Category: Technology

Categories
Culture Science Technology Theocratic

diǎnliàng

diǎnliàng (diǎn·liàng {dot → [light (v); ignite]} · {to be bright} [→ [illuminate; shine light on]] 点亮 點亮) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

This week’s MEotW, “diǎnliàng (diǎn·liàng {dot → [light (v); ignite]} · {to be bright} [→ [illuminate; shine light on]] 点亮 點亮)”, is used to good effect in lesson 02 point 5 (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus) of the Mandarin Enjoy Life Forever! (lffi) brochure (and of the Mandarin Enjoy Life Forever! (lff) book).

“Diǎnliàng” in _Enjoy Life Forever!_ br., lesson 02 point 5 (WOL CHS+Pinyin, _Pīnyīn_ Plus)

Translating the English text “The Bible’s hope can make a difference”, the Mandarin text means ‘The Bible’s hope shines a light on human life’.

What’s a Word?

Note that the Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY currently renders the morphemes “”diǎn (dots → [lights (v)] 点 點)” and “liàng ({to be bright} 亮)” as two separate words, whereas the unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resource renders them together as one word, as many past official Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) publications would likely have done. Is one of these renderings “right” and the other “wrong”? Is one better and the other worse? How much does it matter?

These seemingly simple questions turn out to actually be not that simple to answer. Especially in languages like Mandarin that have historically been written using the Chinese characters writing system—a system that probably for traditional stylistic reasons neglects to clearly and conveniently put spaces between words like alphabetic writing systems generally do—there is not always a consensus regarding the answers to the questions of “What’s a word?” and “What morphemes should be put together as words?” As the Wikipedia article on “Word” says:

There still remains no consensus among linguists about the proper definition of “word” in a spoken language that is independent of its writing system, nor about the precise distinction between it and “morpheme”.[source] This issue is particularly debated for Chinese and other languages of East Asia,[source]

Standards and Conventions

Unlike the Chinese characters writing system, the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) alphabetic writing system does clearly and conveniently put spaces between words—such word separation is in fact a big advantage of Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) compared to the Chinese characters writing system. However, the question of what constitutes a word that is to be separated from other words by spaces remains one that may be answered differently by different people.

The technical linguistic term that relates to such matters is orthography. The Wikipedia article on that provides this summary of what that means:

An orthography is a set of conventions for writing a language, including norms of spelling, hyphenation, capitalization, word breaks, emphasis, and punctuation.

One might wonder whether there are official rules and standards regarding Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) orthography, and indeed there are. In fact, the PRC government has an official national standard for Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) orthography, with the designation GB/T 16159-2012. (A convenient annotated web version (rendered in Simplified Chinese characters) has been made available here on the independent website Pīnyīn.info.)

What the letters “GB/T” stand for is significant. Wikipedia provides this summary:

GB stands for Guobiao (simplified Chinese: 国标; traditional Chinese: 國標; pinyin: Guóbiāo), Chinese for national standard.

Mandatory standards are prefixed “GB”. Recommended standards are prefixed “GB/T” (T from Chinese language 推荐; tuījiàn; ‘recommended’).

(The above summary is confirmed elsewhere on the web, e.g. here on legal analysis website Lexology.)

So, while the PRC’s GB/T 16159-2012 provides many basic rules regarding Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) orthography, even within China it is not a mandatory standard—the “T” in “GB/T 16159-2012” indicates that even within China, it is at most a set of recommendations.

(An interesting contrast is the mandatory PRC standard GB 18030, which relates to software support for the PRC’s Chinese characters, both simplified and traditional, and which, for example, Microsoft makes its Windows software comply with.)

Regarding standards and conventions, even officially recommended ones, for things like language and writing, views and practices vary in different places, and at different times. For example, Chinese writing in the past didn’t have punctuation, and now it has punctuation largely modeled after European punctuation. (For reference: Chinese punctuation – Wikipedia, Q&A: When were punctuation marks first used? – HistoryExtra, history – When was punctuation introduced into Chinese? – Chinese Language Stack Exchange)

Even today, within the same time frame, there are differing views and practices regarding how things should be written. For example, in English, there are differing views and practices regarding British vs. American spellings, whether or not to use the Oxford (serial) comma, how titles should be capitalized, what should be italicized/bolded/underlined, etc.

When it comes to Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), another factor to keep in mind is that due primarily to cultural prejudice, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) has simply not been used much overall, relatively speaking, especially as a full writing system on its own. So, it has not really gone through much of the process of receiving the widely agreed upon tweaks and refinements that a system typically receives as it gets tried out and put to extensive use by many people.

Verb-Complement Togetherness

Getting back to the MEotW “diǎnliàng (diǎn·liàng {dot → [light (v); ignite]} · {to be bright} [→ [illuminate; shine light on]] 点亮 點亮)”, the PRC national standard GB/T 16159-2012 recommends that, being made up of a single-syllable verb and its single-syllable complement, this expression should be written together. Recent official Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) publications such as those on the Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY often do not follow this recommendation regarding single-syllable verbs and their single-syllable complements, whereas older official Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) publications did follow this recommendation, and as do the unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resources.

On the other hand, the unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resources join the official Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) publications, old and new, in explicitly indicating tone sandhi for “bù (not 不)” and “yī (one 一)” (e.g., “búzài (bú·zài not · again; further; continuing; anymore 不再)” instead of the standard “bùzài (bù·zài not · again; further; continuing; anymore 不再)”) to make things easier for readers, even though this practice is not included in the GB/T 16159-2012 standard’s recommendations.

In the end, what matters most re how anything is written is not just what is officially recommended or what happens to be popular among changing, imperfect humans. Rather, what matters most is what really works best to accomplish the goal of writing: To communicate to readers. This is especially true when God-honouring and life-saving Bible truths need to be communicated. So, this blog and the other Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resources will continue to seek to render Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) in ways that maximize how clearly, easily, effectively, and appropriately it communicates with readers.

For convenience:

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

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

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Enjoy Life Forever! brochure 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) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus web material based on the Mandarin Enjoy Life Forever! brochure and the Mandarin Enjoy Life Forever! book will be made available in the above-mentioned Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus web resources as time allows.

Categories
Current Events Technology

yìmiáo

yìmiáo (yì·miáo epidemic · {seedling → [vaccine]} → [vaccine] 疫苗) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Note: Tap/click on a Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to reveal its “flashcard”, tap/click on a “flashcard” or its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to hide the “flashcard”.]

As of this writing, deep in the year 2021, the subject of the COVID-19 pandemic has been, to say the least, on people’s minds now for a while. So, it would be good to be able to refer to things related to it in Mandarin when speaking to people in the Mandarin field, or when speaking to our brothers and sisters in the truth.

electron microscope image of SARS-CoV-2—also known as 2019-nCoV, the virus that causes COVID-19

An electron microscope image of SARS-CoV-2—also known as 2019-nCoV, the virus that causes COVID-19
Creative Commons Attribution License logo NIAID

This week’s MEotW, “yìmiáo (yì·miáo epidemic · {seedling → [vaccine]} → [vaccine] 疫苗)”, means “vaccine”. Interestingly, this expression’s literal meaning is “epidemic seedling”, which is appropriate considering that vaccines have been made from disease-causing microorganisms, without being live, full-grown versions of them.

Examples

To say something meaning “I have received one dose of vaccine” in Mandarin, one might say:

📖 📄 📘 “Wǒ (I 我) dǎle (dǎ·le {have been struck with → [generalized verb]} · [indicates a change] 打了) yìmiáo (yì·miáo epidemic · {seedling → [vaccine]} → [vaccine] 疫苗) yí (one 一) cì (time 次).”

To refer in Mandarin to “an arrangement that will be even more effective than vaccines at eliminating disease”, we could use this phrase:

📖 📄 📘 “yí (one 一) ge ([mw] 个 個/个) huì (will 会 會) bǐ ({compared to} 比) yìmiáo (yì·miáo epidemic · {seedlings → [vaccines]} → [vaccines] 疫苗) gèng (more 更) yǒuxiào (yǒu·xiào having · effect → [effective] 有效) de (-ly 地) xiāochú (xiāo·chú eliminate · {get rid of} 消除) jíbìng (disease 疾病) de (’s 的) ānpái (ān·pái {placing in a suitable position} · arranging → [arrangement] 安排)”

Categories
Culture History Language Learning Technology

zhǐnán‐zhēn

zhǐnán‐zhēn ((zhǐ·nán {(points with) finger → [points]} · south 指南)‐(zhēn needle 针 針) → [compass]) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Jehovah’s organization has pointed out that it is significant that the Psalms rhyme in meaning, whether or not the words rhyme in sound.

The July 15, 1979 issue of The Watchtower expresses it this way:

THE book of Psalms constituted the book of poetry and song of the ancient Hebrew nation. …The poetry was not based on the rhyming of words, nor altogether on meter. Often, there is parallelism in thought, sometimes synonymous, sometimes contrasting. This enables the mind and the spirit of the reader to follow the thought smoothly so that much better understanding and motivation result.

Similarly, while many Westerners especially may be fascinated by the Chinese characters usually used to write Mandarin words, characters are ultimately merely superficial visual representations, as are idols used in idol worship. A much more truly meaningful (pun totally intended) benefit to Westerners of learning Mandarin words involves learning about the meanings of those Mandarin words, and how they reveal the contrastingly different ways that Chinese people have thought about things. As 2 Corinthians 4:18 says:

while we keep our eyes, not on the things seen, but on the things unseen. For the things seen are temporary, but the things unseen are everlasting.

One classic example of the contrastingly different ways that Chinese people have thought about things is this week’s MEotW, “zhǐnán‐zhēn ((zhǐ·nán {(points with) finger → [points]} · south 指南)‐(zhēn needle 针 針) → [compass])”. While Westerners think of a compass as having a needle that points north, the literal meaning of the Mandarin word “zhǐnán‐zhēn ((zhǐ·nán {(points with) finger → [points]} · south 指南)‐(zhēn needle 针 針) → [compass])” is “points south needle”. Did the Chinese get it wrong? Are Westerners wrong? Neither! The fact is that as one end of a compass needle points north, the other end simultaneously points south. So, in this case, Westerners and Chinese people are both right—they’re just looking at the same thing from different points of view.

Sometimes, considering a different point of view, a different perspective, can help give one the mental—or even emotional—leverage needed to make a leap of progress that one would not otherwise make, if one was limited to one way of looking at things.

The fact that different languages come from different cultures, with their different perspectives and ways of thinking, is also why there is truth in the quote from Charlemagne that “to have another language is to possess a second soul.” (Of course, we know that by “soul” he meant what is described in the Insight on the Scriptures book entry for “Spirit”, under the subheading “Impelling Mental Inclination”.)

A Great Invention

Speaking of the compass, it’s also noteworthy that the compass is one of what are called the Four Great Inventions (Sì (Four 四) Dà (Big → [Great] 大) Fāmíng (Fā·míng {Sendings Out → [Bringings into Existence]} · {to Be Distinct} → [Inventions] 发明 發明)) from ancient China.

Chinese compass held at Queensland Museum c. 1938
Chinese compass held at Queensland Museum c. 1938
Creative Commons Public Domain logo

As the Wikipedia article on the compass summarizes for us:

Among the Four Great Inventions, the magnetic compass was first invented as a device for divination as early as the Chinese Han Dynasty (since c. 206 BC),[source][source] and later adopted for navigation by the Song Dynasty Chinese during the 11th century.[source][source][source] The first usage of a compass recorded in Western Europe and the Islamic world occurred around 1190.[source][source]

So, maybe the Chinese actually got first dibs on getting to say which way a compass needle points, for whatever that’s worth, considering that a compass needle simultaneously points in two opposite directions. 😄

But Wait, There’s More!

In addition to the weirdness about a compass needle pointing both north and south simultaneously, I found the below weirdness summarized in the Wikipedia article on the North Magnetic Pole:

All magnets have two poles, where the lines of magnetic flux enter and emerge. By analogy with Earth’s magnetic field, these are called the magnet’s “north” and “south” poles. The convention in early compasses was to call the end of the needle pointing to Earth’s North Magnetic Pole the “north pole” (or “north-seeking pole”) and the other end the “south pole” (the names are often abbreviated to “N” and “S”). Because opposite poles attract, this definition means that Earth’s North Magnetic Pole is actually a magnetic south pole and Earth’s South Magnetic Pole is a magnetic north pole.[source][source]