Skip to main content

How Often Are Chinese Names in Pinyin Misread in an Asian History Class?

 
As a person born in the 1980s, I would say I saw a significant amount of technology and methods develop, I remembered typing my high school thesis stuck with a very old PC, working on my college group paper with a better PC, and finally had a laptop during my graduate school days. Back then, I remembered when Chinese schools taught Zhuyin (which I really dislike), I didn't pass my Zhuyin subject (good thing, the Chinese language teacher didn't make me take summer since I should be applying for college), and how pinyin was barely taught. It was pretty much like how some older Taiwanese folks had a bad attitude toward pinyin. Barriotic people do exist and I'm afraid that pinyin's potential was never explored back then.

It's going to be obvious that names in Chinese will be written in pinyin in the history books. I really thought there was a typographical error when Mao Zedong was spelled as such. I was used to hearing Mao Zedong as Mao Tse Tung. People read the z and the d like it was in the English language. A lot of names were mispronounced. I guess that's why the old Chinese methodology taught Zhuyin since if one knew Zhuyin, it would be harder to mispronounce. However, with a little practice, one can know when to read a little differently with another language. It's like how the letter j in Filipino is read as a softer h. People who don't know it are bound to make funny mistakes. It's like how often hear Spanish and Filipino words and names misread such as Juan, Alejo, and Junta. 


So, the basic drill is that certain letters will be read somewhat alike but different. We have the BOPOMOFO in pinyin. The drill would go like this:
  1. BP would mean reading a softer P followed by a harder P.
  2. DT would mean reading a softer T followed by a harder T.
  3. GK would mean reading a softer K followed by a harder K.
  4. JQ would mean reading a softer Qi followed by a harder Qi.
  5. CH-SH would mean reading a softer CH followed by a harder CH.
  6. ZS would mean reading a softer TS followed by a harder TS.
Basically, Z and D in Mao Zedong with be read with a softer TS and a softer T. So, reading Mao Zedong as Mao Zedong with the Z and D read like the English alphabet is fully wrong. Because of this, it's very common to misread a lot of Chinese names spelled in a romanized context. Even more, it would be important to get the tone right. The tones would be spelled as Máo Zédōng which means reading "ao" and "e" with a quick rise and "o" with a bit of a stretch. The "ao" and "e" are read with the second tone. The "o" is read with a first tone.  

The mistakes are made even by several Asian history teachers. I'm afraid that Asian history hasn't been taught to read the pinyin. That's why they are prone to reading pinyin like the English alphabet. I could remember how a Chinese language teacher soon taught some Asian history teachers how to pronounce certain words. I even remembered telling my teacher how to read Zhang Ziyi's name in pinyin. Though, I'd have missed the tones since they'll be written as Zhāng Zǐyí. 

Right now, I'm practically an advocate for the use of pinyin. I could care less if Taiwan still requires its citizens to learn zhuyin. Zhuyin is pretty much part of their heritage as much as Cebuano is to Cebu and Tagalog is the national language of the Philippines. Though, for international students, pinyin has become more accessible. It's because there will always be a need to make some changes. International marketing would mean foreign investors may need to make adjustments where they go. I believe pinyin is one of the best adjustments ever made as Chinese language is increasing worldwide. 

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...