Skip to main content

Learning More About Pinyin and the Genius Behind It

I think one of the biggest problems of Filipino-Chinese schools and their Chinese education is the method. I remembered how we were taught zhuyin and pinyin wasn't really taught. We had to memorize long sentences. More often, Chinese language teachers tend to act like we were in China than the Philippines. It wasn't until later that I developed an interest in learning Mandarin. I developed a sudden taste for Chinese media. It was there I learned about the existence of another dialect known as Cantonese. Pinyin was barely taught. Instead, we were taught zhuyin which was still widely used in Taiwan. Zhuyin was the standard Chinese alphabet. Then there was pinyin which is the proper Romanization. 

We need to take a look at the history of pinyin with the late Zhou Yougang. He was born on January 13, 1906, and died on January 14, 2017. As I was using the Tao Li, I got curious and Googled the inventor of Pinyin. I'd dare say that the inventor himself is a plain genius. I do have a hard time believing he died at 111 years old since I have no relatives who died beyond the 100s. Pretty much, all of the younger photos of Zhou are now vintage photos. 


Pinyin and zhuyin both have a very divisive history. Back then, I had no idea how to do pinyin so I did romanizing wrong. The Chinese teachers hardly taught it back then. Instead, we had to settle for the bopomofo using the zhuyin. I even read how Taiwan did have some issues with pinyin as a "Communist invention". I read this from the Hutong School website: 

The split in Zhuyin versus Pinyin is almost entirely political. In an effort to spread literacy, promote Mandarin over local dialects, and “modernize” the country, the People’s Republic of China official adopted Hanyu Pinyin in the 1950s to replace Zhuyin (as well as other systems of Romanization). The ROC, however, viewed Pinyin as a “Communist invention” that was an antagonist to traditional Chinese culture. This attitude pushed them to continue using Zhuyin.

At the same time, some Taiwanese conservatives were alarmed at the ease people could learn to read without using Chinese characters! They didn’t consider this “legitimate learning” and forbid using this method to promote “full literacy.” Both Bopomofo and GR were restricted to annotating the pronunciation of Chinese characters. Bopomofo was renamed as 注音符號 ZhùyÄ«n Fúhào/Juhin Fwuhaw “National Phonetic Symbols” to emphasize its new, restricted role.

I think it's because Taiwan has tense relations with China. Many times, I feel Taiwan is still considered the true home of Chinese culture. Some of the multinational Chinese cuisines come from Taiwan or Hong Kong--two countries frequently bullied by Communist China. Yet, I'm glad that some Taiwanese conservatives saw the ease pinyin could bring. If only earlier Taiwanese politicians saw that the inventor of pinyin himself was also a victim of Communist China. Zhou was practically a victim of Mao Zedong's brutal regime during the 1950s but lived to tell about it. Liu Shaoqi wasn't so lucky as he ended up dying in jail. Later, Zhou became a vocal critic of Chinese corruption even after being re-educated during the Cultural Revolution. 

The big advantage of pinyin is that it's more open to non-Chinese speakers. One thing worth noting is that some Filipino-Chinese are only Chinese by blood. I, for one, even struggle with learning what's often called standard Chinese or 化语 (huá yÇ” or hua2 yu3). Also, most keyboards are using the English alphabet. It would be easier for non-Chinese speakers to slowly learn how to type in Chinese than if they had to look for a specialized keyboard. It's like I just need to type the pinyin and find the Chinese character I want. It's unlike zhuyin which requires to start all over from square one.

Popular posts from this blog

What's the Use of Complaining About Celebrities and Political Dynasties Running for Politics While DEFENDING Presidential and Rejecting Parliamentary?

2025 is just around the corner for the midterm elections . People keep emphasizing the need to "defend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines" for any amendments whatsoever. If that were true then we really need to remove Article XVII entirely if the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines was meant to be set in stone (read here ). Several camps whether it's PDP-Laban supporters, Liberal Party of the Philippines supporters, Uniteam supporters, etc.--I can expect social media mudslinging at its finest . I keep talking about the need to amend or even replace the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, they keep acting like it's the best constitution in the world, they cite Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. (and others like the Monsods) to idolatrous levels , and when I talk about the parliamentary system--I can expect the whole, "Boohoo! It will never work because we already tried it under Marcos! The proof was Cesar Virata!" However, I wrote a refute on that ...

The EDSA Revolution of 1986 Would've Never Happened if People were Stuck in Nostalgia

  It's something that I read crybaby comments online where people are saying, "Making EDSA a special working day is making us forget the glory of EDSA." Please, let me remind people that even 10 years later , neither the late Lee Kuan Yew's birthday nor his death anniversary has become a national holiday in Singapore! Singapore simply honored LKY's birthday by working on that day. I was laughing at the toxic Facebook page called We Are Millennials. What truly made me think that these people are stuck in nostalgia is that EDSA 1986 would never have been possible if the Filipinos were stuck in nostalgia . I remember talks about how the first Marcos administration was built on these two pillars. The first pillar was information control . The other pillar was toxic positivity. I remember back in 1995 when the social studies teacher talked about how he thought that Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was a "good president" due to the long holidays. However, the holidays ...

No to Cha Cha Because of EDSA?

Back when I was in elementary, we were told that EDSA 1986 was a good thing. I don't want to deny the well-documented human rights abuses of the first Marcos Administration . The repeated call to amend or reform the constitution has unfortunately been demonized as if it's always a bad thing. I guess that's a result of people with poor reading (and listening) comprehension for so long . If only people started to read in-between the details of Philippine history, if only people read through the book From Third World to First and not just quote the late Lee Kuan Yew about the Marcoses, they'll see that using EDSA to demonize charter change is really a bad move. Startling facts during the Marcos Years that may have been ignored by anti-charter change proponents What happened during EDSA was practically a revolutionary government . Above is a video of the late Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. aka Ninoy. I confess that I do tend to admire Ninoy, especially with his Los Angeles sp...

[OPINION] Why Do Some Filipino Boomers Insist that the Marcos Years Were Under a "Parliamentary System"

  This is a screenshot I got on Facebook. The Tweet is courtesy of Raissa Espinosa-Robles, who I hear is a marites or a gossiper. I'm not denying that there are some truths in what she said. It's true that the Marcos Years have their well-documented human rights abuses. However, Mrs. Robles still continues to insist in the myth of a parliamentary system under Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s regime. It's not just Mrs. Robles but also some Filipino boomers who keep saying, "Are you crazy? We had a parliamentary system under Marcos."  I could show them some evidence like Marcos' severe lack of legitimacy to disprove the parliamentary systme. I even wrote about the snap elections because Marcos was a president with powers (read here ). Under a parliamentary system, the president is purely ceremonial. The president is just a door opener and credentials receiver! Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. and Salvador "Doy" Laurel both challenged the legitimacy of Marcos...

Why EDSA Should Be a Reason to Support, NOT Oppose Cha Cha

  I don't doubt that the EDSA Revolution left a legacy to the world. Yesterday, I wrote a piece where I asked if EDSA should be a reason to say no to cha-cha . It was a peaceful revolution though it's often argued that the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. didn't want to further ruin his already  tarnished image  in front of the world. How true was it that President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., in his younger days, wanted to run over the protestors? However, consider EDSA wasn't really one of a kind. The Indian pacifist Mohandas Karamchand "Mahatma" Gandhi, and his  writings inspired the late Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. aka Ninoy . also led a similar revolution against the  unjust  British occupation of India during that time. Gandhi may have been dead by the time Ninoy read about Gandhi. However, Gandhi's peaceful protests left a legacy that was probably not so well-known before. Today, the Indian economy has been doing better than the Philippines. I even consult...