Tag: Neutrality

app (a-p-p)

This week’s MEotW, “app” (sometimes written as “APP”), is now the organization’s official way to translate “app” in Mandarin, as much as there is an official way to do so. For example, it’s used in the Mandarin version of the 2024 Governing Body Update #5 video, at around the 11:06 mark—the subtitles say “app”, while the narrator says what sounds like “ay pee pee”.

(By the way, note that in this screenshot, the JW Library app is shown in Dark Mode—afters many years of people being used to using computer displays with white backgrounds that mimick paper, the organization is showing that there is nothing objectionable about the dark or black backgrounds enabled by computing device displays, backgrounds which can be easier on the eyes in some situations. After all, the default mode of the universe that Jehovah created is dark mode!)

An Unexpected Pronunciation

Yes, interestingly, as we can hear from the aforementioned video, when one refers to the JW Library app in Mandarin, in addition to using the English app name “JW Library” instead of a corresponding native Mandarin expression, one spells out the letters of “app” instead of just saying the English word “app”.

Why use three syllables to pronounce this exceedingly simple one-syllable English word in such an unusual and unexpected way? An Internet search turned up a Quora page discussing this question, which page contains the following excerpt that seems to summarize the points made in many of the replies:

Since the the original form “application” is not widely known, app is thought to be an acronym. In the aspect of pronunciation, closed syllables ending with p do not meet the Chinese pronunciation habit.

So, in other words, some believe that:

• Being unfamiliar with the English word “application” that “app” is an abbreviation for, many Mandarin-speaking people erroneously thought that “app” is an acronym/initialism like “USA” or “PRC”, and acronyms are pronounced by saying the names of the letters in them. [2024-08-21: Thanks to reader SB for bringing up the matter of acronyms vs. initialisms. It seems that there is agreement that initialisms are, or can be, pronounced letter by letter, like “USA” and the Mandarin “app” are. However, there is not agreement about whether expressions pronounced that way count as acronyms, since some hold that only expressions like “NASA” that are pronounced as words should be considered acronyms.]
  • The fact that the Mandarin “app” is sometimes written in all upper case letters as “APP”, like an acronym/initialism would be written, lends credence to this theory.
• Because Mandarin does not have words that end with a “p” sound, people who have only ever spoken Mandarin are not used to saying such words, and thus were naturally inclined to not just pronounce “app” like it is pronounced in English.
  • Some drag Chinese characters and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) into discussion of this question, but these writing systems are just secondary visual representations of the actual primary factor relating to this issue, which is the system of sounds used in Mandarin speech. (I believe that technically, this is referred to as Mandarin phonology.)
  • Personally, I have doubts about this proposed factor, since other one-syllable English words ending with a “p” sound, like “jeep” (“jípǔ (jeep 吉普)”) and “Trump” (“Tèlǎngpǔ (Trump 特朗普)/Chuānpǔ (Trump (Tw) 川普)”), have been borrowed by Mandarin without requiring Mandarin-speakers to spell out their letters. I suppose it’s possible, as some have said, that putting “app” through this process results in a Mandarin expression that sounds confusingly similar to other expressions.

It’s also interesting that “app”, with its spelled-out letters, is used in Mandarin to correspond with the English word “app”, including in official media published by the organization, even though a native Mandarin expression meaning “app” does indeed exist. As shown in dictionaries, “yìngyòng (yìng·yòng apply · use | applied · used [(instance/etc.)] [→ [applied; for practical application; practical | application; practical use | (computing) app]] 应用 應用)” may be used to mean “app”, and just as “app” is short for “application”, “yìngyòng (yìng·yòng apply · use | applied · used [(instance/etc.)] [→ [applied; for practical application; practical | application; practical use | (computing) app]] 应用 應用)” is short for “yìngyòng chéngxù ((yìng·yòng applied · used (instance) → [application] 应用 應用) (chéng·xù {journey → [procedure]} · order; sequence → [(computer) programme] 程序) → [application programme])” (or “yìngyòng chéngshì ((yìng·yòng applied · used (instance) → [application] 应用 應用) (chéng·shì {journey → [procedure]} · pattern → [(computer) programme (Tw)] 程式) → [application programme (Tw)])” in Taiwan).

“Resistance Is Futile”

While Chinese traditionalists may futilely carry on about keeping Chinese culture “pure”, the common use of “app” in Mandarin is yet another example of Chinese culture naturally being influenced by Western culture, since the phenomenon of the modern mobile app followed on from the Western invention of the iPhone. Regarding the influence of Western culture on Chinese people, I have also noticed that some Chinese people seem to consider it “cool” to sprinkle in some English words here and there when they are speaking Mandarin, Cantonese, etc., even when they know the corresponding native Mandarin, Cantonese, etc. expressions.

Speaking of “cool”, a recent Language Log blog post written by Victor Mair and entitled “The Englishization of Chinese enters a new phase” said the following about “cool”, and about our MEotW “app”:

He takes the well-known example of “cool” (I’ll summarize what he says here). Before the year 2000, if somebody mentioned in a praiseworthy way that something was “kù 酷”, which at that time literally meant “cruel; ruthless; brutal; oppressive; savage”, people would consider that he was mixing English “coo[l]” in his Chinese speech, because at that time English “cool” was still in the early stages of being absorbed into Chinese. Standard dictionaries listed only the negative, pejorative meanings of “kù 酷”; there was not a trace of the positive meaning of “neat; nifty” and so forth. However, with the passage of time and with more and more saying “coo[l]” in a positive, approbatory sense, it gradually became a Chinese word. Now, if you say that someone or something is “kù 酷” (i.e., “cool”), no one would think that you’re mixing English in your speech. The positive meanings “cool; neat; nifty” have now become the primary definitions for “kù 酷”.

…people are no longer feeling the need to syllabize, much less hanziize, English words. They just say them flat out, and nobody blinks an eye that they are English words in Chinese. They have already instantly become Chinese terms — at least in speech. Nobody has cared to figure out how they should be written in hanzi [Chinese characters]. Even if you write them, you write them with roman letters…the roman alphabet has become an integral part of the Chinese writing system

…

There are hundreds of such words in current Chinese discourse, and they are at diverse stages of absorption into Chinese, e.g., “app”, “logo”, and “Ptú P图” (lit. “P picture/image”).

Yes, along with the “JW Library” app name, “app” is yet another example of how English words and Latin alphabet letters—like those used in Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)—are being incorporated into how people speak and write Mandarin Chinese “in the wild”, in the real world.

Anyway, as discussed in the 2024 Governing Body Update #5 video mentioned above, we stay neutral with regard to the world’s conflicts. While this obviously includes the world’s wars and political conflicts, in principle, this also applies to the world’s culture wars and its cultural conflicts and competitions. Our focus should be on how we can advance the interests of God’s Kingdom, and promote God’s righteous ways of doing things.—Matthew 6:33.