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”
[As of this writing, jw.org is featuring the upcoming Memorial. So, this is basically a reposting of a post from a few years back about the current official Mandarin translation of “the Memorial of Jesus’ death”.]
This year’s Memorial is coming up soon, 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:
Ben Cohen, manager of the Swift team at Apple, speaks of their core design goal of making the Swift programming language ceremony-free.
Here is a clip of the podcast referred to in the X post above, in which Mr. Cohen speaks of the core goal to make Swift ceremony-free:
As the above X post 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.
Zhōngdōng+
(Zhōng·dōng
Middle · East
中东
中東) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”
[In view of the renewed fighting in the Middle East, and since the below-mentioned article is again being featured on jw.org, it seems appropriate to revisit this post that was originally posted on July 1, 2025. By the way, the Mandarin expression for “Iran” is “Yīlǎng+
(Iran
伊朗)”.]
[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.]
At the time of this writing, jw.org was featuring the article “War in the Middle East—What Does the Bible Say?”. Where the English version of this article uses the expression “Middle East”, the Mandarin version uses this week’s MEotW, “Zhōngdōng
(Zhōng·dōng
Middle · East
中东
中東)”. For example, here are the English and Mandarin versions of the article’s title:
The “Zhōng
({within/among/[in] the midst of (it/them…)} | centre; middle | midst | amid | medium; intermediate
中)” in “Zhōngdōng
(Zhōng·dōng
Middle · East
中东
中東)” corresponds to “Middle”, and it also occurs in expressions such as past MEotW’s “Zhōngguó
(Zhōng·guó
Central · Nation →[China | Chinese]
中国
中國)”🔗, “Zhōngwén
(Zhōng·wén
{Central → [Chinese]} · Writing
中文)”🔗, and “Zhōngyāng Zhǎnglǎo‐Tuán+
((Zhōngyāng
Central
中央)
(Zhǎng·lǎo
{Grown → [Elder]} · Old (Men) → [Elders]
长老
長老)‐(Tuán
{Rolled into a Ball (Thing)} → [Group] → [Body]
团
團/糰)
→[Governing Body])”🔗. (Note that in these past MEotW’s, “Zhōng
({within/among/[in] the midst of (it/them…)} | centre; middle | midst | amid | medium; intermediate
中)” is really used to mean “Central”, which is a bit different from “Middle”.)
The “dōng
(east
东
東)” in “Zhōngdōng
(Zhōng·dōng
Middle · East
中东
中東)” corresponds to “East”. For reference, here are the Mandarin expressions for the cardinal directions and the ordinal or intercardinal directions:
Note how the Mandarin expressions for the ordinal or intercardinal directions use reverse word order compared to their English counterparts. For example, “xīběi
(xī·běi
{west | western} · {north | northern} →[north-west | north-western]
西北)” literally means “west · north”, in contrast to the English word “north-west”. This may remind one of how the Mandarin word for “compass”, past MEotW“zhǐnán‐zhēn
((zhǐ·nán
{(points with) finger → [points]} · south
指南)‐(zhēn
needle
针
針)
→[compass])”, on a certain level of literalness means “points south needle”, in contrast to the Western view that a compass needle points north. Both are right—when one end of a symmetrical compass needle is pointing south, the other end is simultaneously pointing north—they’re just different ways of thinking about the same thing.
A Longer Usage Example
To provide a longer, more extensive example of how “Zhōngdōng
(Zhōng·dōng
Middle · East
中东
中東)” and some related expressions can be used in the ministry, here is some Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) Plus material based on the introductory paragraphs of the above-mentioned article:
English:
The world is anxiously watching the conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran. Will the situation escalate into a wider war? Can governments avert disaster and achieve lasting peace?
Those familiar with Bible prophecy may wonder whether this Middle East conflict could be the start of the battle of Armageddon mentioned in the book of Revelation.
What does the Bible say?
Mandarin:
📖📄➕Měiguó
(Měi·guó
American · Nation →[USA]
美国
美國),
Yǐsèliè
(Israel
以色列),
hé
({(together) with} →[and]
和
和/龢)Yīlǎng+
(Iran
伊朗)zhījiān
(zhī·jiān
them · among
之间
之間)de
(’s
的)chōngtū+
(chōng·tū
{dashing → [clashing]} · {chimney → [dashing forward]} →[conflict]
冲突
衝突),
nòngde
(nòng·de
{has played with → [has made]} · getting
弄得)shìjiè
(shì·jiè
{generation → [world]} · extent’s →[world’s]
世界)gèdì
(gè·dì
various · lands
各地)rénxīn
(rén·xīn
people’s · hearts → [public feeling]
人心)‐huánghuáng
(huáng·huáng
{to be fearful → [to be anxious]} · {to be fearful → [to be anxious]}
惶惶).
Zhèige
(Zhèi·ge
this · [mw]
这个
這個)chōngtū
(chōng·tū
{dashing → [clashing]} · {chimney → [dashing forward]} →[conflict]
冲突
衝突)huì
(will
会
會)yǎnbiàn
(yǎn·biàn
perform · changing →[develop]
演变
演變)chéng
({to become}
成)dà
(large
大)‐guīmó+
(guī·mó
{compasses → [rules]} · model →[scale]
规模
規模)de
(’s
的)zhànzhēng
(zhàn·zhēng
war · contending →[war]
战争
戰爭)ma([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions]
吗
嗎)?
Zhèngfǔ
(Zhèng·fǔ
political · {seats of government} →[governments]
政府)yǒu
({do have}
有)nénglì
(néng·lì
ability · power
能力)píngxī+
(píng·xī
{to make to be flat, level, even → [to make to be calm]} · {to stop} →[to calm/quiet down]
平息)chōngtū
(chōng·tū
{dashing → [clashing]} · {chimney → [dashing forward]} →[conflict]
冲突
衝突),
dàilái
(dài·lái
{to bring} · {to come}
带来
帶來)chángjiǔ
(cháng·jiǔ
long · {for a long time}
长久
長久)de
(’s
的)hépíng
(hé·píng
{being (together) with (one another)} · {being flat, level, even} →[peace (nwtsty-CHS Appx. A2 says this term mainly refers to the absence of war or conflict)]
和平)ma([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions]
吗
嗎)?
[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.]
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).
‘Keeping Account of the Injury’
This week’s MEotW, “jìjiào
(jì·jiào
count; calculate · {dispute [about]} [→ [haggle over; fuss about; bother about; bicker]]
计较
計較)”, is used in verse 5 (WOL) of 1 Corinthians 13:
(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. Other web browsers may also have extensions with similar functionality.)
For comparison, here are the current English and Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) Plus renderings of 1 Corinthians 13:5:
The “jì
(counting; computing; calculating; numbering [→ [plot; plan (n or v)]]
计
計)” in “jìjiào
(jì·jiào
count; calculate · {dispute [about]} [→ [haggle over; fuss about; bother about; bicker]]
计较
計較)” can mean “count; calculate”, and it also appears in “jìsuàn
(jì·suàn
counting; computing; calculating · computing; calculating; figuring
计算
計算)”. As for the “jiào
(compare; contrast | dispute | {being compared} → [comparatively; relatively; fairly; quite; rather | clear[ly]; obvious[ly]]
较
較)” in “jìjiào
(jì·jiào
count; calculate · {dispute [about]} [→ [haggle over; fuss about; bother about; bicker]]
计较
計較)”, while it means “compare; contrast” in “bǐjiào
(compare; contrast | {being compared} → [comparatively; relatively; fairly; quite; rather] | comparing → [comparison]
比较
比較)”, in “jìjiào
(jì·jiào
count; calculate · {dispute [about]} [→ [haggle over; fuss about; bother about; bicker]]
计较
計較)” it has its older meaning of “dispute”.
Interestingly, besides its morphemes’ literal meanings of “count; calculate · dispute”, “jìjiào
(jì·jiào
count; calculate · {dispute [about]} [→ [haggle over; fuss about; bother about; bicker]]
计较
計較)” can also mean “haggle over; fuss about; bother about; bicker” in some settings. In 1 Corinthians 13:5 in the current English and Mandarin versions of the New World Translation Bible, it corresponds with the English expression “keep account of”.
Nitpicking…
Every human-designed system has its shortcomings and negative aspects, including Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音). However, is it advantageous or helpful to harp on or “fuss about” its potentially negative aspects without considering the whole picture?
For example, some make a fuss about the many homophones (different words that sound the same) in Mandarin, saying that they make Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) unsuitable to be a full writing system for Mandarin. In the overall picture of reality, though, since Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) is just a relatively simple representation of Mandarin speech, homophones are no more a problem when people use Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) than they are when people speak Mandarin. People have learned to deal with the challenge of homophones when speaking Mandarin by using sufficient clarifying context, and so people can similarly understand Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音), homophones and all.
(People who say they have trouble understanding Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) because of homophones may actually be showing that the texts they are reading were written without sufficient context, and were relying on characters as a crutch rather than accurately representing Mandarin speech like they should. Or, these people may be showing that they themselves don’t actually understand spoken Mandarin very well, rather than that Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) has some inherent shortcoming, when it just simply and directly represents spoken Mandarin.)
Conversely, in the overall picture, characters have the parallel problem of homographs, characters that could represent multiple different words. So, making an anti-Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) fuss over Mandarin homophones amounts to jìjiào
(jì·jiào
counting · {disputing about} (things) → [fussing about (things)]
计较
計較), nitpicking over a problem that’s being adequately handled, while offering a solution in the characters that has its own corresponding problem.
Another objection to Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) that I have heard is that it makes some English-speaking Mandarin learners think of English sounds, so the Mandarin they speak doesn’t sound like native Mandarin. For this reason, some say, it would be better to use Chinese characters or Zhùyīn+
(Zhù·yīn
{Annotating of} · Sounds →[Zhuyin]
注音
註/注音), which would not similarly remind people of English. Is this a real thing? Or, is it just an excuse used by some who are infected by Exotic East Syndrome to focus on “exotic” Eastern systems rather than the “mundane” Latin alphabet used by English and Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音)?
I do not doubt that some, even many, English-speaking Mandarin learners think of English sounds when they see Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音), but this is actually not a shortcoming of Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) itself, but rather, a rookie mistake on the part of these English-speaking Mandarin learners, who have not yet trained themselves to recognize Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) as a system that actually represents Mandarin sounds, not English sounds. It may also indicate that these Mandarin learners still need to become more familiar with and used to the sounds of Mandarin in the first place. The article Pīnyīn Is a Good, Workable Writing System on Its Own has an entire section on this, part of which says:
As English-speaking Mandarin-learners get more familiar with the sounds of correct Mandarin speech, they can come to get used to correctly mentally connecting Pīnyīn to correct Mandarin sounds, rather than to English sounds. Then, they can regularly and reliably use Pīnyīn to help them speak Mandarin-sounding Mandarin, just like people regularly and reliably use written French to help them speak French-sounding French.
…While Ignoring White Elephants
Rather than just nitpicking and harping on the real or perceived shortcomings of Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) in order to support the traditionally imposed Chinese characters, let us not overlook the white elephant in the room regarding the inhumanly and inhumanely complex characters—learning and remembering them is extremely difficult and costly in terms of time and effort, especially compared to comparatively simple and elegant Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音). Let us not “strain out the gnat but gulp down the camel” like the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day did. (Matthew 23:24) Yes, let us not incorrectly look down on and dismiss Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) as merely being training wheels when it is really regular wheels, and let us also not just swallow the egregious reality that Chinese characters are actually more like square wheels than regular wheels!
The problem is not that Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) is like training wheels, because Pīnyīn
(Pīn·yīn
{Piecing Together of} · Sounds →[Pinyin]
拼音) is actually like regular wheels. The real problem is that characters are like square wheels!
