Thoughts on: What is the Chinese language?

The Economist recently shared two opposing views of Chinese linguistics.  I have included them in bold with my comments.

In brief, Chinese traditionalists believe:

1) Chinese is one language with dialects.
I would argue this is a highly political statement to make.  As part of its political rhetoric, China states that it is one people comprised of fifty some minorities.  Having everyone, from different ways of life and different cultures, speaking different dialects from the same language, works to reinforce that notion.  One might disagree, but how many times have pro-Tibet groups argued for Tibetan independence by citing the fact that Tibetans do not speak Chinese or that Chinese language is forced upon them?

2) Chinese is best written in the character-based hanzi system.
How does one define best? See below.

3) All Chinese read and share the same writing system, despite speaking in different ways.
All Chinese is a bit extreme. Mongolians, Manchus, Tibetans (just to name the most obvious examples) all have their own writing systems distinct from Chinese characters.  Most now can read and write in Chinese characters due to the education system, but this was by no means a natural progression.


Western linguists tend to respond:

1) Chinese is not a language but a family; the "dialects" are not dialects but languages.
Western linguists define dialects as part of the same language if they are intercomprehensible.  If they are not, then they are distinct languages, not dialects. If a Mandarin speaking Beijinger listened to a Cantonese speaker, he or she would not understand what was being said.  If one accepts this definition, then one must accept this conclusion. 

With that said, many regional dialects/languages are, however, intercomprehensible.  Chinese in the same province or same region can often understand each other's dialects even though they cannot speak them.

2) Hanzi-based writing is unnecessarily difficult; the characters do not represent "ideas" but "morphemes" (small and combinable units of meaning, like the morphemes of any language). Pinyin (the standard Roman system) could just as easily be used for Chinese. Puns, wordplay and etymology might be sacrificed, but ease of use would be enhanced.
Chinese characters are in part composed of morphemes (items that represent meaning), but there are a lot of characters with phonetic indicators (meaning they indicate pronunciation).  Regardless of how one looks at the linguistic analysis, what is meant by best represented?  Arguably, one could communicate with just pinyin, although there would undoubtedly be the occasional confusion that would not have arisen if characters were used. 

However, this is not the question at hand.  Is the best writing system to use one that solely reflects pronunciation?  One could question, is the Roman alphabet the best writing system for English?  In English, there are countless of words for which the writing does not reflect pronunciation. Languages such as French and German have entered the English language, and while the written word has retained its original form, the pronunciation is distinctly English.  One could very well argue that we could rid ourselves of this by using a phonetic system such as IPA.  Aside from being more work than it's worth, there is a history that is lost in the transition. Most Chinese would say the same about their own language. 

In addition, pinyin itself is not free from problems.  Some sounds and letters are not represented consistently.  For example in yan and yang, the vowel a makes different sounds in each.  With chu and qu, the written form of the consonants change while the vowels remain constant, while for the actual pronunciation the opposite is true.

3) Modern hanzi writing is basically Mandarin with the old characters in a form modified by the People's Republic. Everyone else (Cantonese speakers, say) must either write Mandarin or significantly alter the system to write their own "Chinese".
I have heard Chinese people speaking formally in dialect, and the structure is similar to how it would be in Mandarin.  However, is this the natural way in which dialects are expressed in formal discourse or is it the result of Mandarin language education?  When dialect speakers write colloquial sentences, they use different Chinese characters to express themselves than they would in Mandarin, and a non-speaker of the dialect would not necessarily understand.  I am certainly not the expert on this, though. Any thoughts?

What's Your Exit Strategy?

As one can tell from my last post, I have been contemplating my China exit strategy and have been submitting applications to American law schools.  I have found myself going back and forth.  Aside from missing the people, friends, language and food, various issues have crossed my mind.  Is it worth it to pick up and leave everything here behind?  Is going to graduate school worth losing a few years of potential work experience, salary and connections? 

However, a few issues have started to make me think that maybe now is the right time to leave China.

• The China Law Blog has commented on some unusual signs in the Chinese economy. An increasing number of Chinese companies working with foreign firms from various industries have exhibited behavior such as walking away from deals, disputing credit, sending faulty products or not sending at all.  According to the author, "Chinese companies that are going out of business or believe they are going out of business have an annoying tendency to ship bad or fake or no product at all."
• For years rising housing prices have padded the pockets of Chinese middle class. The Wall Street Journal reported that housing prices have begun to fall (see this for a more recent report).  Only month to month data is reportable, but could this be indicative of a larger trend?
• The age of China as the world's factory is ending.  Prices are rising and the glut of blue collar workers, which to large effect fueled China's growth, is starting to disappear.  While the extend of China's manufacturing demise is disputed, it is doubtful China can remain an export oriented manufacturing giant growing at double digit growth indefinitely. 

The evidence here is far from conclusive, but enough to make one think hard about how long China's miracle of decades long growth can last, as well how long one should stay here.

Thoughts after three years

After three years in the capital Beijing, I took a few months off at home to prepare for graduate school applications.  Now that I've put some distance between myself and China, I thought I'd put a few points of reflection about my experience there.

-Anything and everything is negotiable.  This will resonate with people who live there and find that deals can be made anywhere, not just in street markets but also in restaurants, bars, shopping centers, and taxis.  On my way to Singapore, the staff at the airport informed me that my bags were overweight by some 20kg (40+lbs).  After being in China for so long, I knew there had to be some wiggle room.  And so, after some negotiation I ended up paying less than a third of the total fine. Not bad.

-The air really is bad.  Most of us put up with the poor air quality in Beijing, although comparing Beijing air to a few packs a day is a popular conversation starter at expatriate mixers.  But nothing will make you feel that difference like spending extended time in a country with blue skies every day.   Many in Beijing are familiar with the fact that the US Embassy publishes air quality indicators on Twitter, which often measure off the charts.  

-Chinese are very serious about studying abroad.  I've written before about how Chinese students are flocking to American undergraduate programs.  However, more and more Chinese are applying for US law degrees.  The LSAC (administers the LSAT exam) has published information showing that Asia, and specifically China and Australia, have been the big areas for growth in terms of the number of LSAT exams taken.  Obviously, most of the test takers I saw were Chinese when I took the exam in Beijing.  However, when I took the LSAT again in Singapore, a large number of my fellow test takers were (PRC) Chinese.  This trend will undoubtedly continue in the foreseeable future, but questions such as how bad the backlash will be as more Chinese students swarm American schools, as well as how much of this is a blind grab for foreign credentials, are all open questions.  

Chinasmack Diaspora: Are We Content to Let Our DNA Define US

Recently, my article entitled Are We Content to Let Our DNA Define Us was published on the blog Chinasmack.com.  Chinasmack's Diaspora series is a look at the personal experiences and perspectives of overseas Chinese communities.  You can read other articles in the series here.  

A Chinese friend once responded harshly when asked, "Are you Japanese?" by a young child who had approached him on the street. His response struck me as strange. After all, my identity was always a topic of discussion. As a child of a Chinese-American father and Caucasian mother, I looked neither. I have thick dark hair, a long nose, large eyes, and slightly colored skin. In fact, I was more often mistaken for Hispanic or Native American rather than Asian or white. My identity was discussed among close friends, acquaintances, and even with strangers who I bumped into in a bar or with whom I had a brief encounter on the street.

Plus, I got it all the time. Meeting someone for the first time usually meant that he or she might give me that slightly elongated, curious gaze, which was followed by an awkward "I'm sorry..I can't tell, are you [insert misconceived identity here]?" Or, in contrast, when meeting someone Asian, my appearance wouldn't merit a second glance, but my last name would always surprise them. "Wait…. why do you have a Chinese last name?" they might ask. In time, I got used to it, like a high school graduate who puts up with questions like "What are you going to major in? What do you want to do when you graduate from college?" You know people are good intentioned and genuinely curious, but when you answer the same question to all your relatives, family friends, teachers and random acquaintances, you still answer out of courtesy, but each time you draw a deeper sigh as you prepare your now well-practiced response.

Read more...

China and Mongolia

I recently took a trip to outer Mongolia.  A few reflections on the trip relative to its neighbor, China.

Population:

Mongolia has a population of only a few million, small compared to even a modestly sized Chinese city. Traditionally, the people lived a nomadic lifestyle, sprinkled throughout the countryside as they cared for their herds.  Like China, it is experiencing massive urbanization (now some half of the country's population is living in the capital, Ulan Bator).  For a view of Mongolia's changing demographic and economic landscape, Foreign Policy published a moving photo essay.

However, Inner Mongolia (the Chinese province) is experiencing a different dynamic.  Population pressures in the east and supportive policies have brought many ethnic Han Chinese to the area, vastly changing the racial dynamic and has become a source of tension between ethnic groups.  This should come as no surprise given the recent tensions there.  

Rural-Urban divide

With rapid urbanization, both China and Mongolia are experiencing a vastly changing  dynamic between the countryside and urban areas.   As higher paying jobs have shifted to the cities, both countries have rural workers coming to the cities to find work.  A brief walk around Ulan Bator reveals the sharp contrast between the slim, chic urbanites toting brand name bags, next to scruffy workers fresh from the grasslands, clothes tattered and torn, and skin worn from the sun.  

In China, this has been a trend for decades now.  Even today, country dwellers are evident through not only their dress, appearance, mannerisms and language, but also through their residential registration, which allocates resources such as education and healthcare to the populace based on geographic location.  

Hangovers from economic miracles

In the past few years, China has woken up to the bitter realities of its break-neck economic growth.  In addition to massive inequalities, corruption still permeates every aspect of the system, there is rampant pollution, poor city planning and to top it off, the food is unsafe.   Now that the source of China's economic miracle, its sea of cheap labor, is starting to dry up (see the Economist's recent report), these social and political problems present daunting structural problems that will need to be addressed in the coming years.   

While Mongolia's growth may be more recent, it is also adjusting to its newfound growth.  The influx of foreign mining companies into the country has sparked a debate of the role of foreign companies and capital in the country's development as well as how all of this recent wealth should be used.  Like China, wealth needs to be managed, especially given the rising inequality in Mongolia, as well as the need for services and infrastructure, especially in the rural areas.  Both countries need to be prepared for the next step in their development. For what does happen when minerals and low cost labor dry up?  At best, the societies will undergo difficult political and economic changes.  At worst, the societies will wake up to the disturbing reality that they have been fooled by the promises of economic openness and progress.

Thoughts on China and Egypt

The protests in Egypt have garnered considerable press all over the world, and China is no exception.  However, it is not for the same reasons.  Media such as CNN are quick to emphasize popular dissent, broadcasting vivid images of a people discontent with an oppressive regime and taking to the streets in protest.  A quick glance at CCTV shows a clearly different story.  A recent Chinese media story describes the movement as chaotic, and focuses on the economic repercussions such as the downturn in the Egyptian stock market and tourism market.  Laughable? Maybe.  Effective? Yes. 

Many a friend has come to China expecting to encounter a population yearning for democracy.  While there has been enough popular discontent to keep the government on its toes, there is certainly not enough dissatisfaction to inspire a popular revolt.  Part of this is due to the government's control over the media.  The government has been effective about controlling the debate over democracy.  Democratic processes (including Hong Kong and Taiwan) are broadcast as protests, chaotic and disruptive.  Instances of corruption in democratic societies have been touted as institutional flaws, causing, for example, a good friend of mine to call democracy in America simply a game for the rich.  Calls for reform and human rights abroad are responded to with appeals to nationalism and anti-imperialism. 

In addition, the government has carefully studied the lessons from its socialist neighbors.  It watched as a combination of economic and political freedoms tore the Soviet Union apart, and as a result, even though there have been waves of economic reforms, the Party's reach and the political institutions that govern the country today have remained largely unchanged. Wary of its potentially precarious situation, the government maintains policies aimed at assuaging the economic concerns of the socially mobile: keeping the currency low (China is still by far a manufacturing country), pumping liquidity into the economy, expanding educational opportunities, as well as maintaining growth and employment.  With this kind of Party, who wants to ruin a good thing?

The question of whether the events in Egypt will spill over in China has begun to surface.  The word around the blogosphere is a resounding no (see entries from the New Yorker and the Peking Duck).  The reasoning is simple: while the protests in Egypt are new, in China, it's still the same old song.  

Being Mixed Blood in China: A Year in Reflection

Recently, this blog passed its one year anniversary.  And so, I thought that the most suitable post to write would be to take a step back and reflect on the very question of why I write, or particularly why I write here.  

George Orwell, in his piece Why I Write, points out a few qualities that motivate writers everywhere.

He describes traits such as a desire to seek out truth, an urge to push the world in a certain direction, an appreciation of literary beauty, and, in all honesty, for the sheer purpose of one's own ego.  

In a recent piece by the New Yorker entitled An Inspirational Letter to My Students, Roger Rosenblatt describes the art of writing to his students.  True writing, he states, is not about selling more books, or about dwelling over the intricacies of style, whether one has used the right verb or adverb.  Writing must strive for greatness, must form an opinion, and most of all, must be useful to the world.  

I write for these reasons and more.  

I write not because I see myself as the writer of a "China blog," a blog about China by some enlightened foreigner who can explain China to the world. Aside from hubris, opinion, a desire for greatness etc., I write because I believe (and hope) I represent a different opinion. 

While I am close with both China and America, I do not belong in full to either one.  I am not viewed as fully American or Chinese.  At the same time, I do not need to defend one side against the other.  So in a way, I have a certain degree of objective distance to both.  

I view this as not a better opinion, or a more informed opinion.  It is simply a different opinion.  It may not be great, but hopefully, it is of use to this world.  

And this, is why I write.