Tag: Chinese Culture

Categories
Culture Current Events History Theocratic

tiānxià

tiānxià (tiān·xià heaven · under → [all under heaven; the whole world] 天下) ← 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.]

At the time of this writing, the main page of jw.org was featuring the following headline in support of a global campaign:

English

Will War Ever End?

Mandarin:

📖 📄 📘 Tiānxià (Tiān·xià Heaven · Under → [the Whole World] 天下) Huì (Will 会 會) Tàipíng (Tài·píng Supremely · {Be Flat, Level, Even → [Be Peaceful]} 太平) Ma ([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)?

Screenshot of jw.org (CHS) on 2023-09-05, with _“天下 (Tiānxià)”_ circled

The Mandarin headline shown above is derived from the common expression “tiānxià (tiān·xià heaven · under → [all under heaven; the whole world] 天下)‐tàipíng (tài·píng supreme · {being flat, level, even → [being peaceful]} → [peace; tranquility] | supremely · {[be] flat, level, even → [[be] peaceful]} 太平)”, which basically means “peace on earth”. Note that the expression “tiānxià (tiān·xià heaven · under → [all under heaven; the whole world] 天下)”, this week’s MEotW, may also be capitalized, since it may be used in reference to “Tiān (Heaven [→ [God]] 天)” (the Chinese mythological concept of Heaven), which should really be capitalized for a similar reason to why “Shàngdì (Shàng·dì Above’s · {Emperor → [God]} → [God] 上帝)” (also a term used by the ancient Chinese) is capitalized.

Heaven…

This excerpt from the MEotW post on “Shàngtiān (Shàng·tiān Above’s · {Heaven [→ [God]]} → [Heaven; Providence; God] 上天)” recounts how the Chinese concept of Heaven developed:

As mentioned in the MEotW post on “Shàngdì (Shàng·dì Above’s · {Emperor → [God]} → [God] 上帝)”:

The Lasting Peace brochure has a box explaining how the concept of Shàngdì (Shàng·dì Above’s · {Emperor → [God]} → [God] 上帝) has been viewed in China throughout its history.

Here is a quote from that box that relates how the Chinese came to view the “Tiān (Heaven [→ [God]] 天)” in “Shàngtiān (Shàng·tiān Above’s · {Heaven [→ [God]]} → [Heaven; Providence; God] 上天)”, and how that affected their understanding of Shàngdì (Shàng·dì Above’s · {Emperor → [God]} → [God] 上帝):

…according to Chinese historical records, between three and four thousand years ago, during the Xia and Shang dynasties, the Chinese were already worshipping one supreme deity. The book The Religious History of China explains that they “reckoned that between heaven and earth there was a principal God who stood supreme and had absolute control over all things. . . . This supreme deity came to be called Di, or Shang-di, during the Shang Dynasty, and was known as Tien [heaven], or Tien-di [Emperor in Heaven], during the Zhou Dynasty [11th century to 256 B.C.E.].” Thus, the ancient Chinese believed in the existence of a Supreme Sovereign of the universe.

During the Spring and Autumn period (c. 722-481 B.C.E.) and the Warring States period (c. 480-221 B.C.E.), Confucianism and Taoism gained ascendancy. Influenced by these two schools of thought, the worship of Shang-di was gradually replaced by the abstract idea of reverence for Tien. By the Han dynasty (202 B.C.E.–221 C.E.), under the dominance of Confucianism, the Chinese became engrossed in moral culture and social order, and the concept of Shang-di suffered another setback. With the spread of Buddhism into China, the Chinese no longer held to the belief of a Creator who is in control of the universe, but they accepted Heaven, or Providence, as the first cause of all things. Since then, the concept of God, or Shang-di, has become something completely foreign to most Chinese.

…and All Under Heaven

What about when “Tiān (Heaven [→ [God]] 天)” is combined with the common and seemingly simple morpheme “xià (below; under; underneath [→ [next; later; following]] | downward; down | {go/come/put/set/bring down}; descend | fall | {be less/lower than} | lower; inferior | {times going/coming/putting/setting/bringing down} 下)”, which here means “under”? Wikipedia provides this summary of what “Tiānxià (Tiān·xià Heaven · under → [all under Heaven; the whole world | the whole of China] 天下)” came to mean in Chinese culture:

Tianxia (Chinese: 天下), literally meaning “(all) under Heaven”, is a Chinese term for a historical Chinese cultural concept that denoted either the entire geographical world or the metaphysical realm of mortals, and later became associated with political sovereignty. In ancient China and imperial China, tianxia denoted the lands, space, and area divinely appointed to the Chinese sovereign by universal and well-defined principles of order. The center of this land was directly apportioned to the Chinese court, forming the center of a world view that centered on the Chinese court and went concentrically outward to major and minor officials and then the common subjects, tributary states, and finally ending with fringe “barbarians”.

The center of this world view was not exclusionary in nature, and outer groups, such as ethnic minorities and foreign people, who accepted the mandate of the Chinese Emperor were themselves received and included into the Chinese tianxia. In classical Chinese political thought, the “Son of Heaven”, having received the Mandate of Heaven, would nominally be the ruler of the entire world.

In passing, we can note that the above describes Sinocentrism, the view of China as the centre of the world, as discussed in the MEotW post on “Zhōngguó (Zhōng·guó Central · Nation → [China | Chinese] 中国 中國)”. Anyway, what is this “Mandate of Heaven” that’s mentioned above? Wikipedia provides this summary:

The Mandate of Heaven (Chinese: 天命; pinyin: Tiānmìng; Wade–Giles: T’ien-ming; lit. ‘Heaven’s command’) is a Chinese political philosophy that was used in ancient and imperial China to legitimize the rule of the King or Emperor of China.[source] According to this doctrine, heaven (天, Tian) bestows its mandate[source] on a virtuous ruler. This ruler, the Son of Heaven, was the supreme universal monarch, who ruled Tianxia (天下; “all under heaven”, the world).[source] If a ruler was overthrown, this was interpreted as an indication that the ruler was unworthy and had lost the mandate.[source] It was also a common belief that natural disasters such as famine and flood were divine retributions bearing signs of Heaven’s displeasure with the ruler, so there would often be revolts following major disasters as the people saw these calamities as signs that the Mandate of Heaven had been withdrawn.[source]

“The Most High is Ruler”

As seen from its usage on jw.org, as shown above, “Tiānxià (Tiān·xià Heaven · under → [all under Heaven; the whole world | the whole of China] 天下)” (or “tiānxià (tiān·xià heaven · under → [all under heaven; the whole world] 天下)” with a lowercase “t”, corresponding to an uncapitalized “heaven”) is now often used just to mean “the whole world”, or “throughout the earth”. However, some continue to seek to apply the concept of “Tiānxià (Tiān·xià Heaven · under → [all under Heaven; the whole world | the whole of China] 天下)” to the contemporary world by connecting it to China’s current political influence, which some aspire to spread to the whole world. In this regard, it would be good to bear in mind the lesson referred to in Daniel 4:25, 26 that Babylon’s King Nebuchadnezzar had to learn, that really, “the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind”, and that “the heavens are ruling”, not him, a mere human king.

Also, as the article linked to by the above-mentioned headline on jw.org says:

English:

[The Bible] says that “the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed.” (Daniel 2:44) Under that Kingdom, or government, God will bring “an end to wars throughout the earth.”—Psalm 46:9.

Mandarin:

📖 📄 📘 Shèngjīng (Shèng·jīng (the) Holy · Scriptures → [the Bible] 圣经 聖經) shuō (says 说 說/説): “Tiānshang (Tiān·shang heaven · upon 天上) de (’s 的) Shàngdì (Shàng·dì Above’s · {Emperor → [God]} → [God] 上帝) yào (will 要) shèlì (shè·lì {set up} · {make to stand} 设立 設立) yí (one 一) ge ([mw] 个 個/箇/个) yǒngbú (yǒng·bú forever · not 永不) mièwáng (miè·wáng {will be extinguished} · {will die} 灭亡 滅亡) de (’s 的) wángguó (wáng·guó king’s · nation → [kingdom] 王国 王國).” (Dànyǐlǐshū (Dànyǐlǐ·shū Daniel · Book 但以理书 但以理書) 2:44) Shàngdì (Shàng·dì Above’s · {Emperor → [God]} → [God] 上帝) huì (will 会 會) tōngguò (tōng·guò through · passing → [passing through] → [through] 通过 通過) zhèige (zhèi·ge this · [mw] 这个 這個) Wángguó (Wáng·guó King’s · Nation → [Kingdom] 王国 王國) “zhōngzhǐ (zhōng·zhǐ end · halt 终止 終止) zhànzhēng (zhàn·zhēng wars · contendings → [wars] 战争 戰爭), píngdìng (píng·dìng {make to be flat, level, even → [make to be peaceful]} · {make to be settled → [make to be calm]} 平定) tiānxià (tiān·xià heaven · under → [the whole world] 天下)”. (Shīpiān (Shī·piān {Sacred Song} · {Piece of Writing} → [Psalm] 诗篇 詩篇) 46:9)

(For reference, here are the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus links for the scriptures cited above: Dànyǐlǐshū (Dànyǐlǐ·shū Daniel · Book 但以理书 但以理書) 2:44; Shīpiān (Shī·piān {Sacred Song} · {Piece of Writing} → [Psalm] 诗篇 詩篇) 46:9.)

Categories
Culture Current Events History Language Learning Science Technology

xuānchuán

xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Several MEotW posts, including last week’s post on “cì’ěr (cì’·ěr {stabs; pricks → [irritates; pierces]} · ear → [grating on the ear; jarring; ear-piercing] 刺耳)”, have mentioned propaganda. So, it seems that it’s about time to consider the Mandarin expression “xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳)”, which is often used to translate “propaganda”.

Morphemic Breakdown

The “xuān (declare; proclaim; announce 宣)” in “xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳)” means “declare; proclaim; announce”, and it also appears in expressions like “xuānbù (xuān·bù declare; proclaim; announce · declare; spread; announce; publish; proclaim 宣布 宣布/佈)”, “xuānjiǎng (xuān·jiǎng declare; proclaim; announce · {speak of → [explain]} 宣讲 宣講)”, “xuānyáng (xuān·yáng declare; proclaim; announce · {raise → [make known]} 宣扬 宣揚)”, etc.

The “chuán ({pass on}; {hand down}; spread; transmit [→ [summon]] 传 傳)” in “xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳)” means “pass on; hand down; spread; transmit”, and it also appears in expressions like “chuándào (chuán·dào spreading · way → [preaching] 传道 傳道)”, “Chuándàoshū (Chuán·dào·shū Spreading · Way · Book → [Ecclesiastes] 传道书 傳道書)”, “chuánjiǎng (chuán·jiǎng spread · {speak of; say; tell} [(that)] 传讲 傳講)”, “chuántǒng (chuán·tǒng {passed on} · {gathered together (things) → [interconnected system]} → [tradition | traditional] 传统 傳統)”, etc.

The above-mentioned morphemes in “xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳)” are both basically verbs, and “xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳)” itself is also basically a verb. However, it’s also used as a noun, making it a verbal noun, or a gerundial noun, in those cases.

How Bad Is It?

As mentioned in the excellent Referenced Theo. Expressions (RTE) resource, “it seems 宣传 [xuānchuán] is a neutral word in Chinese (can be either positive or negative)”. Indeed, the morphemes that make up “xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring; proclaiming; announcing · {passing on}; spreading; transmitting → [conducting propaganda; propagating; disseminating; publicizing | propaganda] 宣传 宣傳)”, mentioned above, are themselves both morally neutral. Like any technology, whether the things that these morphemes represent result in good or harm depends on how they are used. Unfortunately, we are now living in the last days of a world ruled by Satan the Devil, a world filled with self-seeking people who totally would misuse anything that would potentially enable them to exert influence over other people.—2 Timothy 3:1–5; 1 John 5:19.

It should not be surprising, then, that the worldly Chinese governing authorities may at times disseminate what many would recognize as propaganda—biased, misleading distortions of the truth meant to promote certain viewpoints, political or cultural objectives, etc. Add to that how Eastern culture generally encourages people to conform to the group and not question authority, and it’s not surprising that many who grew up marinated in Chinese culture have come to just accept such propaganda as fact, as just the way things are in the Chinese world.

As for the West, even though it has more of a culture of questioning authority, it, along with the world in general that the Internet can reach, has been experiencing a rise in misinformation and disinformation. Social media and other technologies that have become available have given people more power to select what information they want to take in, and, egged on by engagement-seeking algorithms, many have unfortunately chosen to just focus on information sources that tell them what they want to hear, whether it’s true or not. As the Bible foretold long ago:

For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled. They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.
—2 Timothy 4:3, 4.

As Jehovah’s people, we especially need to be wary of any worldly propaganda, because we want to be the true worshippers spoken of by Jesus, ones who “must worship with spirit and truth”.—John 4:23, 24.

Unfortunately, these days, even something as basically human as language gets politicized, so even just being language learners in the Mandarin field, we still need to watch out for worldly propaganda. Below are a couple of commonly accepted beliefs about the Chinese languages that are actually propaganda, not truth.

Propaganda About “Dialects”

“Mandarin, Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc. are just dialects of the one Chinese language.” The truth is that being mutually unintelligible, Mandarin, Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc. are really different languages, like French and English are different languages. The erroneous belief that Mandarin, Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc. are just dialects of the one Chinese language has been promoted by the worldly central governing authorities in China to bolster the idea that China is indeed one big happy political entity that should have a central government—them.

Historically, though, it wasn’t always the case that there was just one government over the land that China now occupies. That didn’t become the case until Qín Shǐhuáng ((Qín {Qin (dynasty)} 秦) (Shǐ·huáng Beginning · Emperor 始皇) (the founder of the Qín dynasty and the first emperor of China)) conquered the other Warring States—which were peers of his own state of Qín ({Qin (one of the Warring States)} 秦)—and became the first emperor of a forcefully unified China. If it wasn’t for this, China could conceivably have become like modern-day Europe, with several peer states which are recognized as having their own distinct languages and cultures.

So, there is no need to allow the idea that Mandarin, Cantonese, etc. are just dialects to sabotage our efforts to learn Mandarin well by making us think that we can just take Cantonese, etc. and twist it a little to get Mandarin—all we would get then is a twisted mess!

Propaganda and the Characters

“Chinese characters are the primary aspect of the Chinese languages.” The truth is that when it comes to human language, speech is primary, not writing.

However, given how so many people around the world are so enchanted with the visually intricate Chinese characters, some may feel that the characters give China a certain amount of cultural—and maybe even political—soft power. Many also feel that characters have a unifying effect on Chinese people, since they use characters to write even if they speak different Chinese languages, as explained above. Thus, many may also feel that there may be some political advantages to characters for China’s worldly central ruling authorities. So, they may thus be motivated to promote Chinese characters over, say, a system like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) that doesn’t have the same perceived visual and cultural pizzaz that the characters have, and that is only for Mandarin.

The truth is, though, that there is really no technical requirement for any language, Chinese or otherwise, to be written using Chinese characters—Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) works fine as a writing system for Mandarin without incurring the extraordinary costs in time and effort that the characters do, and separate but similar alphabetical systems can conceivably be designed and used for other Chinese languages as well.

Re the supposed unifying effect of the Chinese characters, there is not necessarily really much of a unifying effect among the Mandarin-speakers, Cantonese-speakers, Japanese-speakers, Korean-speakers, etc. who may use characters to write, any more than the use of the Latin alphabet unifies English-speakers, French-speakers, Italian-speakers, Mandarin-speakers, etc. who may use it to write. An especially stark current example of the relative insignificance of any unifying effect that a script or writing system may have is that unfortunately, Russia and Ukraine have hardly been unified because of their both using the Cyrillic script.

We who are Jehovah’s people in particular don’t need a product of human culture like the Chinese characters to unite us—we are united by the culture of spirit and truth from Jehovah God himself!—John 4:23, 24.

Don’t Be a Gullible “Tourist”!

As Jehovah’s people, let us make sure we are advancing the interests of God’s Kingdom, and not unwittingly serving the interests of worldly Chinese governments. As missionaries and rescue workers in the Mandarin field, and not just tourists (email me for login information, and include information on who referred you and/or what group/cong. you are in), let us be focused on what really helps us to do our God-honouring and life-saving work better. Let us not be misled by the self-serving xuānchuán (xuān·chuán declaring · spreading → [propaganda] 宣传 宣傳), the propaganda, from Satan’s world.

Categories
Culture Language Learning Science Technology Theocratic

cì’ěr

cì’ěr (cì’·ěr {stabs; pricks → [irritates; pierces]} · ear → [grating on the ear; jarring; ear-piercing] 刺耳) ← 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).

“Clashing”

This week’s MEotW, “cì’ěr (cì’·ěr {stabs; pricks → [irritates; pierces]} · ear → [grating on the ear; jarring; ear-piercing] 刺耳)”, occurs in verse 1 (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus) of 1 Corinthians 13:

Screenshot of “cì’ěr” 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.)

“Cì’ěr (Cì’·ěr {stabs; pricks → [irritates; pierces]} · ear → [grating on the ear; jarring; ear-piercing] 刺耳)” literally means “stabs ear”, and is used in the Mandarin New World Translation Bible’s rendering of 1 Corinthians 13:1 to translate the “clashing” in “clashing cymbal”. In this context, “cì’ěr (cì’·ěr {stabs; pricks → [irritates; pierces]} · ear → [grating on the ear; jarring; ear-piercing] 刺耳)” effectively means “grating on the ear; jarring; ear-piercing”.

Mandarin Field Need-Greater? Or Ear-Grater 😬?

First, let me establish that of course Jehovah and we who are in the Mandarin field deeply appreciate those who have been moved by love to come and try to learn Mandarin and help out in the Mandarin field. Given that, sometimes things do happen that can literally and figuratively grate on the ears of those who truly serve in this field out of love, and who have become acquainted with what good Mandarin sounds like.

The Tone Beast…

One time, a brother I know whose mother tongue is English gave a Mandarin talk during which so many of his tones were off that at times I was genuinely having trouble making out what words he was saying, even when I was listening closely. After that meeting, when I tried to kindly advise him that this was the case, he jokingly quipped something like ‘Well, at least I made you listen closely!’

Maybe this brother really did try his best, and maybe his reply was just an attempt to lighten the mood with some humour. He may also have felt safe using some humour because we know each other and generally get along fairly well. However, his words in this case might also be taken to show that he took his responsibility to give a good Mandarin talk a bit lightly. If so, things said with such a flippant attitude could grate on the ears of someone who views with appropriate seriousness the God-honouring and life-saving work that needs to be done in the Mandarin field.

It is true that especially for those whose mother tongue is, say, English, the tones can be one of the most difficult aspects of Mandarin for them to master, since that way of using pitch (how high or low a “note” is) is so different from how they use pitch in English. The sincere efforts of Mandarin field language learners in this regard are much appreciated!

…And How to Tame It

For those of us who are trying to learn Mandarin for the Mandarin field, it should help if we keep the following points in mind regarding Mandarin tones:

  • Tones are just as important to conveying meaning in Mandarin as vowels are to conveying meaning in English. In English, if someone says a wrong vowel, that person is not actually saying the word that person meant to say, and that person is not expressing the meaning that person meant to express. For example, there’s a world of difference between “I love you” and “I leave you”, even though it’s “only” the matter of a single vowel. Similarly, in Mandarin, if someone uses a wrong tone, that person is saying a whole different word from what that person meant to say, as shown by the classic example of “mā (ma; mom; mummy; mother 妈 媽)/má (hemp; flax; linen | (surname) | {[is] pocked; pockmarked; pitted; spotty} [→ [[is] rough; coarse]] | numbed; tingling | sesame 麻 麻/蔴)/mǎ (horse [(surname)] [→ [knight chess piece; horse piece in Chinese chess | [is] big; large]] 马 馬)/mà ({verally abuse}; curse; swear; {call names} [→ [condemn; rebuke; reprove; scold]] 骂 罵/駡)/ma ([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)”.
  • In languages like English, we may change the pitch of what we are saying to do things like add emphasis, ask a question, etc. In Mandarin, though, as explained above, the tone of a syllable—which involves how pitch is used while saying it—is an essential part of how that syllable represents meaning. So, while in English the way we use pitch while saying a word may be negotiable based on how we want to emphasize it, etc., in Mandarin, tones are non-negotiable, like our stand on blood transfusions is non-negotiable. A first tone, for example, must always be recognizable as a first tone and must not be changed into a fourth tone or something, no matter how much we want to emphasize a Mandarin word with a first tone in it!
    • How can we add emphasis in Mandarin, then? Study 10 of the Teaching (th) brocure, entitled “Modulation”, tells us that ‘we can convey ideas clearly and stir emotion by varying our volume, pitch, and pace’. So, while the pitches of Mandarin tones are non-negotiable, we can still add emphasis in Mandarin by varying volume—by speaking softer or louder—and/or by varying pace—by speaking slower or faster.
  • Wrong tones can be really cì’ěr (cì’·ěr {stabbing → [irritating]} · ear → [grating on the ear] 刺耳) because, as mentioned above, tones are made of pitch, and when one speaks with wrong pitches, it’s a lot like singing off-key—very grating to the ears of those who know how the music of the language should sound! 🎵

With the above points in mind, do the following:

  • Practise recognizing the different tones and telling them apart when listening to Mandarin speech. This is especially important if you have just recently started to learn Mandarin, and are not used to what Mandarin tones sound like yet. Such practice is needed to gradually train your hearing. As it is with determining if a musical instrument is in tune or not, eventually, with focus and practice, recognizing Mandarin tones will become easier, even second nature.
    • As you get better at being able to recognize good Mandarin tones when you hear them, that will in turn help you to make sure you speak with good Mandarin tones. Speaking of which…
  • Practise speaking with correct Mandarin tones. This is also especially important if you have just recently started to learn Mandarin, and are not used to speaking with Mandarin tones yet. Such practice is needed to gradually train your body’s system for producing speech. Beware: If you let yourself get into bad habits early on involving the tones, then you’ll have to walk a long, hard road to get rid of these bad habits later. As it is with playing a musical instrument well, eventually, with focus, study, and practice, speaking with correct Mandarin tones will become easier, even second nature. 🎸

The Cantonese Twist

As discussed in the MEotW post on “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)”, to those who know Mandarin well, Cantonese that is twisted to try to make it sound like Mandarin sounds awful:

Well, as someone who along with many others has come to the Mandarin field from the Cantonese field, I have had the dubious pleasure of observing how some have tried to speak Mandarin by just taking the Cantonese they knew and twisting it a little, since they were relying on the conventional wisdom that Mandarin and Cantonese are just different dialects of the same language. As well-meaning as they may have been, the results were often just as bad as when someone sings badly off-key, or as Star Trek fans may say, they often sounded like the language equivalent of a transporter accident 🙀. Even after decades in the Mandarin field, some publishers who had come over from the Cantonese field still say some Mandarin words with Cantonese-y pronunciations.

Any Cantonese-speakers who help out in the Mandarin field are very much appreciated, but it would be good for everyone involved if they realized that, contrary to worldly political propaganda, Mandarin and Cantonese are not just different dialects of the same Chinese language. Rather, as linguists recognize, Mandarin and Cantonese, being mutually unintelligible, are really different languages, like French and English are different languages. So, we should all understand and expect that as different languages, Mandarin and Cantonese have different phonologies. That is, they basically sound different, not just like slightly twisted versions of each other. Some, in fact, have compared how different Mandarin and Cantonese sound to how different chickens and ducks sound.

Avoiding Being “a Clashing Cymbal”

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.
—1 Corinthians 13:1.

Chinese people are known for being very appreciative of Westerners who try to speak Mandarin or one of the other Chinese languages, and for often praising the spoken results of such efforts as being much better than they actually are. Beginning Chinese language learners especially are often given lots of leeway when it comes to how they sound.

After a few years or even decades, though, does our Mandarin speech, for example, still sound not much better than it did when we started learning Mandarin? Some have observed that those who focus on Chinese characters and pay relatively little attention to Mandarin speech often—unsurprisingly—don’t speak Mandarin very well. Some may say that their focusing on Chinese characters shows their love for Chinese culture, but is it not more important for Christians especially to show love for Chinese people by learning to actually understand what they say and learning to speak to them understandably? And as Witnesses of Jehovah, is it not more important to show love for Jehovah by being able to speak clearly, understandably, and movingly in Mandarin about him and the good news of his Kingdom?

While a lot of leeway is rightly given to beginning Mandarin language leaners, one not progressing after learning Mandarin for a long time might in some cases give at least the impression of a lack of caring, a lack of love on the part of that one. (Hebrews 5:12) As humans, we can often tell if something has not been made, done, or said lovingly, with care, for example, if not much attention to “details” like tones is evident. On the other hand, even if some music is performed or something is said in a way that may show only a modest amount of skill or talent, but that does show a lot of love, people often appreciate that more than if one is displaying great skill or talent, but is only doing so to show off or something. Such a one would indeed seem like “a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal”, or, as the Mandarin NWT Bible says, a “chǎonào ({(disturbing by) making noise} 吵闹 吵鬧) de (’s 的) luó (gong 锣 鑼), cì’ěr (cì’·ěr {stabbing → [irritating]} · ear → [grating on the ear] 刺耳) de (’s 的) bó (cymbal 钹 鈸)”.—1 Corinthians 13:1 (English, Mandarin).