Tag: Chinese Culture

Categories
Culture Experiences Language Learning Science Theocratic

yì‐zhī‐bàn‐jiě

yì‐zhī‐bàn‐jiě ((yì {one (part)} 一)‐(zhī know 知)‐(bàn {half (part)} 半)‐(jiě untie → [solve] → [understand] 解) → [have half-baked understanding; be a dilettante/amateur]) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[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 None re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

We in the Mandarin field should keep in mind that many Mandarin-speaking people were taught to believe in evolution, and thus tend to not believe in God. The Shēngmìng Láizì Chuàngzào Ma? ((Shēngmìng Life 生命) (Lái·zì Came · From 来自 來自) (Chuàng·zào Initiating · {Making, Creating} → [Creating] 创造 創造) (Ma [? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)? → [Was Life Created? (lc)]) (Was Life Created? (lc)) brochure and the Shēngmìng de Qǐyuán—Zhíde Sīkǎo de Wǔ Ge Wèntí ((Shēngmìng Life 生命) (de ’s 的) (Qǐ·yuán {Rising → [Starting]} · Source → [Origin] 起源/原)—(Zhí·de Worth · Getting → [Worth] 值得) (Sī·kǎo {Thinking About} · Examining 思考) (de ’s 的) (Wǔ Five 五) (Ge [mw] 个 個/个) (Wèn·tí Asking · Subjects → [Questions] 问题 問題) → [The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking (lf)]) (The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking (lf)) brochure were originally published back in 2010, but they are still considered current publications, and relatively recently, the English version of the Was Life Created? brochure was updated to the December 2022 Printing, and the Mandarin version of it was updated to the February 2023 Printing. So, it would be good for us to consider some of the expressions used in the Mandarin versions of the Was Life Created? and Origin of Life brochures, which can be so helpful when discussing the fundamentally important question of whether life was created.

“Poorly Understood”

This week’s MEotW, which appears in the section of the Mandarin Was Life Created? brochure entitled “Shēngjī (Shēng·jī Life · {Mechanism → [Being Organic]} → [Life] 生机 生機)‐Bóbó (Bó·bó Flourishing · Flourishing 勃勃) de (’s 的) Dìqiú (Dì·qiú Earth · Globe → [Earth] 地球)” (“The Living Planet”), is “yì‐zhī‐bàn‐jiě ((yì {one (part)} 一)‐(zhī know 知)‐(bàn {half (part)} 半)‐(jiě untie → [solve] → [understand] 解) → [have half-baked understanding; be a dilettante/amateur])”:

English:

Life on earth could never exist were it not for a series of very fortunate “coincidences,” some of which were unknown or poorly understood until the 20th century.

Mandarin (WOL; Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus)

📖 📄 📘 Dìqiú (Dì·qiú earth · globe → [earth] 地球) zài (in 在) hěn (very 很) duō (many 多) fāngmiàn (fāng·miàn {directions → [sides]} · faces → [aspects] 方面) dōu ({all of them} 都) “qiǎohé (qiǎo·hé {being coincidental → [coincidentally]} · {closing → [matching]} → [coincidental] 巧合)” de (-ly 地) pèihe (pèi·he matches · {closes → [accords]} → [is suitable] 配合) de (getting 得) tiān‐yī‐wúfèng ((tiān (to be) heavenly 天)‐(yī garment 衣)‐(wú·fèng without · seams 无缝 無縫) → [to be flawless]), yào (if 要)‐bu ((it) not 不)‐shì (was 是) zhèyàng (zhè·yàng this · {form → [way]} 这样 這樣), dìqiú (dì·qiú earth · globe → [earth] 地球) shang (upon 上) gēnběn (gēn·běn (at) {root (of a plant)} · {root or stem of a plant} → [basically] 根本) jiù (then 就) bù (not 不) kěnéng (could 可能) yǒu (have 有) shēngmìng (life 生命). Duìyú (Duì·yú towards · {with regard to} 对于 對於) zhèixiē (zhèi·xiē this · {indefinite number of} → [these] 这些 這些) “qiǎohé (qiǎo·hé coincidental · {closings → [matchings]} → [coincidences] 巧合)”, kēxué‐jiā ((kē·xué {branches of study} · learning → [science] 科学 科學)‐(jiā -ists 家) → [scientists]) yìzhí (yì·zhí one · {being straight} → [all along] 一直) yì‐zhī‐bàn‐jiě ((yì {one (part)} 一)‐(zhī {were knowing} 知)‐(bàn {half (part)} 半)‐(jiě {were untying} → [were solving] → [were understanding] 解) → [were having half-baked understanding]) shènzhì (shèn·zhì extremely · {going to the extent of} → [even] 甚至) yìwú‐suǒzhī ((yì·wú {one → [entirely]} · {were not having} 一无 一無) (suǒ·zhī {that which (they)} · {were knowing} 所知) → [were knowing nothing]), zhídào (zhí·dào straight · {up until} 直到) 20 shìjì (shì·jì generation · era → [century] 世纪 世紀) cái ({only then} 才 才/纔) míngbai (míng·bai {were bright (about them) → [were understanding (them)]} · {to be white → [clearly]} 明白) duō (more 多) yìdiǎnr (yì·diǎn·r a · bit · {child → [(diminutive) non-syllabic retroflex suffix; pronunciation feature in Beijing dialect]} 一点(儿) 一點(兒)).

As can be seen from the above quotes, the Mandarin Was Life Created? brochure uses “yì‐zhī‐bàn‐jiě ((yì {one (part)} 一)‐(zhī know 知)‐(bàn {half (part)} 半)‐(jiě untie → [solve] → [understand] 解) → [have half-baked understanding; be a dilettante/amateur])” to correspond to the expression “poorly understood” that appears in the English version.

Know More Than “Just Enough to be Dangerous”

The matter of understanding reminds me of a couple of lines from the Beatles song “Strawberry Fields Forever”:

Living is easy with eyes closed
Misunderstanding all you see

Yes, many are unfortunately content to live without understanding of many things or just with whatever understandings they were given by others, since that way of living spares them of the effort required to think for themselves. However, no one ever really came into the truth that way—even those who “grew up in the truth” had to ultimately make the truth their own if they were to stay in the truth.

When it comes to the subject of creation/evolution, and also the Mandarin language itself that we seek to be able to use to speak about that subject, we need to grow and develop our knowledge and understanding beyond the point of “knowing just enough to be dangerous”. With true science, true religion, and also truly effective language learning, there must be willingness to leave behind old ideas when newly discovered evidence and newly acquired knowledge and understanding show that those ideas are in error, or are inadequate. As Proverbs 4:18 says:

But the path of the righteous is like the bright morning light
That grows brighter and brighter until full daylight.

“Become Full-Grown in Your Understanding”

For example, the traditional cultural doctrine that Mandarin learners should focus on learning characters is only partially, superficially true, insofar as it is indeed of some practical value, in this current system that has remained enthralled with characters, to be able to read and write Mandarin Chinese that’s written in characters. However, as shown by language science and by 1 Corinthians 14:8–11 in God’s Word itself, the most basically important aspect to focus on when learning a language for the ministry is actually understandable speech:

For if the trumpet sounds an indistinct call, who will get ready for battle? 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. It may be that there are many kinds of speech in the world, and yet no kind is without meaning. 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.

We imperfect humans tend to focus on what is visible and apparently easy to measure, as opposed to what is invisible and not as apparently easy to measure. Idols, for instance, are visible and apparently easy to measure—an idol worshipper might say, or just subconsciously feel, “Look, I can plainly see my god, that idol, so I’ve got the religious/spiritual aspect of my life covered.” Similarly, a traditionally inclined Mandarin learner may say, or just subconsciously feel, “Look, these visible and visually fascinating Chinese characters obviously represent the Mandarin language, and are emphasized and glamourized by many people, so by focusing on the characters, I’ll have Mandarin learning covered.”

However, visible idols are actually false gods, and the only true God Jehovah is invisible. Similarly, the visible and visually fascinating Chinese characters, as glamourized as they are, are not actually the Mandarin language itself—they are just an unnecessarily convoluted traditional system of writing the Mandarin language, which actually consists of invisible Mandarin speech.

So, when preparing to talk to Mandarin-speaking people about whether life was created, let us proceed with understanding that is as full as possible regarding both the topic itself and also the Mandarin language that we use to discuss it, rather than being content with “misunderstanding all you see”, or with half-baked understandings passed on from others. As 1 Corinthians 14 goes on to say, “become full-grown in your understanding”.—1 Corinthians 14:20.

For convenience:

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

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Was Life Created? brochure 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 Was Life Created? brochure will be made available in the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus web resource as time allows.

Categories
Culture Current Events History Language Learning Technology

Gōngyè‐Dǎng

Gōngyè (Gōng·yè {Work → [Industry]} · {Engaged In (Thing) → [Industry]} → [Industrial] 共产 共產)‐Dǎng (Party 党 黨/党) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

In contrast to “Gòngchǎn (Gòng·chǎn {Commonly Possessing} · {Produced (Things) → [Property]} → [Communist] 共产 共產)‐Dǎng (Party 党 黨/党)”, which refers to the Chinese Communist Party, the only political organization currently tolerated in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), this week’s MEotW, “Gōngyè (Gōng·yè {Work → [Industry]} · {Engaged In (Thing) → [Industry]} → [Industrial] 共产 共產)‐Dǎng (Party 党 黨/党)”, refers, not to a political organization, but rather, to an intellectual movement. It is introduced this way in the Wikipedia article about it:

In China, Industrial Party (simplified Chinese: 工业党; traditional Chinese: 工業黨; pinyin: gōngyè dǎng, also translated as Industrialist or Technologist[source]) refers to a group of Chinese thinkers and Chinese people who support scientific thinking, advanced technology, techno-nationalism, and economic growth,[source] and reject liberalism, universal values, and free market.[source] In a narrow sense, it could also refer to the fan culture of Illumine Lingao, a Chinese time-travel novel.

Technology, Industry, and China

In recent years, the PRC has indeed placed much emphasis on developing its technology and industry, to much worldly success. However, while the technological pragmatism that Gōngyè (Gōng·yè {Work → [Industry]} · {Engaged In (Thing) → [Industry]} → [Industrial] 共产 共產)‐Dǎng (Party 党 黨/党) thinkers claim to support is evident to a degree in how modern China operates, it is insufficient to enable us to fully understand modern Chinese thinking and culture. For example, if the people of China were purely rational and pragmatic technologists, then Chinese characters would long ago have been replaced by Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), which is obviously the objectively superior writing technology from a technical standpoint. In reality, as discussed by a past post about the Needham Question, some unfortunate spiritual characteristics have plagued worldly Chinese culture, that have hampered its technological and industrial progress in the past and that perhaps continue to do so to some extent.

Also, there are signs that people in China are getting disillusioned with Gōngyè (Gōng·yè {Work → [Industry]} · {Engaged In (Thing) → [Industry]} → [Industrial] 共产 共產)‐Dǎng (Party 党 黨/党) thinking that prioritizes working hard for industrial and technological progress. For example, as discussed in a previous post on this blog, a significant number of young Chinese people are opting to tǎngpíng (tǎng·píng lie · {to be flat} 躺平), or “lie flat”, instead of persisting in the technological and industrial rat race.

Yes, technical capability is necessary, but it is insufficient on its own to bring about a perfect society, a paradise earth. A basic flaw of focusing mainly on technology and industry is that doing so focuses on physical things, and neglects necessary spiritual things. As 1 Corinthians 2:14, 15 says:

But a physical man does not accept the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know them, because they are examined spiritually. However, the spiritual man examines all things, but he himself is not examined by any man.

Technology, Industry, and Jehovah’s People

Even just measuring according to technology and physical infrastructure, Jehovah God has produced the best technology and physical infrastructure in the universe, far surpassing what humans have accomplished, whether in China or in the West. A few examples of this that come to mind are:

  • The molecular machines in our cells
  • Beavers and the ecological infrastructure they produce instinctually
  • The sun, a working, immensely powerful, yet safe and reliable nuclear fusion reactor that has been providing energy for the earth since before humans existed (Matthew 5:45)

How about Jehovah’s people? That technical capability is of some importance even for those who prioritize spiritual things can be seen from how Jehovah arranged for certain ones among the Israelites to be given the knowledge and skills needed to produce things that were necessary for his worship at that time.—Exodus 35:30–36:2.

Looking at the big picture, Jehovah God has trained us to understand that to truly succeed, we must first be motivated by the kind of love spoken of at 1 Corinthians 13, and he has trained us to understand that without such love, we ultimately “do not benefit at all”, regardless of our technical abilities. At the same time, just as “faith without works is dead”, love also must not be just a feeling in our hearts, but rather must be followed through with and expressed by what we do. (James 2:26) May we use well the technology available to us, and thus show our godly love by accomplishing the best we can for Jehovah God and for the people we can help.—Malachi 1:6–14.

Categories
Culture Language Learning Names 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”

[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:

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.