Tag: Chinese Culture

Categories
Culture Language Learning Science Technology Theocratic

mìmì

mìmì (mì·mì {[is] secret} · {[is] dense → [[is] intimate; close] → [[is] secret; confidential]} [(thing)] → [[is] secret; confidential; clandestine | secret [(thing)]] 秘密 秘/祕密) ← 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).

Secrets

This week’s MEotW, “mìmì (mì·mì {[is] secret} · {[is] dense → [[is] intimate; close] → [[is] secret; confidential]} [(thing)] → [[is] secret; confidential; clandestine | secret [(thing)]] 秘密 秘/祕密)”, is used in verse 2 (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus) of 1 Corinthians 13:

Screenshot of “mìmì” in 1 Co. 13:2 (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.)

While the two morphemes in “mìmì (mì·mì {[is] secret} · {[is] dense → [[is] intimate; close] → [[is] secret; confidential]} [(thing)] → [[is] secret; confidential; clandestine | secret [(thing)]] 秘密 秘/祕密)” sound the same, they are different morphemes, with different meanings. The first one, “mì ({secret (n)} [→ [secretary (abbr.)]] | {[is] secret; mysterious; difficult to understand; obscure} [→ [[is] seldom seen; rare]] | {keep sth. secret; hold sth. back} [→ [block; obstruct]] 秘 秘/祕)”, here means “secret” (used as an adjective). Interestingly, this “mì ({secret (n)} [→ [secretary (abbr.)]] | {[is] secret; mysterious; difficult to understand; obscure} [→ [[is] seldom seen; rare]] | {keep sth. secret; hold sth. back} [→ [block; obstruct]] 秘 秘/祕)” also appears in “mìshū (mì·shū secret · documents (person) → [secretary] 秘书 秘書)”, which means “secretary”, and it can be used as an abbreviation for “secretary”. (Yes, in both English and Mandarin, the word for “secretary” is based on the word for “secret”. So, be nice to office secretaries, congregation secretaries, etc. everywhere, since they are literally keepers of secrets!)

The second morpheme in “mìmì (mì·mì {[is] secret} · {[is] dense → [[is] intimate; close] → [[is] secret; confidential]} [(thing)] → [[is] secret; confidential; clandestine | secret [(thing)]] 秘密 秘/祕密)”, “mì ({[is] dense; thick} [[→ [[is] intimate; close] [→ [[is] secret; confidential]]] | [→ [[is] fine; meticulous]]] 密)”, literally means “dense; thick”, and can effectively mean “intimate; close”. (Compare the English expression “thick as thieves”.) That meaning, in turn, can effectively mean “secret” (used as an adjective), which is how it is used in “mìmì (mì·mì {[is] secret} · {[is] dense → [[is] intimate; close] → [[is] secret; confidential]} [(thing)] → [[is] secret; confidential; clandestine | secret [(thing)]] 秘密 秘/祕密)”. Another expression in which it’s used that way is “mìmǎ (mì·mǎ {dense → [intimate] → [secret]} · {sth. indicating a number} → [cipher; code | password; PIN] 密码 密碼)”, which can mean “code”. For example, the Mandarin Was Life Created? brochure uses “yíchuán (yí·chuán {leaving behind} · {passing on} → [genetic] 遗传 遺傳) mìmǎ (mì·mǎ {dense → [intimate] → [secret]} · {sth. indicating a number} → [code] 密码 密碼)” to translate “genetic code”. (Compare: English WOL, CHS+Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus.)

Exotic East Syndrome

Speaking of secrets, some may be fascinated by the seemingly secret knowledge of the Chinese characters. However, 1 Corinthians 13:2 tells us that even understanding “all the sacred secrets and all knowledge” means nothing if one does not have love, and while Chinese characters may seem alluringly secret and mysterious to those looking on from outside the culture, they certainly are not sacred. Only things from God are sacred, and Chinese characters are the unnecessarily complex, haphazardly designed, highly imperfect products of mere imperfect humans.

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.
—1 Corinthians 13:2.

Regarding this tendency of some to exoticize Chinese characters and other aspects of Chinese culture, the MEotW post on “jī‐tóng‐yā‐jiǎng ((jī chicken 鸡 雞/鷄)‐(tóng {together with} 同 同/仝)‐(yā duck 鸭 鴨)‐(jiǎng speaking 讲 講) → [people not understanding each other because of speaking different languages (from Cantonese)])” pointed out:

Western-educated publishers learning a Chinese language may unwittingly go along with the Western worldly tendency to exoticize things related to China. (John DeFrancis, in his book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy (p. 37), calls this “Exotic East Syndrome”.) They may be content with—or even enjoy—the alluring veil of mystery and mystique surrounding certain things related to China and Chinese culture. Thus, they don’t seek to learn about and understand deeper truths about such things, that may pierce through this obscuring veil, and burst this bubble.—Compare 2 Corinthians 3:14, including the margin note.

Secrets and Identities

It is of course possible for one to have a balanced approach to Chinese characters, in which love moves one to seek to acquire whatever knowledge of characters is needed to serve effectively in the Chinese field that one is in. Many take the approach of using a system like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) when they can, and learning to use characters when they have to. However, regarding how personally and emotionally important to them their knowledge of the secrets of Chinese characters has become to some people, the article “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Was Plan A” said:

In addition to those who feel that phasing out the Hànzì would be a regrettable cultural loss, I have also noticed that there are some for whom knowledge of Hànzì is a matter of pride and self-identity. They are proud of knowing the Hànzì as they do, and they view their knowledge of the Hànzì as part of what makes them who they are, as something that distinguishes them from those who don’t know the Hànzì. Such ones may defend the Hànzì to the point of irrationality in the face of a more accessible alternative that would make them and their hard-earned knowledge of Hànzì less “special”, that would threaten to render worthless all of the blood, sweat, and tears they have invested into grappling with these “Chinese puzzles”. It’s as if they are saying, “That’s not fair! If I had to go through all this bitter hard work to learn characters before I could read and write Chinese, then everyone else has to too!”

…

…during the 2014 Stanford Commencement address, Bill Gates said:

If we have optimism, but we don’t have empathy, then it doesn’t matter how much we master the secrets of science, we’re not really solving problems—we’re just working on puzzles.

Mr. Gates’ above observation applies to the subject at hand in that while many enjoy trying to solve the puzzles presented by Chinese characters, and while many also enjoy being known for being good at solving these puzzles, empathy should move us to recognize that there are much bigger issues involved than just our personal enjoyment or glorification.

Yes, when even some worldly people can recognize the above points, we Christians should recognize even more the need to show love and empathy rather than being proud, self-glorifying, self-justifying, and self-serving. Also, we should be actively and determinedly following the course of true Christian love and empathy rather than just going along with others who are proud, self-glorifying, self-justifying, and self-serving. We should especially do so when we have scriptures such as this to guide us:

Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.—1 Corinthians 8:1.

Love and AI

As touched on in the MEotW post on “réngōng (rén·gōng human · work → [artificial] 人工) zhìnéng (zhì·néng intelligence · ability → [intelligence] 智能)”, lately there has been much discussion in the media about the recent developments in AI (artificial intelligence). AI systems can now be given access to lots and lots of human knowledge, but I don’t think anyone can reasonably claim that modern AI systems have been taught to have love the way the Bible says we need to have love. And so, many continue to worry about AIs falling out of alignment with humans and maybe even harming humans, maybe even to the point of extinction. Yes, as God’s Word pointed out long ago in 1 Corinthians 13:2, if one has much knowledge, even of secrets, but does not have love (Greek: a·gaʹpe), it is ultimately of no benefit. Indeed, without love to guide its use, that knowledge could actually be used to bring great harm!

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.