• Anglo Chinese Manual Of The Amoy Dialect Tests

Jul 15, 2014  Elihu Doty (1809- 1864) produced the Anglo Chinese Manual of the Amoy Dialect. William John Pohlman (1812.1849) raised funds to build the first church in Xiamen; John Van Nest Talmage (1819-1892) spent forty years preaching, teaching in seminary, writing, translating parts of the Bible.

Pe̍h-ōe-jī (Taiwanese Hokkien: [peʔ˩ u̯e˩ d͡ʑi˨](listen), abbreviated POJ, literally vernacular writing, also known as Church Romanization) is an orthography used to write variants of Southern Min Chinese, particularly Taiwanese Hokkien and Amoy Hokkien. Developed by Western missionaries working among the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia in the 19th century and refined by missionaries working in Xiamen and Tainan, it uses a modified Latin alphabet and some diacritics to represent the spoken language. After initial success in Fujian, POJ became most widespread in Taiwan and, in the mid-20th century, there were over 100,000 people literate in POJ. A large amount of printed material, religious and secular, has been produced in the script, including Taiwan's first newspaper, the Taiwan Church News.

During Taiwan under Japanese rule (1895–1945), the use of Pe̍h-ōe-jī was suppressed and it faced further countermeasures during the Kuomintangmartial law period (1947–1987). In Fujian, use declined after the establishment of the People's Republic of China (1949) and in the early 21st century the system was not in general use there. Taiwanese Christians, non-native learners of Southern Min, and native-speaker enthusiasts in Taiwan are among those that continue to use Pe̍h-ōe-jī. Full native computer support was developed in 2004, and users can now call on fonts, input methods, and extensive online dictionaries. Rival writing systems have evolved, and there is ongoing debate within the Taiwanese mother tongue movement as to which system should be used. Versions of pe̍h-ōe-jī have been devised for other Chinese varieties, including Hakka and Teochew Southern Min.

In the 2006, the Taiwanese Romanization System was developed based on pe̍h-ōe-jī for official use to write Hokkien phonetically.

• 2History
• 3Current system

Name[edit]

The name pe̍h-ōe-jī (Chinese: 白話字; pinyin: Báihuà zì) means 'vernacular writing', written characters representing everyday spoken language.^[1] The name vernacular writing could be applied to many kinds of writing, romanized and character-based, but the term pe̍h-ōe-jī is commonly restricted to the Southern Min romanization system developed by Presbyterian missionaries in the 19th century.^[2]

The missionaries who invented and refined the system used, instead of the name pe̍h-ōe-jī, various other terms, such as 'Romanized Amoy Vernacular' and 'Romanized Amoy Colloquial.'^[1] The origins of the system and its extensive use in the Christian community have led to it being known by some modern writers as 'Church Romanization' (教會羅馬字; Jiàohuì Luōmǎzì; Kàu-hōe Lô-má-jī) and is often abbreviated in POJ itself to Kàu-lô. (教羅; Jiàoluō)^[3] There is some debate on whether 'pe̍h-ōe-jī' or 'Church Romanization' is the more appropriate name.

Objections to 'pe̍h-ōe-jī' are that it can refer to more than one system and that both literary and colloquial register Southern Min appear in the system and so describing it as 'vernacular' writing might be inaccurate.^[1] Objections to 'Church Romanization' are that some non-Christians and some secular writing use it.^[4] One commentator observes that POJ 'today is largely disassociated from its former religious purposes.'^[5] The term 'romanization' is also disliked by some, who see it as belittling the status of pe̍h-ōe-jī by identifying it as a supplementary phonetic system instead of a fully-fledged orthography.^[4] Sources disagree on which of the two is more commonly used.^[3][4]

History[edit]

The history of Peh-oe-ji has been heavily influenced by official attitudes towards the Southern Min vernaculars and the Christian organizations that propagated it. Early documents point to the purpose of the creation of POJ as being pedagogical in nature, closely allied to educating Christian converts.^[6]

Early development[edit]

The first people to use a romanized script to write Southern Min were Spanish missionaries in Manila in the 16th century.^[2] However, it was used mainly as a teaching aid for Spanish learners of Southern Min, and seems not to have had any influence on the development of pe̍h-ōe-jī.^[7] In the early 19th century, China was closed to Christian missionaries, who instead proselytized to overseas Chinese communities in South East Asia.^[8] The earliest origins of the system are found in a small vocabulary first printed in 1820 by Walter Henry Medhurst,^[9][10] who went on to publish the Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms in 1832.^[9]

This dictionary represents the first major reference work in POJ, although the romanization within was quite different from the modern system, and has been dubbed Early Church Romanization by one scholar of the subject.^[3] Medhurst, who was stationed in Malacca, was influenced by Robert Morrison's romanization of Mandarin Chinese, but had to innovate in several areas to reflect major differences between Mandarin and Southern Min.^[11] Several important developments occurred in Medhurst's work, especially the application of consistent tone markings (influenced by contemporary linguistic studies of Sanskrit, which was becoming of more mainstream interest to Western scholars).^[12] Medhurst was convinced that accurate representation and reproduction of the tonal structure of Southern Min was vital to comprehension:

Respecting these tones of the Chinese language, some difference of opinion has been obtained, and while some have considered them of first importance, others have paid them little or no intention. The author inclines decidedly to the former opinion; having found, from uniform experience, that without strict attention to tones, it is impossible for a person to make himself understood in Hok-këèn.

The system expounded by Medhurst influenced later dictionary compilers with regard to tonal notation and initials, but both his complicated vowel system and his emphasis on the literary register of Southern Min were dropped by later writers.^[14][15] Following on from Medhurst's work, Samuel Wells Williams became the chief proponent of major changes in the orthography devised by Morrison and adapted by Medhurst. Through personal communication and letters and articles printed in The Chinese Repository a consensus was arrived at for the new version of POJ, although Williams' suggestions were largely not followed.^[16]

The first major work to represent this new orthography was Elihu Doty's Anglo-Chinese Manual with Romanized Colloquial in the Amoy Dialect,^[16] published in 1853. The manual can therefore be regarded as the first presentation of a pre-modern POJ, a significant step onwards from Medhurst's orthography and different from today's system in only a few details.^[17] From this point on various authors adjusted some of the consonants and vowels, but the system of tone marks from Doty's Manual survives intact in modern POJ.^[18]John Van Nest Talmage has traditionally been regarded as the founder of POJ among the community which uses the orthography, although it now seems that he was an early promoter of the system, rather than its inventor.^[10][16]

In 1842 the Treaty of Nanking was concluded, which included among its provisions the creation of treaty ports in which Christian missionaries would be free to preach.^[6]Xiamen (then known as Amoy) was one of these treaty ports, and British, Canadian and American missionaries moved in to start preaching to the local inhabitants. These missionaries, housed in the cantonment of Gulangyu, created reference works and religious tracts, including a bible translation.^[6] Naturally, they based the pronunciation of their romanization on the speech of Xiamen, which became the de facto standard when they eventually moved into other areas of the Hokkien Sprachraum, most notably Taiwan.^[19] The 1858 Treaty of Tianjin officially opened Taiwan to western missionaries, and missionary societies were quick to send men to work in the field, usually after a sojourn in Xiamen to acquire the rudiments of the language.^[19]

Maturity[edit]

Because the characters in your country are so difficult only a few people are literate. Therefore we have striven to print books in pe̍h-ōe-jī to help you to read... don't think that if you know Chinese characters you needn't learn this script, nor should you regard it as a childish thing.

Thomas Barclay, Tâi-oân-hú-siâⁿ Kàu-hōe-pò, Issue 1

Quanzhou and Zhangzhou are two major varieties of Southern Min, and in Xiamen they combined to form something 'not Quan, not Zhang' – i.e. not one or the other, but rather a fusion, which became known as Amoy Dialect or Amoy Chinese.^[20] In Taiwan, with its mixture of migrants from both Quanzhou and Zhangzhou, the linguistic situation was similar; although the resulting blend in the southern city of Tainan differed from the Xiamen blend, it was close enough that the missionaries could ignore the differences and import their system wholesale.^[19]

The fact that religious tracts, dictionaries, and teaching guides already existed in the Xiamen tongue meant that the missionaries in Taiwan could begin proselytizing immediately, without the intervening time needed to write those materials.^[21]Missionary opinion was divided on whether POJ was desirable as an end in itself as a full-fledged orthography, or as a means to literacy in Chinese characters. William Campbell described POJ as a step on the road to reading and writing the characters, claiming that to promote it as an independent writing system would inflame nationalist passions in China, where characters were considered a sacred part of Chinese culture.^[22] Taking the other side, Thomas Barclay believed that literacy in POJ should be a goal rather than a waypoint:

Soon after my arrival in Formosa I became firmly convinced of three things, and more than fifty years experience has strengthened my conviction. The first was that if you are to have a healthy, living Church it is necessary that all the members, men and women, read the Scriptures for themselves; second, that this end can never be attained by the use of the Chinese character; third, that it can be attained by the use of the alphabetic script, this Romanised Vernacular.

A great boon to the promotion of POJ in Taiwan came in 1880 when James Laidlaw Maxwell, a medical missionary based in Tainan, donated a small printing press to the local church,^[24] which Thomas Barclay learned how to operate in 1881 before founding the Presbyterian Church Press in 1884. Subsequently, the Taiwan Prefectural City Church News, which first appeared in 1885 and was produced by Barclay's Presbyterian Church of Taiwan Press,^[24] became the first printed newspaper in Taiwan.^[25]

As other authors made their own alterations to the conventions laid down by Medhurst and Doty, pe̍h-ōe-jī evolved and eventually settled into its current form. Ernest Tipson's 1934 pocket dictionary was the first reference work to reflect this modern spelling.^[26] Between Medhurst's dictionary of 1832 and the standardization of POJ in Tipson's time, there were a number of works published, which can be used to chart the change over time of pe̍h-ōe-jī:^[27]

Competition for POJ was introduced during the Japanese era in Taiwan (1895–1945) in the form of Taiwanese kana, a system designed as a teaching aid and pronunciation guide, rather than an independent orthography like POJ.^[37] From the 1930s onwards, with the increasing militarization of Japan and the Kōminka movement encouraging Taiwanese people to 'Japanize', there were a raft of measures taken against native languages, including Taiwanese.^[38] While these moves resulted in a suppression of POJ, they were 'a logical consequence of increasing the amount of education in Japanese, rather than an explicit attempt to ban a particular Taiwanese orthography in favor of Taiwanese kana'.^[39]

The Second Sino-Japanese War beginning in 1937 brought stricter measures into force, and along with the outlawing of romanized Taiwanese, various publications were prohibited and Confucian-style shobō (Chinese: 書房; pinyin: shūfáng; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: su-pâng) – private schools which taught Classical Chinese with literary Southern Min pronunciation – were closed down in 1939.^[40] The Japanese authorities came to perceive POJ as an obstacle to Japanization and also suspected that POJ was being used to hide 'concealed codes and secret revolutionary messages'.^[41] In the climate of the ongoing war the government banned the Taiwan Church News in 1942 as it was written in POJ.^[42]

After World War II[edit]

Initially the Kuomintang government in Taiwan had a liberal attitude towards 'local dialects' (i.e. non-Mandarin varieties of Chinese). The National Languages Committee produced booklets outlining versions of Bopomofo for writing the Taiwanese tongue, these being intended for newly arrived government officials from outside Taiwan as well as local Taiwanese.^[43] The first government action against native languages came in 1953, when the use of Taiwanese or Japanese for instruction was forbidden.^[44] The next move to suppress the movement came in 1955, when the use of POJ for proselytizing was outlawed.^[42] At that point in time there were 115,000 people literate in POJ in Taiwan, Fujian, and southeast Asia.^[45]

Two years later, missionaries were banned from using romanized bibles, and the use of 'native languages' (i.e. Taiwanese Hakka, Hakka, and the non-Sinitic Formosan languages) in church work became illegal.^[42] The ban on POJ bibles was overturned in 1959, but churches were 'encouraged' to use character bibles instead.^[42] Government activities against POJ intensified in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when several publications were banned or seized in an effort to prevent the spread of the romanization. In 1964 use of Taiwanese in schools or official settings was forbidden,^[44] and transgression in schools punished with beatings, fines and humiliation.^[46] The Taiwan Church News (printed in POJ) was banned in 1969, and only allowed to return a year later when the publishers agreed to print it in Chinese characters.^[42][47]

In 1974, the Government Information Office banned A Dictionary of Southern Min, with a government official saying: 'We have no objection to the dictionary being used by foreigners. They could use it in mimeographed form. But we don't want it published as a book and sold publicly because of the Romanization it contains. Chinese should not be learning Chinese through Romanization.'^[48] Also in the 1970s, a POJ New Testament translation known as the 'Red Cover Bible' (Âng-phoê Sèng-keng) was confiscated and banned by the Nationalist regime.^[49] Official moves against native languages continued into the 1980s, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of the Interior decided in 1984 to forbid missionaries to use 'local dialects' and romanizations in their work.^[42]

With the ending of martial law in 1987, the restrictions on 'local languages' were quietly lifted,^[50] resulting in growing interest in Taiwanese writing during the 1990s.^[51] For the first time since the 1950s, Taiwanese language and literature was discussed and debated openly in newspapers and journals.^[52] There was also support from the then opposition party, the Democratic Progressive Party, for writing in the language.^[44] From a total of 26 documented orthographies for Taiwanese in 1987 (including defunct systems), there were a further 38 invented from 1987 to 1999, including 30 different romanizations, six adaptations of bopomofo and two hangul-like systems.^[53] Some commentators believe that the Kuomintang, while steering clear of outright banning of the native language movements after the end of martial law, took a 'divide and conquer' approach by promoting Taiwanese Language Phonetic Alphabet (TLPA), an alternative to POJ,^[54] which was at the time the choice of the majority inside the nativization movement.^[55]

Native language education has remained a fiercely debated topic in Taiwan into the 21st century and is the subject of much political wrangling.^[56][57]

Current system[edit]

The current system of pe̍h-ōe-jī has been stable since the 1930s, with a few minor exceptions (detailed below).^[58] There is a fair degree of similarity with the Vietnamese alphabet, including the ⟨b/p/ph⟩ distinction and the use of ⟨ơ⟩ in Vietnamese compared with ⟨o͘⟩ in POJ.^[59] POJ uses the following letters and combinations:^[60]

Chinese phonology traditionally divides syllables in Chinese into three parts; firstly the initial, a consonant or consonant blend which appears at the beginning of the syllable, secondly the final, consisting of a medial vowel (optional), a nucleus vowel, and an optional ending; and finally the tone, which is applied to the whole syllable.^[61] In terms of the non-tonal (i.e. phonemic) features, the nucleus vowel is the only required part of a licit consonant in Chinese varieties.^[61] Unlike Mandarin but like other southern varieties of Chinese, Taiwanese has final stop consonants with no audible release, a feature that has been preserved from Middle Chinese.^[62] There is some debate as to whether these stops are a tonal feature or a phonemic one, with some authorities distinguishing between ⟨-h⟩ as a tonal feature, and ⟨-p⟩, ⟨-t⟩, and ⟨-k⟩ as phonemic features.^[63] Southern Min dialects also have an optional nasal property, which is written with a superscript ⟨ⁿ⟩ and usually identified as being part of the vowel.^[64]

A legitimate syllable in Hokkien takes the form (initial) + (medial vowel) + nucleus + (stop) + tone, where items in parenthesis indicate optional components.^[65]

The initials are:^[66]

Vowels:^[67]

Coda endings:

POJ has a limited amount of legitimate syllables, although sources disagree on some particular instances of these syllables. The following table contains all the licit spellings of POJ syllables, based on a number of sources:

Tone markings[edit]

Anglo Chinese Manual Of The Amoy Dialect Tests

In standard Amoy or Taiwanese Hokkien there are seven distinct tones, which by convention are numbered 1–8, with number 6 omitted (tone 6 used to be a distinct tone, but has long since merged with tone 2).^[72] Tones 1 and 4 are both represented without a diacritic, and can be distinguished from each other by the syllable ending, which is a vowel, ⟨-n⟩, ⟨-m⟩, or ⟨-ng⟩ for tone 1, and ⟨-h⟩, ⟨-k⟩, ⟨-p⟩, and ⟨-t⟩ for tone 4.

Southern Min dialects undergo considerable tone sandhi, i.e. changes to the tone depending on the position of the syllable in any given sentence or utterance.^[65] However, like pinyin for Mandarin Chinese, POJ always marks the citation tone (i.e. the original, pre-sandhi tone) rather than the tone which is actually spoken.^[73] This means that when reading aloud the reader must adjust the tone markings on the page to account for sandhi. Some textbooks for learners of Southern Min mark both the citation tone and the sandhi tone to assist the learner.^[74]

There is some debate as to the correct placement of tone marks in the case of diphthongs and triphthongs, particularly those which include ⟨oa⟩ and ⟨oe⟩.^[75] Most modern writers follow six rules:^[76]

1. If the syllable has one vowel, that vowel should be tone-marked; viz. ⟨tī⟩, ⟨láng⟩, ⟨chhu̍t⟩
2. If a diphthong contains ⟨i⟩ or ⟨u⟩, the tone mark goes above the other vowel; viz. ⟨ia̍h⟩, ⟨kiò⟩, ⟨táu⟩
3. If a diphthong includes both ⟨i⟩ and ⟨u⟩, mark the ⟨u⟩; viz. ⟨iû⟩, ⟨ùi⟩
4. If the final is made up of three or more letters, mark the second vowel (except when rules 2 and 3 apply); viz. ⟨goán⟩, ⟨oāi⟩, ⟨khiáu⟩
5. If ⟨o⟩ occurs with ⟨a⟩ or ⟨e⟩, mark the ⟨o⟩ (except when rule 4 applies); viz. ⟨òa⟩, ⟨thóe⟩
6. If the syllable has no vowel, mark the nasal consonant; viz. ⟨m̄⟩, ⟨ǹg⟩, ⟨mn̂g⟩

Hyphens[edit]

A single hyphen is used to indicate a compound. What constitutes a compound is controversial, with some authors equating it to a 'word' in English, and others not willing to limit it to the English concept of a word.^[75] Examples from POJ include ⟨sì-cha̍p⟩ 'forty', ⟨bé-hì-thôan⟩ 'circus', and ⟨hôe-ho̍k⟩ 'recover (from illness)'. The rule-based sandhi behaviour of tones in compounds has not yet been clearly defined by linguists.^[77] A double hyphen ⟨--⟩ is used when POJ is deployed as an orthography (rather than as a transcription system) to indicate that the following syllable should be pronounced in the neutral tone.^[78] It also marks to the reader that the preceding syllable does not undergo tone sandhi, as it would were the following syllable non-neutral. Morphemes following a double hyphen are often (but not always) grammatical function words.^[79]

Audio examples[edit]

Regional differences[edit]

In addition to the standard syllables detailed above, there are several regional variations of Hokkien which can be represented with non-standard or semi-standard spellings. In the Zhangzhou accent, spoken in Zhangzhou and parts of Taiwan, particularly the northeastern coast around Yilan City, the final ⟨ng⟩ is replaced with ⟨uiⁿ⟩, for example in 'egg' ⟨nuīⁿ⟩ and 'cooked rice' ⟨pūiⁿ⟩.^[80] The /ɛ/ vowel is written as ⟨ɛ⟩ or ⟨e͘⟩ (with a dot above right, by analogy with ⟨o͘⟩).

Texts[edit]

Genesis 1:1–5^[81]

Due to POJ's origins in the church, much of the material in the script is religious in nature, including several Bible translations, books of hymns, and guides to morality. The Tainan Church Press, established in 1884, has been printing POJ materials ever since, with periods of quiet when POJ was suppressed in the early 1940s and from around 1955 to 1987. In the period to 1955, over 2.3 million volumes of POJ books were printed,^[82] and one study in 2002 catalogued 840 different POJ texts in existence.^[83] Besides a Southern Min version of Wikipedia in the orthography,^[84] there are teaching materials, religious texts, and books about linguistics, medicine and geography.

• Lán ê Kiù-chú Iâ-so͘ Ki-tok ê Sin-iok (1873 translation of the New Testament)
• Lāi-goā-kho Khàn-hō͘-ha̍k, by George Gushue-Taylor, 1917
• Chinese–English dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy, by Carstairs Douglas, 1873
• Lear Ông, translation of King Lear by Tē Hūi-hun

Computing[edit]

POJ was initially not well supported by word-processing applications due to the special diacritics needed to write it. Support has now improved and there are now sufficient resources to both enter and display POJ correctly. Several input methods exist to enter Unicode-compliant POJ, including OpenVanilla (OS X and Microsoft Windows), the cross-platform Tai-lo Input Method released by the Taiwanese Ministry of Education, and the Firefox add-on Transliterator, which allows in-browser POJ input.^[85] When POJ was first used in word-processing applications it was not fully supported by the Unicode standard, thus necessitating work-arounds. One employed was encoding the necessary characters in the 'Private Use' section of Unicode, but this required both the writer and the reader to have the correct custom font installed.^[86] Another solution was to replace troublesome characters with near equivalents, for example substituting ⟨ä⟩ for ⟨ā⟩ or using a standard ⟨o⟩ followed by an interpunct to represent ⟨o͘⟩.^[86] With the introduction into Unicode 4.1.0 of the combining characterU+0358◌͘COMBINING DOT ABOVE RIGHT in 2004, all the necessary characters were present to write regular POJ without the need for workarounds.^[87][88] However, even after the addition of these characters, there are still relatively few fonts which are able to properly render the script, including the combining characters. Some of those which can are Charis SIL, DejaVu, Doulos SIL, Linux Libertine, Taigi Unicode, and Source Sans Pro.^[89][86]

Han-Romanization mixed script[edit]

Sample mixed orthography text^[90]

One of the most popular modern ways of writing Taiwanese is by using a mixed orthography^[91] called Hàn-lô^[92] (simplified Chinese: 汉罗; traditional Chinese: 漢羅; pinyin: Hàn-Luó; literally Chinese-Roman), and sometimes Han-Romanization mixed script, a style not unlike written Japanese or (historically) Korean.^[93] In fact, the term Hàn-lô does not describe one specific system, but covers any kind of writing in Southern Min which features both Chinese characters and romanization.^[91] That romanization is usually POJ, although recently some texts have begun appearing with Taiwanese Romanization System (Tâi-lô) spellings too. The problem with using only Chinese characters to write Southern Min is that there are many morphemes (estimated to be around 15 percent of running text)^[94] which are not definitively associated with a particular character. Various strategies have been developed to deal with the issue, including creating new characters, allocating Chinese characters used in written Mandarin with similar meanings (but dissimilar etymology) to represent the missing characters, or using romanization for the 'missing 15%'.^[95] There are two rationales for using mixed orthography writing, with two different aims. The first is to allow native speakers (almost all of whom can already write Chinese characters) to make use of their knowledge of characters, while replacing the missing 15% with romanization.^[91] The second is to wean character literates off using them gradually, to be replaced eventually by fully romanized text.^[96]Examples of modern texts in Hàn-lô include religious, pedagogical, scholarly, and literary works, such as:

• Chang Yu-hong. Principles of POJ.^[97]
• Babuja A. Sidaia. A-Chhûn.^[98]

Adaptations for other Chinese varieties[edit]

POJ has been adapted for several other varieties of Chinese, with varying degrees of success. For Hakka, missionaries and others have produced a Bible translation, hymn book, textbooks, and dictionaries.^[99] Materials produced in the orthography, called Pha̍k-fa-sṳ, include:

• Hak-ngi Sṳn-kin, Sin-yuk lau Sṳ-phien: Hien-thoi Thoi-van Hak-ngi Yit-pun (Hakka Bible, New Testament and Psalms: Today's Taiwan Hakka Version). Bible Society. 1993.
• Phang Tet-siu (1994). Thai-ka Loi Hok Hak-fa (Everybody Learn Hakka). Taipei: Southern Materials Center. ISBN957-638-017-0.
• Phang Tet-siu (1996). Hak-ka-fa Fat-yim Sṳ-tien (Hakka Pronunciation Dictionary). Taipei: Southern Materials Center. ISBN957-638-359-5.
• Hak-ka Sṳn-sṳ (Hakka Hymns). Tainan: PCT Press. 1999. ISBN957-8349-75-0.

A modified version of POJ has also been created for Teochew.^[100]

Current status[edit]

Most native Southern Min speakers in Taiwan are unfamiliar with POJ or any other writing system,^[101] commonly asserting that 'Taiwanese has no writing',^[102] or, if they are made aware of POJ, considering romanization as the 'low' form of writing, in contrast with the 'high' form (Chinese characters).^[103] For those who are introduced to POJ alongside Han-lo and completely Chinese character-based systems, a clear preference has been shown for all-character systems, with all-romanization systems at the bottom of the preference list, likely because of the preexisting familiarity of readers with Chinese characters.^[104]

POJ remains the Taiwanese orthography 'with the richest inventory of written work, including dictionaries, textbooks, literature [...] and other publications in many areas'.^[105] A 1999 estimate put the number of literate POJ users at around 100,000,^[106] and secular organizations have been formed to promote the use of romanization among Taiwanese speakers.^[107]

Outside Taiwan, POJ is rarely used. For example, in Fujian, Xiamen University uses a romanization known as Bbánlám pìngyīm, based on Pinyin. In other areas where Hokkien is spoken, such as Singapore, the Speak Mandarin Campaign is underway to actively discourage people from speaking Hokkien or other non-Mandarin varieties in favour of switching to Mandarin instead.^[108]

In 2006, Taiwan's Ministry of Education chose an official romanization for use in teaching Southern Min in the state school system.^[109] POJ was one of the candidate systems, along with Daighi tongiong pingim, but a compromise system, the Taiwanese Romanization System or Tâi-Lô, was chosen in the end.^[110] Tâi-Lô retains most of the orthographic standards of POJ, including the tone marks, while changing the troublesome ⟨o͘⟩ character for ⟨oo⟩, swapping ⟨ts⟩ for ⟨ch⟩, and replacing ⟨o⟩ in diphthongs with ⟨u⟩.^[111] Supporters of Taiwanese writing are in general deeply suspicious of government involvement, given the history of official suppression of native languages,^[5] making it unclear whether Tâi-Lô or POJ will become the dominant system in the future.

References[edit]

Notes

1. ^ ^abcKlöter (2005), p. 90.
2. ^ ^abKlöter (2002), p. 1.
3. ^ ^abcKlöter (2005), p. 89.
4. ^ ^abcChang (2001), p. 13.
5. ^ ^abKlöter (2005), p. 248.
6. ^ ^abcKlöter (2005), p. 92.
7. ^Klöter (2002), p. 2.
8. ^Heylen (2001), p. 139.
9. ^ ^abHeylen (2001), p. 142.
10. ^ ^abChang (2001), p. 14.
11. ^Heylen (2001), p. 144.
12. ^Klöter (2005), p. 109.
13. ^Medhurst (1832), p. viii.
14. ^Klöter (2005), p. 110.
15. ^Heylen (2001), p. 145.
16. ^ ^abcHeylen (2001), p. 149.
17. ^Klöter (2005), p. 111.
18. ^Klöter (2005), pp. 111, 116.
19. ^ ^abcKlöter (2005), p. 93.
20. ^Ang (1992), p. 2.
21. ^Heylen (2001), p. 160.
22. ^Klöter (2002), p. 13.
23. ^Quoted in Band (1936), p. 67
24. ^ ^ab'Our Story'. Taiwan Church News. Archived from the original on 2009-03-01. Retrieved 2009-04-30.
25. ^Copper (2007), p. 240.
26. ^Klöter (2005), p. 114.
27. ^Adapted from Klöter (2005), pp. 113–6
28. ^Medhurst (1832).
29. ^Doty (1853).
30. ^MacGowan (1869).
31. ^Douglas (1873).
32. ^Van Nest Talmage (1894).
33. ^Warnshuis & de Pree (1911).
34. ^Campbell (1913).
35. ^Barclay (1923).
36. ^Tipson (1934).
37. ^Klöter (2005), p. 136.
38. ^Klöter (2005), p. 153.
39. ^Klöter (2005), p. 154.
40. ^Klöter (2005), p. 135.
41. ^Lin (1999), p. 21.
42. ^ ^abcdefChang (2001), p. 18.
43. ^Klöter (2005), p. 231.
44. ^ ^abcLin (1999), p. 1.
45. ^Tiuⁿ (2004), p. 7.
46. ^Sandel (2003), p. 533.
47. ^Klöter (2005), p. 217.
48. ^'Guide to Dialect Barred in Taiwan: Dictionary Tried to Render Local Chinese Sounds'. New York Times. September 15, 1974. sec. GN, p. 15. Retrieved 18 December 2014.; quoted in Lin (1999), p. 22
49. ^Iûⁿ (2009), p. 24.
50. ^Sandel (2003), p. 530.
51. ^Wu (2007), p. 1.
52. ^Wu (2007), p. 9.
53. ^Chiung (2005), p. 275.
54. ^Chang (2001), p. 19.
55. ^Chiung (2005), p. 273.
56. ^Loa Iok-sin (2009-02-28). 'Activists demand Hoklo exams'. Taipei Times. Retrieved 2010-03-31.
57. ^'Premier's comments over language status draws anger'. China Post. 2003-09-25. Retrieved 2010-03-31.
58. ^Klöter (2005), p. 98.
59. ^Chang (2001), p. 15.
60. ^Klöter (2005), p. 99.
61. ^ ^abChung (1996), p. 78.
62. ^Norman (1998), p. 237.
63. ^Klöter (2005), p. 14.
64. ^Klöter (2005), p. 15.
65. ^ ^abRamsey (1987), p. 109.
66. ^Chang (2001), p. 30.
67. ^Chang (2001), p. 33.
68. ^謬
69. ^Campbell (1913), pp. 1–4: Entries under the initial ts have been tallied under the modern spelling of ch.
70. ^Embree (1973).
71. ^Kì (2008), pp. 4–25.
72. ^Maryknoll (1984), pp. 5–7.
73. ^Klöter (2005), p. 100.
74. ^Klöter (2005), p. 101.
75. ^ ^abKlöter (2005), p. 102.
76. ^Chang (2001), pp. 86–88.
77. ^Klöter (2005), p. 103.
78. ^Klöter (2005), p. 103–104.
79. ^Klöter (2005), p. 104.
80. ^Chang (2001), p. 134.
81. ^Barclay et al. (1933), p. 1.
82. ^Tiuⁿ (2004), p. 6.
83. ^Tiuⁿ (2004), p. 8.
84. ^Iûⁿ (2009), p. 23.
85. ^Iûⁿ (2009), p. 29.
86. ^ ^abcIûⁿ (2009), p. 20.
87. ^Iûⁿ (2009), p. 11.
88. ^'Combining Diacritical Marks'(PDF). unicode.org. p. 34. Retrieved 2010-07-29.
89. ^'Fonts version 3.006 (OTF, TTF, WOFF, WOFF2, Variable)'. GitHub. Adobe Systems Incorporated. 2010-09-06. Retrieved 2010-09-06.
90. ^Sidaia (1998), p. 264.
91. ^ ^abcKlöter (2005), p. 225.
92. ^Ota (2005), p. 21.
93. ^Iûⁿ (2009), p. 10.
94. ^Lin (1999), p. 7.
95. ^Lin (1999), pp. 9–11.
96. ^Klöter (2005), p. 230.
97. ^Chang (2001).
98. ^Sidaia (1998).
99. ^Wu & Chen (2004).
100. ^潮州字典-韵母表 (in Chinese). Hailufeng. Retrieved 2010-03-10.
101. ^Ota (2005), p. 20.
102. ^Baran (2004), p. 35–5.
103. ^Chiung (2005), p. 300.
104. ^Chiung (2005), p. 301.
105. ^Chiung (2005), p. 272.
106. ^Lin (1999), p. 17.
107. ^Chiung (2007), p. 474.
108. ^Wong-Anan, Nopporn (2009-09-16). 'Eyeing China, Singapore sees Mandarin as its future'. Reuters. Retrieved 2009-10-31.
109. ^Tseng (2009), p. 2.
110. ^閩南語鄉土教學確定採台灣閩南語羅馬字拼音 [Southern Min native language teaching to use Taiwan Southern Min Romanization] (in Chinese), Central News Agency
111. ^Tseng (2009), pp. 2–5.

Bibliography

• Ang, Ui-jin (1992). Taiwan Fangyan zhi Lü (A Journey Through Taiwanese Regional Speech) (in Chinese). Taipei: Avanguard Publishing. ISBN957-9512-31-0.
• Band, Edward (1936). Barclay of Formosa. Ginza, Tokyo: Christian Literature Society. OCLC4386066.
• Baran, Dominika (2004). 'Taiwanese don't have written words': Language ideologies and language practice in a Taipei County high school. 2004 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization. 2. OCLC77082548.
• Barclay, Thomas; Lun, Un-jîn; Nĝ, Má-hūi; Lu, Iok-tia (1933). Sin-kū-iok ê Sèng-keng. OCLC48696650.
• Campbell, William (1913). A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular spoken throughout the prefectures of Chin-chiu, Chiang-chiu and Formosa. Tainan: Taiwan Church Press. OCLC867068660.
• Campbell, William (2006) [1913]. A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular. Tainan: PCT Press. ISBN957-8959-92-3.
• Chang, Yu-hong (2001). Principles of POJ or the Taiwanese Orthography: An Introduction to Its Sound-Symbol Correspondences and Related Issues. Taipei: Crane. ISBN9789572053072.
• Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2003). Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization.' (PhD dissertation). University of Texas at Arlington.
• Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2005). Language, Identity and Decolonization. Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. ISBN9789578845855.
• Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2007). Language, Literature and Reimagined Taiwanese Nation. Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. ISBN9789860097467.
• Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2011). Nations, Mother Tongues and Phonemic Writing. Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. ISBN978-986-02-7359-5.
• Chung, Raung-fu (1996). The Segmental Phonology of Southern Min in Taiwan. Taipei: Spoken Language Services. ISBN9789579463461. OCLC36091818.
• Copper, John F. (2007). A Historical Dictionary of Taiwan (Republic of China) (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. ISBN9780810856004.
• Doty, Elihu (1853). Anglo Chinese Manual of the Amoy Dialect. Guangzhou: Samuel Wells Williams. OCLC20605114.
• Douglas, Carstairs (1873). Chinese–English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy (1st ed.). London: Trübner. OCLC4820970. OL24969218M.
  • Barclay, Thomas (1923). Supplement to Dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy. Shanghai: The Commercial press, limited.
• Embree, Bernard L. M. (1973). A Dictionary of Southern Min: based on current usage in Taiwan and checked against the earlier works of Carstairs Douglas, Thomas Barclay, and Ernest Tipson. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Language Institute. OCLC2491446.
• Heylen, Ann (2001). 'Romanizing Taiwanese: Codification and Standardization of Dictionaries in Southern Min (1837–1923)'. In Ku, Wei-ying; De Ridder, Koen (eds.). Authentic Chinese Christianity, Preludes to Its Development: Nineteenth & Twentieth Centuries. Leuven: Leuven University Press. ISBN9789058671028.
• Iûⁿ Ún-giân; Tiuⁿ Ha̍k-khiam (1999). 台灣福佬話非漢字拼音符號的回顧與分析 [Comparison and Analysis of non-Character Transcription Systems for Taiwanese Holo] (in Chinese). Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. Archived from the original on November 16, 2007. Retrieved 2009-12-17.Cite uses deprecated parameter deadurl= (help)
• Iûⁿ, Ún-giân (2009). Processing Techniques for Written Taiwanese – Tone Sandhi and POS Tagging (Doctoral dissertation). National Taiwan University. OCLC367595113.
• Kì, Bō͘-hô (2008). 台語教會羅馬字講義 [Notes on Taiwanese Church Romanization]. Tainan: PCT Press. ISBN9789866947346.
• Klöter, Henning (2002). 'The History of Peh-oe-ji'. 2002台灣羅馬字教學KAP研究國際學術研討會論文集 [Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization Research]. Taipei: Taiwanese Romanization Association.
• Klöter, Henning (2005). Written Taiwanese. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ISBN9783447050937.
• Lin, Alvin (1999). 'Writing Taiwanese: The Development of Modern Written Taiwanese'(PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers (89). OCLC41879041.
• MacGowan, John (1869). A Manual of the Amoy Colloquial. Hong Kong: de Souza & Co. OCLC23927767.
• Maryknoll Fathers (1984). Taiwanese: Book 1. Taichung: Maryknoll. OCLC44137703.}
• Medhurst, Walter Henry (1832). Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms. Macau: East India Press. OCLC5314739.
• Norman, Jerry (1998). Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN0521296536.
• Ong Iok-tek (2002). Taiwanyu Yanjiu Juan (in Chinese). Taipei: Avanguard Publishing. ISBN957-801-354-X.
• Ota, Katsuhiro J. (2005). An investigation of written Taiwanese(PDF) (Master's). University of Hawai'i at Manoa. OCLC435500061.
• Ramsey, S. Robert (1987). The Languages of China. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN9780691014685.
• Sandel, Todd L. (2003). 'Linguistic capital in Taiwan: The KMT's Mandarin language policy and its perceived impact on language practices of bilingual Mandarin and Tai-gi speakers'. Language in Society. Cambridge University Press. 32 (4). doi:10.1017/S0047404503324030. JSTOR4169285.
• Sidaia, Babuja A. (1998). A-Chhûn : Babuja A.Sidaia e短篇小說集 (in Chinese). Taipei: Taili. ISBN9789579886161. OCLC815099022.
• Tipson, Ernest (1934). A Pocket Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular: English-Chinese. Singapore: Lithographers. OCLC504142973.
• Tiuⁿ, Ha̍k-khiam (2004). 白話字kap台語文的現代化 [Peh-oe-ji and the Modernization of Written Taiwanese]. 2004 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization (in Chinese). 1. OCLC77082548.
• Tseng, Rui-cheng (2009). Taiwan Minnanyu Luomazi Pinyin Fang'an Shiyong Shouce [Practical Manual for the Taiwan Southern Min Romanization System] (PDF) (in Chinese). ROC Ministry of Education. ISBN9789860166378.
• Van Nest Talmage, John (1894). New Dictionary in the Amoy Dialect. OCLC41548900.
• Warnshuis, A. Livingston; de Pree, H.P. (1911). Lessons in the Amoy Vernacular. Xiamen: Chui-keng-tông Press. OCLC29903392.
• Wu, Chang-neng (2007). The Taigi Literature Debates and Related Developments (1987–1996) (Master's). Taipei: National Chengchi University. OCLC642745725.
• Wu, Guo-sheng; Chen, Yi-hsin (2004). 客家語羅馬字文獻的版本研究 [Books Written in Hakka Romanization]. 2004 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization (in Chinese). 2. OCLC77082548.

External links[edit]

• Media related to Pe̍h-ōe-jī at Wikimedia Commons

General

• 'Tai-gu Bang'. – Google group for Taiwanese language enthusiasts – uses POJ and Chinese characters.
• 'Pe̍h-ōe-jī Unicode Correspondence Table'(PDF). Tailingua. 2009. – information on Unicode encodings for POJ text
• 'Taiwanese Romanization Association'. – group dedicated to the promotion of Taiwanese and Hakka romanization

Input methods

• 'Open Vanilla'. – open source input method for both Windows and Mac OS X.
• 'Taigi-Hakka IME'. – Windows-based input method for both Hokkien (with both Pe̍h-ōe-jī and Taiwanese Romanization System input) and Hakka variants.
• 'Tai-lo Input Method' (in Chinese). – cross-platform input method released by Taiwan's Ministry of Education.
• 'Transliterator'. – extension for the Firefox browser which allows POJ input in-browser.

POJ-compliant fonts

• 'Charis SIL'. SIL International. – serif font in regular, bold, italic, and bold italic.
• 'DejaVu'. Archived from the original on 2009-12-13.Cite uses deprecated parameter deadurl= (help) – available in serif, sans-serif, and monospace.
• 'Doulos SIL'. SIL International. – Times New Roman-style serif.
• 'Gentium'. SIL International. – open source serif.
• 'Linux Libertine'. – GPL and OPL-licensed serif.
• 'Linux Libertine G'. – GPL and OPL-licensed serif.
• 'Taigi Unicode'. – serif font specifically designed for POJ.

Texts and dictionaries

• 'Taiwanese bibliography'. Archived from the original on 2006-08-18.Cite uses deprecated parameter dead-url= (help) – list of books in Taiwanese, including those written in POJ.
• 'Memory of Written Taiwanese'. Archived from the original on 2009-11-29.Cite uses deprecated parameter deadurl= (help) – collection of Taiwanese texts in various orthographies, including many in POJ.
• 'Tai-Hoa Dictionary'. – dictionary which includes POJ, Taiwanese in Chinese characters, and Mandarin characters. Some English definitions also available.
• Exhibits: Taiwanese Romanization Peh-oe-ji – sample images of various older POJ texts.
• Chinese Character to Pe̍h-ōe-jī Online Transliterator, archived from the original on 2017-05-11Cite uses deprecated parameter dead-url= (help) - Transliterates Southern Min Characters and Mandarin Characters to POJ.

Carstairs Douglas (Chinese: 杜嘉德; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Tō͘ Ka-tek) (born 27 December 1830 in Kilbarchan, Renfrewshire; died 26 July 1877 in Xiamen, China) was a Scottish missionary, remembered chiefly for his writings concerning the Southern Min language of Fujian, in particular his Chinese–English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy.

• 3Published works

Early life[edit]

Castairs Douglas was born a son of the manse in Kilbarchan in Renfrewshire, Scotland,^[1] the youngest or second-youngest of seven children.^[2] His father Rev Robert Douglas, was the parish minister, and his elder brother Robert^[3] was also closely involved in the church. His brother George also joined the church and served as Moderator of the General Assembly to the Free Church of Scotland 1894/95/^[4]

Douglas studied at the University of Glasgow from 1845 until 1851, gaining an MA degree, and was later awarded the LL.D. by his alma mater in recognition of his scholarly achievements. Going on to study Divinity at the University of Edinburgh, Douglas professed a keen interest in missionary work. He was ordained in February 1855 and set sail for China a month later.^[5]

Mission to Amoy (Xiamen)[edit]

As one of the treaty ports opened to Westerners in 1842, Xiamen (then known in the West as Amoy) was one of the few places in China where missionaries could go about their work relatively unmolested. During his tenure Douglas was responsible for increasing the single church in Xiamen to a congregation of twenty-five churches, composed mostly of Chinese members.^[1] Contemporaries of Douglas were heavily involved in producing material concerned with the local language, including Elihu Doty who wrote the Anglo-Chinese Manual with Romanized Colloquial in the Amoy Dialect and John Van Nest Talmage, author of the Ê-Mn̂g Im ê Jī-tián (Dictionary of the Amoy Speech).^[6] While stationed in Xiamen, Douglas, alongside fellow Scottish medical missionary H. L. Mackenzie, visited Formosa (modern-day Taiwan) and was influential in the decision by the English Presbyterian Mission to send missionaries to the island.^[1][7] In his last significant position Douglas was elected joint Chairman of the Shanghai Missionary Conference of 1877, a gathering of 150 or so missionaries employed in the China field.^[8]

Published works[edit]

Amoy–English Dictionary[edit]

During twenty-two years as a Presbyterian missionary in Xiamen Douglas amassed a wealth of information on the Southern Min language spoken in the area, eventually compiling his Chinese–English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy (1873), which was the first comprehensive Southern Min–English dictionary and indeed the first dictionary of 'living' Southern Min in any language;^[9] it remains an important work in the understanding of the language.^[10] The dictionary used an early version of the Peh-oe-ji romanisation to represent the sounds of Southern Min, with pronunciations from both the Zhangzhou and Quanzhou dialects of Southern Min, along with literary readings for many of the entries.^[11]

Douglas felt that in regards to his work...

...[t]he most serious defect is the want of the Chinese character. ... I cherish the hope of publishing a Key or Sequel in two or three years, giving the characters so far as they can be found.^[12]

Douglas' hope was ended by his early death, although fifty years after the initial publication of his dictionary just such an appendix was added, by the Reverend Thomas Barclay, a missionary stationed in Tainan, Qing-era Taiwan who had himself much benefited from the volume.^[13]

Death and memorial[edit]

Douglas died of cholera^[14] on 26 July 1877 at the age of 46 in his adopted home of Xiamen and was buried on Gulangyu. He is memorialised in a stained-glass window in St. Bryce Kirk, Kirkcaldy which was dedicated by his brother Robert Douglas, an elder of the kirk.^[15]

Family[edit]

Douglas's nephew (son of his brother Robert) was the eminent hygienist Prof Carstairs Cumming Douglas, named in his memory.

References[edit]

1. ^ ^abcAnderson, Gerald H. (1998). Biographical Dictionary of Christian Missions. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. ISBN9780028646046.
2. ^'RootsWeb'. Retrieved 1 July 2008.
3. ^http://www.glasgowwestaddress.co.uk/1909_Glasgow_Men/Douglas_Carstairs_Cumming.htm
4. ^Ewings Annals of the Free Church
5. ^'Carstairs Douglas: The Amoy Mission (1840–1951)'. Retrieved 1 July 2008.
6. ^Cheung, David (2004). Christianity in Modern China. Brill. p. 18. ISBN978-90-04-13143-9.
7. ^A. Hamish Ion (21 September 2009). The Cross and the Rising Sun: The British Protestant Missionary Movement in Japan, Korea and Taiwan, 1865-1945. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press. p. 19. ISBN978-0-88920-761-5
8. ^Giderot, N.J. (2002). The Victorian Translation of China. University of California Press. p. 215. ISBN978-0-520-21552-8.
9. ^Ang Ui-jin (1985). 臺灣河佬語聲調研究 (in Chinese). Taipei: 自立. p. 197. ISBN957-596-035-1.
10. ^'Taipei Language Institute Dictionary Page'. Archived from the original on 24 February 2007. Retrieved 1 July 2008.
11. ^Douglas 1873
12. ^Douglas 1873, p. viii
13. ^Barclay, Thomas (1923). Supplement to Dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy. Shanghai: The Commercial press, limited.
14. ^'The Sunday Magazine for Family Reading'. 1878.Cite journal requires journal= (help)
15. ^'St. Bryce Kirk, Kirkcaldy'. Archived from the original on 8 October 2007. Retrieved 27 June 2008.

Bibliography[edit]

• Douglas, Carstairs (1869). A Reply to the charges brought against Protestant Missions in China ... With a preface [by D. Matheson]. London.
• Band, Edward (1948). Working his purpose out : the history of the English Presbyterian Mission, 1847-1947. Presbyterian Church of England. OCLC7700717.
• Douglas, Carstairs (1873). Chinese–English dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy (1st ed.). London: Trübner. OCLC4820970.
• Douglas, Carstairs (1899) [1873]. Chinese-English dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy (2nd ed.). London: Presbyterian Church of England. OCLC5516636. OL25126855M.
• Douglas, Carstairs; Barclay, Thomas (1990) [1923]. Chinese–English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy. Taipei: SMC Publishing. ISBN9579482322. OCLC670105622.
• Douglas, John M. (1878). Memorials of Rev. Carstairs Douglas. Amoy Mission to China. LCCN21006465. OCLC40746248. OL24150785M.

External links[edit]

• Works by or about Carstairs Douglas at Internet Archive