Tag: Propaganda

Categories
Culture Current Events Language Learning

tǎngpíng

tǎngpĂ­ng (tǎng·pĂ­ng lie; recline · {[to be] flat} èșșćčł) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

I recently came across an interesting article on the website Sixth Tone*, about this week’s MEotW, “tǎngpĂ­ng (tǎng·pĂ­ng lie; recline · {[to be] flat} èșșćčł)”.

Screenshot of the article “Tired of Running in Place, Young Chinese ‘Lie Down’ ”, on the Sixth Tone website

This Sixth Tone article is about how some cool cats are dropping out of the Chinese rat race.

The article briefly describes how this word is being used now by people in China:

China’s young people have coined yet another neologism to reflect their growing disillusionment with the country’s often oppressive work culture. Rather than trying to keep up with society’s expectations or fight them, many are resolving to simply “lie down.”

The new lifestyle buzzword, tang ping, stems from a now-deleted post on forum site Tieba. Unlike similar, previous terms to have had their time in the spotlight in recent years, tang ping is an action rather than a feeling — resolving to just scrape by, exerting the bare minimum effort at an unfulfilling job, as opposed to the futility of raging against the capitalist machine.

Chinese “Rat Race”

The above reference to China’s “often oppressive work culture” may remind one of the English term “rat race”, which is referred to later in the above-mentioned article. The Online Etymology Dictionary tells us about an early application of “rat race”:

A rat race is … a simple game of “follow the leader” in fighter planes. The leader does everything he can think of — Immelmanns, loops, snap rolls, and turns, always turns, tighter and tighter. [Popular Science, May 1941]

Of course, “rat race” also went on to refer to “fiercely competitive struggle”. Wikipedia describes it this way:

A rat race is an endless, self-defeating, or pointless pursuit. The phrase equates humans to rats attempting to earn a reward such as cheese, in vain. It may also refer to a competitive struggle to get ahead financially or routinely.

The term is commonly associated with an exhausting, repetitive lifestyle that leaves no time for relaxation or enjoyment.

The Most Rational Choice?

Continuing on, the Sixth Tone article goes into an interview with Huang Ping, a literature professor at East China Normal University who researches youth culture:

“The state is worried about what would happen if everyone stopped working,” said Huang. But he doesn’t necessarily agree with the media reactions. “Humans aren’t merely tools for making things,” he said.

To lie down is a rational choice rather than a negative attitude, Huang explained. For some young people, it’s a way for them to unburden themselves. “When you can’t catch up with society’s development — say, skyrocketing home prices — tang ping is actually the most rational choice,” he said.




According to Professor Huang, lying down can be seen as the opposite of involution — a decades-old academic term referring to societies becoming trapped in ceaseless cycles of competition that resurfaced last year as an online buzzword in China. [“NĂšijuǎn (NĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ)”, the Mandarin word for this, is a past MEotW.] “In a relatively good social environment, people may feel involuted, but at least they’re trying,” he said. “If it’s worse, people will tang ping.”

A Rational Reaction of Mandarin-Learners to Chinese Characters?

Many who are learning Mandarin to help in the Mandarin language field find the Chinese characters writing system to be unreasonably difficult to learn and use for regular human beings in their situation. So, kind of like the people mentioned above who are faced with China’s “often oppressive work culture”, they stop trying to deal with Chinese characters and tǎngpĂ­ng (tǎng·pĂ­ng lie; recline · {[to be] flat} èșșćčł), some even ultimately leaving the Mandarin field because of this.

Is this a rational reaction? Besides just toughing it out, is there another alternative to just quitting the Mandarin field because of the extraordinary difficulties associated with Chinese characters?

Chinese characters are indeed so complex and haphazardly designed that trying to learn them (and also remember them) is an unachievably difficult ordeal for all but a talented/stubborn minority. So, for many, it may indeed be rational to tǎngpĂ­ng (tǎng·pĂ­ng lie; recline · {[to be] flat} èșșćčł) when it comes to the traditionally mandated Chinese characters.

Thankfully, though, the simple, elegant PÄ«nyÄ«n (PÄ«n·yÄ«n {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] æ‹ŒéŸł) writing system for Mandarin offers a reasonable alternative to Chinese characters in many situations. Some may be reluctant to use it because of being concerned about miĂ nzi (miĂ n·zi face · [suf for nouns] [→ [reputation; prestige; esteem; honor]] 靱歐) (a past MEotW) in the eyes of character-loving Chinese traditionalists, but really, as ones who seek to walk on the narrow road Jesus spoke of, the approval of the tradition-loving majority should not be something we are overly concerned about.—Matthew 7:13, 14.

With the help of PÄ«nyÄ«n (PÄ«n·yÄ«n {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] æ‹ŒéŸł) and a proper focus on Mandarin speech instead of on the traditionally mandated Chinese characters (while just learning as many characters as they reasonably can), many who in all rationality have chosen to tǎngpĂ­ng (tǎng·pĂ­ng lie; recline · {[to be] flat} èșșćčł) with regard to focusing on Chinese characters can still make a go of it in the Mandarin field.—1 Corinthians 14:8–11.

“Everything Was Futile”

Those caught up in getting ahead in this human world ruled by Satan indeed experience the truth of Solomon’s words at Ecclesiastes 1:14:

I saw all the works that were done under the sun,
And look! everything was futile, a chasing after the wind.

Thankfully, God also inspired Solomon to record these words at Ecclesiastes 12:13 that tell us what actually does give meaning and purpose to our lives:

The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the true God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole obligation of man.

 

* According to Wikipedia,

Sixth Tone is an online magazine owned by the Shanghai United Media Group, a state media company controlled by the Shanghai committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is published in English from China, and its readership is intended for people in Western countries.

It appears, though, that Sixth Tone is not purely China-boosting political propaganda. Vincent Ni, a senior journalist at the BBC World Service in London, commented as follows:

Mainstream outlets such as the BBC often cite Sixth Tone as their source when reporting on Chinese social stories
 For foreign journalists, it has also shown a diverse and authentic side of China that rarely received much attention elsewhere.




The success of Sixth Tone might be explained by the bigger change happening in China’s media scene over the past few years. Although the Communist Party has intensified its control, it has also allowed many forms of media entrepreneurship. Anecdotally, this is, in part, because of a lack of impact overseas by traditional Chinese party-owned newspapers.




Nowadays, an investment in media is not something that can solely be done by the government. Private capital has also joined the game, and these firms are making profits.




This is a significant change in China’s media scene. While few would be able to fight the Communist Party’s stringent and increasingly sophisticated censorship rules, the abundance of funding has liberated Chinese journalists who have long been complaining about a lack of freedom and resources. These days, journalists working in start-ups say they have greater freedom to report on topics that would not be possible in well-established traditional media

I have found information on Sixth Tone that helps us to understand some of the things that people in China are concerned about. Perhaps such information can help us as we talk to people from China in our ministry. ^

Categories
Culture Current Events Language Learning

nùijuǎn

nĂšijuǎn (nĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

I recently came across an interesting article on the website Sixth Tone*, about this week’s MEotW, “nĂšijuǎn (nĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ)”.

The article briefly describes how this word is being used now by people in China:

Originally used by anthropologists to describe self-perpetuating processes that keep agrarian societies from progressing, involution has become a shorthand used by Chinese urbanites to describe the ills of their modern lives: Parents feel intense pressure to provide their children with the very best; children must keep up in the educational rat race; office workers have to clock in a grinding number of hours.

Involution can be understood as the opposite of evolution. The Chinese word, neijuan, is made up of the characters for ‘inside’ and ‘rolling,’ and is more intuitively understood as something that spirals in on itself, a process that traps participants who know they won’t benefit from it.

Regarding the “juǎn ({roll up}; {roll (n)} ć· ć·/æČ)” in “nĂšijuǎn (nĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ)”, dictionaries say that it means “roll up” when used as a verb, and that it means “roll” when used as a noun. For example, a “chĆ«njuǎn (chĆ«n·juǎn spring · roll [→ [egg roll]] æ˜„ć· 昄æČ)” is a “spring roll” or “egg roll”.

Chinese “Rat Races”

It’s interesting that the above quote compares “nĂšijuǎn (nĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ)” to the English term “rat race”. The Online Etymology Dictionary tells us that an early application of “rat race” often included literal rolls and turns:

A rat race is … a simple game of “follow the leader” in fighter planes. The leader does everything he can think of — Immelmanns, loops, snap rolls, and turns, always turns, tighter and tighter. [Popular Science, May 1941]

Of course, “rat race” also went on to refer to “fiercely competitive struggle”. Wikipedia describes it this way:

A rat race is an endless, self-defeating, or pointless pursuit. The phrase equates humans to rats attempting to earn a reward such as cheese, in vain. It may also refer to a competitive struggle to get ahead financially or routinely.

The term is commonly associated with an exhausting, repetitive lifestyle that leaves no time for relaxation or enjoyment.

Contrasting Cultures

Continuing on, the Sixth Tone article goes into an interview with anthropologist XiĂ ng Biāo, a professor at the University of Oxford and the director of the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology in Germany. The interview touches on various aspects of nĂšijuǎn (nĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ) and on how this term can be applied to life in China, both past and present.

I especially found Mr. Xiàng’s comparisons of Chinese cultural attitudes and practices with those of other cultures interesting:

Because our culture traditionally encouraged having large families, population growth made labor extremely cheap and took away any incentive for technological innovation. This is a big difference between China and Europe. For example, the carrying pole was virtually nonexistent in Europe. However, every farming family in China had one. All heavy work in Europe was done almost entirely using animals. Once the steam engine was invented in Europe, machinery was then used to solve the problem.




In terms of the workplace, we can say that involution is being used to critique modern capitalism. But capitalism is too broad and imprecise a word. It first emerged in places like the United Kingdom, with modern capitalism then best developing probably in Germany, but the phenomenon of involution isn’t as evident in these countries. So, there’s something characteristically Chinese about it.




Everyone in China has the same goals: Earn more money, buy a home of more than 100 square meters, own a car, start a family, and so on. This route is very well marked, and everyone is highly integrated. People are all fighting for the same things within this market.




we don’t have horizontal differentiation. In Germany, there is a strong emphasis on apprenticeships, which are considered an important method of employment. One time in Germany, I went to get a haircut. I was a little nervous beforehand since Asian people have very different hair than Europeans. I didn’t know if the barber could deal with it, and yet it turned out to be the best haircut I’ve ever had. The barber was very focused and content with the work. My hypothesis is that hairdressers in Germany begin their training early on as apprentices; hairdressing is their career, and they are very devoted. It’s not like in Asia where if someone doesn’t do well at school, they’re left with no choice but to open a hairdressing salon to make some money. From then on, they feel unable to attend school reunions.




I don’t know much about undergraduates at Oxford University. But overemphasizing exam scores, as well as instrumentalizing everything, carefully pleasing authorities, and considering classmates potential competitors — I don’t think these issues exist there.

Firstly, this kind of GPA competition, or call it involution, is an exception in human history. In China it has only been around for the past decade. Of course, there’s also group pressure in the U.K. What is group pressure for undergraduates at Oxford? When you’re doing something, people expect you to say why you find it interesting. If you can’t explain why, your reputation will take a bit of a hit and people will think you’re not a very “authentic” person. It’s as if you’re doing something just to please people, or because others think it’s a good thing — then people will think you’re not interesting. So, you need to have a good narrative for why you do what you do. It’s a habit: When students write reports or research applications, you can see that they emphasize why they think something is of interest. Chinese students who study abroad have some difficulty in this respect and will write about the social significance of the project in their research proposals. The thing is, lots of things are socially important. Plus, this socially important topic has been done to death — so what new things can be done? These reports can sound empty and just parrot the conventional.




But Confucianism is also a very broad concept. For example, the experiences of involution in China and the high-pressure work and school life in Japan are not exactly the same. Japan does have karoshi — death from overwork — but this is more of a kind of group pressure. It’s closer to Confucianism, meaning there is a strong communal nature and highly uniform moral judgment. If your workmates don’t leave the office, neither should you; otherwise, you’ll feel you’re letting them down. In addition, there’s not so much of a desire to advance yourself in Japan.

Japan has a large number of homebodies who lack any desire to get ahead. Yesterday, I asked my wife (a Japanese sociologist) how she squares the fact that Japan has people dying from overwork, and yet no competitiveness. Japanese education is very equalitarian, and no one should be left behind. Classes are taught according to the least able, and everyone waits for them. That’s the opposite of China, where education is aimed at the top students. China has a Confucian foundation with extremely liberal market competition mixed in.




In Japan, I visited one restaurant where they only serve tempura. The chef there picks up a sea urchin and starts to tell you about the fisher who caught it, and then how they are transported from the Seto Inland Sea to Tokyo. This one sea urchin requires the work of so many hands. He treats the oil and flour with the same reverence. You’ll start to think about how you’re connected to all those people. So in this sense, the spirit of craftsmanship is a very deep devotion to the here and now, to that little corner of the world where you find yourself. I think this is a much better way to deal with your sense of worry and being adrift in the world.

Narrow-Minded, Inward-Rolling Language Learning

Re Mr. Xiàng’s comment that in China they “don’t have horizontal differentiation”, I believe that basically he means that people there often only recognize a very narrow range of top goals to strive for, and they often only recognize a very narrow range of ways to the top. From my own experience with people who were brought up in traditional worldly human Chinese culture, I tend to agree that such ones can be narrow-minded about what they consider to be the way to success, and dismissive about anything that is outside of that narrow range.

For example, when it comes to learning the Mandarin language, traditional Chinese culture has defined a narrow goal that involves focusing on learning Chinese characters. Thus, those who adhere to narrow-minded traditional Chinese culture are automatically dismissive of an alternate primary goal such as proficiency with Mandarin speech, and they are also automatically dismissive of an alternate means to that goal, such as PÄ«nyÄ«n (PÄ«n·yÄ«n {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] æ‹ŒéŸł). Ignoring the facts that according to first principles of language science 1) speech is primary and 2) PÄ«nyÄ«n (PÄ«n·yÄ«n {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] æ‹ŒéŸł) qualifies as a full writing system for Mandarin, such Chinese culture traditionalists proudly and dogmatically stick to their narrow focus on Chinese characters.

Unfortunately for Mandarin field language-learners who listen to such ones, Chinese characters are so complex and haphazardly designed that trying to learn them (and also remember them) is for many a possibly decades-long exercise in grinding, relatively high-effort/low-reward nĂšijuǎn (nĂši·juǎn inner · rolling → [involution] ć†…ć· ć…§ć·/æČ). Because of that, many more than necessary have dropped out, and the talented/stubborn few who persevere to attain some proficiency with Mandarin speech this way can be said to have done so in spite of the characters, at least as much as they have done so because of the characters.

“Everything Was Futile”

Those caught up in getting ahead in this human world ruled by Satan indeed experience the truth of Solomon’s words at Ecclesiastes 1:14:

I saw all the works that were done under the sun,
And look! everything was futile, a chasing after the wind.

Thankfully, God also inspired Solomon to record these words at Ecclesiastes 12:13 that tell us what actually does give meaning and purpose to our lives:

The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the true God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole obligation of man.

 

* According to Wikipedia,

Sixth Tone is an online magazine owned by the Shanghai United Media Group, a state media company controlled by the Shanghai committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is published in English from China, and its readership is intended for people in Western countries.

It appears, though, that Sixth Tone is not purely China-boosting political propaganda. Vincent Ni, a senior journalist at the BBC World Service in London, commented as follows:

Mainstream outlets such as the BBC often cite Sixth Tone as their source when reporting on Chinese social stories
 For foreign journalists, it has also shown a diverse and authentic side of China that rarely received much attention elsewhere.




The success of Sixth Tone might be explained by the bigger change happening in China’s media scene over the past few years. Although the Communist Party has intensified its control, it has also allowed many forms of media entrepreneurship. Anecdotally, this is, in part, because of a lack of impact overseas by traditional Chinese party-owned newspapers.




Nowadays, an investment in media is not something that can solely be done by the government. Private capital has also joined the game, and these firms are making profits.




This is a significant change in China’s media scene. While few would be able to fight the Communist Party’s stringent and increasingly sophisticated censorship rules, the abundance of funding has liberated Chinese journalists who have long been complaining about a lack of freedom and resources. These days, journalists working in start-ups say they have greater freedom to report on topics that would not be possible in well-established traditional media

I have found information on Sixth Tone that helps us to understand some of the things that people in China are concerned about. Perhaps such information can help us as we talk to people from China in our ministry. ^

Categories
Culture Language Learning Languages Science

yǔzĂș

yǔzĂș (yǔ·zĂș language · {ethnic group → [group of things with common characteristics] → [group]} èŻ­æ— èȘžæ—) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

While “language family” seems to be a commonly accepted linguistic term, there does not seem to be universal consensus on what terms to use for subdivisions of language families. This is suggested by the wording used in the Wikipedia article on language families, under the subheading “Structure of a family”:

Language families can be divided into smaller phylogenetic units, conventionally referred to as branches of the family because the history of a language family is often represented as a tree diagram. A family is a monophyletic unit; all its members derive from a common ancestor, and all attested descendants of that ancestor are included in the family. 


Some taxonomists restrict the term family to a certain level, but there is little consensus in how to do so. Those who affix such labels also subdivide branches into groups, and groups into complexes.

So, it seems that one common—but not universal—language classification scheme is:

  • family > branch > group > complex


In contrast, noted American sinologist and University of Pennsylvania Professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations Victor H. Mair, in his article “The Classification of Sinitic Languages: What Is ‘Chinese’?” (p. 749), sets out a slightly different language classification scheme:

  • family > group > branch > language > dialect

The Mandarin Word for “Language Group”

Regardless of whether we consider language families to be first subdivided into branches or into groups, an accepted and acceptable Mandarin translation for “language group” is this week’s MEotW, “yǔzĂș (yǔ·zĂș language · {ethnic group → [group of things with common characteristics] → [group]} èŻ­æ— èȘžæ—)”, as Prof. Mair confirms in the article (p. 747) mentioned above.

If “zĂș (clan; race; tribe; {ethnic group}; nationality [→ [class or group of things or people with common characteristics]] 族)” seems familiar, perhaps that is because it occurs in some fairly well-known scriptures. For example, the 2019 Edition of the Mandarin New World Translation Bible translates “every nation and tribe and tongue and people” in Revelation 14:6 as “měi (every æŻ) ge ([mw] äžȘ 怋/缇/äžȘ) guĂłzĂș (guó·zĂș national · {ethnic group} → [nation] ć›œæ— ćœ‹æ—), bĂčzĂș (bĂč·zĂș sectional · {ethnic group} → [tribe] 郚族), yǔyĂĄn (yǔ·yĂĄn language · {(type of) speech} èŻ­èš€ èȘžèš€), hĂ© (and 撌) mĂ­nzĂș (mĂ­n·zĂș {(of) people} · {ethnic group} → [people] 民族)”.

The Mandarin Word for “Language Branch”

For reference, the Mandarin word for “language branch” is “yǔzhÄ« (yǔ·zhÄ« language · branch èŻ­æ”Ż èȘžæ”Ż)”, as Prof. Mair confirms in the article (p. 747) mentioned above.

It’s interesting to note that according to Prof. Mair’s article (p. 737) mentioned above, not only are Mandarin and Cantonese separate languages (not just “dialects”), it would be more accurate to consider them to be in separate language branches, as defined by the language classisification scheme he uses:

Cantonese and Mandarin are separate languages. Cantonese is not a ‘dialect’ of Mandarin or of Hanyu, and it is grossly erroneous to refer to it as such. Since Cantonese and Mandarin are separate languages (or, perhaps more accurately, separate branches), it is wrong to refer to them as ‘dialects.’ The same holds for Hokkien, Shanghainese, and so forth.

That Mandarin and Cantonese should really be considered to be in separate language branches emphasizes to us politically neutral Mandarin field language-learners that we must not repeat or be misled by the politically motivated erroneous assertion that Mandarin, Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc. are just dialects of “Chinese”. That might be even more wrong than saying that English, French, Spanish, etc. are just dialects of “European”!