If the lightning strike on the back of the Merlion’s head is meant to be a wake up call, it certainly hasn’t gotten its desired effect. Instead of the Merlion, that bolt of lightning might have better effect if it fell on the collective heads of some of these bureaucrats in the higher strata of the civil service, such as the person who wrote the below.
Foolish to advocate the learning of dialects
I REFER to yesterday’s article by Ms Jalelah Abu Baker (One generation – that’s all it takes ‘for a language to die’). It mentioned a quote from Dr Ng Bee Chin, acting head of Nanyang Technological University’s (NTU) Division of Linguistics and Multilingual Studies: ‘Although Singaporeans are still multilingual, 40 years ago, we were even more multilingual. Young children are not speaking some of these languages at all any more.’
To keep a language alive, it has to be used regularly. Using one language more frequently means less time for other languages. Hence, the more languages a person learns, the greater the difficulties of retaining them at a high level of fluency.
There are linguistically gifted individuals who can handle multiple languages, but Singapore’s experience over 50 years of implementing the bilingual education policy has shown that most people find it extremely difficult to cope with two languages when they are as diverse as English and Mandarin.
This is why we have discouraged the use of dialects. It interferes with the learning of Mandarin and English. Singaporeans have to master English. It is our common working language and the language which connects us with the world.
We also emphasised the learning of Mandarin, to make it the mother tongue for all Chinese Singaporeans, regardless of their dialect groups. This is the common language of the 1.3 billion people in China. To engage China, overseas Chinese and foreigners are learning Mandarin and not the dialects of the different Chinese provinces.
We have achieved progress with our bilingual education in the past few decades. Many Singaporeans are now fluent in both English and Mandarin. It would be stupid for any Singapore agency or NTU to advocate the learning of dialects, which must be at the expense of English and Mandarin.
That was the reason the Government stopped all dialect programmes on radio and television after 1979. Not to give conflicting signals, then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew also stopped making speeches in Hokkien, which he had become fluent in after frequent use since 1961.
Chee Hong Tat
Principal Private Secretary
to the Minister Mentor
First of all, this high level civil servant serpent ‘self-owned’ (or ‘self-pwned’) by writing this extremely stupid piece which suggest to everyone that our language policies are as such because Singaporeans are linguistically challenged. I’ll make a daring prediction that he won’t survive by the side of our illustrious Mentos Minister Mentor for too long as the MM does not to suffer such fools lightly. As a personal advice I would suggest Chee resign on his own so as not to tarnish the MM’s good name.
Either way, let me politely correct the secretary’s misconception regarding mother tongue. I define mother tongue as either the tongue in my mother’s mouth, or the language my mother teaches me to speak when I was an infant.
Thus, Mandarin is neither of those. At best, Mandarin serves as a common language among the Chinese. It has the least to do with the language I use to speak with my mother, or even with living relatives of my grandparent’s generation. It also has very little to do with the province of my ancestors – Guangdong in China. If I recalled correctly, I read on the papers that when a new party secretary or mayor in Guangzhou attempted to eliminate Cantonese from the public announcements in their subway system some time last year, the public was outraged. The common public opinion is this: 广州不讲粤语，讲咩? [Translation: If Cantonese is not spoken in Guangzhou (Canton), then what should be?] There was so much outrage and it was so unpopular that Cantonese announcements were eventually restored to the trains to avoid massive social unrest.
Next, I consider the forced implementation Mandarin as ‘mother tongue’ an impediment to the passing on of knowledge and Chinese culture from the older generation to the younger. It creates an artificial disconnect between non Mandarin speaking grandparents and their grandchildren. In effect, a lot of Chinese culture were lost and some interesting sayings with great punchlines were lost. For e.g. the Cantonese phrase: 神枱猫屎 – 神憎鬼厌 [Translation: Cat shit on the altar – detested by both gods and demons], generally used when we refer to a detestable individual or certain actions.
It is such short sayings which relates deep meanings that makes the Chinese language interesting, and they served to nourish the interest of an individual in the language. It also pass on years of wisdom and also part of our cultural heritage. Taking the phrase 神枱猫屎 for e.g., it would have allowed us to connect with the stories of the deities.
I grew up listening to Cantonese stories told on Rediffusion (麗的呼聲) – a wired box where broadcasts are heard. My interest in 封神榜 – the story on the Chinese pantheon of gods – led me to read up on some parts of it. It was from there I knew about the Shang (商) and Zhou (周) Dynasties, and it led me to read up on Chinese history. In short, my ability to speak and listen to Cantonese (a Chinese dialect) had in reality firmly connect me to Chinese, and it served as the driving force behind my learning of the Chinese words and thus Mandarin – the common spoken tongue.
In short, it is my considered opinion that the above article suggesting that Singaporeans are linguistically challenged, and dialects being detrimental to the dual language policies, showed a lack of understanding and disconnect in the higher level gahmen with the problem. In fact, I had always considered the continual deterioration of Chinese language standards to be in part related to the Speaking Mandarin Campaign encouraging its use.
All that being said, I will move on to the point on foreigners learning Mandarin and not the dialects of the regions. While that maybe true, dialects still serve their own purposes. Some time back I called a vendor’s tech support which is located in Hong Kong. The lady on the line speaks good English, albeit with a Cantonese accent. After I reported my name and contact number, she asked if I could speak Cantonese because she could tell I am of Cantonese descent. We switched over to Cantonese and the matter was resolved quicker than it would have normally. My friend who does business in China mentioned that knowing the dialect allows you to connect with the locals there. In fact, learning a Chinese dialect and speaking it is almost as learning an European language and even better. The reason being that knowing Mandarin may allow you to get around China, and knowing the dialect gets things moving even quicker. This is unlike knowing English but not knowing French in France, where you will be ignored.
To end, I must say the above letter showed just how Chee and some of the bureaucrats appointed by our elected leaders lea-duhs despised the very people they are tasked to serve. If that is the elitist attitude that most of these bureaucrats generally espoused, it is of no wonder why some of the problems are never solved. Their elitist attitude blinds them to the very fact that they are not infallible. They are a problem in the system which needs to be expunged, the sooner the better as our elected lea-duhs relied on them to provide accurate and useful information to make proper decisions.
Related Articles:
Xtralicious: Don’t tell me what my Mother Tongue is
Cartoons:
