Tag: Pīnyīn

Categories
Culture Experiences History Language Learning Science Theocratic

jǐngrán‐yǒuxù

jǐngrán+ (jǐng·rán neat; orderly · right; correct [→ [tidy; methodical; shipshape]] 井然)‐yǒuxù+ (yǒu·xù having · order; sequence [→ [methodical; systematic; in good order; regular]] 有序) 👈🏼 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 + Symbols re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

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

In Good Order

This week’s MEotW, “jǐngrán (jǐng·rán neat; orderly · right; correct [→ [tidy; methodical; shipshape]] 井然)‐yǒuxù (yǒu·xù having · order; sequence [→ [methodical; systematic; in good order; regular]] 有序)”, occurs in paragraph 12 of the QUESTION 2 section of the Origin of Life brochure, which section is entitled, in English, “Is Any Form of Life Really Simple?”:

English:

Imagine that you have been allowed past the “security guard” and are now inside the cell. The interior of a prokaryotic cell is filled with a watery fluid that is rich in nutrients, salts, and other substances. The cell uses these raw ingredients to manufacture the products it needs. But the process is not haphazard. Like an efficiently run factory, the cell organizes thousands of chemical reactions so that they take place in a specific order and according to a set timetable.

Mandarin (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ 🔗):

📖 📄 ➕ Jiǎshè (Jiǎ·shè {being artificial} · {set up} → [suppose] 假设 假設) nǐ (you 你) dédào (dé·dào {have gotten} · {arriving at} 得到) “ménwèi (mén·wèi door/entrance · {guarding (person’s)} 门卫 門衛)” yǔnxǔ (permitting 允许 允許), kěyǐ (kě·yǐ {are able} · [suf] 可以) jìnrù ({to enter} 进入 進入) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) “gōngchǎng (gōng·chǎng work · factory → [factory] 工厂 工廠)” le ([(at the end of a phrase/sentence) indicates a change] 了). Nǐ (you 你) huì (will 会 會) fāxiàn (fā·xiàn {send out → [develop]} · {appearing of} → [find] 发现/见 發現/見) yuánhé+ (yuán·hé primitive · {pit (of a fruit) → [nucleus]} → [prokaryotic] 原核) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) nèi (inside 内 內) mǎn ({filled with} 满 滿) shì (is 是) xiàng (like 像/象) shuǐ (water 水) yíyàng (yí·yàng {(of) one} · form → [the same] 一样 一樣) de (’s 的) yètǐ+ (yè·tǐ fluid · {bodies → [substances]} → [fluids] 液体 液體), zhèixiē (zhèi·xiē this · {indefinite number of} → [these] 这些 這些) yètǐ (yè·tǐ fluid · {bodies → [substances]} → [fluids] 液体 液體) hányǒu (hán·yǒu {hold in the mouth → [contain]} · have 含有) fēngfù (fēng·fù rich · abundant 丰富 豐富) de (’s 的) yǎngfèn+ (yǎng·fèn supporting · components → [nutrients] 养分 養分), yán (salts 盐 鹽), hé ({(together) with} → [and] 和 和/龢) qítā (qí·tā them · otherwise’s → [other] 其他) wùzhì (wù·zhì matter · substances → [substances] 物质 物質). Xìbāo (Xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) yòng (uses 用) zhèixiē (zhèi·xiē this · {indefinite number of} → [these] 这些 這些) “yuán+ (original → [raw] 原) cáiliào (cái·liào {timber → [material]} · materials → [materials] 材料)” zhìzào (zhì·zào {to manufacture} · {to make} → [to manufacture] 制造 製造) suǒxū (suǒ·xū {those which} · {are needed} 所需) de (’s 的) dōngxi (dōng·xi easts · wests → [things] 东西 東西), dàn (but 但) guòchéng (guò·chéng {to be passed through} · {journey → [procedure]} → [process] 过程 過程) bìng (definitely 并 並/竝/并) bú (not 不) shì (is 是) záluàn+ (zá·luàn mixed · random → [disorderly] 杂乱 雜亂)‐wú (without 无 無/无)‐zhāng (sections → [structure] 章) de ({’s (process)} 的). Xìbāo (Xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) hǎoxiàng (hǎo·xiàng {well → [very much]} · {is like} 好像/象) yùnzuò (yùn·zuò transports · does → [operates] 运作 運作) shùnchàng+ (shùn·chàng {being following → [being suiting]} · {being smooth} → [smoothly] 顺畅 順暢) de (’s 的) gōngchǎng (gōng·chǎng work · factory → [factory] 工厂 工廠) nàyàng (nà·yàng that · {form → [way]} 那样 那樣), zài (in 在) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) li (inside 里 裡/裏) jìnxíng (jìn·xíng {are advanced} · {are walked → [are carried out]} 进行 進行) de (’s 的) wúshù (wú·shù without · number 无数 無數) huàxué+ (huà·xué {transforming → [chemistry]} · studying → [chemical] 化学 化學) fǎnyìng (fǎn·yìng {in the reverse direction} · respondings → [reactions] 反应 反應) quándōu (quán·dōu completely · all 全都) ànshí (àn·shí {according to} · {(particular) times} → [on schedule] 按时 按時) jìnxíng (jìn·xíng {are advanced} · {are walked → [are carried out]} 进行 進行), érqiě (ér·qiě and · moreover 而且) jǐngrán+ (jǐng·rán {are orderly} · {are correct} 井然)‐yǒuxù+ (yǒu·xù {are having} · sequence 有序).

In the above examples, “jǐngrán (jǐng·rán neat; orderly · right; correct [→ [tidy; methodical; shipshape]] 井然)‐yǒuxù (yǒu·xù having · order; sequence [→ [methodical; systematic; in good order; regular]] 有序)” is used to translate the English phrase “in a specific order”. In contrast, past MEotW “záluàn (zá·luàn miscellaneous; mixed · {in disorder}; chaotic; random; arbitrary → [disorderly; mixed; in a jumble/mess; chaotic] 杂乱 雜亂)‐wú ({not having}; without; no 无 無/无)‐zhāng (sections [→ [order | rules; regulation; constitution | composition; structure; system; pattern]] 章)”, which occurs earlier in the example paragraph above, is used to translate the English word “haphazard”.

Yes, in contrast to the haphazard mess that any system generated by random chance would be (if anything even resembling a system gets generated at all), the system inside our cells for manufacturing needed products actually operates with a very high degree of organization, orderliness, and efficiency. This is strong evidence that our cells were actually not produced by the random processes of evolution, but rather, by an organized and orderly intelligent Creator.

Not in Good Order, in Good Order

Of particular interest to Mandarin field language learners, if we look at Chinese characters, which were designed by imperfect humans, it would be fair to describe the way they were designed as being haphazard, even compared to other human-designed systems. For example, the book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, on page 111, says:

Comparatively speaking, the Japanese syllabaries are quite simple and efficient. Their forty-seven symbols do a reasonably good job of representing the sound system of Japanese with its mere 113 different syllables. In contrast, the Chinese syllabary, which must cope with a far more complex syllabic system (3,877 syllables in earlier Chinese and 1,277 in current standard Chinese if tones are included, 398 if tones are excluded), is not only appallingly large but also quite unstandardized and hence extremely inefficient—all this of course due to the fact that it has not been manipulated and refined like the Japanese syllabaries but throughout its history right down to today has evolved in a more or less haphazard manner.

One of the ways in which Chinese characters are relatively haphazard is in how they represent their pronunciations. Even though many characters have phonetic (relating to speech sounds) elements that supposedly relate to how they are to be pronounced, ultimately, there is no consistent, overall system such that if a character is like this, then its pronunciation must thus be that—if you bump into a Chinese character that you never learned, or that you learned but forgot (this character amnesia actually happens all the time, even to experienced native Mandarin speakers), then ultimately you can only guess at how to pronounce it!

Speaking of phonetic elements, characters are so old that the phonetic elements of characters that have them may actually be based on old pronunciations that are different from the modern day pronunciations that these phonetic elements appear to modern readers to indicate. So, even the supposedly phonetic elements of characters are not reliable indicators of the modern Mandarin pronunciations of these characters, adding to the overall haphazard nature of characters.

Another haphazard aspect of characters is the many homographs among them, that is, different words that are written with the same characters, but that have different possible pronunciations and meanings, such that one must examine the context to deduce which pronunciation and meaning are actually the intended ones in any given situation.

In marked contrast, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is a simple, elegant, consistent system of representing modern Mandarin speech, such that if Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expressions are written a certain way, then they must be pronounced a certain way—well-designed, neat, and orderly, not having “evolved in a more or less haphazard manner” like Chinese characters!

For convenience:

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

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Origin of Life brochure is:

More Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ web material based on the Mandarin Origin of Life brochure will be made available in the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)+ web resource as time allows.

Categories
Culture History Language Learning Science

Pīnyīn

Pīnyīn+ (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[To accompany last week’s repost on “Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音)”, here is a repost of the MEotW post on “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)”.]

“Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)” is the expression commonly used to refer to the phonetic alphabet introduced by China in 1958. This system is also known by longer, more official names:

  • Hànyǔ (Hàn·yǔ {Han (Chinese)} · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin] 汉语 漢語) Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)
  • Hànyǔ (Hàn·yǔ {Han (Chinese)} · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin] 汉语 漢語) Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Fāng’àn+ (Fāng’·àn {Direction → [Method]} · {Long, Narrow Table or Desk → [Plan]} 方案)

When thinking of Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and its predecessor Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn Annotating · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) (last week’s MEotW), some focus on the superficial differences between them. However, it’s perhaps even more important to note what they have in common, as indicated by the fact that the names of both systems end in “yīn+ (sound [→ [musical note/sound; tone; pronunciation | syllable | news; tidings]] 音)”: Both systems focus on representing the sounds of Mandarin, sounds which make up Mandarin speech and thus represent meanings. In fact, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)’s literal meaning tells us that this system helps people to “piece together sounds” to make up Mandarin speech, and thus convey the meanings that Mandarin speech represents.

汉字 / 漢字? Pīnyīn?

In contrast, many people believe that the Hànzì+ (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字), the Chinese characters, represent meanings more directly through their own visual design, as opposed to primarily being a system that represents Mandarin, Cantonese, etc., speech sounds which represent meaning. This view of Chinese characters, however, is actually a myth, which has been called the ideographic myth—God designed our brains and bodies to primarily represent meaning through speech, some humans in their hubris presumed that it would be better for us humans to represent meaning directly through visual symbols, and of course God was right and these humans were wrong.

There are actually many myths and misconceptions that people believe regarding Chinese characters, and sadly, that is also the case regarding Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).

Common Myths and Misconceptions

  • “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is just a pronunciation aid. It’s not really a writing system like the characters are.”

    • But, is Pīnyīn even really a writing system? Interestingly, the Chinese national standard Zhōngguó Mángwén (中国盲文/中國盲文, Chinese Braille) is basically a transliteration or conversion of Pīnyīn into braille letters. Braille is obviously a writing system, so Pīnyīn must also be a writing system, not just a pronunciation aid.

  • “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is just training wheels. Characters are real wheels.”

    • Since Pīnyīn is not just a pronunciation aid, but a full writing system, it is not “training wheels”—it’s regular wheels. On the other hand, Chinese characters are like non-round wheels—more difficult than necessary.

  • “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) on its own can’t be understood because there are too many homophones (words that sound the same, but have different meanings) in Mandarin.”

    • When people are just speaking Mandarin, with no characters in sight to help them, do they have problems understanding each other because of all the homophones? Can blind Mandarin-speakers, who cannot see characters, still “see” what people mean when those people speak Mandarin? Native Mandarin-speakers have confirmed to me that no, homophones are not a significant problem in spoken Mandarin—people can use the context and understand each other okay. So, people can use the context and understand each other okay when using Pīnyīn too, since Pīnyīn directly represents the sound of spoken Mandarin.

      • The above quote is from the article “Pīnyīn Was Plan A”. Check it out for more on this subject.

  • “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is less accurate than Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn Annotating · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音).”

    • Some people say that Zhuyin is more accurate or correct than Pinyin. Actually, both Zhuyin and Pinyin represent the same Mandarin sounds, just with different symbols. In fact, it’s not difficult to find tables that directly map the corresponding Zhuyin and Pinyin expressions to each other—a simple Google search for “pinyin zhuyin table” turns up many, many results. Pinyin and Zhuyin are just like different codes for encoding the same Mandarin message, so basically, neither is more accurate or correct than the other.

      • The above quote is from the tiandi.info post “Pinyin and Zhuyin”. (If you need login information for the parts of tiandi.info that require it, request it by email, and include information on who referred you and/or what group/cong. you are in.)
  • “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) makes your Mandarin sound like English.”
    • This is only true if you are using it wrong. For example, if you read a French word and you make it sound like English when you read it out, the problem is not that the French word is written using the Latin alphabet like English is—the problem is that you are thinking of English sounds when you see the French word, when you should be thinking of French sounds. Similarly, you shouldn’t blame Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) if you are thinking of English sounds when you see it, because it’s up to you to understand that Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) represents Mandarin sounds, not English sounds.
    • Don’t worry, it becomes second nature to properly associate Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) with Mandarin sounds after you get familiar with Mandarin sounds and used to the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) system. However, if you, say, prematurely stop using Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and instead turn to characters in an effort to avoid the baggage of English sounds, you may actually never really get the hang of Mandarin sounds. Seriously, I’ve seen people who focus on characters remain in this speech Twilight Zone for years and years! That’s because while characters do represent Mandarin speech sounds, they’re just bad at it—it’s just not what characters focus on. In stark contrast, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is all about the sounds of Mandarin. It literally spells out in a simple way how a Mandarin syllable sounds at the beginning, at the end, and in between. Characters, though, represent the complex sound of a Mandarin syllable as one coarse lump, in a complex and often unrelated way—you either get it or you don’t, and many don’t.
      • Yes, characters are like a conceited jerk who convinces you with grand promises to jump from a high place, doesn’t bother to catch you, and then makes you think it’s your fault that you can’t fly. Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), though, is like a modest and straightforward person who clearly explains each step for you so that you can dependably and confidently get to where you want to go.

For more information regarding Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and how we in the Mandarin field should view it, check out these articles:

“Pīnyīn is a Good, Workable Writing System On Its Own”
This article is a brief overview of why it’s important for those of us in the Mandarin field to recognize that Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is a full writing system, not just a pronunciation aid.

“Pīnyīn Was Plan A”
This extensively researched in-depth article discusses how we in the Mandarin field should view Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).

(Short link: tiandi.info/articles)

Categories
Culture History Language Learning

Zhùyīn

Zhùyīn+ (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Lately I’ve been unusually busy with the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus material for the Learn From the Bible book that’s being covered in the Congregation Bible Study meetings, and with preparing musical notation + Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) songbook material for this year’s Mandarin conventions. So, here’s another repost, this time of one of the earliest MEotW posts. It’s probably time for a reminder about this subject anyway. 😄]

The last imperial dynasty of China was the Qing dynasty. We call it the last dynasty, though, because it ended, and it was not followed by another dynasty. Towards the end of the Qing dynasty’s rule, China was in a bad way. Wikipedia provides this summary of the situation:

The dynasty reached its high point in the late 18th century, then gradually declined in the face of challenges from abroad, internal revolts, population growth, disruption of the economy, corruption, and the reluctance of ruling elites to change their mindsets.

One of the ways in which some sought to help with the deteriorating situation in China is described by American linguist, sinologist, author of Chinese language textbooks, lexicographer of Chinese dictionaries, and Professor Emeritus of Chinese Studies at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa John DeFrancis, in his book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy:

…toward the end of the nineteenth century…The obvious disintegration of Chinese society and the inability to cope with foreign aggressors led some reformers in contact with missionaries to conceive of carrying out a reform of the writing as part of a general educational reform that would help revitalize the country and save it from extinction.1

Professor DeFrancis goes on the describe the development and naming of an early result of the efforts of these reformers:

Official resolution of these issues was effected by the decisions reached by the Conference on Unification of Pronunciation that was held under government auspices in 1913. …The majority members of the conference reached the decision to adopt a set of thirty-nine phonetic symbols derived from Chinese characters, to use them as an adjunct to the characters, and to confine their scope to representing the Mandarin pronunciation as the national standard. The symbols were initially called Zhùyīn Zìmǔ (“Phonetic Alphabet”); later they were also called Guóyīn Zìmǔ (“National Phonetic Alphabet”). The fear that they might be considered an alphabetic system of writing independent of characters led in 1930 to their being renamed Zhùyīn Fúhào (“Phonetic Symbols”).2

Bopomofo in Regular, Handwritten Regular, & Cursive formats

Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音), or Bopomofo, in regular, handwritten regular, and cursive formats

This week’s MEotW, “Zhùyīn+ (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音)”, is a commonly used name for this system. It’s also commonly called “Bopomofo (ㄅㄆㄇㄈ)”, after the first four symbols of the system. This is similar to how in English we use “ABCs” to refer to the alphabet, and to how the word “alphabet” itself comes from alpha and bēta, the first two letters of the Greek alphabet.

The Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) system continues to be used in elementary schools in Taiwan for teaching reading and writing, with the system’s symbols often appearing as ruby characters over Chinese characters in textbooks.

Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) / Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)

ㄓㄨ`ㄧㄣ? Pīnyīn?

In mainland China, Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) has largely been replaced by Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), which was adopted by the mainland Chinese government in 1958. This was possible because Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) both do the same job of representing in alphabetic writing the sounds of Mandarin speech—they just use different symbols.

Around the time that Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) was introduced, Premier of the People’s Republic of China Zhōu Ēnlái ((Zhōu {Circumference (surname)} 周 周/週) (Ēn·lái Kindness · Comes 恩来 恩來) (the first Premier of the People’s Republic of China)) wrote the following comparing the different practical effects of using these different sets of symbols:

Although [Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音)] has been in existence for forty years and was popularized in primary schools by governments in the past, it has been forgotten by most of its students. Now only a few people know the phonetic transcript. In future, we shall adopt the Latin alphabet for the Chinese phonetic alphabet. Being in wide use in scientific and technological fields and in constant day-to-day usage, it will be easily remembered.

Some Mandarin field language learners prefer not to use the Latin alphabet-based Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) system, claiming that it makes them think of English sounds rather than Mandarin sounds. Perhaps those who feel this way could instead get the benefits of a phonetic alphabet by using Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音). However, they would first have to learn and remember the rarely-used symbols of Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音), which for almost everyone these days is going to be significantly harder than remembering the familiar Latin alphabet letters of Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).

Regarding associating language sounds with a writing system (which both Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) qualify as), once a Mandarin learner passes the very beginning stage and gets familiar with Mandarin sounds and gets used to the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) system, he or she will actually have no more problem associating Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) with Mandarin sounds than an English-speaking non-beginner student of French has associating French words with French sounds.

For more information on how Zhùyīn (Zhù·yīn {Annotating of} · Sounds → [Zhuyin] 注音 註/注音) compares to Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) for Mandarin field language learners, please see the tiandi.info post “Pinyin and Zhuyin”. (If you need login information for the parts of tiandi.info that require it, request it by email, and include information on who referred you and/or what group/cong. you are in.)

1. John DeFrancis, The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1984), p. 241. ^

2. Ibid., p. 242. ^