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 Zhùyīn 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 yǔ 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

Nirvana Fallacy and the Die-Hard Defenders of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

IMGUR The philosopher Voltaire (real name  François-Marie Aroue ) was said to have said, "Perfect is the enemy of good." To define the Nirvana fallacy, we can look at Logically Fallacious to help us define it: Description: Comparing a realistic solution with an idealized one , and discounting or even dismissing the realistic solution as a result of comparing to a “perfect world” or impossible standard, ignoring the fact that improvements are often good enough reason . Logical Form: X is what we have. Y is the perfect situation. Therefore, X is not good enough. Example #1: What’s the point of making drinking illegal under the age of 21?  Kids still manage to get alcohol. Explanation: The goal in setting a minimum age for drinking is to deter underage drinking, not abolish it completely.  Suggesting the law is fruitless based on its failure to abolish underage drinking completely, is fallacious. Example #2: What’s the point of living?  We’re all going to die anyway. Ex...

The Foolishness of Complaining About Stupid Voters and Stupid Candidates, While Insisting the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "So Perfect"

I was looking into the Facebook page of Butthurt Philippines . Honestly, it's easy to complain but what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions? The art produced by its administrator shows some problems. However, if the administrator here believes that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "perfect as it is" (and he seems to be throwing a "saving face" by saying it was just sarcasm, and I failed to detect it) then it's really something. It's one thing to keep complaining. Complaining can be good. However, what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions. Even worse, complaining about the quality of candidates for the upcoming 2025 midterm elections , while still saying, "It's not the system it's the people!" Please, that kind of thinking has been refuted even by basic psychology and political science! It's really good to point out the three problems. Distractions? Check. Keeping people hopeless? ...

A Parliamentary Philippines with Mandatory Weekly Questioning Will Be Better Than Its Mandatory Yearly Presidential SONAs

Rappler I must admit that ignorance of the difference between the parliamentary system vs. the presidential system is there. Some people still insist on the myth that the first Marcos Administration headed by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.'s late father, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr., was really a parliamentary system. In reality. the Marcos "parliamentary" years during the Martial Law era, were still presidential (read why  here ). A simple research would show that Cesar Virata was called by the late Lee Kuan Yew, as a non-starter and no leader. LKY would know how a real parliamentary system works. Sure, it's one thing that those who consider themselves Dilawan, voice their criticisms. However, the big problem of the Dilawans is their focus on political idolatry rather than solutions. I can talk with the Dilawans all they want that we do need to shift to the parliamentary system and some of them still cry foul, say that it'll be a repetition of the first Marcos Admi...

Why I Believe So Many Filipinos (Especially Boomers) Misunderstand (and Blindly Oppose) Charter Change

Okay, I'm no political analyst or historian. That doesn't mean I should just shut up and not share my opinion. I felt like I needed to publish this piece. This is where I want to examine another issue. I've noticed some people on Facebook are sharing the quotes of Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. Some would try to do Ad Hominem attacks on me because I'm no constitutionalist (which I admit that I'm not). Just because I'm not a constitutionalist, doesn't mean, that I can't quote from the experts . Do I really need a degree in law at one of those prestigious universities in the Philippines? Sadly, some people are supposedly smarter than me but are the ones spreading nonsense.  Understanding charter change We need to see the definition first to understand why so many Filipinos, especially boomers , are so against it. The Philippine Star   gives this definition of charter change: Charter change, simply, is the process of introducing amendments or revisions to the ...

What? The Aquinos Aren't Part of a Political Dynasty?!

  I was looking at the Mahal Ko Ang Pilipinas  (I Love the Philippines)  Facebook page, which made me laugh. This is what they wrote on their post saying that the Aquino Family isn't a political dynasty: THE AQUINO FAMILY IS NOT A POLITICAL DYNASTY 🇵🇭🎗 Pro-Duterte blogger Tio Moreno says that Bam Aquino is part of a political dynasty because the Aquino family is a political dynasty. But to me, this is not true. Why is it not true that the Aquino family is a political dynasty? 🤔 1. When Ninoy Aquino entered politics, none of his children joined him in his endeavors, and even his wife Cory did not join him in politics. 2. When Ninoy was assassinated in 1983, none of his children succeeded him in politics, not even his wife. But when the opposition and his supporters were looking to be the opposition's candidate for the presidency in the snap election called by Ferdie Marcos for 1986, his housewife Cory Cojuangco-Aquino was approached, encouraged or convinced by people t...