GnuDoyng

I don’t blog here anymore. All my guests please visit GnuDoyng.cn. Thank you!

Now I am more convinced than ever that the Foochow Bible was originally translated from English.

When I was writing the entry “Ten Commandments” (Sĕk Gái) in Min Dong Wikipedia this morning, I made reference to the Deuteronomy 5 of the Foochow Bible, a passage of which reads (bold by me):

5:14 Dâ̤ chék nĭk sê nṳ̄ Siông-dá̤ Ià-huò-huà gì ăng-sék-nĭk, cī siŏh nĭk, nṳ̄ gâe̤ng nṳ̄ nàng-nṳ̄-giāng, nù-chài, ă-tàu, ngù, lè̤, gáuk tàu-săng, lièng hiók nṳ̄ chió diē gì nè̤ng-hák, dŭ ng-tĕ̤ng có̤ dâi, ī-dé nṳ̄ gì nù-chài ă-tàu â̤ hiōng ăng-sék, gâe̤ng nṳ̄ cê-gă siŏh-iông.

The phrase “ī-dé” (以致) sounds very unnatural to me, and my intuition made me think that it, in all probability, came from an unskilled translating hand. So I opened up the English Bible (New Revised Standard Version) to refer to the corresponding texts, in which I found the phrase “so that”, just as I had expected.

5:14 But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work - you, or your son or your daughter, or your male or female slave, or your ox or your donkey, or any of your livestock, or the resident alien in your towns, so that your male and female slave may rest as well as you.

Another obvious point is the excessive “sê” (是) in the Foochow Bible. The Foochow word “sê” can sometimes be considered as a counterpart of the English phrase “to be”, but the latter, however, plays a much more important grammatical role as a copula that can never be omitted in a subject-predicative sentence structure. Here, let me show you two sentences:

English: You are very tall.
Foochow: Nṳ̄ iā gèng. (汝野懸.)

English: I am twenty-four years old.
Foochow: Nguāi niék-sé huói go̤ lāu. (我廿四歲去了.)

In both examples above, we see no “sê” in the standard Foochow sentence. Actually, never will a Foochow speaker say “Nṳ̄ sê iā gèng” or “Nguāi sê niék-sé huói“, unless he intends to specifically emphasize something.

But in the Foochow Bible, the “sê” is everywhere. Most of them sound quite awkward to a native ear, e.g.:

Genesis 1:10

Ciā dă tù Siông-dá̤ giéu lō̤ Dê, cê̤ṳ siŏh-dŏi gì cūi giéu lō̤ Hāi. Siông-dá̤ káng ciŏng-uâng sê hō̤.

God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

All these tiny pieces of evidence in the Bible, along with the innumerable Foochow vulgar words and expressions, construct a whole view of an English-influenced Foochow literature. Just as Martin Luther’s Bible for the standard German today, this Foochow Bible could as well have served to further the evolvement of the Foochow language. Had it not been oppressed by the Mandarin Movement, Foochow language would have developed in a very distinct way, and reached the consummation of all the traditional and modern cultures it carries.

The government deliberately misreads the vox populi again, as pictured below…

But once kindled, the fire of democracy shall never be quenched! Fight on for your rights and God bless you, Amoy people!!!

The real question we need to ask ourselves is why we should value diversity. There is nothing good in itself about diversity. It is important because it allows us to compare and contrast different values, beliefs and lifestyles, make judgments upon them, and decide which are better and which worse. It’s important, in other words, because it allows us to engage in political dialogue and debate that can, paradoxically, help create more universal values and beliefs. But it is precisely such dialogue and debate, and making of such judgments, that multiculturalism attempts to suppress in the name of ‘tolerance’ and ‘respect’. The very thing that is valuable about diversity – the clashes and conflicts that it brings about – is what multiculturalists most fear. Rather than cut ourselves off, each in our own multicultural ghettos, it would be far better to help build a dynamic common culture to which we all contribute and from which we all partake.

Why should we value diversity? A very good question you have raised, which certainly needs a deep meditation. Unfortunately, according to some researches conducted by sociologists, this diversity, which has featured our world ever since it was created, won’t last long. I presume all of us here have well realized the approaching crisis, so I’m not going to quote any statistics.

With all due respect, I am not a little astonished by the remark “there is nothing good in itself about diversity.” In my humblest opinion, you are rather utilitarian in defining what is good and what not. Indeed, even if the minor cultural group is assimilated into a larger one, the human security of its people is by no means threatened (unlike the cases in the biological diversity), the only loss being the decadence of its unique linguistic, cultural, racial, as well as all other intangible heritage. Cultural death might not seem violent to some people, nevertheless, with countless cultures fading and withering, we could have lost forever what would have greatly enriched our knowledge of linguistics, ethnology, anthropology, etc., and thus we mankind could never ever thoroughly understand ourselves. If you still suppose “there is nothing good in itself about diversity,” then you are ignoring the whole universe, the entire humanity, and more exactly, ignoring yourself.

I quite agree with the point that culture “is important because it allows us to compare and contrast different values, beliefs and lifestyles.” But according to the theory of cultural relativism (the beliefs and activities should only be interpreted in terms of their own culture), however, I don’t think the comparison and contrast can help us “make judgments,” “decide which are better and which worse,” and let alone “help create more universal values and beliefs.” Well, I’ve heard many a doctrinaire preach that some cultures are essentially superior to others. Sarcastically, all of them, including you, fail to offer any “universal” criterion for judging a “good” culture (neither am I expecting that). So bear in mind, we are different: no better, no worse, just different!

“The very thing that is valuable about diversity – the clashes and conflicts that it brings about – is what multiculturalists most fear.” I wonder how you came to such an ungrounded conclusion. Why should anyone of us possibly fear the cultural integration? Quite the contrary, we warmly welcome it, because such fusion promotes friendliness and mutual understanding amongst people from different cultural communities. What we hate and attempt to suppress is the inequality in cultural assimilation, so please don’t get confused with that.

Lastly, I don’t know if it is proper to call us multiculturalists. We are merely ordinary people who make efforts to save the dying and fight against those cultural hegemonists. If we really deserve such a formal title, then, how about labeling yourself a social Darwinist?

Hello all my friends, I gotta apologize for my very very long overdue reply to your comments… Well, that was because of a silly mistake: I had no idea that in Blogsome, a comment must be approved by the admin before it appears on the page. Sorry sorry sorry… I have canceled the option so from now on, your comments will be instantly shown after submission. Feel free to leave in my blog what you wanna share with me and let me know who you are, thanks!

Though much has been depicted and debated, it would be quite a fresh experience to read a Japanese scholar’s point of view about Foochowese, which also provides a very concise and neutral elucidation for its decline in everyday use:

しかし、閩東語（福州語）については、福州が福建省の省都であるにもかかわらず、福建省全体への影響力があるわけではなく、福建省内には閩南語や客家語などの強い言語もあることから、相対的に通じにくい閩東語の地位は低くなって忘れられがちだ。生活言語も中国語化されてしまい、福州に住んでいながら閩東語が話せない子どもが増えているのだという。福州市は閩東語の発展に積極的ではなく、街には「普通話（中国語）で話しましょう」というスローガンが見られ、市内バスの自動アナウンスも中国語のみで、閩東語は使われていない。

Thanks to my Taiwanese friend Taokara’s help (as I don’t read or write Japanese), the most important part of that article has now been translated for your convenience:

When it comes to Min Dong (Foochowese), however, things are somewhat different. Despite being the capital of Fukien, Foochow has no equivalent influence over the whole province. In respect that Min Nan and Hakka is more influential whereas Min Dong is relatively difficult to understand and thus could be easily forgotten (not sure if this sentence is correctly translated), Min Dong only has a humble status, and is undergoing the process of Mandarinization. The number of children residing in Foochow that cannot speak Min Dong is perhaps on the increase. Moreover, Foochow citizens take little action in the revival of Min Dong. In the streets there are posters reading “Let’s speak Mandarin!”; in the downtown buses only Mandarin is broadcast, Min Dong excluded.

By the way, you might find this term “Mandarinization” confusing. I’ll clarify it with an example: the pure Foochowese word for “airplane” is “Buŏi-sùng” (飛船), but nowadays the loanword from Mandarin “Hĭ-gĭ” (飛機) is the most widely used. Of course, the death of our mother tongue won’t occur all of a sudden, but will go through a long stage of Mandarinization, by which Mandarin will erode Foochowese in every aspect, be it pronunciation, glossary, or syntax.

More often than not, youth is compared to some niceness. That, however, is a falsehood, fabulized out of benevolence by those who have already lost their youth. Actually, only when in his youth is one aware of how unfortunate he has been: in that what he read and what he heard has purposely misled him into believing this world is the Garden of Eden, and that mankind is such a perfect creature; as he bumps into reality, he tumbles, gets scraped, and bleeds. Therefore, I would rather compare youth to a path, rough and tenebrous, alongside which there lurk all kinds of conspiracies; the youngster has to depend on himself to discover all these, and then decides whether to fight or to evade.

But there will come a day, when he finally gets accustomed to all wickedness in our world, and won’t so much as distinguish good from evil; through the continuation of the fables he heard in his early years, he goes on to beguile his offspring. Yes, till then, he reaches the end of that path, catches the sunlight, and kisses his youth goodbye, once and for good…

My friend William Lau sent me a short audio file of the Foochowese news broadcast in Sarawak, Malaysia. To speak the truth, I was quite surprised by this accent when I first heard it. Its most prominent features that makes it distinguishable from Foochow downtown accent are the lack of “initial assimilations” and “close/open rimes“. But a Foochowese would understand most part of it, whether he has the backround knowledge or not.

I guess most Malaysian Foochowese are originally Mìng-chiăng (閩清) or Kŭ-chèng (古田) decents… well then again, maybe not.

I put its text here, so that you won’t get lost.

ΟΟΟΟ我國人民ΟΟ政府舉行 2007 年大馬旅游年獲得成功，州政府將繼續加強努力，以提昇本州XX事業其質量共數量。本州遘了 2008 年將有自家其Ο稻谷種子加工中心。本州預料將有三萬余中國人口遘本州來觀光，以配合 2007 年大馬旅游年。以下是新聞內容。

A few months ago, I started translating some great literary works from English into Foochowese. How, you might wonder, can we possibly express the deepest feelings of humanity with such a vulgar language as Foochowese?! Well, before you doubt further, I suggest you take a look at this tiny piece of work: Lolita in Foochowese version, Chapter 1.

Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.

She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita.

Did she have a precursor? She did, indeed she did. In point of fact, there might have been no Lolita at all had I not loved, one summer, a certain initial girl-child. In a princedom by the sea. Oh when? About as many years before Lolita was born as my age was that summer. You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, exhibit number one is what the seraphs, the misinformed, simple, noble-winged seraphs, envied. Look at this tangle of thorns.

Lolita, 我生命其光，我欲望其火。我其罪愆，我其靈魂。Lo-lee-ta：喙舌尾由上岸向下，將換做三下，遘第三下介輕輕碰著牙嚟。Lo。Lee。Ta。

早頭，伊 sê̤ṳng 蜀 kiă 短襪，拔直四英尺十英寸其漢馬，伊是 Lo，普通其 Lo。當伊身 sê̤ṳng pă-pă 其褲，伊是 Lola。著學校，伊是 Dolly。正式簽名其辰候，伊是 Dolores。但是 găk 我懷抱底勢，伊永遠是 Lolita。

Găk 伊之前有過別儂無？有，確實有。講實話，nâ 伓是我有蜀年夏天仈曾愛過蜀隻諸娘囝，可能透底就無什乇 Lolita。Huòi 是著海墘其蜀 bĭk 小王國底勢。啊，是乜候呢？由 hī 蜀年夏天算跨，故著等真 sâ̤ 年 Lolita ciáh 出世，我 hiā 辰候其歲數就大母是 hī sâ̤ 年。汝永遠會使倚望蜀隻刣儂犯寫蜀手蓋一其文章。

陪審團各位先生小姐，頭 bĭk 證據就是乞六翼天使——hī 陣聽 mâ̤ 著准確消息其、單純其、翼翼高貴其六翼天使所 cháik 其。我其心事 nìng-亂亂，dāng 請汝罔聽。

Yesterday, my Malaysian friend William Lau sent me an email asking about the status quo of Foochowese in Foochow. He couldn’t understand why Foochowese has become a “forgotten dialect” in its place of origin, while it is still widely spoken amongst oversea Foochow descents. Well, I’d like to briefly share my understanding, though perhaps not very objective, with all my friends interested in this topic.

There are 6 main reasons accounting for this phenomenon (ordered according to importance):

1. Cultural identification: Foochow citizens generally identify themselves as Chinese, and most of them take it for granted that a Chinese should speak his national language only, and that all other regional dialects should be abandoned. These people, even including my parents, have willingly given up teaching their children to speak the local language.
2. Language policy: Mandarin is the only official language in China, so the use of Foochowese is discouraged in media, education and other formal occasions. Therefore, most highly educated people only speak Mandarin as their daily language.
3. Low degree of mutual intelligibility: Foochowese is not mutually intelligible even within its many varieties. In order to communicate with people from other regions, Foochowese speakers would have to learn Mandarin.
4. Population structure: The second half of the 20^th century has witnessed a large immigration into Foochow, which greatly altered the structure of its population. This local language, which is archaic and full of seemingly irregular changes, is indeed difficult for newcomers. Therefore, they and their offspring only speak Mandarin.
5. Lack of self-confidence: Even the Foochowese speakers themselves find this language uncivilized, let alone those who don’t speak it. Such self-contempt can be attributed to the relatively lower economic status of Foochow (in contrast with those of Amoy, Canton, and Shanghai).
6. Lack of written form: Having been evolving separately for thousands of years, Foochowese is basically an oral language and lacks its unified written form. Although it does have a Chinese character writing system and a romanization scheme, they may be too abstruse to master.

Still something I should clarify:

1. The decline of Foochowese takes place merely within downtown Foochow, whereas in the suburban and rural areas, Foochowese is still the daily language, living up to its name “平話” (Bàng-uâ).
2. In linguistic principle, Foochowese is a de facto independent language, and so are hundreds of other southern Chinese languages. The official term “方言”  (dialect) misleads people to underestimate their significance.

I strongly suggest you read these articles: 1, 2, 3 and 4, which will help you understand more profoundly how a language and its culture fall out of favor. Well of course, any further questions and discussions are welcome!