Learning ... as a second language

Teaching English, Chinese, or any language as a second language must obey the rule that the students learn the fastest when they understand a certain amount of materials, either spoken or written. Without scientific study, I place the "certain amount" at roughly 75%, beyond which the students find it boring, and below which they find it too challenging to be interesting. A local high school in the town is academically reputed in all subjects, including foreign languages. The Advanced Chinese class is taught by teachers from Taiwan, who are excellent in the Chinese language and less than desired in English. As the class is taught in mostly Chinese, almost all students are Chinese-descent so as to be able to follow the teacher's instructions; basically, students not hearing Chinese in everyday life have a hard time to survive. Another high school not far away is not as competitive, and the Chinese class is taught by one whose mother tongue is English. The class is full of white and black students fully engaged and sufficiently but not overly challenged. A similar case is given by a friend of mine, who opened a foreign language school in southern China in the 1990's. Initially, the students demanded foreign teachers, who were fairly expensive back then. Recently, my friend said, some of her students "became more realistic" and preferred Chinese teachers, because they "felt they learned more" this way.

In a nutshell, other things being approximately equal, the determining factor for the fastest progress, and as a side effect, personal interest, is the percentage of the language that can be understood. The graph of the learning speed vs. material or class difficulty may be a bell-shaped curve centered around 75% of materials understood on initial reading or hearing as a metric for difficulty. Now, all I wish is a proof from a controlled study by psychologists or educational scientists.

P.S. There is one unique aspect in teaching Chinese as a second language. Traditionally, the students are required to memorize the characters completely so they can write them manually. As everyone knows, the Chinese writing system is not spelling-based and so poses the greatest difficulty to all students. With the advent of computer technology and acceptance of the unofficial standard of input, pinyin, one no longer needs to completely memorize a character to "write" it; he only needs to recognize the one out of multiple given by the IME, Input Method Editor. (A classical example is "嚏" as in "喷嚏", "sneeze", which few Beijing University students can write with free hand.) This has made significant impact on all the people around the world using the Chinese language, businessmen, workers, students, and teachers themselves. Unfortunately, some teachers in some schools still require the students to write the characters in hand, wasting their energy otherwise available to study more characters, more sentence structures, or more culture topics.

"Ni Hao Ma" (你好吗） is not a native Chinese greeting

I keep hearing non-native Chinese speakers greet a native Chinese with a friendly "Ni Hao Ma?" (你好吗?). It's time to set this straight: "Ni Hao Ma" is not native Chinese. It sounds so artificial that a native speaker immediately envisions a foreigner speaking with a big smile but drifting tones. I'm not sure why this 3-character greeting is not used by the Chinese but mostly used by foreigners. I think it has to do with a direct translation of "How are you?" What else could be a better translation of this 3-word English phrase?

So what's the native Chinese greeting? It's a simple "Ni Hao!" (你好!). Why do the Chinese people not like to append a "Ma" (吗)? I don't know. Whoever invented "Ni Hao", perhaps during the Vernacular Chinese Movement a hundred years ago, probably didn't like to make this frequent greeting phrase any longer than necessary.

If you do need to ask the question as if saying How's your situation?, "Ni Hao Ma?" certainly makes sense. That is, this 3-character question is used in an inquiry, not greeting. But in that case, "Ni Hai Hao Ma?" (你还好吗?) or "Ni Zuijin Zenme Yang?" (你最近怎么样？) may be just as or even more common. Similarly, you ask the plural "you" with "Ni Men Hai Hao Ma?" (你们还好吗?) or "Ni Men Dou Hai Hao Ma?" (你们都还好吗?).

[2012-06 Update] A Taiwanese pointed out to me that "Ni Hao Ma?" is said among Taiwanese. I don't recall hearing them say that in a greeting; I can't imagine two native Chinese/Taiwanese walking toward each other and both saying "Ni Hao Ma?" to each other, shaking hands. But it may be because I haven't had enough greetings with them. If "Ni Hao Ma?" is more common among Taiwanese and "Ni Hao" more common among the mainlanders, again, in greeting, not inquiry, then this posting may be titled something like "Ni Hao Ma?" is not a native mainland Chinese greeting. (After all, there's not one single Chinese linguistic authority in the world, but as many as the number of regions where the majority of the population speak Chinese.)

[2013-05 Update] In case a reader is still confused, I'd like to briefly emphasize the main point: The single Chinese word "问候" has two meanings, greeting and inquiry. In the sense of greeting, "你好!" is the choice. In the sense of inquiry, "你好吗?" is a perfect question sentence. This short note is about greeting, as when two friends run into each other on the street and neither had any recent incident that would worry the other. Saying "你好吗?" as a greeting sounds foreign, or causes confusion or misunderstanding.

Chinese Dance "Flower Kidney"

My kids were reading the English version of the program for an end-of-year show in the Chinese community. They had doubt about the last one in the list, supposed to be the most exciting among all, "Flower Kidney". That doesn't sound right to them, or to me. If you have some knowledge of Chinese folk dance and also enjoy Chinese cuisine (a really Chinese one), you may guess what the Chinese title for the dance is: 花腰花.

What the hell is this? And Why is it linked to kidney? Here's my guess (and I can pretty much guarantee the accuracy). Go to Google Translate:
http://translate.google.com/#zh-CN|en|%E8%8A%B1%E8%85%B0%E8%8A%B1
and see what it is. That's right. The first 花 is "flower" and the two characters "腰花" is kidney, as in "炒腰花"  or stir-fry (pig) kidney.

So, what is exactly this dance? Ignorant of Chinese folk dance, I have to hazard a guess. "腰花" is likely some dance stressing the waist (pun intended) of the dancer, not sure how the name came about. The first "花" is unlikely related to Flowers, but instead suggests variations of a standard pattern, as is often the case in traditional Chinese folk music. Therefore, the most appropriate literal translation is probably "Waist Dance With Variations". Prepend "Chinese" and add translator's note, as you wish.

(On the other hand, I bet the waist dance indeed can be related to kidneys, in the sense that it improves your health if practiced moderately, or degrades it or harms the kidneys if otherwise.）

Why the Chinese language should not adopt phonetic writing?

This is part of a comment posted to Xujun Eberline's blog Will Chinese Go Alphabetic? Re-posted here as a standalone piece. "Phonetic" and "alphabetic" are used interchangeably when referring to a writing system.

There's an often-forgotten aspect of the resistance against Chinese romanization: unification of China. A number of scholars have expounded this idea since about one hundred years ago. The earliest I read is from Sun Yat-sen in his "Three Principles of the People". If China were to use an alphabetic writing system, people in different regions of China would soon find it impossible to communicate with each other due to great differences in pronunciation of the dialects, and China would disintegrate into many small countries as Europe. Sun's voice might appear weak against the few prominent figures in the 1920's and 1930's advocating romanization, because Sun's major concern was something bigger. In fact, that idea is largely unknown to most people, in spite of reiteration by a few scholars mostly in Taiwan. Generally, in the past 100 years, when the Chinese woke up to the fact that China is weak in power, romanization of the Chinese writing system would gain momentum, and subside in other times. I think the latest wave was in the 1980's, on a much smaller scale than its predecessors. With economic boom in recent decades, romanization is only a wishful thinking of the foreign students interested in something about China except the language itself.

To be fair, I think it's proven that children spend more time studying Chinese to a literacy level than studying an alphabetic language. But in view of the benefit of national unity, and to a lesser extent, artistic and literary beauty, let the kids, or foreign students, suffer! (By the way, I'm not sure if there's proof that simplified Chinese takes less time to learn than the non-simplified, but all anecdotal evidence suggests so.)

Technical document needs literal translation

A question recently posted to a Chinese database forum is about the translation of the Oracle database term "recursive call" as "递归调用". That's a perfect literal translation. But the problem is that the word "recursive" or "递归" in computer programming refers to the fact that a function calls itself, as in this pseudo code:

function f()
{ //some condition to stop the loop
  call f();
}

In case of Oracle, a recursive call has nothing to do with calling the function or routine from within itself. Instead, it refers to a background, lower-level, normally database kernel-level, function call, not issued by the user. (In case of PL/SQL, it's a user-written SQL modified by the PL/SQL engine behind the scenes.)

This is an interesting topic about translation in that I believe, all technical translation should be literal, using the word, in the target language, that has long been established as a proper translation. In this case, "recursive" has only one translation, "递归" in Chinese, with no other choice. As to whether the original document used the correct word, it's the original author's responsibility. A translator can add a translator's note to his translation, but should not choose a word that he thinks more closely matches the original meaning.

Similarly, "object-oriented programming" should indeed be translated as "面向对象的编程", even though I think "object-central", "object-centered", or "object-focus" would be better in the original language. And Oracle's "recursive call" may simply be called "lower-level call", so as to not raise the eye-brow of a seasoned programmer unnecessarily, not to mention the fact that an Oracle PL/SQL programmer may actually write code that has a real recursive call as in this example.

Having said that, I won't go further to say Christopher Columbus' "Indian" should be translated as "印度人" instead of "印第安人", which is a perfect translation. Columbus made a big mistake to equate American Indians to Indian Indians (so to speak). An obvious mistake is better corrected in translation if incorrect in the original language. But a word only questionable in the source is better left alone in the target language. After all, a translator may do more wrong in trying to outsmart the original author, causing endless confusion among the readers of the translation.

Chinese Accent in English Pronunciation

One could write a dissertation on foreign language accent. But here's a little observation I made after my recent reading on phonology. Some Chinese have a hard time to pronounce [ʌ] as in 'but' correctly, substituting [a] as in Chinese "阿" for it. But those living in an English-speaking country long enough can easily make a distinction not only in listening, but in pronouncing it as well. Now comes the more difficult one, the difference between [a] ("阿") and [ɑ] (as in "palm"). I knew the difference and subconsciously made the distinction in pronouncing "阿" and "palm" in its own context and language. But I had not realized the International Phonetic Alphabet actually used two different symbols to represent them until recently I did some casual reading of Wang Li's Chinese Phonology (汉语音韵) and Bernhard Karlgren's book on the same subject. So what's the difference between these two vowels? A good explanation is in the vowel chart of the IPA. For native Chinese, all [ɑ] needs is to move the tongue slightly toward the back from where it is needed to pronounce the Chinese [a] ("阿").

Chinese accent, or foreign language accent in general, in speaking English, is actually easier to overcome when English has a syllable [note] completely non-existing in Chinese (or that foreign language). When there's a syllable that sounds like one in Chinese but does not exactly match it, the native Chinese student learning English will conveniently substitute the Chinese syllable for the English counterpart without being corrected. Short of an incentive to make this correction in his future career or life, the substitution becomes permanent or fossilized.

_____________
[note] It would be better to talk about the more "atomic" element, phoneme. But that may be slightly too technical to people that stumble across this blog.

Off-topic: "Those from Taiwan know their Chinese but not their English..."

A recent topic in a Chinese forum titled http://bbs.gxsd.com.cn/archiver/?tid-477193.html

Levels of translation quality proposed by Yan Fu: A small example

Yan Fu (严复, 1854-1921), a thinker, translator and educator, proposed three levels of translation quality, i.e., progressively, 信, 达, 雅, roughly, fidelity to the original, sentence fluency, and elegance of the translation, respectively. Numerous books and articles talk about these standards. I just want to give a simple case to illustrate the point. At my first job after graduation in China, I worked with a coworker that recently graduated just like me, except she had an English major. One day she suggested we translate a short paragraph in an English novel, separately. I don't remember any part of it, except this sentence, "He put his hands on her waist". Naturally, my translation goes, "他把手放在她的腰上". Then I looked at hers, which is "他搂着她的腰". I almost gasped at the perfect choice of the word (or character) "搂" (hug or embrace). I don't know why she picked that paragraph to test my translating skills, perhaps because she or her teacher or schoolmates tested it before and found it interesting.

Back to the 信-达-雅 standard. No doubt my translation has fidelity (I got the meaning right), and fluency (the Chinese sentence is natural and understandable), but definitely lacks elegance. If the material were from a technical book instead of a novel, my rendering of "put hands on" would be good, or even better without elegance. But it's a novel, a literary piece of art. Mr. Yan's highest standard 雅 is not just desired, but really demanded!

On the other hand, the original sentence, "He put his hands on her waist", begs the question whether it's elegant in itself. I think not. Should the translator inject a bit of literary element in translation? Well, I guess it depends. In this case, it looks appropriate. It's not uncommon a translated piece of work is more beautiful than the original, although the opposite is more common.

Proper name translation (2): standardization

This is a sequel to Proper name translation: semantic or phonetic. Proper names pose a challenge to translation not because of the language, but because of their unique features. Selection of semantic or phonetic translation is only one of them. A more common problem may be standardization. This is not obvious to English-speaking people, who are used to translated names in English provided on the source side by the translators of the originating language. But occasionally, there are no source side translators. Shortly after 9-11 of 2001, bin Laden's name was spelled differently in various writings. I contacted pbs.org regarding their spelling in a 3(?)-part long article. They explained the name was being standardized at the moment.

I used to work at an organization in China officially designated as the agency translating the United Nations documents into Chinese. Choosing correct Chinese characters for proper names is a big deal. We follow certain sources in sequence: check the People's Daily first, check ... (some other official news media), check less authoritative newspaper, and so on. If the name in Chinese is still not found, use a standard proper name translation dictionary. Yes, such a dictionary does exist. Nevertheless, proper names are still translated differently across different regions where the Chinese language is spoken, such as mainland and Taiwan.

Off-topic: What language is popular?

There are many ways to gauge what foreign language is popular. One way is to check how many books are at a bookstore. I went to a local Borders Bookstore and noted down the following. The numbers are the numbers of book shelves holding books for that language (self-study books, dictionaries, easy readers, etc):

Arabic: 1
Chinese: 1
French: 4
German:: 2
(ancient) Greek: ?
Italian: 3
Japanese: 2
Korean: less than 0.5
Latin: 1.5
Portuguese: 1
Russian: less than 1
Spanish: too many

Even if this were not in south Texas, I bet Spanish would still beat any other language. I'm surprised at the high number for French and relatively low number for Chinese, considering the fact that more high schools or junior high have both as foreign languages. But that's what the market is, or at least what the bookstore follows.

[Update] This posting has a follow-up in 2015: What language is popular? A revisit.

"有情人终成眷属" and "Money talks" on Google Translate

Google Translate is increasingly popular. But more mistakes are also being found, especially when idioms are translated. One salient example is the Chinese-to-English translation of "有情人终成眷属" [People in love eventually get married], which is translated as "Money talks" [有钱能使鬼推磨]. I checked a few other languages I know, such as French and Spanish, where the translation is "L'argent parle" and "El dinero habla", respectively. They both literally mean "Money talks".

How does this or this kind of errors occur? According to Inside Google Translate, Google Translate "looks for patterns in hundreds of millions of documents to help decide on the best translation for you". Let's check those "millions of documents" for this particular idiom. Search for
"有情人终成眷属" "money talks"
quotation marks included, and the result is 31300 hits as of this writing. Most indeed bear titles associating the Chinese idiom with "money talks". But some are apparently talking about Google Translate's mistake. So to be fair, we need to filter them out. Try excluding "Google" with the minus operator
"有情人终成眷属" "money talks" -google -"谷歌"
Again, quotation marks included. The result is 26400 hits. The first hit

Album : Money talks
Chinese : 有情人终成眷属  (You Qing Ren Zhong Cheng Juan Zhu)
Artist : Zheng Yuan (郑源 Zheng Yuan)
Release Date : 1/18/2006

Proper name translation: semantic or phonetic

In researching a subject in history of Chongqing, I came across various English translations of the name of a building, "白公馆" in Chinese, e.g. "Bai Mansion", "Baigong Guan", "Baigongguan", "White Residence", "White House".[note] The interesting part is the translation of "白". Should it be phonetically "Bai" or semantically "White"? The answer is, It depends on the origin of the name. According to Baidu, this building was named after its owner Bai Ju (surname Bai). So the correct translation must be phonetic. "Bai Mansion" may be the best, although "Baigongguan" serves well as the name of a place. I don't suppose Mr. Bai, the owner, called it "白公馆" with intention of using a pun. But if he had done so, our translation would be impossible, or you pick one you like.

This reminds me of the translation of "Rice University", a reputable college in Texas. In the late 1980's, people in China referred to it as either "莱斯大学" or "稻米大学". But since the school was named after a person, as was known to all later, only the translation "莱斯大学" survived.

________________
[note] If you need to see who uses which term, use these keywords to search on Google (quotation marks matter; example for "Bai Mansion"):
"白公馆" "重庆" "bai mansion"
chongqing "bai mansion"
chungking "bai mansion"

"最近" is not always "recently"

I've seen too many Chinese use the word "recently" to translate "最近" incorrectly. Dict.org explains "recently" as "in the recent past" or "not long since". It clearly indicates the past tense, as in "I bought a car recently", "我最近买了一辆车". But "我最近准备买一辆车" should be "I'm going to/I'm planning to buy a car soon", not "...recently". This mistake is made presumably because the English textbooks in Chinese equate "最近" with "recently" without pointing out the tense it should be used in. Interestingly, the Chinese having immigrated to English-speaking countries subconsciously avoid using the word "最近" in future tense *in Chinese conversations*; they tend to use the word "很快" [literally "very quickly" but more appropriately "soon"], as in "我很快要买一辆车", which reflects the influence of language on thought.

Translation of a sentence in Classical Chinese

> 一句文言，大家看怎么翻译合适？
> “民困于贪残之政，故托言大鼠害己而去之也。”

This is a classical or literary Chinese sentence from "Interpretation of The Book of Songs"(《诗集传》) by Zhu Xi (Chu Hsi, 朱熹), who lived in the Song Dynasty more than 800 years ago. I hope the following translation is close:


The people suffer under the government of greed and cruelty. So the author allegorically talks about rats that cause harm to him and his attempts to get rid of them.

Requested to translate a poem

> Hi there, a friend of mine gave me your email as a way to
> translate Chinese to English.  I have attached a picture.
> Can you help?

This is a poem. So my translation may be crude by the literary standard. It goes like this:

The eagle flies, the tiger roars, resonating in the river and mountains
Deep valley, sound of tide, a whole night's wind
High flying eagle, ferocious tiger, have great ambitions

by Zhang Baiyun
in early winter of year XX (maybe 1963?)

I'm not quite sure of the first of the two letters representing the year. If it's 癸, the year may be 1963 or any year matching the formula: 1963-60*n (i.e. 1963 minus 60 times n), where n is an integer. (Ref)

The three seals all bear the name of the calligrapher (possibly author too)

Normally, a poem should have four lines. I don't know why this Mr/Ms Zhang only had three.

Off-topic: Travel to Chongqing

http://yong321.freeshell.org/misc/TravelToChongqing.html

"an amateur historian's cultural trip"

Some interesting comments extracted below:

(About an altercation provoked by a stranger trying to cut in line) While Confucianism brings family members extremely close to each other, and also friends to some extent, this religion or philosophy alienates strangers, i.e. people of no family or friend relationship, beyond indifference and sometimes to the extent of hostility.
...

(About scenery of the Three Gorges for landscape painting) What puzzles me and the people I ask everywhere is that these stunningly beautiful mountains and thousand-feet high cliffs never went into ancient painters' vision, even though famous poets in the Tang dynasty wrote about them. This can't be explained in the same way that Jiuzhaigou or Guilin of natural beauty no less than that of the three gorges was also not in ancient paintings, because the latter were either physically inaccessible in ancient times, or rarely stepped on due to occupation of a non-Han civilization.
...

(On viewing the exhibition of the Sino-Japanese War) Not all feuds are created equal. Forty years after the Korean war, Chinese and American then pilots could meet and chat about their air fights as if they were playing a game. During the 1979 China-Vietnam war, soldiers reportedly exchanged canned food during the intermission of a battle or perhaps lunch time. But the two belligerents of the Sino-Japanese war would never come to terms in this life or the next, as if a threshold of human indignation was surpassed.
...

(On visiting Dazu Rock Carvings) unlike Christianity or Islam, Buddhism does not exclude other religions, and the Chinese religions or doctrines care even less whether you worship another god or God privately or publicly.

Learning Foreign Languages 学外语

http://yong321.freeshell.org/misc/LearningForeignLanguages.html

"好像有人说没有目的的学习是没有动力的。但要是我有了目的就坏了，不管是我自己还是别人给定个计划或目标什么的，我一定会失去动力的，因为我不想为了没用的东西而给自己增加生活中已经有的压力。"

" 我学外语没有目的，但不妨碍我想一个目的。...... 或者用学外语来防老年痴呆，据说比玩拼字游戏有效。想象我老了躺在床上，嘴里一会儿蹦出几个西语词，一会儿几句法语，旁边的人一定会又惊讶又佩服。或者只 是以学外语来保持良好的心态。我想一个人要在生活中保持好的心态需要做两件事，一是完全出于自愿的、没有一点peer pressure（同伴压力）的慈善或义工，二是在毫无压力的情况下学某种没有任何功利目的的屠龙之技，比如工作和生活都不需要的外语。"

"user group" or "users group"?

I'm organizing a database user group (formerly Oracle user group) at my work place. One trivial question comes up. Should it be "Database User Group" or "Database Users Group" with plural "Users"? While people are making comments with respect to English grammar, I thought it would be helpful to check how most people say on the Internet. So here it is my email to them:

"users group" or "user group"? Here's Google exact word search hit count (when you search, enclose the words in double quotes):

user group: 7,950,000
users group: 3,580,000
oracle user group: 80,400
oracle users group: 70,100
unix user group: 32,100
unix users group: 50,600
linux user group: 566,000
linux users group: 2,800,000
mac user group: 53,400
mac users group: 43,300
java user group: 82,700
java users group: 36,800

Although how people say on the Internet doesn't mean it's grammatical, it's at least statistically more popular. So we can use that as a reference. It looks like more people prefer the singular "user group". When it's broken down to a specific type of user group, all that I checked except Linux and UNIX people prefer singular. (No wonder UNIX and especially Linux people are the most likely associated with geeks in this society.) My conclusion of this search: the geekier and less coherent the members are, the more likely they prefer plural, "users group".

Chinese translation of "Insight"

According to http://www.dict.org, "insight" primarily means "A sight or view of the interior of anything", as in "He had an insight into almost all the secrets of state." According to http://translate.google.com/#en|zh-CN|insight, however, the Chinese translation is "洞察", or "慧眼", "内省力", "眼光". But it does not sound natural when you substitute 洞察" for "insight" in the Chinese translation of the above sentence ("他对国家的几乎所有秘密都有洞察"). In fact, a far better choice for this word is "真知灼见", i.e., valuable views about something ordinary people cannot have thought of. The words "慧眼", "内省力" and, "眼光" are even more remote from the true meaning, because they mean the capability to gain the insight, not insight itself.

What is 聪明？

> 中學時候常常聽到的一句話“xx學生不是不聰明，就是不好好學”。
> 後來我就有想到，什麽是聰明？什麽是不聰明？不知道時間的寶貴、
> 學生時代學習機會的難得而只是貪玩，這是最大的不聰明

The Chinese sentence is playing with the multiple meanings of the word "聪明". In “xx學生不是不聰明，就是不好好學” (It's not that the student XX is not 聪明, only that he didn't take time to study.), "聪明" means having high IQ (intelligence quotient), as that could be determined by the rigorous psychological test. In the sentence "不知道時間的寶貴、學生時代學習機會的難得而只是貪玩，這是最大的不聰明" (It's the biggest non-聪明 to not know the value of time and the opportunity of study as a student, and to play all the time.), "聪明" means wise or 明智. In both cases, you could use the English word "smart" just like "聪明" in Chinese. But if you think about it, the exact meaning of the word in either English or Chinese is different.

Playing tricks with words sometimes can impress people and give others thought-provoking ideas that sound clever, smart or 聪明. But those words should be taken as nothing more than clever talk.

Off-topic: Quote of a message about atheism

Very interesting remark by a guy named Russianbear at
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17338&PN=2&TPN=4

Atheism is not the same as religious intolerance. I am an atheist, and I think religions are stupid, but I am quite tolerant of people's stupidity and ignorance in general, and of religion-related stupidity and ignorance in particular.

Most atheists don't prejudge. (Some, like me) judge. And that happens AFTER the fact, so PREjudice is not the right word.
...
In my experience, atheists are relatively quiet; it is religious people who tend to try to ram their beliefs down other people's throats. It is also a fact that atheists tend to be better educated than religious people. And atheists tend to be more tolerant. I am yet to see atheists fly planes into skyscrapers or blow themselves (and many other people) up for their atheist beliefs. Those things are done by folks who believe in god(s).

And of course, "fundamentalism" kinda implies religiousness :)

Grammatical error: "Even if ... but"

> even if today is sunday,but we have to work.

That's a common mistake Chinese make in learning English. If you have "even if", you don't need "but". Drop one of the two. The same is true for "although".

As always, capitalize the first letter of the sentence. It makes people feel you're not writing English too casual.

Attitude thing

Educative comments from an online forum. Not just for Japanese.

Are Japanese natives generally exclusive?

"but I've met the people (some from Japan, some from China, although I'm sure it's global) that strike up a conversation with you in English but totally lose interest when you transition to their native language. That attitute would be language rape."

Off-topic: Message to My Neighbors

We're going to have a neighborhood night-out gathering and emails are sent to everybody. Neighbor's dogs used to bother me at night. So I took this opportunity to post the following message to the email list:

"I want to borrow this thread to send a friendly reminder to this wonderful neighborhood, that dog owners need to keep their best friends quiet late at night. While I need to train myself to tune out, the dogs need to be trained to only bark outdoors perhaps before 10pm or after 7am, or indoors to their happy owners' hearts' content at any time. This is a friendly neighborhood so I hope this message is taken with a friendly smile!"

As a result of this, I haven't heard any dog barking at night since then. One neighbor's email to me said "we don't have a dog...your lovely message would have been taken with all due respect and kindness. It's almost as if you were writing poetry!"

How could some old time Chinese scholars learn foreign languages?

> 一开始就学中等或高级学习者的教材或看适合他们的难度的
> 文章，这样欲速则不达。(If from the beginning you
> study the textbooks suitable for an intermediate
> or advanced student or read articles whose difficulty
> matches their level, it's Haste makes waste.)

I agree. But one thing that has always bugged me is that some well known scholars in the 民国 times (about 100 years ago) learned foreign languages by directly reading classic literary works. For example,

http://baike.baidu.com/view/57482.htm
金克木
他曾仅靠一部词典，一本凯撒的《高卢战纪》，就学会了非常复杂的拉丁文。(He (Jin Kemu) learned the complicated Latin language solely with a dictionary and a copy of Julius Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic War.)

http://baike.baidu.com/view/1998.htm
辜鸿铭
到了英国，在布朗的指导下,辜鸿铭从西方最经典的文学名著入手，以最朴拙的死记硬背办法很快掌握了英文、德文、法文、拉丁文、希腊文 (Upon arrival in England, Ku Hung-ming, under the guidance of Brown (Forbes Scott Brown?), started from the classic literary works in the western world, and quickly mastered English, German, French, Latin, Greek by the most simplistic rote learning.)

Off-topic: 罗家伦"新人生观"

Luo Jialun's "A New Point of View of Human Life" is full of interesting little stories and quotes of historical figures. Other than that, his own words are sometimes thought-provoking, such as the following, when he talked about the role of Belgium in World War One and the recognition of its contribution:

"所以一旦战争结束，在巴黎和会上，比利时不但获得和列强分庭抗礼的光荣，并且各大国都很尊重他‘赞助他，就是因为它已尽了他国家的责任，所以能得战后应得的权利。当时中国也是参战国，但为什么得不到这种权利？就是因为中国在名义上虽曾参战，其实是参而不战，并未尽参战的责任，哪有资格去享受权利？"

pp.116-7, "从完成责任到实现权利"，"新人生观"

That's new to me because nobody, either from the mainland side or from Taiwan, talked about lack of participation or involvement of the then Chinese government or army when talking about the humiliation of China at the Paris Peace Conference.

Other points in the book are also worth reading. He said Japan became so aggressive and atrocious because China spoiled Japan, not limiting their mischief at the early stage.

Off-topic: 读章太炎“国学概论“有感

近读章太炎“国学概论“，感字字珠玑，隽语良多。然章谓“历观中国古代，在太平安宁之时,治哲学的极少,等到乱世,才有人研究。”颇出人意料。盖哲学思辨之学，本当衣暖食饱然后静坐而治之，何以至乱世才有人研究？或许中国哲学皆入世之学，或以入世为最终目的，非泰西哲学之纯思辨。

想练习英语口语总是感到没有话说怎么办？

Others have excellent suggestions. Let me add that for now, you can imagine you're giving a presentation in your native language, Chinese, and on the fly, translating that into English. Many language teachers oppose this way of learning (you do translation in your brain). But I disagree. Once you're fluent in English, the explicit translation in your brain silently yields to "natively" thinking in English.

Off-topic: Language education to solve Chinese ethnic conflict

The ethnic conflict, or riot, in Xinjiang of northwestern China, caused more than 150 deaths. To be politically correct, the central government will probably not reveal the ratio of Uyghur to Han ethnic death tolls, and I won't comment on that, even though pretty much every Chinese having lived there or having friends or relatives living there have a very well educated guess. But even mention of that guess causes sadness. A more interesting and constructive discussion, though, should be about the way the Chinese government improves its strategy to ease the ethnic tension. We all agree that so far the preferential treatment of, or affirmative action toward, the ethnic minority in China causes grief to the Han ethnicity yet at the same time does not adequately meet the request of the minority. This lose-lose situation will not go anywhere in the future. While the government provides financial and other support, the love is largely unrequited. The Uyghur think their culture is violated, even though the government encourages them and spends money for them to promote their own language.

Human language is the key to human gathering. Why is there natural, spontaneous separation between Han and Uyghur, or between any two ethnic groups for that matter? Because they have difficulty communicating. No doubt the Uyghur people are forced to learn the Chinese language, not by law, not at all, but by the economic opportunities. But there's not much assimilation in the other direction, i.e., the Han learning Uyghur. If the Han have no basic skills in the language of the previously dominating residents in this region, they don't feel their culture is respected (enough). The government should have a mandate that all the Han Chinese living in that area, perhaps younger than say 50 years old, learn the Uyghur language for 3 months, and review once every 3 years for 10 or so years. Once this done, the Han and Uyghur will mingle much more easily, in the neighborhood as neighbors, in the work place as coworkers, and in public areas as citizens. Separation is rooted in lack of communication, which starts from nowhere else than everyday life.

Interesting References:

I. Wang Lixiong, My West Region, Your Eastern Land
王力雄, 《我的西域，你的东土》, p.187, "一九五六年新疆的汉族有十五万... 他们在这里学会了维语。毛泽东让他们首先要学维语，要学当地的语言... 一九五三年他从上海到新疆来的时候，库尔勒有汉族学校，可是讲维语，让那些汉族孩子必须学维语，民族学校却不要求学汉语。那时毛泽东说没有大汉族主义就不会有民族分裂主义，所以有很多尊重少数民族生活习惯的政策。那个年代的干部和汉族人比较尊重少数民族。" [In 1956, there were 150,000 Han ethnic people in Xinjiang... they learned the Uyghur language here. Mao Zedong required them to first learn the Uyghur language, learn the local language... In 1953 when he came to Xinjiang from Shanghai, there were Han ethnic schools in Korla but Uyghur was spoken in the school; the Han school children were required to learn the Uyghur language, while in the minority ethnic schools the Chinese language was not required. Back then Mao Zedong said that there will not be ethnic separatism if there is no Han-chauvinism, and so there were many policies that respect the customs of the minority ethnic people. The cadres and the Han people in those years well respected the minority ethnic people.]

II. Nicholas Ostler, Empires of the Word
Garcilaso certainly held the view, still widely held today though not among knowledgeable linguists, that a shared language makes for common understanding and good mutual relations: 'because the likeness and conformity of words almost always tend to reconcile people and bring them to true union and friendship'.[Father Blas Valera's words, quoted by Inca Garcilaso, Commontarios Reales, part I, vii.3: 'porqué la semejanza y conformidad de las palabras casi siempre suelen reconciliar y traer a verdadera unión y amistad a los hombres.']

"ever" for 曾经?

Many Chinese say "ever" when they mean to say 曾经 (ceng2jing1). But that word can be translated as 曾经 only when it's in a question, e.g. "Have you ever been to Shanghai?", or in a negative sentence where it changes to "never", e.g. "I've never said that". Otherwise, it means "always", e.g. "Finding the cure for cancer seems to be an ever-lasting process without an end."

If you really want to say 曾经, say "once" instead, e.g. "Once I had a car accident."

Learn English from native speakers

No doubt there's great benefit in learning English by talking with a native speaker. But most people don't realize that talking to native speakers may not be the fastest way to study English for everybody. Here's some discussion posted to a language study forum six months ago.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't completely agree with you on "当然是和母语英语的老外或外教学口语效果最好". It's not true in all cases. My friend is the president (or school master) of 若亚语言学校 (www.eduroyal.com). She told me many of the students in her school started to change their preference a few years ago from preferring foreign teachers to Chinese teachers, because they slowly realized that in Chinese teachers' classes, they actually improve their English faster.

(I have no connection with that school. I mention it only because the president was my school mate.)

> interesting point, is that a general case, or specific to that school only?

I don't have statistics. But I believe it's a general case in most language schools in China. It should not be a rule that applies to English study in general. Suppose you do have a long-term close relationship with somebody fluent in English and that person is e.g. your spouse (so he or she is infinitely patient!!), then almost definitely it's better if he or she is a native speaker.

Judy, creator of 若亚语言学校:

关于跟老外练习口语

好议题！
我接触过不少学生，为练习口语花费不少精力，效果却不尽相同。关于是否需要和母语的老外练口语，我个人觉得不能绝对。如果有大把时间，而且又遇到文化和教 育程度都不错的母语老外，那么，恭喜你！不过，真实的语言环境中，比如雅思考试、BEC考试或者对外贸易的交流等，经常会遇到不同口音的英语，让听者一头 雾水。所以，我建议练习口语还可以考虑多听不同的录音，然后跟着相对专业的人士练习－－－无论他是否是母语的老外．经常的情况是：如果一个非母语的人员说 一口漂亮的英语，他／她一定有独到的体验，这种陪练者会更加的可遇而不可求．

"Last January" vs "January last year"

> He arrived in New York last January.其中的last January
> 书上解释为今年一月，而不是去年一月~困惑~
> 如果按这样翻译那last该怎么分辨是今年还是去年？

"Last" is a commonly confused word. Technically, it means "immediately past" (see dict.org, where an example is "last Thursday"), "most recent; next before the present" (see dictionary.com, where an example is "last Friday"). So if today is Friday, "last Thursday" as the "immediately past" or "most recent" Thursday would technically be yesterday. Similarly, if it's any month after January now, "last January" would be January this year.

But as Gary B. Larson in his Style Manual points out,

The word last can also be confusing to mean "most recent" when using the name of a month or day; does last April mean April this year or April last year? Preferred: It happened in April. It happened Wednesday. Or: It happened last week. It happened last month. Redundant: It happened last Wednesday

I think Mr. Larson has a good point (although I don't have the feeling of redundancy in the last sentence).Use "last" only when it's not ambiguous; e.g., if it's February now, "last May" means May last year. But say "last Month" or "in January" to refer to the January of this year, and "in January last year" to refer to that in the last year.

[Update 2024-09] We just did a very small test by asking 7 American English native speakers. Suppose today is Friday, six say "last Wednesday" means "Wednesday last week" and one says it means "the past Wednesday" (i.e. two days ago). (That one person lives in New York and is a young man. By the way, he's also the only person that says "next Wednesday" means "the coming Wednesday" if today is Monday.) In fact, the six people's response matches my personal impression, even though I always try to be specific in speaking and writing. In spite of the small sample size, it's safe to say there's a discrepancy between what most people mean by these phrases and what some dictionaries say most people mean. Nevertheless, it's always a good idea to avoid ambiguity.

"no more than" vs "not more than"

> Any difference in meaning between these two sentences?
>
> "His victory in the final was no more convincing than I had expected."
> "His victory in the final was not more convincing than I had expected."
>
> Note that the two sentences below do have difference:
> You are not more careful than he is. 你不如他仔细。
> You are no more careful than he is. 你和他一样不仔细。

That makes perfect sense. But that distinction doesn't seem to apply to the case here: "His victory in the final was (no|not) more convincing than I had expected." I'm not sure, but if I have to think of an explanation, maybe it's because the part after "than" is not a direct object. Consider:

"His victory in the final was (no|not) more convincing than hers."

In this case, "no more convincing" implies his and hers are equally unconvincing, while "not more convincing" says her victory is more convincing.

"idea" not to be pronounced like "idea-r"

> yuzhoucn said:
>
> 不少中国人滥用美音的儿音，如China、India、puma、idea这
> 种字里根本就没有r，也去给它附加一个儿音，听起来就很怪。

I can't agree more on that! We should make as many Chinese studying English now as possible aware of this very common and yet easy to correct mistake.

By the way, a former coworker of mine who grew up in Germany always said "data" as if it was dater. But I don't recall he read "idea" as "idea-r".