The Great Pinyin Debate (1 Viewer)

[ludahai]

Jfuh and I have gone way off topic on a thread about the Da Vinci code with a discussion of pinyin. I have opened this thread to move the discussion to the appropriate forum.

This is a hot political issue in Taiwan. There are currently four pinyin systems commonly in use. Two of them are quite good (Hanyu and Tongyong) while the other two, while internally consistent, have a load of pronunciation related problems.

The pro-localization political forces prefer the Tongyong system that was devised by Taiwanese lingustic scholars in the 1980s and 1990s. The pro-China Nationalist Party favors the use of the Hanyu Pinyin system, which was developed in China in the 1950s.

Frankly, I don't care which one is abopted so long as ONE is adopted consistently. However, the debate turned into one of legitimate usage. Jfuh considers only Hanyu Pinyin to be "correct" while I have countered that ALL of them are correct as all are used and are considered legal and acceptable in Taiwan.

The next post will be a continuation of this discussion from Jfuh's last post on this subject in the DaVinci Code thread.

 

[ludahai]

A response from the DaVinci Code thread

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...plots-against-da-vinci-code-7.html#post313126

No? What about the ㄨ ㄩ problem? Tongyong compensates for it, Hanyu makes a mess of it.

It's no problem at all. It's spelled Xu.

ㄨ and ㄩ do not make Xu, that would be ㄒㄨ. That gets to by point, both ㄨand ㄩ are rendered with a 'u' in Hanyu Pinyin. In Tongyong Pinyin, ㄩ is rendered as yu, so you have a distinction between ㄌㄨ lu and ㄌㄩ lyu. Hanyu Pinyin's solution to the problem is to use a two-dot accent mark called a diaeresis. However, this is ONLY used with initials that use BOTH sounds. Absent that, solely the u is used, creating a major inconsistency. Furthermore, most English keyboards can't produce the accent mark without an ASCII code. This is an uncessary complication that Tongyong solves.

Taipei is the capital of the state and sets the basis that the rest of the province eventually follows.

The use of Hanyu pinyin was determined by the MUNICIPAL government of Taipei, NOT the national government. Taichung County, for example, uses Tongyong pinyin as do several counties and cities in the south. Others use a variety of pinyin systems. Taichung City has at least FOUR different "systems" in use.

Aww there you go again, you have to inject partisan politics don't you? Fine, but according to your beloved DPP, Taipei is the capital of Taiwan and so sets the laws and agendas that the rest of the country then follows. Do you really want to go down such partisanship?

The MUNICIPAL government of Taipei doesn't set the rules for the rest of the country, the NATIONAL government does. Currently, there are THREE types of pinyin the national government accepts: Wade-Giles (still the most used), Hanyu, and Tongyong.

One is more accurate and intuitive then the other as pinyin makes use of all 26 characters of the roman alphabet in pronunciation fitting quite nicely with the zhuyin system. Tongyong on the other hand spells out Chen for 5 completely different characters pronounced completely differently.

The Tongyong system is more intuitive in some cases than Hanyu pinyin. There is nothing intuitive about the use of 'x', 'z', and 'c' in some of the Hanyu pinyin combinations.

I was wondering if you were ever going to ask this. Relevance of who developed it? Are you going to call me again a chicom because of it's development by the PRC? Well then by that standard then I guess you'll have to throw Singapore into the loot too since they adapted hanyu pinyin. I guess Taipei is Chicom too huh? Lame.

Singapore is HARDLY a democratic society and they have very close relations with Peiping.

Of course, one is ng, the other is n. But it is my own mistake in pronunciation of the characters that leads to the mistake. Again it's a mistake similar to a typo and is hardly any grounds for invalidity. So again, tu quo quoi; your argument is moot.

It would be a typo if you made the mistake once. You made the SAME MISTAKE three times in the same post. That ISN'T a typo, that is one indication that you don't really know how to use the system you are advocating. Your first comment in this post is yet another piece of evidence that you truly don't understand the Hanyu Pinyin system.

Proper paperwork? Chen only cares about chen, that means money and power for himself, not indifferent from lee deng hui. The panda's were gifts, not rental as is in the US or any where else. ARe you going to continue to deny the relationship between ROC and PRC? What am I thinking, of course you are.

Right! Paperwork MUST be filed with relevant international agencies when an endangered species is transported across international borders. China was NOT going to file those papers in this proposed "gift" to Taiwan.

Awww, boo hoo. You can't read the past posts?

I read your posts. You have no evidence for your allegations against Tzu Chi. They are apolitical! You have not shown any evidence to the contrary.

 

[ludahai]

A response from the DaVinci Code thread

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...plots-against-da-vinci-code-7.html#post313126

No? What about the ㄨ ㄩ problem? Tongyong compensates for it, Hanyu makes a mess of it.



ㄨ and ㄩ do not make Xu, that would be ㄒㄨ. That gets to by point,

My edit button isn't working.

That should be ㄒㄩ, not ㄒㄨ

 

[jfuh]

A response from the DaVinci Code thread

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/10749-vatican-plots-against-da-vinci-code-7.html#post313126

No? What about the ㄨ ㄩ problem? Tongyong compensates for it, Hanyu makes a mess of it.

ㄨ and ㄩ do not make Xu, that would be ㄒㄨ. That gets to by point, both ㄨand ㄩ are rendered with a 'u' in Hanyu Pinyin. In Tongyong Pinyin, ㄩ is rendered as yu, so you have a distinction between ㄌㄨ lu and ㄌㄩ lyu. Hanyu Pinyin's solution to the problem is to use a two-dot accent mark called a diaeresis. However, this is ONLY used with initials that use BOTH sounds. Absent that, solely the u is used, creating a major inconsistency. Furthermore, most English keyboards can't produce the accent mark without an ASCII code. This is an uncessary complication that Tongyong solves.

My bad, ㄨ and ㄩ do not make Xu. You are refering to the problem between 怒 and 女. Actually the sollution is not with the two dots but rather with u and v that first character would be nu and the second would be nv. Westerners would of course have no method of proper pronunciation but pinyin but without proper education in the Chinese phonetic system they'd still have no ability to pronounce 日 or 瑞 (which would be nearly impossible).
So no, you're concept is out of date with regards to the utilization of the two dots. There's no inconsistancy.

The use of Hanyu pinyin was determined by the MUNICIPAL government of Taipei, NOT the national government. Taichung County, for example, uses Tongyong pinyin as do several counties and cities in the south. Others use a variety of pinyin systems. Taichung City has at least FOUR different "systems" in use.

And as per your own note, it's completely redundant to have so many for the sole purpose of being "politically correct". The phonetic system is to best reflect the chinese characters. Since the Zhu yin system is obviously not going to be use, then the second best and most consistent system should be used. That would be the pinyin system.

The MUNICIPAL government of Taipei doesn't set the rules for the rest of the country, the NATIONAL government does. Currently, there are THREE types of pinyin the national government accepts: Wade-Giles (still the most used), Hanyu, and Tongyong.

No, it doesn't, however the department of education/ministry of education also agrees with the implication of using pinyin system for it's accuracy and clarity for pronunciations that are consistent with the zhuyin system. The only reason that Taiwan has issue with implimenting pinyin is the same one you have brought up, for the fear of becoming chicoms. A completely rediculous and irrational fear.

The Tongyong system is more intuitive in some cases than Hanyu pinyin. There is nothing intuitive about the use of 'x', 'z', and 'c' in some of the Hanyu pinyin combinations.

For westerners yes, not for Chinese. The pinyin system is 100% derived from the zhuyin system. X, R, Q, Zh, Ch, V all take place of the zhuyin system. Though I would prefer the zhuyin system, however the romanization does represent something much simplar internationally.

Singapore is HARDLY a democratic society and they have very close relations with Peiping.

That's not my argument is it? Is Singapore chicom? Don't forget, Singapore also has relations extreemly close with Taiwan. Afterall, thier military still trains in Taiwan and not on the mainland. Doesn't get much closer then that.

It would be a typo if you made the mistake once. You made the SAME MISTAKE three times in the same post. That ISN'T a typo, that is one indication that you don't really know how to use the system you are advocating. Your first comment in this post is yet another piece of evidence that you truly don't understand the Hanyu Pinyin system.

Once again, tu quo quoi. THis by no means invalidates anything. As I said, it's a mispronunciation on my behalf. Many Chinese southerners as myself have issue with proper pronunciation between n and ng. Some even have issue with h and f. Just as in the US ppl in TX pronounce one way, those in NY pronounce quite another way. You're argument is moot.

Right! Paperwork MUST be filed with relevant international agencies when an endangered species is transported across international borders. China was NOT going to file those papers in this proposed "gift" to Taiwan.

ARe we still on pinyin here? Perhaps you should open a seperate thread for this?
If you're still on pinyin, the relationship here is again the irrational fear of closeness to the mainland. The paperwork argument is moot.

I read your posts. You have no evidence for your allegations against Tzu Chi. They are apolitical! You have not shown any evidence to the contrary.

Again, are we still on pinyin?

 

[ludahai]

My bad, ㄨ and ㄩ do not make Xu. You are refering to the problem between 怒 and 女. Actually the sollution is not with the two dots but rather with u and v that first character would be nu and the second would be nv. Westerners would of course have no method of proper pronunciation but pinyin but without proper education in the Chinese phonetic system they'd still have no ability to pronounce 日 or 瑞 (which would be nearly impossible).
So no, you're concept is out of date with regards to the utilization of the two dots. There's no inconsistancy.

Yes, there is an inconsitency. It refers to the Romanization for the ㄩ sound. The "v" is only used in typing and ONLY with intials that have BOTH ㄨ and ㄩ finals. If it only uses the ㄩ final, then no 'v' is used. That IS a clear inconsistency. Also, in writing, the accent mark most certainly IS used. My textbooks from China all use it, and the one series I use from Taiwan that uses Hanyu Pinyin also uses it. They use the accent mark. ㄌㄩ uses it while ㄒㄩ does not. CLEAR inconsistency.

And as per your own note, it's completely redundant to have so many for the sole purpose of being "politically correct". The phonetic system is to best reflect the chinese characters. Since the Zhu yin system is obviously not going to be use, then the second best and most consistent system should be used. That would be the pinyin system.

Well, I do prefer the Jhuyin system, without a doubt. It is easier to use with Taiwanese because few know ANY Romanization system. However, all four systems are consistent to some degree, though Hanyu is NOT the most consistent (I have already demonstrated a major inconsistency), Tongyong is the most consistent.

In an earlier post, you claimed Chen represents four different sound combinations in Tongyong Pinyin. Would you mind pointing out which they are?

Also, this debate was sparked by your arrogant claim that Tzu Chi can't even determine for themselves what is the legitimate English spelling for their name and that Hanyu Pinyin is the ONLY LEGITIMATE way to spell Chinese. Pure hubris!

No, it doesn't, however the department of education/ministry of education also agrees with the implication of using pinyin system for it's accuracy and clarity for pronunciations that are consistent with the zhuyin system. The only reason that Taiwan has issue with implimenting pinyin is the same one you have brought up, for the fear of becoming chicoms. A completely rediculous and irrational fear.

Source? The Executive Yuan supports the use of Tongyong Pinyin, NOT Hanyu Pinyin. It is the Taipei MUNICIPAL government that uses Hanyu, NOT the Executive Yuan.

For westerners yes, not for Chinese. The pinyin system is 100% derived from the zhuyin system. X, R, Q, Zh, Ch, V all take place of the zhuyin system. Though I would prefer the zhuyin system, however the romanization does represent something much simplar internationally.

Tongyong is also derived from the Jhuyin system.

That's not my argument is it? Is Singapore chicom? Don't forget, Singapore also has relations extreemly close with Taiwan. Afterall, thier military still trains in Taiwan and not on the mainland. Doesn't get much closer then that.

You agree with Singapore and the International convention when it sides with you (Hanyu Pinyin), but DISAGREE with Singapore AND International convention when it comes to Chinese Characters (both use the hideously ugly simplified characters.) Once again, your inconsistency comes to the fore.

Once again, tu quo quoi. THis by no means invalidates anything. As I said, it's a mispronunciation on my behalf. Many Chinese southerners as myself have issue with proper pronunciation between n and ng. Some even have issue with h and f. Just as in the US ppl in TX pronounce one way, those in NY pronounce quite another way. You're argument is moot.

What, you get caught and you drag up your Latin phrase of the week? You know, I might actually be impressed if it weren't for the fact that I have had Latin around me since I was a kid and was singing songs in Latin since I was four years old.

As for the issue of accent. Sure, New Yorkers, Texans, and heck, throw in we New Hampshirites, have different accents, but we still spell the words in the same way. You make a big deal about Jhuyin and Hanyu Pinyin, BUT the Jhuyin the same in the dictionary regardless of mispronuciations on your part. You merely claim my argument is moot because I have caught you in another of your large number of inconsistencies.

ARe we still on pinyin here? Perhaps you should open a seperate thread for this?
If you're still on pinyin, the relationship here is again the irrational fear of closeness to the mainland. The paperwork argument is moot.

Again, are we still on pinyin?

Again, these were issues YOU brought up in a previous post. Thanks for once again confirming you have no evidence for your slanderous statements against the Tzu Chi Foundation.

 

[jfuh]

Yes, there is an inconsitency. It refers to the Romanization for the ㄩ sound. The "v" is only used in typing and ONLY with intials that have BOTH ㄨ and ㄩ finals. If it only uses the ㄩ final, then no 'v' is used. That IS a clear inconsistency. Also, in writing, the accent mark most certainly IS used. My textbooks from China all use it, and the one series I use from Taiwan that uses Hanyu Pinyin also uses it. They use the accent mark. ㄌㄩ uses it while ㄒㄩ does not. CLEAR inconsistency.

One of your own arguments formerly was:

Furthermore, most English keyboards can't produce the accent mark without an ASCII code. This is an uncessary complication that Tongyong solves.

Which I debunked completely.
As for the phoneticism, again there is no inconsistency as with your example of ㄒㄩ there is no pronunciation of Xu that is Xv in existance. Thus there is no need for the dots. Your argument of inconsistency is moot.

Well, I do prefer the Jhuyin system, without a doubt. It is easier to use with Taiwanese because few know ANY Romanization system. However, all four systems are consistent to some degree, though Hanyu is NOT the most consistent (I have already demonstrated a major inconsistency), Tongyong is the most consistent.

Tongyong is actually the most inconsistent. With multiple varied Chinese characters all under the letters C and S. Example of 吃，陳，張 and 朱 completely different yet all with a ch. Also of the complete and illogical overuseage of H.
Finally on inconsistancies itself, how many different versions has tongyong gone through now? I really can't keep up with it's various changes. 忠孝東路 used to have 7 different romanizations, one for all 7 sections.

In an earlier post, you claimed Chen represents four different sound combinations in Tongyong Pinyin. Would you mind pointing out which they are?

振，晨，譖. predominantly with vareid last names.

Also, this debate was sparked by your arrogant claim that Tzu Chi can't even determine for themselves what is the legitimate English spelling for their name and that Hanyu Pinyin is the ONLY LEGITIMATE way to spell Chinese. Pure hubris!

Legitimacy? Is that my claim? good luck hunting for where said that. I said it was more proper and accurate.

Source? The Executive Yuan supports the use of Tongyong Pinyin, NOT Hanyu Pinyin. It is the Taipei MUNICIPAL government that uses Hanyu, NOT the Executive Yuan.

I'm not saying the executive yuan now am I?
As for source I have none at the moment. It was what I heard on the news last year.

Tongyong is also derived from the Jhuyin system.

Very poorly, as noted above.

You agree with Singapore and the International convention when it sides with you (Hanyu Pinyin), but DISAGREE with Singapore AND International convention when it comes to Chinese Characters (both use the hideously ugly simplified characters.) Once again, your inconsistency comes to the fore.

It's noted that you again have changed your premise.

One is romanization, and romanization on it's very nature is international. The other is strictly chinese, which by default rests on the traditional form. I also stated that Printed matter should be in traditional form where as handwritten for the purpose of simplicity would of course allow for simplified.
So no, don't even go there.

What, you get caught and you drag up your Latin phrase of the week? You know, I might actually be impressed if it weren't for the fact that I have had Latin around me since I was a kid and was singing songs in Latin since I was four years old.

As for the issue of accent. Sure, New Yorkers, Texans, and heck, throw in we New Hampshirites, have different accents, but we still spell the words in the same way. You make a big deal about Jhuyin and Hanyu Pinyin, BUT the Jhuyin the same in the dictionary regardless of mispronuciations on your part. You merely claim my argument is moot because I have caught you in another of your large number of inconsistencies.

You caught my poor pronunciations? Good job.
As for spelling of chinese characters? Sorry we Chinese typically do not spell our characters from a series of phonetic symbols regardless it being zhuyin or pinyin.
For some one that was raised around latin, you certainly seem to lack in understanding tu quo quoi with regards to validity of argument.

Again, these were issues YOU brought up in a previous post. Thanks for once again confirming you have no evidence for your slanderous statements against the Tzu Chi Foundation.

I'm not going to waste my time going over the same point I've already made in former posts and not once alone neither.

 

[ludahai]

One of your own arguments formerly was:
Which I debunked completely.
As for the phoneticism, again there is no inconsistency as with your example of ㄒㄩ there is no pronunciation of Xu that is Xv in existance. Thus there is no need for the dots. Your argument of inconsistency is moot.

You didn't debunk what I said at all. I was referring to representing it as pinyin, NOT as Chinese characters. There IS a consistency in usage of ㄩ. It is becoming increasingly clear that you simply don't understand the usage of the system you advocate.

Tongyong is actually the most inconsistent. With multiple varied Chinese characters all under the letters C and S. Example of 吃，陳，張 and 朱 completely different yet all with a ch. Also of the complete and illogical overuseage of H.

Like Hanyu Pinyin, 吃 and 陳 both use c, but 張 and 朱 do NOT use C. They use Jh, not Ch.

Finally on inconsistancies itself, how many different versions has tongyong gone through now? I really can't keep up with it's various changes. 忠孝東路 used to have 7 different romanizations, one for all 7 sections.

Tongyong now has a consistent system. I think you are confusing it with other systems. Please educate yourself about the system before commenting on it. Your above comment indicates you don't know what it is. I think you are confusing it with Wade-Giles.

Legitimacy? Is that my claim? good luck hunting for where said that. I said it was more proper and accurate.

No, you said that it was the ONLY correct form of Romanization!

http://www.debatepolitics.com/conspiracy-theories/10749-vatican-plots-against-da-vinci-code-6.html Post #58

I could care less what thier official english spelling is as the proper romanization of them is ci ji.

I'm not saying the executive yuan now am I?
As for source I have none at the moment. It was what I heard on the news last year.

The Ministry of Education IS A PART of the Executive Yuan.

Very poorly, as noted above.

Your comments were incorrect. You don't seem to know what Tongyong Pinyin is.

It's noted that you again have changed your premise.

One is romanization, and romanization on it's very nature is international. The other is strictly chinese, which by default rests on the traditional form. I also stated that Printed matter should be in traditional form where as handwritten for the purpose of simplicity would of course allow for simplified.
So no, don't even go there.

You just hate it when your inconsistencies are pointed out and exposed to the world. Nice try, but I am not buying it.

You caught my poor pronunciations? Good job.

I also caught your poor rationalization for the mistakes.

As for spelling of chinese characters? Sorry we Chinese typically do not spell our characters from a series of phonetic symbols regardless it being zhuyin or pinyin.

Except in school or possibly looking it up in a dictionary or typing (though there are admittedly other ways of doing both.)

For some one that was raised around latin, you certainly seem to lack in understanding tu quo quoi with regards to validity of argument.

Well, admittedly the Latin was mostly liturgical or musical in nature. I DO understand that phrase, I simply refuse to accept your labelling specific points by yourself as such.

I'm not going to waste my time going over the same point I've already made in former posts and not once alone neither.

Your "points" were poorly made and with no support. Your slanderous remarks against Tzu Chi have gone unsupported, as do many of your other comments on this and other threads.

Back to pinyin, please educate yourself on what the Tongyong pinyin system actually is as well as to the actual usage of the u for ㄨ and ㄩ in Hanyu pinyin.

 

[jfuh]

You didn't debunk what I said at all. I was referring to representing it as pinyin, NOT as Chinese characters. There IS a consistency in usage of ㄩ. It is becoming increasingly clear that you simply don't understand the usage of the system you advocate.

You're argument of pinyin's flaw is in it's difficulty in typing, your own words were provided above and shown you're lack of knowledge in the use of hanyu pinyin.

Like Hanyu Pinyin, 吃 and 陳 both use c, but 張 and 朱 do NOT use C. They use Jh, not Ch.

Wrong, 吃 and 陳 use Ch not c alone. You're correct on Jh for 張 and 朱, but you do not provide any substance to the overuseage flaw of H.

Tongyong now has a consistent system. I think you are confusing it with other systems. Please educate yourself about the system before commenting on it. Your above comment indicates you don't know what it is. I think you are confusing it with Wade-Giles.

Tongyong continues to change everyday because of it's inconsistancies, hanyu has been unchanged because it's consistancy and simplicity since it was concieved in the 50's.
Even with the evolution that tongyong has gone through it still remains inconsistent as is demonstrated with the overusage of H.

No, you said that it was the ONLY correct form of Romanization!

http://www.debatepolitics.com/conspiracy-theories/10749-vatican-plots-against-da-vinci-code-6.html Post #58

I fail to see any mention of legitamcy on my part.
In either case regardless of which system you use, the romanization is still wrong for "Tzu Chi". Hanyu would be Ci Ji, Tongyong is Cih Ji. Want to go over the inconsistent portion again here? Or should we go over the mis-identification you've made.

The Ministry of Education IS A PART of the Executive Yuan.

And they differ in direction, one political, the other educational.

Your comments were incorrect. You don't seem to know what Tongyong Pinyin is.

It's a completely inconsistent system with an overusage of h that is completely un-intuitive, ie Jh for the head of the phonetic, when Zh is much more closely intuitively to 之.

You just hate it when your inconsistencies are pointed out and exposed to the world. Nice try, but I am not buying it.

Tu quo quoi does not exclaim inconsistency, and you've done nothing of the such.

I also caught your poor rationalization for the mistakes.

Yes, I've made mistakes. However I've made no poor rationalizations.

Well, admittedly the Latin was mostly liturgical or musical in nature. I DO understand that phrase, I simply refuse to accept your labelling specific points by yourself as such.

So you admit you're only arguing for the sake of argument alone and not on the validity of the argument itself. Good to know.

Your "points" were poorly made and with no support. Your slanderous remarks against Tzu Chi have gone unsupported, as do many of your other comments on this and other threads.

:roll:

Back to pinyin, please educate yourself on what the Tongyong pinyin system actually is as well as to the actual usage of the u for ㄨ and ㄩ in Hanyu pinyin.

I already have, yet you continue to refuse that the argument has been clearly presented. Plz stop trolling.

 

[ludahai]

You're argument of pinyin's flaw is in it's difficulty in typing, your own words were provided above and shown you're lack of knowledge in the use of hanyu pinyin.

THat was PART of my argument. I was talking about representing it as PINYIN NOT as Characters on a computer screen. You still need an ASCII code to do that. There is STILL the inconsistency which you REFUSE to address.

ㄌㄩ = Lu (with the two-dotted accent mark) - or lv if you are typing for a character.
ㄒㄩ = Xu (with NO accent mark) and Xu is your are typing a character.

No inconsistency?

 

[jfuh]

THat was PART of my argument. I was talking about representing it as PINYIN NOT as Characters on a computer screen. You still need an ASCII code to do that. There is STILL the inconsistency which you REFUSE to address.

Because it's non-existant. you're making up something out of nothing.
typing out with lv is completely acceptable.
For that matter, shei yong zhe zhong fang fa da zi huo xian shi? 都是這樣子打的.

ㄌㄩ = Lu (with the two-dotted accent mark) - or lv if you are typing for a character.
ㄒㄩ = Xu (with NO accent mark) and Xu is your are typing a character.

No inconsistency?

Two different phonetics what's your point?
So far this seems to be the only single "inconsistancy" that you claim against pinyin.
Face it, the only beef you have with hanyu pin yin has nothing to do with the system itself, but only like the criminal president you support whom only 5.8% of the island also supports, is purly political and not academic. 唉 朽木不可調也

 

[ludahai]

Because it's non-existant. you're making up something out of nothing.
typing out with lv is completely acceptable.
For that matter, shei yong zhe zhong fang fa da zi huo xian shi? 都是這樣子打的.

You are making more and more up every day.

It is NOT acceptable. I have more than a DOZEN Chinese textbooks from China. NOT ONE of them uses the "v", they all use "u" with the tréma. NOT A SINGLE ONE!

Two different phonetics what's your point?
So far this seems to be the only single "inconsistancy" that you claim against pinyin.

You have claimed that Hanyu Pinyin is the most consistent system. I have pointed out an inconsistency and POINTED OUT HOW TONGYONG IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER IT! Keep :spin: ing......

Face it, the only beef you have with hanyu pin yin has nothing to do with the system itself, but only like the criminal president you support whom only 5.8% of the island also supports, is purly political and not academic. 唉 朽木不可調也

If you actually READ what I posed (post number one in this thread I believe), I point out that I don't care which is eventually adopted, as long as one is adopted for consistency. I DO object to YOUR characterization of Hanyu pinyin as the ONLY PROPER form or Romanization -something that is CLEARLY not the case. :2brickwal

What does Chen's approval rating have to do with pinyin? You are the most hypocritical individual on these boards. This is the second thread today that I am completely knocking you back and forth with the FACTS!

To use a soccer analogy from 2002 - I am the USA, you are Mexico! :2rofll:

 

[jfuh]

You are making more and more up every day.

In your dreams I suppose.

It is NOT acceptable. I have more than a DOZEN Chinese textbooks from China. NOT ONE of them uses the "v", they all use "u" with the tréma. NOT A SINGLE ONE!

So what? Means you haven't seen it before, doesn't mean it's not true. I know very well of your bias against anything you disagree with.

You have claimed that Hanyu Pinyin is the most consistent system. I have pointed out an inconsistency and POINTED OUT HOW TONGYONG IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER IT! Keep :spin: ing......

When you haven't explained nor attempted to explain the overuseage of H in tongyong.
Oh and what about Tzu Chi? Not quite tongyong now is it?

If you actually READ what I posed (post number one in this thread I believe), I point out that I don't care which is eventually adopted, as long as one is adopted for consistency. I DO object to YOUR characterization of Hanyu pinyin as the ONLY PROPER form or Romanization -something that is CLEARLY not the case.

It's the most efficient, intuitive, and precise romanization of any there are. All letters are clearly and singularily used with no inconsistencies though you like to make up complications that are non-existant.

What does Chen's approval rating have to do with pinyin? You are the most hypocritical individual on these boards. This is the second thread today that I am completely knocking you back and forth with the FACTS!

Why Chen? Because the only reason not to impliment the vastly efficient hanyu system is political and not academic. Chen's politics are the only reason why hanyu is not implimented as the romanization system in Taiwan. You're completely blinded by partisanship. You've only presented what you think are "facts" yet they're just made up garbage.:roll:

 

[ludahai]

In your dreams I suppose.

So what? Means you haven't seen it before, doesn't mean it's not true. I know very well of your bias against anything you disagree with.

Actually, I think YOU are the one with the bias you mention. I only have a dozen textbooks in my bookshelf that back up what I am saying.

When you haven't explained nor attempted to explain the overuseage of H in tongyong.

The only time 'h' is used in Tongyong that it ISN'T in Hanyu is in the finals of the ㄓ ㄗ ㄕ ㄔ, etc. sounds. Frankly, while neither Zhi and Jhih are ideal for ㄓ, the last one creates fewer inconsistencies with the use of 'i' in ㄑㄒ一,etc.

Oh and what about Tzu Chi? Not quite tongyong now is it?

But I am not arguing that there is one single "proper" form of Pinyin, am I?

It's the most efficient, intuitive, and precise romanization of any there are. All letters are clearly and singularily used with no inconsistencies though you like to make up complications that are non-existant.

WRONG. You deny there is an inconsistency with the way ㄨ and ㄩ is represented again? Talk about bias. You are so blind to your partisanship, you can't see the OBVIOUS!

Why Chen? Because the only reason not to impliment the vastly efficient hanyu system is political and not academic. Chen's politics are the only reason why hanyu is not implimented as the romanization system in Taiwan. You're completely blinded by partisanship. You've only presented what you think are "facts" yet they're just made up garbage.

YOU are blinded by partisanship. You can't see the flaws in Hanyu pinyin. I don't remember seeing ANY of your vaunted "V"s on Taipei street signs, because that is INCORRECT Hanyu Pinyin and is used ONLY for typing Chinese Characters on a computer keyboard. Please wake up and smell the coffee Artful Dodger.

:2brickwal :2brickwal :2brickwal :2brickwal

 

[ludahai]

Two more Hanyu pinyin inconsistencies

ㄩㄥ is yong, but ㄐㄩㄥ is jiong in Hanyu Pinyin.
Tongyong is consistent. ㄩㄥ is yong and ㄐㄩㄥ is jyong.

ㄡ is ou in both systems. ㄐ一ㄡ is jiu in Hanyu pinyin, but jiou in Tongyong pinyin. Once again, Tongyong is more consistent.

 

[jfuh]

Two more Hanyu pinyin inconsistencies

ㄩㄥ is yong, but ㄐㄩㄥ is jiong in Hanyu Pinyin.
Tongyong is consistent. ㄩㄥ is yong and ㄐㄩㄥ is jyong.

ㄡ is ou in both systems. ㄐ一ㄡ is jiu in Hanyu pinyin, but jiou in Tongyong pinyin. Once again, Tongyong is more consistent.

To the forienger yes it looks inconsitant, however to the native speaker, there is no such inconsistanc the transitions are completely intuitive.

 

[ludahai]

To the forienger yes it looks inconsitant, however to the native speaker, there is no such inconsistanc the transitions are completely intuitive.

Most Taiwanese don't have any clue what any of these mean. There is nothing intuitive about it. Face it, Hanyu Pinyin is NOT consistent with Jhuyin. However, this is still igoring your arrogance position that Hanyu Pinyin is the proper form of Romanization.

 

[scowalters]

Hi, I'm from Seattle, but I currently reside in Taichung and Tainan as an English tutor. I speak Taiwanese and Mandarin, and I would like to point out what the point of romanization is, because one of you guys seem to have a problem with 'non-natives'. The point of romanization is for 'nonnatives'. Why bother with roman characters, when you could have good ol' traditional characters.

Born and raised in the USA, I would like to say that this debate has sparked my attention between Hanyu and Tongyong, and that after research (quite a bit on Wikipedia), Tongyong would actually make better sense out of the two.

I mean, really, since when is 'qi' pronounced like "ci"? Romanization is supposed to make learning languages simplified for people who are used to languages with roman characters, and 'q' is not pronounced like 'ch'.

 

[jfuh]

I mean, really, since when is 'qi' pronounced like "ci"? Romanization is supposed to make learning languages simplified for people who are used to languages with roman characters, and 'q' is not pronounced like 'ch'.

Qi is not even close to CI (see). Qi is closer to Chi (Chee)
But then that comes into conflict with another pronunciation ㄔ.
Xi or Si isn't close to Shee neither.

The whole reason for having a romanization system is to allow those who cannot read Chinese characters to know the pronunciation of characters.

I'm glad you've brought this up because I've been saving this site for a while. Finally my source for this whole argument:
Source

 

[scowalters]

How about a site that is unbiased and reviewed by more than one person, like Wikipedia? That site is biased and there is only one author. A bigger site with a larger user/author base would be a better source.

Also, by 'ci', I meant "chi" in English pronounciation.

Having that you understand the purpose, get somebody who doesn't know any chinese at all to speak in Hanyu, and he will not say any real words. Get someone to speak in Tongyong, and it will be closer to the native tones of Traditional Chinese.

By the way, even Wikipedia says Taiwan uses Tongyong officially. See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongyong_Pinyin

 

[jfuh]

How about a site that is unbiased and reviewed by more than one person, like Wikipedia? That site is biased and there is only one author. A bigger site with a larger user/author base would be a better source.

Also, by 'ci', I meant "chi" in English pronounciation.

Having that you understand the purpose, get somebody who doesn't know any chinese at all to speak in Hanyu, and he will not say any real words. Get someone to speak in Tongyong, and it will be closer to the native tones of Traditional Chinese.

By the way, even Wikipedia says Taiwan uses Tongyong officially. See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongyong_Pinyin

Anyone can edit wiki, I can edit wiki to reflect my stance easily as well as monitoring it to reflect it's factuality. The wiki source says very little of the practicality nor adaptability or history on tongyong but does bring up the criticism and reflects what was on my source being that the use is simply political and not academic.
I have no issue with wiki, except that the source which I provided is very factual. There's no opinionation.
Bring out what you feel it does not properly address, anything that is not factual or twisted for some personal agenda one way or another.

 

[scowalters]

Anyone can edit wiki, I can edit wiki to reflect my stance easily as well as monitoring it to reflect it's factuality. The wiki source says very little of the practicality nor adaptability or history on tongyong but does bring up the criticism and reflects what was on my source being that the use is simply political and not academic.
I have no issue with wiki, except that the source which I provided is very factual. There's no opinionation.
Bring out what you feel it does not properly address, anything that is not factual or twisted for some personal agenda one way or another.

However, as I have said above, Wikipedia has a very large user base, and author base. With so many people, the information is what is generally accepted. On the other hand, the site you posted was a small user base, with only a single author. It's like majority vs. one person. There's no fact in what one person thinks. Even you could be that person who made up "romanization.com". With Wikipedia, you get millions of people from across the globe. People in Taiwan, the US, EU, Russia, etc. With this many more sources, it is much more assuring than one author's knowledge.

Also, in Wikipedia, if a "fact" or "edit" is not generally accepted or believed in, it will be taken out and be reviewed by peers. At "romanization.com", you have one person, who really doesn't care about what other people say because it is the webmaster's website, not everybody else's.

If you took time to read the Wikipedia article, it clearly says that (in the first paragraph) "Tongyong Pinyin is the current official romanization of the Chinese language adopted by the national government (although not all local governments) of the Republic of China (Taiwan) since late 2000, announced by the Mandarin Promotion Council of the Ministry of Education."

Plus, I have asked my students what pinyin system their schools use, and guess what pops up: Tongyong!

The article only says that the adoption could be political, but it has been adopted by the Ministry of Education (not President Chen, as you have previously claimed). You have said that Tongyong has not been proved by the Ministry of Education, but here's the proof that they use it!

Here's some formal documents too: http://abc.iis.sinica.edu.tw/pinyinfangan.htm

 

[jfuh]

However, as I have said above, Wikipedia has a very large user base, and author base. With so many people, the information is what is generally accepted. On the other hand, the site you posted was a small user base, with only a single author. It's like majority vs. one person. There's no fact in what one person thinks. Even you could be that person who made up "romanization.com". With Wikipedia, you get millions of people from across the globe. People in Taiwan, the US, EU, Russia, etc. With this many more sources, it is much more assuring than one author's knowledge.

Also, in Wikipedia, if a "fact" or "edit" is not generally accepted or believed in, it will be taken out and be reviewed by peers. At "romanization.com", you have one person, who really doesn't care about what other people say because it is the webmaster's website, not everybody else's.

If you took time to read the Wikipedia article, it clearly says that (in the first paragraph) "Tongyong Pinyin is the current official romanization of the Chinese language adopted by the national government (although not all local governments) of the Republic of China (Taiwan) since late 2000, announced by the Mandarin Promotion Council of the Ministry of Education."

Plus, I have asked my students what pinyin system their schools use, and guess what pops up: Tongyong!

The article only says that the adoption could be political, but it has been adopted by the Ministry of Education (not President Chen, as you have previously claimed). You have said that Tongyong has not been proved by the Ministry of Education, but here's the proof that they use it!

Here's some formal documents too: http://abc.iis.sinica.edu.tw/pinyinfangan.htm

You have not refuted any of the practicalities of hanyu vs tongyong. Note the title of the source which I have cited "Questions and answers about Taiwan's romanization situation, and information about why tongyong pinyin is not what it claims to be". This is in direct response to what you argued:

Born and raised in the USA, I would like to say that this debate has sparked my attention between Hanyu and Tongyong, and that after research (quite a bit on Wikipedia), Tongyong would actually make better sense out of the two.

I mean, really, since when is 'qi' pronounced like "ci"? Romanization is supposed to make learning languages simplified for people who are used to languages with roman characters, and 'q' is not pronounced like 'ch'.

And yet I see nothing on the wiki source to which you cited that says anything about tongyong to "make better sense".


Fair enough if you wish to ignore the academic aspect and focus on the political aspect, I'll toss in my two cents.

The ministry of education which is under the prime minister, is Chen's government.

From August to October of 2000 after Chen took office deliberation began on changing the former romanization system. Concensus amongst Chen's politicians, not academics, was reached then to utilize tongyong. The former director of the ministry of education resigned his post upon the adoptation stating ".....I will not be held accountable for the historical ramifications of the political decision to use Tongyong pinyin...."

 

[ludahai]

Born and raised in the USA, I would like to say that this debate has sparked my attention between Hanyu and Tongyong, and that after research (quite a bit on Wikipedia), Tongyong would actually make better sense out of the two.

Don't expect him to see the good sense in your argument. He is amazingly blinded by partisanship on BOTH sides of the Pacific it isn't even amusing.

 

[ludahai]

Anyone can edit wiki, I can edit wiki to reflect my stance easily as well as monitoring it to reflect it's factuality. The wiki source says very little of the practicality nor adaptability or history on tongyong but does bring up the criticism and reflects what was on my source being that the use is simply political and not academic.
I have no issue with wiki, except that the source which I provided is very factual. There's no opinionation.
Bring out what you feel it does not properly address, anything that is not factual or twisted for some personal agenda one way or another.

Tongyong Pinyin (Chinese: 通用拼音; Pinyin: tōngyòng pīnyīn; literally "Universal/General Usage Sound-combining") is the current official romanization of the Chinese language adopted by the national government (although not all local governments) of the Republic of China (Taiwan) since late 2000, announced by the Mandarin Promotion Council of the Ministry of Education. Like all previous ROC official romanizations, it is based on the official Chinese dialect of Standard Mandarin. Around eighty percent of the Tongyong Pinyin syllables are spelled identically to those of Mainland China's Hanyu Pinyin

Nothing in that paragraph is unfactual.

The source you cited is created by a pro-Hanyu pinyin advocate. That is hardly unbiased.

I have been showing you the problems with Hanyu Pinyin, especially its INCONSISTENCIES which you have been unable to refute, and which you now ignore or pass off as unimportant by changing the topic. Typical move out of your book, I know.

 

[jfuh]

Nothing in that paragraph is unfactual.

Have I argued the factuality of the wiki source? Plz show me anywhere where I've stated that wiki wasn't factual. Good luck searching.

The source you cited is created by a pro-Hanyu pinyin advocate. That is hardly unbiased.

Plz show me anywhere stated in my source that is not factual.
Pro-hanyu advocate? That's a new one, does that make you a pro-tongyong advocate?

I have been showing you the problems with Hanyu Pinyin, especially its INCONSISTENCIES which you have been unable to refute, and which you now ignore or pass off as unimportant by changing the topic. Typical move out of your book, I know.

I've shown you how you're claims are completely false. I've cited a source as well that supports my claims and beyond. CAre to talk about any of the points given in my source as unfactual? Plz, your move.