HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jyw@phys.psu.edu (Jin-Yuan Wu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Tuition from Parents (was Re: Fax to Mr. Bush ...)
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:47:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bw4sJ3.6rM
Organization: Penn State, Department of Physics


>In article <1bfmioINN2ve@phakt.usc.edu>, zyou@phakt.usc.edu (Zhongbai You) writes:
>>   I own tuition to my parents ONLY. My parents are CHINESE PEOPLE

The parents of the college students can only provide a fraction of 
the education cost for their kids. People in a country need college students,
so they put their money together to support some of their kids to
go college while take others back to factories and farms. The reason that
people in a country do so is to expect the college students will serve
their country and their people more effeciently.

Gao1 Kao3 (the college entrance exam) is nothing but a way to select the
"lucky" kids who recieve the money not only from their own parents, but also
from the parents whose kids "failed" in the exam. The exam is fair, but
the result is not completely fair.

Someone may say that if our parents earn more, they should be able to pay
our tuition. Well, in USA, the parents do earn a lot (not simply because
they work hard and have hi-tech, but also because their country grabs huge
amount of wealth from the 3rd world). However, even in USA, the tuition 
paid by parents does not cover the education cost completely. 
The public universities recieve money from tax-payer's share, of course.
The private universities collect money related to the tax-examption, in
other word, the money should otherwise be paid as tax in some sense.
Though the fraction covered by parents may vary from country to country,
it is not 100% anywhere.

There is a Chinese idiom: "Er3 Shi2 Er3 Lu4, Min2 Zhi1 Min2 Gao2".
(Er3 = your, Shi2 = food, Lu4 = salary?, Min2 = people, Zhi1, Gao2 = wealth)
Most of the Chinese college students do know the fact described above, 
and they do know what they should do.
From: phsjjc@emrycc.cc.emory.edu (JAMES J. CEN)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: RE: Forward: Shen Tong?
Date: 10 Oct 1992 12:23:59 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Article 86645 (4 more) in soc.culture.china:
From: jtang@hardy.u.washington.edu (J. Tang)
Subject: Re: Forward: Shen Tong?
Date: 10 Oct 92 06:21:34 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Oct10.062134.5457@u.washington.edu> jtang@hardy.u.washington.
edu (J. Tang) writes:

>In article <9210100527.AA10189@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu> phsjjc@emrycc.cc.emory.edu
>(JAMES J. CEN) writes:

>[Stuff about Shen Tong and the outcome of the Protection Bill deleted.]

>>       AHKCUS did not bring this issue up during the lobby efforts of IFCSS
>>for fear of jeopardizing the passage of the Protection Bill.

>Is this your conjecture, or are you speaking for AHKCUS? I don't even
>think you are a member of AHKCUS, let alone the speaker for the
>organization.

Is that your conjecture?  If so, do you have the facts to support it? :)
BUT, congratulations, you have it half-right!  I am not a member of AHKUCS,
let alone the the speaker for that respectable organization.  Nor, however,
did I claim to the contrary in my article.  I have close friends who are
AHKCUS members actively involved in the recent debates, who supported the
the Chinese Protection Bill, and would not let anything jeopardize its
passage.

>1) Shen Tong's act and whether it was irresponsible etc were brought up
>   in some local media during the lobbying.

I am not here to judge.  I try to bring the facts to our readers' attention. 

>2) No matter what Shen Tong's motivation was,

I did not say anything about Shen Tong motivation, do you want say something
about it?  Are you trying to hide what you know?  Why don't you come clean? :)

>   the fact remains that he is an oversea CSS going back and got arrested.

No question about it.  Along with many he visited.

>   That motivation has no relation with the passage of the bill, but the fact
>   does.

>J. Tang

Agreed.  Isn't that also my observation? :)

James J. Cen
Emory University
From: math1pf@rosie.uh.edu (Zheng, Ping)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: i am a spy? if so, it would be interesting
Date: 14 Oct 92 18:02:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: rosie.14OCT199213020030
Organization: University of Houston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Oct14.150231.5233@fcom.cc.utah.edu>, jli@bingham.utah.edu (Jianliang Li) writes...
>In article <2ADB58B0.9521@news.service.uci.edu> yeh@netix.com (Mr Shannon Yeh) writes:
>If i act as a spy, i will hide myself in a corner and watch you blood carders
>and make report to someone in somewhere.  but the fact is: Shannon Yeh 
>publically stood up and fighted with those blood carders.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
OK, where are you now? Let's have the great pleasure to see you,or if you are 
too busy to show you up,PUBLIC your address,we'll visit our "public" fighter
in no time !
>
>Shannon Yeh has his own plan, and he is not a stupid man--he knows how to
>Jiao(foot)Ta(step)Shi(real)Di(earth) to reach his goal.  
>
>shannon
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: 129.83.161.10 (H. Chao)
Subject: (Yue Fe1) Re: Oct 1
Organization: MITRE
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 18:23:33 GMT

> >
> >Yue Fei is very good, in deed. He can fight and write, both. The problem some
> >ones regard him as ultra-(right/left)est is because of his poem:
> >
> >Zhuang Zi Ji Cai Hu Nu Ru,
> >Xiao Tan Ke Yin Xiong Lu Xue.
> >
> But here, the Hu Lu, and Xiong Nu are minority groups. Someone might
> find the prove that the war was just an independent movement. (we are
> quite familiar in CSS) And that is the reason Yue Fei was an ultra
> leftest, or rightest? I'm not sure which side.
> 
> >Some bodies, after being westernized, think that is wrong to be canibalist,
> >while others proved that Xiong Lu Xue is red wine and Hu Nu Ru is nothing
> >more than cheese. Well, you can keep arguing. But please donate no later than
> >Steve Lin.
> >-- 

1) Very funny!  If China and Japan merged into one country like Europe
would be.  How do you define those anti-Japanese heroes who died in WWII? 
Are they leftist, rightist, or just a bunch of fools?

2) A poem is a poem.  When Li3 Bai2 said "white hair 3000 Zhan3", do you
really want to measure how long his hair was?  I don't know why Yue Fei is
a canibalist?

3) In Qing dynasty, thousands of minority POWs was captured in XinJiang. 
One good singer was among these POWs and forced to sing a song by the
emperor (KanXi or QienLong?). He sang "XueHua (snow flake) he (and) xue
(blood) pu (blow on) Zhan4Pao2 (war cloth), Duo2Qu3 (capture)
Huang2He(yellow river) Wei (become) Ma3cao2 (manger) ............. Lu3
(enemy) shi3 (force) wuo3 (me) ge (sing).........."  Even the emperor was
called "Lu3", but he still release the singer.  This singer must be a hero
of that minority group, and of course, he is my hero too.  It doesn't
matter he is a minority or not.

4)  I HATE Japanese, but Marshall Dong1Xiang1 Ping2Ba1Lang2 (commander of
Sino-Japanese war in Qing dynasty), Marshall San1Ben3 WuShiLiu(56)
(commander of Pearl Harbor battle) are still my heroes.  For those who
fought and died for their own contries I really do not want to categorized
them as leftist or rightist, they are heroes for me, and
forever.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: jyw@phys.psu.edu (Jin-Yuan Wu)
Subject: Silk valley has a "Kuai" tree?
Organization: Penn State, Department of Physics
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:59:15 GMT

In article <ldbeulINN9jb@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM (Steven Lin) writes:
>FYI: the silicon valley in Chinese is Si Gu. It has been that name for
>decades. Recently, more mainlanders come in Si Gu and they have surprised
>the people: they rename   "Si Gu"   as   "Gui Gu".
>I checked my dictionary, there is no Gui in Chinese. Ha, CR made it!
>Some day I wonder that my grandson may not be able to bring me home, if my son
>marries a mainlander (she would call it Gui Gu while we live in Si Gu).:-)

>My point was that CCP education has gone with wild rule in teaching Chinese
>to read side or middle character as the whole word, that is wrong.
>There is a Redwood city in California, the RED WOOD is pronounced to be
>Kuai, the same word as Qin Kuai. Thound years old red wood is Chien Nian
>Gu Kuai, not Hui.

>FYI, there is a place in the Front Gate of Beijing used to be named as
>Da Za Lan, now people called it Da San Lan. There is a town in Taipei
>called Mu Za, it shouldn't never be called Mu San.

>Wu San Quei (Qui) was the person who opened Beijing City Gate to let Qing
>army enter into Beijing. His character was same as Qin Kuai who betrayed
>his country.

---From Xin1 Hua2 Zi4 Dian3 published by Shang1 Wu2 Yin4 Shu1 Guang3 in 1987
(6th ed. 10th print) p. 157:
Gui1: a non-metal element, symble Si, old name Xi1, ...
BTW: The writen form of Gui1 and Xi1 are different. 
Calling "Xi Gu" is ok but "Si Gu" will be somewhere has silk.

---"Qin1 Hui4" is not "Qin Kuai". see my other posting.
"Qian1 Nian2 Gu3 Gui4" is not "Chien" Nian Gu "Kuai".
"Hui4" and "Gui4" has same shape but different pronounciations and meaning.
Another netter also posted. See it for details.

--- "Thousand years" is not "thound years". Should be easier.

--- "Zha4 Lan2" is not "Za Lan". 
Beijing people call "Da1 Zha4 Lan2" as "Da1 Sha2 Lan'r4" long time ago,
earlier than 1911. This is not the first time someone found it.

--- "Wu San Qui"? "Qui" is not found in PinYin System.

The Xinhua Dictionary is on top of my desk. Anything you want find out?



Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:28021 soc.culture.taiwan:14451 soc.culture.hongkong:12635
From: chuan@stein.u.washington.edu (Chuan Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
Subject: Re: Better off under Japanese? (Was Re: Oct. 1 or Oct. 10)
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:48:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct15.204848.14788
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Oct15.160424.11720@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>>>Two possibities, if Taiwan was ruled by Japanese after WWII, Taiwan will be
>>>close to what Japan is now, or if Taiwan was governed by U.S., Taiwan will
>>>close to what U.S. is now. Both possibilities are much better off than
>>>what Taiwan is now.  
>>
>>That is interesting.  My dog thinks (I think) something similar to
>>that that he is much better off being an American dog than being those
>>dying Somalian.  Fortunately, Taiwanese (Chinese in general) have
>>something that my dog doesn't, dignity.
>>
>>Chuan Lee
>
>May be in your point of view, Japanese don't have any dignity since they
>have received so much aids form U.S. even their constitutions. But where is

Maybe I wasn't clear enough.  Or maybe you forgot what you said.  Did
I say anything about Japanese's dignity in receiving aids?  Or even
Chinese?  I think that is fine in time of difficulties (boy, I am
starting another flame here :-).)  But my response was entirely
pointing towards your statement on "two possibilities: ... ruled by
Japenese .. or ... governed by U.S." that Taiwan would be better off
today.  Try to say that same statement to the Vietnamese (of course
replace the word Taiwanese with Vietnamese) and wait for the reponses!

I am going to response to the following even though your reply was off
based at the first place.

>Chinese dignity now when the Japan's emperor is going to visit China and
>the government tried to surpress Chinese people to request compensates from
>Japan for their crimes committed during WWII.

Everything is suppressed by the Chinese government inside China.  So
what is the surprise here?  I thought those committed the war crime
were already punished after WWII.  Probably your objective is that
justice is not served if you don't see the money in your pocket.

>Can you see any of your dignity in China when billions of foreign dollars
>flooded in to buy ..., etc., etc. ?

Big deal!  I see that happens in the US too.  The economic circle
keeps rolling on.  Billions of $$ pour in wherever that is a bargain
for business.

>Of cause you can keep your dignity for yourself, but when you compare with
>other people, oh boy, you will find out how '....', you are.
>So, my point is it doesn't matther how you look at yourself, the most
>important is how would other people look upon you.

I do have my own dignity in my own way.  So do you, in your own way.
Changing the subject of your statement above, I would say, "when I
compare with other people, oh boy, I will find out how '...', I am".

Chuan Lee
U of Washington, Seattle.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: jyw@phys.psu.edu (Jin-Yuan Wu)
Subject: Re: Tuition from Parents (was Re: Fax to Mr. Bush ...)
Organization: Penn State, Department of Physics
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:25:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.233028.4762@news.acns.nwu.edu> usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
>In article <Bw4sJ3.6rM@cs.psu.edu> jyw@phys.psu.edu (Jin-Yuan Wu) writes:
>> 
>> >In article <1bfmioINN2ve@phakt.usc.edu>, zyou@phakt.usc.edu (Zhongbai You)  
>writes:
>> >>   I own tuition to my parents ONLY. My parents are CHINESE PEOPLE
>> 
>> The parents of the college students can only provide a fraction of 
>> the education cost for their kids. People in a country need college 
>> students,
>> so they put their money together to support some of their kids to
>> go college while take others back to factories and farms. The reason that
>> people in a country do so is to expect the college students will serve
>> their country and their people more effeciently.
>
>You are right that people in a country expect college students to serve their 
>country and their people more efficiently. However, people definitely don't  
>want college students to be just machines or robots of CCP because college  

[... deleted, some words like CCP, CG etc. randomly found in this portion, 
see original for the readers if interested in]

>Carl

Someone must be sticker seller who had handful labels with CCP, CG, 
communism etc. on his goods. Someone seems like political game too 
much. For the attacker's convenience, I pre-generated some words bellow.
The only thing the attacker needs to do is to connect them into sentances.

CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM 
CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM 
CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM 
CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA CCP CG COMMUNISM 
enough?
From: jli@apex.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: ?????????? PROTECTION BILL: READ MY LIPS! ??????????
Keywords: ******** KEEP ONE'S PROMISE ***********
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:07:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: fcom.1992Oct15.160732.24172
Distribution: soc
Organization: University of Utah

In article <7681@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> kzest+@pitt.edu (Ke Zeng) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.192004.8871@fcom.cc.utah.edu> jli@bingham.utah.edu (Jianliang Li) writes:
>>
>>	
>>	While pushing for the protection bill, from the beginning to the end,
>>what has been said is that the protection bill is GOOD for CHINESE HUMAN RIGHTS.
>>Now the bill has become law and the human rights in China still remain the
>>same.  When you apply and/or receive the greencard, please ask yourself the
>>three questions and SPEAK FROM THE BOTTOM OF YOUR HEART:
>>
>>	Q1:	What are you going to do for Chinese human rights?
>>
>>	Q2:	What are you going to do for those who died on "6.4"?
>>
>>	Q3:	How much do you own Chinese PEOPLE? Are you going to pay
>>		back (such as college tuition)?
>>
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------
>>DISCLAIMER: I MYSELF IS A BENEFICIARY OF THE BILL.
>>--------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>JLI
>
>	I think it's still too early to ask these questions since the
>uncertainties ahead and the law never means the beneficiaries can  get
>thier green cards NOW. Here:
>
>        1)If the human rights conditions improves enough in China by next
>June, the covered by the law should safely go back to China.
>
>	2)If the human rights conditions does not improve or goes even
>worse by next June, the covered would get thier green cards.
>
>
>	Now SPEAK FROM THE BOTTOM OF YOUR HEART:
>
>	Which do you want: Hope 1) will be true
>			   Hope 2) will be true
>			?
>--------------------------------------------------
>DISCLAIMER: I MYSELF IS A BENEFICIARY OF THE BILL.
>--------------------------------------------------
>-- 
>  K. Zeng University of Pittsburgh (412)624-3219 bitnet: kzest@pittvms
>  internet: kzest@unix.cis.pitt.edu  or  kzest@vms.cis.pitt.edu



	I take the first (1) thing first.


JLI
From: xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li)
Subject: Re: Oct 1, our National Day
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:19:23 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.125111.29182@ms.uky.edu> gang@ms.uky.edu (Gang Li) writes:

>No, I mean to use you heart and think that you ARE a Chinese. A lot of people
>want not to be a Chinese, which I will not blame, but the fact is not all them
>can do that. And it is better for them to be a happy Chinese. I think Mr. Bush
>will agree with me.

The first time I learnt about "Chinese heart" was from Zhang Minmin,
the Hongkong singer. His heart was broken in 89, and we never hear
from him anymore.

Then there was Hou Dejian, the first time I met him was in 1982 at
Columbia. A few days later, my Taiwanese friend told me he went
back to mainland to look for his Chinese heart. He finally came back
to Taiwan. Another broken heart.

I guess the current Chinese heart is for money and stock. I don't
see difference between the Chinese heart and American heart in this
way.
From: ping@summit.ATMOS.ColoState.Edu (Ping Ding)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: it's a technical issue
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:39:53 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

In article <2ADA1822.6190@news.service.uci.edu> yeh@netix.com (Mr Shannon  
Yeh) writes:
> To convince people on why blood cards are terrible for Chinese in China
> is a political issue, but how to knock out the signed blood cards will
> be mostly a technical issue.
> 
> I urge those blood carders stop attacking me personally--that does not 
> prove anything, and does not fix anything.  My 9201 colleagues and I  
will
> treat this project as an engineering project.  just like you guys do  
your
> programming, we will follow whatever available procedure to knock it  
out.
> 
> shannon
> -------
You yelled so many times about your 9201 colleagues, where are they and
how many they have?
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:27430 talk.politics.china:1804
From: cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang)
Subject: Re: Oct. 1 or Oct. 10, which is the more important day for China?
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 20:31:26 GMT

>There have been many posts about Oct. 1 or Oct. 10 as the national
>days of China. Let me raise a question. From the point of view as
>Chinese people, disregard any political party, which day is more
>important to China for us to celebrate?
>
>Oct. 10 is the day for Chinese people to overthrow Qing dynasty and 
>the Emperor and founded a republic, Republic of China. Under the
>leadership of Jiang(Chiang), China won WWII and regained the territory
>taken by Japan, including Taiwan.
>
>Oct. 1 is the day PRC founded. Although CCP praised highly for
>the founding of PRC, it is just a dynasty replacing another one 
>from the point of view of history and Chinese people.
>

I thought ROC is another dynasty who replaced Ching dynasty. For two
reasons. (1). ROC used a new calendar after it is founded, exactly like
Ching dynasty. (2). The Old Chiang grabbed power until he died, then let
his son do the same thing, exactly like what happened in Ching dyansty. 
But none of the above occurs to PRC. So, which one is more like
Ching dynasty ? which national day deserves more to be celebrated ?

Yi-Chieh

Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:27668 soc.culture.taiwan:14313 soc.culture.hongkong:12406
From: ericlaw@vax.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
Subject: Re: Traditional vs Simplified Characters
Date: 13 Oct 92 09:51:39 -0600
Organization: Muskingum College

In article <1992Oct12.103214.59624@cc.usu.edu>, ma@cc.usu.edu writes:
> This argument doesn't make any sense. Everyone now knows that "love" and
> any emotion is the result of BRAIN function. Relating "heart" to "love"
> is a misconception by our old folks. By taking "heart" out of the "love"
> only destroys the WRONG meaning of the word. What 's wrong with that?
> Find some better examples, please.

	** The simplified one does not show the brain either.

	   How can one love without brain and heart?

>>             --------
>>            |    -
>>            |   |_|
>>            |
>>            |  -   -
>>            | |_| |_|
>>            |_________
>> 
> 
> Why don't we use the 4-sided square? Please explain why the other side should
> be open?
> 

	** If the fourth side is closed, nobody can get in and out.
	   Why didn't the old communists make China written like that? 
	   May be that is a better word for "country"
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:27492 soc.culture.taiwan:14247 soc.culture.hongkong:12275