From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Subject: Re: Language
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 05:05:50 GMT


In article <1992Sep1.004252.23073@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, chou@cs.washington.edu (Pai Hsiang Chou) writes...
>In article <1992Aug31.225711.343@engage.pko.dec.com> li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes:
>
>Your analogy doesn't work because you got the roles reversed.
>To correctly apply your analogy, it's like forcing the majority
>of Americans to speak Mandarin for the reason that the world
>needs a common language (and 1 billion Chinese speak it)
>and allow English speaking only in their own homes.

No one will suggest this.

>In Taiwan, H"ol"o, Hakka, and aboriginal people have lived
>there for hundreds of years.  Mandarin is a newcomer.
>Yet it is killing all these languages.  Why?

I have said several times any policy results extinction of all other 
languages should be changed.

>During the 50 years of Japanese rule, Taiwanese had 20 years
>of bilingual education, and the Japanese also published
>a H"ol"o dictionary using kana to mark pronunciation.
>And Japanese happened to be called KokuGo (same characters
>as GuoYu, a term Chinese borrowed from the Japanese).
>Bilingual education, dictionary/official phonetic system
>are things that have been implemented over half a century
>ago, so don't tell me they can't be done.  But tell me why
>they are not done?

During the Japanese rule, were Taiwanese forced to speak/write Japanese, 
and adopt Japanese names, etc assimilation policy?

>What do you mean push backwards?  Are you implying that
>these non-Mandarin mothertongues are inferior languages
>than Mandarin?  What makes them backwards?  Or are you
>saying the multilingual policy is backwards?

Sorry for the confusion. I mean "push back to the old times". The old times
means that you speak your language and I speak mine. No implication, Ok.

>Have you read any Taiwanese H"ol"o literature?  Or do you
>know there are such things?  What about literature from
>Japanese occupation era?  From post WWII era?

I have only read literature written by Taiwanese writers which published
recent fifteen years. Have you read any Hakka and Taiwanese aboriginals 
literature?

>Shanghainese, Cantonese, etc are not Taiwanese mothertongues.
>At least not yet.  If one day they should become one,
>then a significant number of people will understand them.

As you suggested, Hakka, and Taiwanese aboriginals are Taiwanese 
mothertongues, Have you understood them? 

>But given today's situation, this could only mean that they
>refuse to identify with Taiwan.  And just how do they get
>elected to the legislative positions in the first place if
>they can't talk to Taiwanese voters?

You suggested there should not have common language policy. Fine. So everyone 
is free to choose his/her favor language. So why Shanghainese, Cantonese not 
allow to speak at our legislator if they are some members' mothertongues? 
Could you explain this? Why is it anything to do with identity issue? If so, 
several hundred years ago, first immigrant group ("newcomer" by your 
definition) should speak Taiwanese aboriginals which is the only Taiwanese 
mothertongue at the time to show the identity with Taiwan. Can we turn the 
clock back so everyone should only speak Taiwanese aboriginals to show the 
identity??

Tom