Categories
Culture Experiences History Language Learning Science

yīnwei

yīnwei (yīn·wei because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

This week’s MEotW, “yīnwei (yīn·wei because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”, was discussed in a podcast episode that I listened to recently. Here’s a clip from it, with the part in which this expression was discussed:

Here’s a transcript of this video clip:

David: You’re a good sport. Thank you for doing this. So you are a native speaker. This question is very important because if you pronounce a character with the wrong tone, you can be fined as much as 50 kuài (pieces → [mw for Renminbi]) at CCTV if you’re an announcer. So what I want you to do is just very slowly pronounce for us the word that in Chinese would be the equivalent of “because”.

Yajun: “Yīnwéi (Yīn·wéi because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”.

David: Say again?

Yajun: “Yīnwéi (Yīn·wéi because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”.

David: So I hear that the “wéi (為/爲) is second tone. Is that right?

Yajun: Yeah…

David: That’s Northern Mandarin. That’s also Běijīng (Běi·jīng North · {Country Capital} → [Beijing] 北京)huà (speech). [With] the actual pǔtōng‐huà ((pǔ·tōng common · {through(out) → [common]} 普通)‐(huà speech) [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)]) citation version of that word, in 90% of the dictionaries that you will see, the second character is pronounced with fourth tone, as “yīnwèi (yīn·wèi because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”.

Yajun: Sure…?

David: Yeah, well if you ask most Chinese, they’re very unsure about it, just like you.

Yajun: I was quite sure it’s “yīnwéi (yīn·wéi because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”, something like that. Now I’m not so sure…and I don’t want to lose 50 kuài (pieces → [mw for Renminbi]).

David: Don’t worry, there are many examples like that and you are not actually wrong. This is an artificial standard that has been imposed and actually, few people, or, not everyone, actually follows it.

By the way, the David Moser speaking in the above clip is indeed the same one who wrote the relatively well-known essay “Why Chinese Is So D- Hard”, which has given many people a lot to think about regarding how Chinese characters make learning Mandarin much harder than it otherwise would be. (I’m not providing a link to this essay because the full title and an example used in the text are a bit less than family-friendly. However, for anyone who’s interested, here is a link to a family-friendly version of this essay that’s been translated into Mandarin and written in Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).)

Getting back to “yīnwei (yīn·wei because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”, there’s also a relatively detailed entry on this expression in the excellent Referenced Theo. Expressions resource.

Dealing With Different Right Pronunciations

The different pronunciations of “yīnwei (yīn·wei because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為) are an example showing us that, while they have a lot of overlap, pǔtōng‐huà ((pǔ·tōng common · {through(out) → [common]} 普通)‐(huà speech) [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)]), Northern Mandarin and Beijing Mandarin, and, for that matter, the Guóyǔ (Guó·yǔ National · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in Taiwan)] 国语 國語) spoken in Taiwan are not exactly the same. (More information on how pǔtōng‐huà ((pǔ·tōng common · {through(out) → [common]} 普通)‐(huà speech) [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)]) has been artificially constructed from various parts and promoted to be a national standard can be found in David Moser’s book “A Billion Voices: China’s Search for a Common Language”.)

So, when we get to a word like “yīnwei (yīn·wei because · for | {because of} · for/{on account of} | {is because} · {is for} 因为 因為)”, which pronunciation should we say it with? Well, considering that the basic principle regarding why language groups and congregations even exist is that Bible truth best reaches a person’s heart in that person’s mother tongue, the logical conclusion is that we should try, as much as we are reasonably able to, to use whichever pronunciation is used by whomever we are talking to. The apostle Paul said “to the Jews I became as a Jew in order to gain Jews”, so we should similarly seek to become as the Mandarin-speaking people we meet in the ministry. (1 Corinthians 9:20) And since tones are an essential part of Mandarin pronunciation, that would include trying to use whichever tone is used by whomever we are talking to.

That may be relatively straightforward—although it may not be easy—when speaking to an individual, but when speaking to a large, mixed audience, perhaps at a meeting or even a convention, we will have to use good judgement to try to speak so as to be understood without distraction by the majority of the audience. It helps, then, to know the audience.

The Accents of Network News Announcers

Speaking of the audience, the clip above mentions that CCTV announcers are required to speak in a particular standard way, and that they are actually fined when they deviate from this standard. CCTV (China Central Television) is the national television broadcaster of China (which, naturally in China, is ultimately controlled by the Chinese Communist Party), and as such, has an audience that includes all of mainland China, with all its various languages, dialects, and accents. As we can see, those calling the shots at CCTV, and indeed, in China in general, have decided to approach this situation by seeking to impose and promote a standard way of speaking, from the top down.

American network news announcers face a sort-of similar challenge—while English is understood throughout the USA, people in different parts of the USA have come to speak with different regional accents.

The article “Why Do So Many News Anchors Sound Alike?”, on the Mental Floss website, says the following about how American news announcers have historically approached this situation:

No matter which channel you tune into or what local broadcast you receive, news anchors share one common trait beyond professional attire and perfect hair. They tend to sound exactly the same, from their cadence to enunciation to a completely curious lack of a regional accent. How does that happen?

Broadcasters didn’t always sound so geographically neutral. In the early part of the 20th century, many radio personalities and performers adopted what was known as a Mid-Atlantic accent, or a blend of mannered British and the East Coast dialect of the United States. This polished, proper method of speaking was popular in Hollywood movies of the 1930s and on radio because it signaled some kind of upper-class education and erudition. Thanks to America’s infatuation with England, sounding even vaguely British made people sound intelligent. Pundits like William F. Buckley Jr. carried the Mid-Atlantic torch even as it fell out of favor in entertainment.

The more contemporary practice of sounding linguistically neutral is often referred to as having a General American accent—which is a bit misleading, since there’s really not much of an accent at all. Also referred to as Standard American, Broadcast English, or Network English, General American was a term first used in the 1920s and ’30s by linguists who wanted to isolate a more widespread accent than the New England or Southern dialects.

Balancing Authenticity with Avoiding Distraction

A relatively recent Business Insider article points out, though, that what American people expect of their media personalities has evolved over time:

“There is something called a broadcast news type voice,” Brice told Insider. “And I really try to coach people to not have that voice. In fact, I coach routinely people to sound more like themselves. People try to emulate other anchors and reporters, and in my opinion, it gets them in trouble.”

“We’ve definitely evolved, just as the news industry has evolved, into a different mindset,” Cairns told Insider, adding that listeners now look for signs of authenticity from their media personalities. “With people being flooded with content, their expectations have changed. People don’t want the typical woman with the big head of hair and the perfect voice, looking a certain way.”

Instead of trying to eliminate regional accents like Fleming’s Boston pronunciations [heard in the post embedded above], Cairns told Insider, speakers who speak with accents should focus only on making sure their speech patterns aren’t distracting from what they’re trying to say.

“It’s just like your hairstyle—you have your own voice style.” Cairns told Insider. “Use it. It’s part of what identifies you. Just don’t let it distract from the message.”

Considering the above and coming back to the Mandarin field, we can see that when speaking to Mandarin-speaking people in the field, there are at least three ways of speaking that we need to mentally juggle:

  • The way we ouselves normally speak Mandarin
  • Modern Standard Mandarin/pǔtōng‐huà ((pǔ·tōng common · {through(out) → [common]} 普通)‐(huà speech) [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)])/Taiwanese Guóyǔ (Guó·yǔ National · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in Taiwan)] 国语 國語)
  • The kind of Mandarin best understood by whomever we are speaking to

In the Mandarin field, we want to speak authentically, sincerely, in a way that other people can tell is coming from our hearts, while avoiding speaking in a way that is so different from what others expect that it distracts from our God-honouring and life-saving message—it’s a balancing act, that may involve juggling! The standard forms of Mandarin that have been promoted by governments, widely broadcast in the media, etc. may heavily influence people’s expectations of the kind of Mandarin we speak, but different situations may require different approaches. So, we should do our best to adapt accordingly, so as to speak in the way that best helps others and glorifies, not any human entity, but rather, our great God Jehovah.


Note: Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus material is aimed at and made available to the worldwide Mandarin field, and so as far as possible, it is based on how most people seem to actually speak pǔtōng‐huà ((pǔ·tōng common · {through(out) → [common]} 普通)‐(huà speech) [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)]), the artificial standard mentioned in the clip at the beginning of this post, that is the standard language promoted in mainland China, where about 95% of the world’s Chinese people are. (As Mr. Moser pointed out in the clip, people don’t always follow the pronunciations found in many dictionaries. E.g., many seem to use more neutral tones than many dictionaries indicate.) Since Taiwan is also a relatively big presence in the Mandarin-speaking world, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus material also contains notes indicating when Taiwan Mandarin has different pronunciations. (Offhand, the only Mandarin dictionary mentions that I can recall that refer to Northern or Beijing pronunciations involve the “r” ({child | youth | son} → [(diminutive) non-syllabic retroflex suffix; pronunciation feature in Beijing dialect]) that Beijingers add to the ends of many words. Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus material includes notes about this.)

Categories
Culture History Language Learning Languages Science

fāngyán

fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[This reposting of a post that was originally posted on November 16, 2020 seems to be a fitting companion to the recent repostings of the posts on “yǔxì (yǔ·xì language · {tied (things) → [system; family]} 语系 語系) and “yǔzú (yǔ·zú language · {ethnic group → [group of things with common characteristics] → [group]} 语族 語族)”. It discusses the important basic issue of whether Mandarin is just a dialect of “Chinese”, a subject about which much political and cultural propaganda has unfortunately been spread.]

The term “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)” has been used in the Chinese-speaking world in various ways, but the literal meanings of the words that make it up indicate that it refers to the speech pattern of a place, even a place as small as a village. For reference, the “fāng (direction [→ [side; party | place; region | method; way [→ [prescription; recipe]] | power (math.)]] | {[is] square} [→ [[is] upright; honest]] | [mw for square things] 方)” in “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)” is the “fāng (direction [→ [side; party | place; region | method; way [→ [prescription; recipe]] | power (math.)]] | {[is] square} [→ [[is] upright; honest]] | [mw for square things] 方)” in “dìfang (dì·fang {(section of) earth → [place]} · {direction → [place]} → [place] 地方)”, and the “yán (speech; word; talk; language | say; talk; speak | character; syllable; word 言)” in “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)” is the “yán (speech; word; talk; language | say; talk; speak | character; syllable; word 言)” in “yǔyán (yǔ·yán language · {(type of) speech} 语言 語言)”.

Fāngyán (Fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)” has customarily been translated into English as “dialect”, but this practice can be misleading and confusing, because while “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)” and “dialect” can sometimes both be applied to a particular speech pattern, the two terms don’t mean exactly the same thing.

What is a Chinese “Dialect”?

American sinologist and University of Pennsylvania Professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations Victor H. Mair wrote an extensive article on this subject, “What Is a Chinese ‘Dialect/Topolect’? Reflections on Some Key Sino-English Linguistic Terms”, which can be found here (PDF) and here (web page) on his website Sino-Platonic Papers.

It has been said that “a language is a dialect with an army and navy”, but in his article Professor Mair gives us a more linguistically correct and useful way to distinguish between a language and a dialect:

Regardless of the imprecision of lay usage, we should strive for a consistent means of distinguishing between language and dialect. Otherwise we might as well use the two terms interchangeably. That way lies chaos and the collapse of rational discourse. Mutual intelligibility [emphasis added] is normally accepted by most linguists as the only plausible criterion for making the distinction between language and dialect in the vast majority of cases. Put differently, no more suitable, workable device for distinguishing these two levels of speech has yet been proposed. If there are to be exceptions to the useful principle of mutual intelligibility, there should be compelling reasons for them. Above all, exceptions should not be made the rule.

What is mutual intelligibility? Simply put, in linguistics, two or more speech varieties are said to be mutually intelligible if they are “able to be understood by one another’s speakers”. For example, if one person only knows English, and another person only knows Spanish, they can’t really understand each other if they try to talk to each other—English and Spanish are not mutually intelligible, and are suitably recognized as being different languages, not just different dialects of “European”.

Similarly, if one person only knows Mandarin, and another person only knows Cantonese, they can’t really understand each other if they try to talk to each other—Mandarin and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible. So, while they may be “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · {(patterns of) speech} 方言)”, linguistically, Mandarin and Cantonese should really be considered to be different languages, not just different dialects of “Chinese”.

If many of the varieties of speech in China are really different languages, as linguists would refer to them, why have so many people come to think that they are just dialects of a single Chinese language? China’s central government is highly motivated to convince people that China is one unified political and cultural entity which should thus be governed by one central government—them—so they have promoted this idea. In other words, it’s basically political propaganda!

Being Clear on What’s What

Why is it especially important for language-learners in a language field like the Mandarin field to recognize, in spite of the commonly accepted political propaganda, that Chinese varieties of speech like Mandarin and Cantonese really function like different languages, and not different dialects of the same language? 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.

In contrast, when one recognizes, for example, that Cantonese is Cantonese and Mandarin is Mandarin, and that neither one is just a slightly mutated version of the other, then that paves the way for language-learning progress that is free of being distorted by untruthful and misleading beliefs. Yes, by recognizing and accepting a variety of speech for what it really is, we can go on to freely learn to speak it well and properly, so that we can be as effective as possible at helping people whose mother tongue is that variety of speech.

As with everything else in life, in language-learning too, the truth matters. As Jehovah’s people, we especially want to “worship the Father with spirit and truth”, and when we seek to do so as we learn a language to use it in Jehovah’s service, we will find that ‘the truth will set us free’ from the distortions and burdens of untruthful and misleading beliefs.—John 4:23; 8:32.

Some Official Recognition

The organization has recently demonstrated that it recognizes the truth about how different many of the Chinese varieties of speech are from one another. For example, whereas before there was one Chinese edition of each publication (using Mandarin wording), now, some publications are available in different Chinese editions for different Chinese languages (including Cantonese), each with different wording.

List of different Chinese languages in which publications are available on jw.org as of 2025-06-02
jw.org now has publications in different Chinese languages.

To help reduce the confusion around the inappropriate use of the English word “dialect” to translate “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)”, Professor Mair proposed that the word “topolect” (topo- (“place”) + -lect (“[language] variety”)) be used instead as an exact, neutral English translation of “fāngyán (fāng·yán {direction → [place]} · speech → [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)] 方言)”. While not as well-known as “dialect”, the word “topolect” has gained a certain amount of recognition, and it can now be found in several dictionaries, e.g., The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Wordnik, and Wiktionary.

Categories
Culture Language Learning Science Technology

tíbǐ‐wàng‐zì

tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

This week’s MEotW, “tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字)”, is generally translated as “character amnesia”. Its literal meaning well describes what it’s like to experience it—you pick up your pen, pencil, brush, etc. to write a certain Chinese character and you…just…can’t…remember how to write it. This can happen with complex, rarely used characters, but it can also happen with fairly commonly used characters, and even with characters you’re sure you once knew well.

It occurs to me that while “tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字)” literally refers to forgetting a character while trying to write it by hand, and while “character amnesia” is similarly defined as forgetting how to write certain characters, people also often forget characters—and thus fail to recognize them—when they are just reading. There doesn’t seem to be a corresponding common Mandarin expression for this, though, probably because it is generally harder to write than it is to read, and so forgetting a character while engaged in the harder task of writing is generally a more significant emotional event compared to forgetting a character when reading.

It Happens to Chinese People Too

It’s also worth noting that “tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字)” is an expression that Chinese people do apply to themselves—it doesn’t just describe a problem that only other people experience while learning a language typically written with Chinese characters. Chinese people are also only human, so it is ultimately practically impossible for them too to learn and continue to remember how to write (or even “just” read) all the over 100,000 existing Chinese characters as well as the theoretically unlimited number of Chinese characters that could be invented in the future, even if they have spent, and are continuing to spend, their entire lives trying to do so.

While the government of China considers someone who can recognize “just” 2,000 characters to be literate, the truth is that even those who are considered literate by this standard can surprisingly often be unable to read or write relatively common characters that they once knew, never mind obscure characters that they never learned.

One example of even relatively highly literate native Mandarin speakers having trouble remembering how to write a not terribly uncommon character is related in David Moser’s well-known essay “Why Chinese Is So…Hard”, which has a section devoted to character amnesia:

this phonetic aspect of the language doesn’t really become very useful until you’ve learned a few hundred characters, and even when you’ve learned two thousand, the feeble phoneticity of Chinese will never provide you with the constant memory prod that the phonetic quality of English does.

Which means that often you just completely forget how to write a character. Period. If there is no obvious semantic clue in the radical, and no helpful phonetic component somewhere in the character, you’re just sunk. And you’re sunk whether your native language is Chinese or not; contrary to popular myth, Chinese people are not born with the ability to memorize arbitrary squiggles. In fact, one of the most gratifying experiences a foreign student of Chinese can have is to see a native speaker come up a complete blank when called upon to write the characters for some relatively common word. You feel an enormous sense of vindication and relief to see a native speaker experience the exact same difficulty you experience every day.

This is such a gratifying experience, in fact, that I have actually kept a list of characters that I have observed Chinese people forget how to write. (A sick, obsessive activity, I know.) I have seen highly literate Chinese people forget how to write certain characters in common words like “tin can”, “knee”, “screwdriver”, “snap” (as in “to snap one’s fingers”), “elbow”, “ginger”, “cushion”, “firecracker”, and so on. And when I say “forget”, I mean that they often cannot even put the first stroke down on the paper. Can you imagine a well-educated native English speaker totally forgetting how to write a word like “knee” or “tin can”? Or even a rarely-seen word like “scabbard” or “ragamuffin”? I was once at a luncheon with three Ph.D. students in the Chinese Department at Peking University, all native Chinese (one from Hong Kong). I happened to have a cold that day, and was trying to write a brief note to a friend canceling an appointment that day. I found that I couldn’t remember how to write the character 嚔, as in da penti 打喷嚔 “to sneeze”. I asked my three friends how to write the character, and to my surprise, all three of them simply shrugged in sheepish embarrassment. Not one of them could correctly produce the character. Now, Peking University is usually considered the “Harvard of China”. Can you imagine three Ph.D. students in English at Harvard forgetting how to write the English word “sneeze”?? Yet this state of affairs is by no means uncommon in China.

Truly, the phenomenon of tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字) is nothing to sneeze at! (Sorry, I couldn’t help it 😜.)

Carrying on, this YouTube video from Asian Boss shows how some people on the streets of Shanghai fared when asked to write some Chinese characters. (One of the interviewees uses “tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字)” at around 7:10.)

Relatively highly literate native Mandarin speakers can also have problems recognizing or remembering characters when “just” reading, as discussed in the tiandi.info blog post “An Avoidable Minefield of Human Tradition and Cultural Pride”:

A few nights ago, my Mandarin congregation had a Memorial meeting that went well overall. However, there was a momentary hiccup that I think we Chinese field publishers can learn from.

The speaker who gave the talk is a fluent, eloquent native Mandarin speaker originally from mainland China, and he is one of the best Mandarin speakers in a city of several Mandarin congregations. In fact, he was one of the instructors in the very first official Mandarin class ever held in this country. However, while reading a scripture from his paper Bible as he was giving the Memorial talk, he, of all people, just…got…stuck…on…a…Chinese…character…. He struggled with it for what felt like quite a while, and eventually, a young brother who was serving as an attendant at the side of the stage approached and gave him a hint, and he was able to carry on.

For Real, It’s Not You

Yes, from considering both the basic design of the Chinese characters writing system as well as real-life experiences like the ones related above, it is evident that the objective truth is that the Chinese characters writing system is by its very nature fundamentally unfit for human use. So, the blame for the all-too-real phenomenon of even relatively highly literate people surprisingly often forgetting characters while reading or writing should be squarely placed on the Chinese characters writing system, not on the imperfect humans whom it should serve, but for whom it so often causes huge problems instead.

It is thus unfortunate, not admirable, that many still cling to the problematic Chinese characters writing system because of tradition, pride, cultural inertia, apathy, inability to walk away from sunk costs, etc. Such ones simply accept tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字) as “normal” rather than recognize it as the institutionalized inhuman madness that it is, while dismissing as madness and heresy any suggestion of using a human-appropriate alphabetic writing system like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) to read and write Mandarin.

New Technology Is Not the Problem

Of course, these days, many people hardly ever write characters by hand anymore. Indeed, many would say that’s the problem! Instead of staying in practice with their handwriting, now, to write something in Mandarin using characters, people generally type Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) with a keyboard and then select the characters they want from the ones their computer or mobile device presents to them in response to their typing. (In such settings, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is like the assistant who does the real work while the big boss, the characters writing system, gets all the credit and recognition, even if many individual characters don’t get recognized when they need to be!)

However, is it really fair to blame the fine new technology for people getting out of practice with the old ways? Consider that if we were to continue with this line of thinking, we could then say that pen/pencil/brush/etc. and paper should in turn be villified for making people forget how to engrave stone tablets! Really, though, people in general got so used to enjoying the advantages of writing on paper compared to having to carve into stone tablets that they didn’t consider it much of a loss that eventually few were able to do the latter. Similarly, few people now lament that with the ubiquity of cars, not many people are now able to ride horses—most people are too busy enjoying their cars to worry about that.

Indeed, rather than blaming keyboards and computing devices for the phenomenon of tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字), some feel that keyboards and computing devices have helped to alleviate the problem. This is because even if they tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (characters 字) when they are trying to type Chinese characters, they feel they can hope in and rely on the visual designs of the characters they want to help them “know them when they see them” when they pop up in response to the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) that they type, making handwriting of characters unnecessary in most situations.

The Actual Problem, the Actual Solution

The thing is, the actual fundamental problem that leads to tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字) is that while “know it when you see it” may be how the visually oriented characters must work (when they work), that’s not the primary way that human language works. With human language overall, speech is actually primary, not writing, so it’s really more important in the grand scheme of things for us—including and especially in our preaching and teaching work—to be able to “know it when we hear it”.

While using the unnecessarily complex and inhumanly numerous visually oriented Chinese characters for this is like trying to put a spiky, sharp-edged object in a round hole, the simple and elegant phonetically oriented Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) writing system is a great fit for “know it when you hear it”. If you know how an expression should sound and you know the easy-to-learn-and-remember Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) writing system, you’re all set—no danger of tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字)!

Of course, you may still encounter occasional situations in which Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is not an option, and you can’t avoid reading or writing characters. In such situations, all you can do is just do your best. When you can use Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), though, don’t let pride, prejudice, etc. prevent you from making good use of it to completely sidestep the very real problem of tíbǐ (tí·bǐ {carry (hanging down from the hand) → [raise; lift]} · pen; pencil; {writing brush} [→ [start writing; write]] 提笔 提筆)wàng (forget 忘) (character 字)!