → [voice message] 语音 語音)” literally means “send out; issue; emit”, and it can also be used to mean various things such as “deliver”, “utter; express”, and “become rich”. With such a variety of meanings, it shows up in various expressions, such as:

  • fāchū (fā·chū issue; send; emit · out 发出 發出)
  • fāchòu (fā·chòu emit · {being stinking} → [smell bad; stink] 发臭 發臭)
  • fāshēng (fā·shēng {issue forth} · {come to life} → [happen] 发生 發生)
  • fācái (fā·cái {issue forth} · wealth; riches → [get rich; make a fortune] 发财 發財) (“Fā ({issue forth (riches)} → [become rich] 发 發)” used on its own to mean “become rich” is probably an abbreviation of this expression.)
  • fāyīn (fā·yīn {sending out; issuing → [uttering] [of]} · sound → [pronouncing/articulating/enunciating | pronunciation; articulation; enunciation] 发音 發音)
  • etc.

The “yǔ (language; speech; tongue | saying; proverb | words; expression | speak; say 语 語)” in “fā ({send out} 发 發) yǔyīn (yǔ·yīn {language → [speech]} · sounds → [voice message] 语音 語音)” basically means “language”. It can also particularly mean “speech”—according to a basic principle of linguistics, speech is the primary aspect of human language. This “yǔ (language; speech; tongue | saying; proverb | words; expression | speak; say 语 語)” is used in:

  • yǔyán (yǔ·yán language; tongue · {(type of) speech} 语言 語言)
  • Guóyǔ (Guó·yǔ National · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in Taiwan)] 国语 國語)
  • Hànyǔ (Hàn·yǔ {Han (Chinese)} · Language [→ [(Modern Standard) Mandarin]] 汉语 漢語)
  • Hányǔ (Hán·yǔ Korean · Language 韩语 韓語)
  • Yīngyǔ (Yīng·yǔ English · Language 英语 英語)
  • etc.

(Note that while “Yīngyǔ (Yīng·yǔ English · Language 英语 英語)”, for example, refers to English language speech, “Yīngwén (Yīng·wén English · Writing 英文)” refers, not to English speech, but to English language writing.)

The “yīn (sound [→ [musical note/sound; tone; pronunciation | syllable | news; tidings]] 音)” in “fā ({send out} 发 發) yǔyīn (yǔ·yīn {language → [speech]} · sounds → [voice message] 语音 語音)” basically means “sound”, and it can also be used to mean “musical note/sound”, “tone”, “pronunciation”, “syllable”, and “news; tidings”. It is used in:

  • shēngyīn (shēng·yīn sound; voice · sound 声音 聲音)
  • yīnyuè (yīn·yuè {(musical) sound} · music → [music] 音乐 音樂)
  • Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)
  • Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音)
  • Mǎtài (Matthew 马太 馬太) Fúyīn (Fú·yīn Blessings · News 福音)
  • etc.

Speech is Natural, Characters, Not So Much

Writing is by now an age-old technology for recording and transmitting human speech. Now, in 2023, audio recording and transmitting technology has been available for a long time that actually allows one to directly hear the recorded speech pretty much as it originally sounded. Additionally, such technology is getting more and more common and accessible, to the point that many are finding that it often is faster and easier to send audio voice messages than to write and send written messages, especially when using as complex and cumbersome a writing system as Chinese characters.

True, in some situations, writing has some advantages over speech, but overall, the linguistic principle remains true that when it comes to human language, speech is primary and writing is secondary. Indeed, if God had meant for us humans to mainly use writing to communicate, then he could easily have designed our bodies with built-in screens that are able to dynamically display writing, like even humans know how to make. Instead, God designed our brains and bodies such that parts of them are specialized for directly understanding and producing speech.

Thus, it is quite natural that people would often take advantage of technology that has become available that allows one to actually hear recorded speech, instead of always settling for the visual abstractions of writing. And, when writing is appropriate, it is similarly relatively natural for people to make use of writing systems like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) that are primarily phonetic, that is, focusing on directly representing the sounds of speech.

The National, the Political, the Universal(?), the Individual, the Rituals

On the other hand, rather than naturally reflecting divine wisdom, the attachment of many to Chinese characters instead reflects some human shortcomings. On a national level, the justification that characters are helpful in politically unifying China in spite of it being comprised of groups speaking different languages is yet another example of a human ruling authority prioritizing its own political power and survival over what’s actually good for the people. Besides, there’s actually nothing special about characters when it comes to being usable by people who speak different languages. As John DeFrancis put it in his book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, in the chapter entitled “The Universality Myth” (p. 159),

Chinese characters used by Asians speaking different languages are no more universal than are Latin letters used by Europeans who also speak different languages.

For example, while it’s true that the character “台” is recognized by both Mandarin-speakers and Cantonese-speakers as meaning “table”, it’s also true that “table”, written in Latin alphabet letters, is recognized by both English-speakers and French-speakers as meaning “table”.

(In China specifically, rather than characters, say, allowing Mandarin-speakers who don’t know Cantonese to understand written-out Cantonese speech, with its unique vocabulary and characters, and vice versa, what has actually happened is that the politically dominant Mandarin-speakers have basically forced speakers of Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc. to learn and use written Mandarin instead of actual written Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc.)

On a more individual level, many who are attached to characters show that they cling to what is old and familiar, even if it is problematic, instead of reaching out for and embracing positive change and progress. Also, many who cling to characters and the intricate procedures required to handwrite them show that they prioritize traditions, rituals, and procedures over what really brings better results. As Jesus said, though, “wisdom is proved righteous by its works”, not by its traditions, rituals, and procedures.—Matthew 11:19.