Categories
Culture Languages

zìmǔ

zìmǔ+ (zì·mǔ character; word · mothers → [letters (of an alphabet) [→ [alphabet]]] 字母) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

As previous MEotW posts (like this one) have shown, “ (character; word; letter 字)” in Mandarin can mean “character”, such that “Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字)”, for example, means “Chinese characters”. In fact, even though “ (character; word; letter 字)”, like its English counterpart “character”, can refer to printed or written letters or symbols in general, Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) are such an 800-pound gorilla in Chinese culture that in Mandarin, “ (character; word; letter 字)” by itself is often understood to specifically mean the Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字), the Chinese characters. This way of thinking has spilled over into the English-speaking world as well, which is why when English-speaking publishers in the Chinese fields speak of “the characters”, that’s generally understood to mean “the Chinese characters”, which in turn is understood to mean the 汉字 and not the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), even though Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is also Chinese and made up of characters (printed or written letters or symbols).

So, when we want to refer to a letter of an alphabet, as opposed to a Chinese character, when speaking Mandarin, we can make that clear by using this week’s MEotW, “zìmǔ (zì·mǔ character; word · mothers → [letters (of an alphabet) [→ [alphabet]]] 字母)”. In Mandarin, a zìmǔ+ (zì·mǔ character; word · mothers → [letters (of an alphabet) [→ [alphabet]]] 字母) is literally a “character/word mother”, something that characters or words come from.

How is it that even Chinese characters or words come from letters? Well, contrary to the traditional Chinese cultural view that Chinese characters are the primary aspect of Chinese languages, linguists (language scientists) now recognize that speech is primary and writing is secondary. So, a Mandarin expression is not primarily something written with Chinese characters, but rather is primarily something spoken in Mandarin. Whereas a Chinese character coarsely represents an entire syllable, letters of alphabets in general represent the individual speech sounds (called phonemes by linguists) that make up the spoken expressions that are the primary part of a language, and this is especially true of a purpose-designed phonetic alphabet like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).

For example, whereas the Chinese character “字” represents an entire Mandarin syllable as one coarse unit, the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression “ (character; word; letter 字)” finely spells out the initial sound, the final sound, and even the tone that actually make up that Mandarin syllable.

That speech and the individual sounds that make it up are the real foundation of any human language is such an important, unignorable linguistic principle that even schoolchildren in China (see especially the Z.T. subheading) learn basic Mandarin speech and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) before getting immersed in Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字), Chinese characters, as tradition dictates.

Perhaps, then, it would be appropriate for Chinese culture, which values filial piety, to be more respectful towards the letters of its phonetic alphabet Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), which, both linguistically and educationally, are the “mothers” of the characters it loves so much!

Categories
Culture Language Learning Languages Science

Zhōngwén

Zhōngwén+ (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

As discussed in last week’s MEotW, the expression “Zhōngguó+ (Zhōng·guó Central · Nation → [China] 中国 中國)” is commonly used to refer to China, since historically, China views itself as the centre of the world, so much so, in fact, that it is the only nation to name itself as such. We can see then that Mandarin expressions starting with “Zhōng (Central → [Chinese] 中)-” can refer to things related to China.

In that case then, are “Zhōnghuà (Zhōng·huà {Central → [Chinese]} · Speech 中话 中話)” or “Zhōngyǔ (Zhōng·yǔ {Central → [Chinese]} · Language 中语 中語)” used to refer to any Chinese language, similarly to how “pǔtōnghuà (pǔ·tōng·huà common; universal · {through(out) → [common]} · speech → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in China)] 普通话 普通話)” and “Guóyǔ (Guó·yǔ National · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin (term commonly used in Taiwan)] 国语 國語)” are used to refer to Mandarin? Apparently not, according to my dictionaries.

Instead, Chinese people commonly use “Zhōngwén+ (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文)”—this week’s MEotW—to mean “Chinese language”. It should be noted, though, that although “Zhōngwén (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文)” is often used to refer to Chinese speech (e.g., in “shuō (speak說/説) Zhōngwén (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文)” (“speak Chinese”)), “wén (writing; script [→ [language | culture]] 文)” really means “writing”.

Why do so many Chinese people thus conflate writing with speech and language, when they, while related, are really distinctly different things? This seems to be a symptom of the deeply ingrained Chinese cultural conceit that the Chinese characters are the primary aspect of the Chinese languages—to many Chinese people, the characters are the language. This is contrary to the principle recognized by modern linguists (language scientists) that speech is the primary aspect of any language, not writing. The truth of this basic linguistic principle is shown by the fact that many languages don’t even have a writing system, showing that the required foundation of a language is its speech, not its writing.

Our Creator himself touches on this matter in his Word the Bible:

8 For if the trumpet sounds an indistinct call, who will get ready for battle? 9 In the same way, unless you with the tongue use speech that is easily understood, how will anyone know what is being said? You will, in fact, be speaking into the air. 10 It may be that there are many kinds of speech in the world, and yet no kind is without meaning. 11 For if I do not understand the sense of the speech, I will be a foreigner to the one speaking, and the one speaking will be a foreigner to me.—1 Corinthians 14:8–11.

Yes, Jehovah God himself, the One who designed us with our ability to use language, emphasizes the primary importance of understandable speech when it comes to communicating with people, especially when communicating about the potentially life-saving good news of the Kingdom.

Chinese people, however, often have the mistaken view, based on nothing more than deeply ingrained human tradition and not a little cultural pride, that their characters writing system is the primary aspect of the Chinese languages. So, we must take that into consideration when they or people deferring to them erroneously tell us, with all sincerity, that we need to focus first on Chinese characters in our efforts to learn one or more of the Chinese languages. The truth, as testified to by both real language experts among humans and by the Creator himself, is that speech—both understanding speech and speaking understandably—should be our primary focus as Chinese field language-learners.

Regarding the expression “Zhōngwén (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文)”, another thing I have noticed is that when Mandarin-speakers say “Zhōngwén (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文)”, they mean Mandarin speech, but when Cantonese-speakers say “Zhōngwén (Zhōng·wén {Central → [Chinese]} · Writing 中文)”, they mean Cantonese speech. As a Chinese person, I must reluctantly admit that with such habits, and with naming their nation “Zhōngguó+ (Zhōng·guó Central · Nation → [China] 中国 中國)”, the central nation of the world, many Chinese people have taken quite far the tendency of imperfect humans to consider themselves the centre of the universe!