Microsoft Word - 00-copyright_contents.doc

Transcription

1 [Tâi-gí/Taiwanese] Pán-koân sī chhut-pán-siā A-se-a Kok-chè Thoân-pò-siā ê. Tī chun-siú ē-bīn ê 3 ê CC tiâu-kiāⁿ chi-hā, lí ē-sái chū-iû thoân-pò chit pún chheh ê tiān-chú-tòng: Chù-bêng lâi-goân Lí ài sek-tòng chù-bêng siū-koân ê lâi-goân, chò liân-kiat kap chùbêng tó-ūi ū siu-kái--kòe. Bô seng-lí bé-bē Lí bē-sái kā chit hūn chu-liāu the h-lâi chò seng-lí bé-bē. Bô seⁿ-thòaⁿ Lí nā ū iōng chit hūn chu-liāu lâi thàu-lām, choán-ōaⁿ ia h-sī koh chè-chō, lí tō bē-sái koh sì-kè iā. Beh CC ê chu-sìn, chhiáⁿ khòaⁿ: Nā beh kò -bé chóa-pún ê chheh ia h-sī ū jīn-hô siū-koân būn-tê, hoan-gêng hām chhutpán-siā chih-chiap. [English] Copyright by the publisher Asian A-tsiu International You are free to redistribute this book in electronic format as long as you follow the following CC terms: Attribution You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. NonCommercial You may not use the material for commercial purposes. NoDerivatives If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. For more info. on CC terms, visit: Please contact the publisher in the case if you need to buy a hardcopy or get further authorization of this book. asian.atsiu@gmail.com Web:

2

3 Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Tâi-oân Kok-ka Chài-sióng-sing

4

5 Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Tâi-oân Kok-ka Chài-sióng-sing Wi-vun Taiffalo Chiung National Cheng Kung University

6 Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Tâi-oân Kok-ka Chài-sióng-sing kap Language, Literature, and Reimagined Taiwanese Nation

7 Bk-lk Contents O-thâu J t-pún n khah Chá Kìm Hàn-bûn, Tâi-ôan Bó-gí Bûn-hk t Chhut-thâu Tài Hó-n! Chiú Ûi-bûn... 7 khah tài POJ Tâi-bûn CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng kap I Chèng-tong-sèng ê Pin-chèng CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± : Tâi-gí-bûn-hk n-tng-sú Chh-thàm CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su kap tùi Tâi-oân Bûn-hk, Bûn-hòa Hoat-tián ê Éng-hióng CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka: í Tâi- oân ûi Kò-àn Gián-kiù CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k±: Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu

8 CH 6. CH 7. CH 8. CH 9. CH 10. ê kap ê kap ê kap ê Ùi ê hm ê CH CH CH CH CH CH English CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere...440

9 O-thâu 7 J t-pún n khah Chá Kìm Hàn-bûn, Tâi-ôan Bó-gí Bûn-hk t Chhut-thâu Tài Hó-n! J t-pún n khah chá kìm Hàn-bûn, tùi Tâi-ôan bûn-hk ê hoat-tián s hó i s bái? J t-pún sî-ti u-kî, Tâi-ôan Chóng-tok i tih chhui-sak Hôngbîn-hòa n-tng thang kàng-k Tâi-ôan-lâng ê Hàn-jîn ì-sek, in ùi 1937 nî khai-sí kìm-chí pò-chóa ê Hàn-bûn-nôa. Chin ch lâng gn-ûi (jn-ûi) chit ki ti-chì tùi Tâi-ôan bûn-hk ê hoat-tián chin ta ê siong-hi. Kám chin-chià s án-ne? Lán chit pún chheh beh ing khah khoah ê s-iá, ùi Hàn-j bûnhòa-khoan, tk-pit s at-lâm bûn-hk hoat-tián-sú chò-l, lâi têng-sin chôan-sek Tâi-ôan bûn-hk-sú. Pún chheh kí-chhut J t-pún n khah chá kìm Hàn-bûn, Tâi-ôan bó-gí bûn-hk t chhut-thâu tài hó-n! J t-pún n ling-chá kìm Hàn-j, Tâi-ôan-lâng -tàng thê-chá thiàu-thoat Hàn-j ê bê-su, án-ne Tâi-ôan bûn-hk -n óng bó-gí bûn-hk hoat-tián, gîchhiá Tâi-ôan-lâng -tàng ling-chá phah-phòa Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióngsing, têng-sin khí-ch Tâi-ôan bîn-chk ê sióng-sing king-tông-thé. Lán chai-iá, t Ho-lan-lâng lâi-kàu Tâi-ôan chìn-chêng, Tâi-ôan s Lâm-tó gí-h bîn-chk ê thian-h. Ho-lan-lâng t Tâi-oân tû-liáu paksiap keng-chè chu-goân chi-ga, iáu chiông-s Ki-tok kàu-g ê thuikóng. In thòe Tâi-oân pê-p-chk siat-kè Lô-má-j ê bûn-j h-thóng, ìn kàu-g-chheh, koh t 1636 siat-l p t-it keng ng pê-p-chk Sinkáng-gí ûi kàu-hk gí-giân ê hk-hu. Che s Tâi-oân iú-sú í-lâi t-it pái ê hk-hu kàu-ik h-thóng kap bûn-hk gí-giân ê chhut-hin. Sui-jiân chit-ê h-thóng tm-ph-á pái-kha, kong-lêng iú-hn, -koh i thêking hit-tong-sî Tâi-oân hm sè-kài sio-chiap ê sòa.

10 8 kap Anderson hun-sek kóng chhut-pán, chong-kàu kái-kek kap tong-t bó-gí ê chhut-thâu s kn-ti bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek hêng-sêng ê ting-iàu goân-thâu. N chiàu chit-chióng koan-tiám lâi khòa, hittong-sî Ho-lan-lâng n bô t 1661 nî ching Tâi-oân ni h T Sêngkong, Sin-káng-gí ê chhut-pán kap kàu-ik khó-lêng lú lâi lú ting-iàu, sm-chì Sin-káng-gí khó-lêng hêng-sêng Tâi-oân pê-p-chk chi-kan ê king-thong-gí, pn-ián í pê-p-chk ûi chú-thé ê Tâi-oân bîn-chk ì- sek ê chhui-hòa-che. Khó-sioh Tâi-oân pê-p-chk thàu-kòe Sin-káng-gí sióng-sing n-mi king-tông-thé ê sî-kan bô-kàu-tg, chi in-i Tiong-kok Bêngtiâu ûi-chiòng T Sêng-kong t 1661 nî niá-kun chìn-kong Tâi-oân lâi tiong-ton. T Sêng-kong chi li-s Ot-lâm lk-sú-tiong ê Ti Tô (), s thàu-kòe kun-s chèng-t k Tâi-oân óng Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sak ê thâu-ch t-lâng. T T--sì Ông-tiâu thóng-t Tâi-oân sî-kî, in thui-hêng Hàn-j, Jû-hk, siat-l p kho-kí chè-t. Tâi-oân chi án-ne hông giú--j pkhì Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan, it-t t-kàu 1895 nî Chheng-tiâu koah Tâi-oân h J t-pún. T Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ch t-ê king-tông ê tk-sek, chis koa-hong t bûn-kàu, hêng-chèng, chèng-sek tiû-hp it-tng s ng Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn su-siá; -koh t bîn-kan, in -khó-lêng siu-kái Hàn-j, hk-chiá ch sin bûn-j thang phòe-hp in ê kháu-gí. Che bôhêng-tiong chi hêng-sêng ch t-chióng koân-k bûn-j (digraphia) ê hin-sing. Chit-chióng hin-sing t chá-kî ê Ot-lâm chi-s Hàn-j (ko-kai bûn-j ) vs. J-lâm ( k-kai bûn-j). N ln-kàu Tâi-oân, chákî bîn-kan m chhut-hin li-s J-lâm ê bûn-j, he t chia lán k thong-chheng-chòe Koa-á-chheh bûn-j. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan chi-s l-ing Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn chò-ûi king-tông ê sióng-sing gêng-ch-thé. Bîn-kan hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê J-

11 O-thâu 9 lâm hk-chiá Koa-á-chheh sui-jiân hun-pit tùi Ot-lâm kap Tâi-oân ê kò-pit bîn-chk ì-sek pang-chn, -koh in-i koa-hong ê tá-ap kap pún-sin ê bûn-j khoat-hm (phái h, phái thk) soah bô-hoat-t hoathui li-s Lô-má-j t Au-chiu tài-tng kn-ti se-au kok-ka kok-bîn bûn-hk kap kok-bîn ì-sek ê hêng-sêng ê kòng-hiàn. Chóng kóng ch tkù, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té 2 khoán lk-ling, ch t-khoán s thàu-kòe Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn kiàn-k±--khí-lâi ê í Tiong-kok hông-tè ûi tiong-sim ê Tiong-kok khip-ín-lt; lng-ga ch t-khoán s thàu-kòe Jlâm hk-chiá Koa-á-chheh chit-khoán ê í chi-t ûi tiong-sim ê pún-th hòa lk-ling. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ê sêng-goân s- -s hoat-t thoat-l Tiong-kok hêng-sêng kn-ti ê bîn-chk kok-ka chi ài khòa chit 2 k lk-ling siáng khah kiông. 19 sè-kí bóe kàu 20 sè-kí chhe -sái kóng s bûn-giân-bûn beh choán-chò ph-o-bûn ê ta sî-ti, m s chit 2 k lk-ling chhia-pià liáu sing chih-lt ê sî. Ot-lâm kn-ti in-i ga-lk ê kài-j p, pang-chn in chhiat-tg thàu-kòe Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn liân--khí-lâi ê hit tiâu Ot-lâm hm Tiong-kok chi-kan ê sòa. Koh in-i Hoat-kok thui-hêng Lô-má-j soah h Ot-lâm chhe-mê-ke tok tih bí tit-tih kái-sin Ot-lâm-gí su-siá hu-lýt ê kang-kh thang thê-seng pún-th -hòa lk-ling. S -í Ot-lâm Hoat-t t 20 sè-kí kái-k± Hàn-j king-tông-thé, kiâ-hiòng bîn-chk kok-ka ê kiàn-k±. Tâi-oân sui-jiân t 19 sè-kí bóe m ga-lk kài-j p, -koh in-i chiàm-niá Tâi-oân ê J t-pún pún-sin m-s Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê kokka, s -í tùi Tâi-oân beh thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê pang-chn png-bô ta. N-chún 1884 nî hit-tong-sî Chheng-kok hm Hoat-kok chi-kan i-tih Ot-lâm chong-chú-koân kui-sik bn-tê s hoat-seng ê Chheng Hoat chiàn-cheng (Tiong Hoat chiàn-cheng) iân-sòa lh-khì jîchhiá Hoat-kok tông-sî chiàm-niá Tâi-oân kap Ot-lâm, án-ne Tâi-oân ê kn-ti-sú chi ài kái-siá, jî-chhiá Tâi-oân khó-lêng ng Ph-o-j

12 10 kap (Tâi-gí Lô-má-j) chhú-ti Hàn-j. Án-chóa kóng J t-pún thóng-t tùi Tâi-oân thoat-l Hàn-j bûnhòa-khoan bô kài ta ê pang-chn? Sui-jiân J t-pún ch 1868 nî Bêng-t ûi-sin í-u t hui-siông chù-ting thoat-hôa j p-au, jî-chhiá chin ting-s gí-bûn kái-kek hm kok-bîn kàu-ik ê ting-iàu-sèng. -koh, J t-pún ê gí-bûn kái-kek kan-ta bêng-hián thê-seng Kana ê sú-ing pí-l, png-bô oân-choân hùi-tû Hàn-j. i-siá-m h J t-pún bô oân-choân hùitû Hàn-j neh? In-i ch 1931 nî J t-pún hoat-tng Boán-chiu s-ki khai-sí choân-lk j p-chhim Tiong-kok tang-pak í-u, J t-pún kun-kok chú-g-chiá khì-sè tng chhia-i. In i-tih kì-lik s chiàm ê Tiong-kok t-miâ kap lâng-miâ ê s t-chit su-iàu, soah hoán-tùi hùi-tû Hàn-j. J t-pún chiàm-niá Tâi-oân kî-kan sui-jiân ch t-khai-sí chi- ànsg thui-hêng J t-pún-o, -koh in tùi Hàn-j iáu -s chin tk-s. Tâioân chóng-tok sm-chì ti kú-pn Hàn-si liân-gîm ti-he, chio Tâichk bûn-jîn lâi koa-thia gîm-si chò-tùi thang giú-kn Tâi-oân-lâng hm J t-pún-lâng ê k-l. J t-pún-lâng chi-s l-ing Hàn-j bûn-hòakhoan li-té Hàn-j ê chn-chhun ê kè-tt lâi chò-ûi ng-hòa Tâi-oânlâng hoán-khòng ê kang-kh. Che kap Hoat-kok-lâng ching Hàn-j tòng-chò phò-hoi Hoat-kok kap Ot-lâm koan-h ê t-sa-chiá oânchoân bô-kng ê koan-tiám. In-i J t-pún chèng-hú tùi Hàn-j bô pâi-thek, koh ka-sing hittong-sî ê Tâi-oân tì-sek-hn-chú tùi ng Lô-má-j lâi chòe Tâi-oân obûn ê su-siá kang-kh m bô chin khòa-ting, tì-sú Tâi-oân sit-khì ng Lô-má-j chhú-ti Hàn-j thang chhiat-tg hm Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê koan-h ê ki-he. J t-pún-lâng ch t-lâi Tâi-ôan ê sî n sûi kìm ing Hàn-j, hit tong-sî ê Tâi-ôan bûn-jîn t chhun 2 chióng chú-iàu ê bûn-j thang kéng, i.t.s. J t-bûn kap Tâi-bûn. In-i bô Hàn-j thang ng, s -í Tâi-bûn n -s ing thôan-thóng kàu-he Lô-má-j, t-s sing J t-pún Kana lâi su-siá.

13 O-thâu 11 Tng Tâi-ôan-lâng bîn-chk ì-sek giâ kôan ê sî, ch-liân-tek khah kheng-hiòng sú-ing sè-kài-sèng ê Lô-má-j, khah b ing s t-bîn-chiá sek-chhái ê Kana. Tng Tâi-ôan-lâng sú-ing Lô-má-j su-siá ê sî, in chuliân ing in ê bó-gí (Tâi-gí, Kheh-gí, hk-chiá Gôan-ch-bîn-gí) lâi susiá bûn-hk, in-i, bô Hàn-j pau-chong ê Tiong-kok ph-e-bûn tùi in lâi-kóng s ah-á thia lûi ôan-chôan thia bô ê ga-kok gí-giân! Tâi-ôan t 20 sè-kí chh-kî í-keng sit-khí ch t-pái hoat-tián bó-gí bûn-hk ê hó sî-ki. Lán kám thang h i án-ne kè-sik hòng-tng--lhkhì? Góa siong-sìn s t-chiàn s sing hó ê ln-chiàn ê kiàm, ah chit pún chheh t-s s t-chiàn ê iân-sik! Chiú Ûi-bûn

14 12 kap khah tài khah ê i bái tih chhui-sak ê in ùi 1937 ch chit ti-chì ê ê Kám án-ne chit beh khah ê ùi khah ling-chá -tàng ê án-ne -n -tàng ling-chá khí ê chai-iát chìn-chêng ê tiáu ê In ê koh t 1636 ê pái ê kapê chit ê -koh hit hm ê Anderson kap ê ê chit hit t 1662 ê kap lú lú ê

15 O-thâu 13 ê ê ê t 1661 ê sak-chi ê Tin án-ne hông giú--j p-khì 1895 T li-té ê t -koh tin thang in ê Che (digraphia) ê Chit t ê vs. m ê he t chia k ê ê ê -koh ê kap ê soah t ê ê li-té 2 ê ê chit khoán ê ê li-té ê ê ài chit 2 siáng khah sái beh ê m chit 2 liáu sing chih-lt ê ê in ê hit hm ê Koh soah

16 14 kap tih tih ê thang t 20 ê t 19 m -koh ê m ê beh ê 1884 hit hm tih ê kap án-ne ê ài Ph-o-j; Án-chóa kài ê 1868 hm ê -koh ê kan-ta Kana ê neh 1931 chhia-iin tih ê kap ê soah -koh in iáu ti thang giú hm ê li-té êchn-chhun ê ê Che kap ê bô-kng ê koh hit ê ê m t 20 thang hm ê ê sûi hit ê chhun 2

17 O-thâu 15 ê thang kap thang giâ kôan ê tek khah ê khah b ê ê in in ê ê in ê t 20 pái ê kám thang h án-ne sing ê ê chit ê

18 16 kap Anderson 1662

19 O-thâu (digraphia) vs. ()

20 18 kap () Ph-o-j

21 O-thâu 19 20

22

23 Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng kap I Chèng-tong-sèng ê Pin-chèng

24 22 kap 1. Chiân-giân Tâi-oân ùi 1987 nî kái-giâm í-u, pau-hâm Tâi-oân bó-gí chi-li ê kok-chióng pún-th -hòa n-tng lóng hiông-hiông chhia-i khí--lâi. Chhi-kóng 1988 nî iû kheh-ka si-thoân hoat-khí kái-giâm í-lâi t-itchân iú-koan bó-gí ê hêng góa bó-gí n-tng chi ke-thâu khòng-g oh-tng nî iû An Ûi-jîn, Lîm Kím-hiân, Iû Kím-hong téng-lâng ch-sêng Tâi-gí-si koh hoat-hêng Tâi-gí-bûn-tiah hk-b-sèng khan-but nî Tâi-oân tông-hiong T Liông-kong, Lí Hong-bêng téng-lâng t Bí-kok Lok-san-ki chhòng-l p Tâi-bûn s p-chok-he, ulâi t 1991 nî 7 goh chhòng-pn kàu ta iáu teh hoat-hêng ê Tâi-bûn Thong-sìn. Chit-hn khan-být tông-sî t Tâi-oân, Bí-kok, Canada hoat-hêng. Tâi-bûn Thong-sìn chá-kî ê chi Tâi chhui-sak-chiá chú-iàu Tân Hong-hi, Tân Bêng-jîn, Liu Si-bêng téng. Tâi-bûn Thong-sìn chhái-ing Hàn-j kap Ph-o-j hp-siá ê Tâi-oân-o-bûn su-siá hongsek, i tùi Hàn-lô su-siá ê thui-kóng kap chiong Ph-o-j sak-chhut kàu-he h khah ch si-he ti-chiòng jn-bat chin ta ê kòng-hiàn. Tû-liáu si-he thoân-thé teh chhui-sak chi-ga, kok ti-hk huhg li-té m sêng-l p Tâi-gí siong-koan si-thoân, che s Tâi-oân-obûn chìn-j p kàu-ik thé-chè ê sian-hong. Pau-hâm Sêng-ti Tâi-gí-si (1988), Tâi-oân Ti-hk Tâi-oân gí-bûn-si (1990), Kau-thong Ti-hk Tâi-gí-si (1990), Tm-kang Ti-hk Tâi-oân gí-giân bûn-hòa gián-s psi (1991), Chheng-hôa Ti-hk Tâi-gí-si (1992) téng. Tû-liáu Tâi-gí si- 1 Tâi-gí-bûn-tiah tong-jîn hk-b-sèng khan-být ê li-iông s chiong pò-chóa chp-chì tongtiong iú-koan Tâi-gí-bûn ê thó-ln bûn-chiu siu-ch p iá-ìn; hoat-hêng sî-kan pau-hâm 1989 nî 8 goh kàu 1991 nî 7 goh.

25 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 23 thoân chi-ga, u-lâi koh Kheh-ka-si kap í goân-ch-bîn ûi chú ê Goân-si téng si-thoân ê sêng-l p. u-lâi chit-kóa hu-hg Tâi-gí sithoân koh chhoàn-liân sêng-l p Hk-seng Tâi-oân Gí-bûn Chhiok-chìnhe (1992). (Iû Ún-giân téng 1995) Siong-tùi kheh-ka kap goân-ch-bîn lâi kóng, Tâi-gí-lâng (hkchiá s -i ê H-ló-lâng kap Bân-lâm-lâng ) t 1990 nî-ti s chìnhêng ê bó-gí n-tng pí-kàu-tk ke chin chhim m ke chin khoah, s tittih ê hôe-èng m ke chin ta. Chit-ê sî-kî Tâi-gí-lâng ê bó-gí n-tng chú-iàu ng ta hong-bn, t-it s iau-kiû s t-si bó-gí kàu-ik kap chìnhêng bó-gí su-siá ê phiau-chún-hòa; t-j s chú-tiu Tâi-g bûn-hk ài kiàn-l p t Tâi-oân bó-gí ê ki-chh téng-thâu 2. Kî-tiong iú-koan bó-gí bûn-hk ê s±-kiû ín-khí chià hoán siang-hong chin ta ê cheng-ln. Cheng-ln -sái hun-chòe gí-giân miâ-chheng kap Tâi-g bûn-hk ti-piáu-sèng ng p-hn lâi thó-ln. Chi gí-giân miâ-chheng lâi kóng, sui-bóng Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o chit 2 ê ing-sû t Tâi-oân si-he í-keng hông ph -phiàn sú-ing chin-kú, -koh soah cho-si kî-tha chk-kûn sm-chì p-hn Tâi-gí chk-kûn sêng-oân ê chit-gî. In chit-gî koh jn-ûi kóng Tâi-gí-lâng sú-ing Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ê ing-sû s sim-koa kheh-h, H-ló soa-bûn-chú-g ê piáu-hin. Chi Tâi-gí bûn-hk tipiáu-sèng lâi kóng, sa ta bô-kng ê chú-tiu, chhi-kóng Lîm Chong-goân, Lîm Iong-bín chú-tiu Tâi-gí bûn-hk ti-piáu Tâi-oân bûn-hk; m oân-choân h -tng Tâi-gí bûn-hk chûn-chi ê pit-iàusèng--ê, chhi-kóng Liu Hiâm-h () kap Tân Jik-hi (); i 2 Iú-koan 1980 nî-ti kap 1990 nî-ti chiam-tùi Tâi-oân bó-gí kap bûn-hk ê thó-ln -sái chham-ot Lîm Chìn-hui (1983), L Heng-chhiong (1999).

26 24 kap chhi Lí Kiâu () kap Phê Si-kim () án-ne -n siau-kk bntùi bó-gí bûn-hk, tian-tò chi-chhî Hôa-gí chiâ-chòe Tâi-oân bûn-hk ê chú-iàu bûn-hk gí-giân ê î-chhî hin-chng phài 3. Tùi chú-tiu sú-ing Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ing-sû ê lâng lâi kóng, che s beh týt-hián ka-t s Tâi-oân lâng, -s Tiong-kok Bân-lâm lâng, s kiông-tiu Tâi-oân jn-tông kap Tâi-oân ì-sek ê piáu-hin. Tùi hoán-tùi ê lâng lâi kóng, in jn-ûi Kheh-gí, goân-ch-bîn-gí, sm-chì Hôa-gí m-s sin-ê Tâi-gí, s -í H-ló-lâng kóng H-ló-o s Tâi-gí s teh h -tng kî-tha chk-kûn gí-giân chiâ-chòe pún-th gí-giân ê pâitha-sèng ê chò-hoat. Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ing-sû kám giâm-ting kàu chiâ-chòe pâi-tha-sèng ê soa-bûn-chú-g? Tng Goân-ch-bîn khoân-l sú-ing goân-ch-bîn chhú-ti hoan-á ê chheng-h ê sî, kám kóng Tâi-gílâng chi- chiap-si kî-s ì-hâm ê Bân-lâm-lâng hk-chiá chiap-si gí-ì put-chheng ê H-ló-lâng ê g-b? Pún ln-bûn ê gián-kiù bk-tek beh ùi gí-giân-hk ê kak-t hunsek Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ê gí-ì li-hâm, koh ùi kng-sî kap lk-sî ê siá lâi thàm-thó Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ing-sû ê chèng-tong-sèng. 2. Ki-pún kài-lim kap lí-ln kè-k± 2.1. Gí-ì sêng-hn hun-sek T gí-giân-hk lìn s -i ê sêng-hn hun-sek (componential 3 Iú-koan chit-kóa jîn-být ê chú-iàu ti-piáu-sèng ln-sýt bûn-chiu, chhiá chham-ot L Heng-chhiong (1999).

27 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 25 analysis). He s gián-kiù gí-sû ê gí-ì ê sî-chn, chiong hit-ê gí-sû s liânsióng tih ê sêng-hn lóng lit--chhut-lâi ê ch t chióng gián-kiù honghoat. Lán í niáu-chhí chit-ê gí-sû ûi s t-chè ê l lâi soat-bêng gí-ì sênghn hun-sek. Lán n si-tih niáu-chhí, lán si-tih siá? Lán khó-lêng si-tih t²-pió 1 lìn hit 9 ê gí-ì sêng-hn. Tong-jiân, niáuchhí ê gí-ì sêng-hn put-chí kan-ta hit 9 ê. I tàu-tóe kúi ê gí-ì sênghn ài kun-kù bô-kng ê chêng-kéng lâi koat-tng; chit-ê chêng-kéng pau-hâm kóng-o-chiá kap thia-o-chiá ê seng-oh pe-kéng hm gí-sû chhut-hin ê sî-kan kap khong-kan téng. Chhi-kóng, ch t-ê -bat khòa-kè bàng-gah jîn-být Mickey mouse ê lâng, chi b chhut-hin Mickey mouse ê gí-ì sêng-hn. In-i múi ch t-ê lâng ê seng-oh pekéng lóng bô-kng, s -í pê-pê tùi tih ch t-ê gí-sû, múi ch t-ê lâng s - ê gí-ì sêng-hn m b pah-hun-chi-pah kng-khoán. Tng múi ch t-ê lâng ê gí-ì sêng-hn ê chha--sèng lú ta ê sî, che ti-piáu lán-lâng tùi hit-ê gí-sû ê gí-ì kiàn-kái lú bô-kng. Chhi-kóng, chòe-kn ê liû-hêng ing-gí Tâi-kheh chi- chià-bn kap hù-bn chin lióng-kk-hòa ê gíì sêng-hn. Tâi-kheh ch t-khai-sí s Tâi-pak Tiong-kok siâ ê mûi-thé sok-ch chhut-lâi beh phì-siù Tâi-oân-lâng hêng-sing ê hù-bn inggí. u--lâi, Tâi-oân phài ián-g-jîn-goân tùi Tâi-kheh gí-ì kái-soeh-koân chìn-hêng hoán-kong, k i hù-sing chià-bn ê gí-ì sêng-hn. Tàu-tóe Tâi-kheh s chià-bn i-s hù-bn ê ing-gí? Che t bk-chêng iáu bô it-tì ê king-sek.

28 26 kap T²-pió 1. Í niáu-chhí ûi l ê gí-ì sêng-hn hun-sek. N ng sêng-hn hun-sek ê hong-hoat lâi khòa Tâi-gí kap Tâioân-o chit 2 ê ing-sû, in ê gí-ì sêng-hn kám it-tng pau-hâm kan-ta H-ló-lâng ê bó-gí s Tâi-oân pún-th gí-giân, ah Kheh-gí kap goânch-bîn-gí lóng -s pún-th gí-giân? Tap-àn s b-pit-jiân. S-s tsing, chi pit-chiá tg-kî-lâi ê koan-chhat, hit-kóa chú-tiu sú-ing Tâigí kap Tâi-oân-o chheng-h ê lâng (chhi-kóng Lîm Iong-bín, Lîm Chong-goân, g Kng-liân téng) -sái kóng bô-lâng h -jn Kheh-gí kap goân-ch-bîn-gí s Tâi-oân pún-th gí-giân. N án-ne, s án-chóa Tâigí kap Tâi-oân-o ê ing-gí ch-sêng kî-tha chk-kûn ê sim-kia-támhiah? Goân-in chhut-chi siang-hong tùi i gí-ì sêng-hn ê kiàn-kái bôkng. Pún ln-bûn chiam-tùi Tâi-gí, Tâi-oân-o kap Tâi-oân gí-giân chit

29 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 27 3 ê ti hông thh-lâi sú-ing -koh koh gâu ch-sêng g-kái ê ing-sû têng-sin tng-g kap hun-sek t-bn. Tâi-oân gí-giân (Taiwanese languages) s kí t ch-jiân chngthi ê chhian-sóa chi-h (hui s t-bîn chèng-koân kiông-pek sú-ing), keng-kòe th -tù-hòa koh Tâi-oân thoân-thóng lk-sú bûn-hòa tipiáu-sèng jî-chhiá ga-kài ph -phiàn jn-tông--chiá. S -í Tâi-oân gígiân pau-hâm goân-ch-bîn s - ê gí-giân, í-kip Kheh-gí kap Tâi-gí. T tng-g chi-h, Eng-gí, Hôa-gí, J t-gí kap Ot-lâm sin-niû s ng ê Otlâm-gí lóng bô sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân, put-kò in -sái sg s kok-bîn ê gí-giân, i chi-s Tâi-oân kok-bîn teh ng ê gí-giân (languages used by the Taiwanese citizens) 4. Lán hun-pit ng t²-pió 2 koh t²-pió 3 lâi kái-sek Tâi-oân gí-giân kap kok-bîn ê gí-giân ê gí-ì sêng-hn. T²-pió 2. Tâi-oân gí-giân ê gí-ì sêng-hn. 4 Siông-sè ê thó-ln -sái chham-khó Chiú Ûi-bûn 2004.

30 28 kap T²-pió 3. Kok-bîn ê gí-giân ê gí-ì sêng-hn. Hon-sè lâng kóng chit-khoán ê pun-hoat siu-kòe sim-heng kheh-h, èng-kai chiong Hôa-gí pau-hâm chi Tâi-oân gí-giân li-té chiah tih. N-chún Hôa-gí sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân, i-siá-m h pí Hôa-gí khah-chá lâi Tâi-oân jî-chhiá koh Tâi-oân-lâng teh ng ê J t-gí b-sái sg Tâi-oân gí-giân? N-chún Hôa-gí sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân, m èng-kai kái-miâ chòe Tâi-oân gí-giân. Án-ne tùi-ha ê Tiong-kok-lâng s- -s -tàng chiap-si in teh ng ê ph -thong-o bô kiò Tiong-kok gí-giân, tian-tò hông kiò chòe Tâi-oân gí-giân? Tâi-oân ê Tiong-kok gí-bûn hkh s- -s gon-ì kái-miâ chòe Tâi-oân gí-bûn hk-h? Tâi-oân-o (Taiwanese) s kí chèng Tâi-oân gí-giân tong-tiong thàu-kòe ch-jiân kng-cheng s hêng-sêng ê ch t-chióng Tâi-oân king-thong-gí (Lingua franca). Tâi-oân-o m-sái kán-chheng-chòe Tâi-gí. Ùi án-ne ê tng-g lâi khòa, Tâi-oân gí-giân s khah-ta ê

31 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 29 hng-bk, li-té ch t-chióng gí-giân kiò Tâi-gí hk-chiá Tâi-oân-o. Tâi-gí chit-ê choan-iú miâ-sû ti n ín-khí Kheh-ka hk-chiá Goân-chbîn chk-kûn ê khióng-hông chi-s cheng-ln-chiá chiong Tâi-gí tòngchòe s Tâi-oân gí-giân ê kán-chheng. S-s t-sing, Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân gí-giân èng-kai hông tòng-chòe 2 ê bô-kng ê kài-lim chhù-lí. Chi chhin-chhi Kg-tang-o kap Kg-tang gí-giân s bô-kng ê kàilim án-ne: Kg-tang gí-giân s kí Tiong-kok Kg-tang t-khu ê Kgtang-o, Kheh-o, kap Bân-lâm-o téng; sui-jiân Kg-tang t-khu m lâng teh sú-ing Kheh-o kap Bân-lâm-o, -koh Kg-tang-o kan-ta choan-bûn kí Kg-tang-o niâ, png-bô kí Kheh-o hk-chiá Bân-lâmo. N chi kok-chè gí-giân lâi kú-l, hoat-gí kap Hoat-kok gígiân m-s bô-kng ê kài-lim. Hoat-gí (Francais) s kí í Pa-lê t-khu ê gí-giân chòe phiau-chún s hêng-sêng ê ti-ke ìn-sing-tiong s -kóng ê Hoat-gí; i ti-iok chiàm Hoat-kok choân jîn-kháu ê 90%. Hoat-kok gígiân s k pau-hâm Breton, Dutch, Gascon, Limousin, Avergnat, Languedocien téng chi-li 24 chióng chió-s± chk-kûn gí-giân (Grimes 1996: ) Th -tù-hòa kap ti-piáu-sèng Th -tù-hòa (indigenization) s kí ùi î-bîn si-he (immigrant society) piàn-chiâ th -tù si-he (native society) ê choán-piàn kòethêng. Chhi-kóng chá-kî Tâi-oân Hàn-jîn ùi Tg-soa î-bîn lâi Tâi-oân ê sî, tú-khai-sí pin-n kòe-nî kòe-chiat, in iáu si-beh tg-khì k±hiong Tg-soa hm chhin-lâng thoân-î, sm-chì n kòe-sin khì m si-beh lh-hih-kui-kin chiong si-thé sàng-tg--khì Tg-soa tâi. Che

32 30 kap chi-s î-bîn si-he hin-sing, i-t-s î-bîn-chiá iáu- kòe-kheh simthài, in iáu jn-ûi k±-hiong t Tg-soa, Tâi-oân put-kò s chim-sî thóthàn ê s -chi. -koh keng-kòe it-tng ê sî-kan kap si-he chêng-kéng ê hoat-tián, hit-kóa Hàn-jîn î-bîn tuh-tuh-á kòe-nî kòe-chiat b koh tg-khì Tg-soa, sí--khì m t t-chiap tâi t Tâi-oân niâ. L-bóe hit-kóa Hàn-jîn î-bîn chi jn-ûi ka-t m-s Tâi-oân-lâng, Tâi-oân s in ê sin k±-hiong. Che chi-s th -tù-hòa ê kòe-thêng. Tâi-oân t 1945 nî í-chêng ê k ch-bîn li-té 1) Lâm-tó gí-h ê goân-ch-bîn kap 2) Pê-p hm Hàn-jîn î-bîn thàu-lm ê Kheh-ka kap H-ló chk-kûn. Lâm-tó gí-h ê goân-ch-bîn t Tâi-oân í-keng kui chheng tang, chá chi th -tù-hòa à. Ah Kheh-ka kap H-ló chk-kûn leh? Tân Kî-lâm (1994:92) kí-chhut kóng ùi 1683 kàu 1895 ê 200 ga nî tang-tiong, Tâi-oân ê Hàn-jîn î-bîn si-he tuh-tuh-á piàn-sêng th -tù si-he. I-t-s kóng t J t-pún kap Tiong-kok Kok-bîn-tóng chèng-koân lâi kàu Tâi-oân chìn-chêng Tâioân chi í-keng hêng-sêng th -tù-hòa si-he. Chit-ê th -tù-hòa si-he ki-chh s Tâi-gí bûn-hk, Tâi-oân gí-giân, kap Tâi-oân bînchk ì-sek hêng-sêng ê ting-iàu in-s±. N chi th -tù-hòa ê kak-t lâi khòa, sú-ing Hôa-gí ê sin-chbîn (hk-chiá s -i ê ga-séng-lâng ) ga-ch pí-l jn-tông ka-t s Tâi-oân-lâng? Chit-kóa sin-ch-bîn pún-té khó-lêng t 2 chì 3 ti lìn chi iông-j p Tâi-oân si-he piàn-chiâ Tâi-oân-lâng, -koh in-i hitkóa chi Tâi Tiong-kok-lâng ê chèng-t chhau-chok kap tng-goân ê koan-h soah hi in bô-hoat-t chám-tg Tiong-kok jn-tông, ch -gi tih in t Tâi-oân th -tù-hòa ê hoat-tián. O ch t-kù-o kóng, Hôa-gí n beh tiàm Tâi-oân si-thòa hoat-tián, chiâ-chò Tâi-oân gí-giân ê ch tchióng, tû-hui i ê sú-ing-chiá jn-tông ka-t s Tâi-oân-lâng.

33 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 31 Beh chiâ-chò Tâi-oân gí-giân, tû-liáu ài th -tù-hòa chi-ga, koh ài ti-piáu-sèng. Ti-piáu-sèng s kí t Tâi-oân ê lk-sú bûn-hòa hoat-tián tong-tiong sek-tòng ê chú-kheh-koan tiâu-ki chhiok-sú hitê gí-giân Tâi-oân ê chú-thé-sèng, tùi ga -tàng piáu-hin Tâi-oân ê tk-sek, jî-chhiá ga-kài m án-ne jn-ûi. T chit-ê tng-g chi-h, bkchêng ûi-chí, Tâi-oân ê ti-piáu-sèng ê chi-s Goân-ch-bîn-gí, Kheh-gí kap Tâi-gí (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2006). N chi tng-g lâi khòa khó-lêng chin phái lí-kái siá-m h s tipiáu-sèng. Lán -sái ng kî-tha ê l lâi soat-bêng. Chhi-kóng lán n kóng-tih J t-pún liu-lí, ti-ke it-tng si-tih susih, sasimih, kap chheng-chiú. N kóng-tih Tâi-oân liu-lí chi si-tih bí-hún-chhá, l -bah-pg, chin-chu ni-tê. N si-tih Bí-kok liu-lí chi-s hamburger, coca cola. Kám kóng Tâi-oân bô chih susih, sasimih? Tong-jiân m, -koh i-siá-m h lán b kóng he s Tâi-oân liu-lí? In- i he bô Tâi-oân ê ti-piáu-sèng! Tong-jiân, sui-jiân hin-chhú-sî susih kap sasimih bô Tâi-oân ê ti-piáu-sèng, -koh hon-sè 100 tang u Tâioân k hoat-iông kong-ti, ga-kài m jn-ûi susih kap sasimih s Tâioân liu-lí. -koh che tang-sî chiah hoat-seng ài chú-kheh-koan ê tiâu-ki, -s tan-hong-bn g-bng chi s t-hin. Tn-s, -sái khaktng ê s chì-chió i hin-chhú-sî bô ti-piáu-sèng. N chi gí-giân lâi kú-l kóng, lán n si beh h Eng-gí lán khì tó kúi ê kok-ka h? It-poa lóng si beh khì Bí-kok, Eng-kok, Australia hk-chiá New Zealand. Sui-jiân Ìn-t, Hui-lýt-pin (Philippine) m teh ng Eng-gí, -koh chin-chió lâng si beh khì hia h. isiá-m h? In-i Ìn-t kap Hui-lýt-pin bô Eng-gí ê ti-piáu-sèng!

34 32 kap 2.3. Gí-giân ê hun-li kap h-miâ Gí-giân ê hun-li kap h-miâ s án-chóa chìn-hêng ê neh? Chi gí-giân hun-li lâi kóng, gí-giân-hk téng-thâu thong-siông chi i khehkoan-tk ê gí-im, gí-sû kap kù-hoat ê -tông lâi chòe hun-li ê phiauchún. N-s gí-giân ê h-miâ, thong-siông t gí-giân-hk ê hun-li kichh téng-thâu kun-kù hit-ê gí-giân ê hun-p± t-lí, sú-ng jîn-kháu kap lk-sú tián-k± lâi chòe h-miâ ê i-kù. Tû-liáu chit-kóa kheh-koan in-s± chi-ga, gí-giân ê miâ-chheng koh gâu si chú-koan in-s± ê éng-hióng, chhi-kóng chk-kûn ê ch-ng jn-tông téng. Gí-giân hun-li ê t-it-p ài châi-tiu khu-hun gí-giân (language) kap hong-giân (dialect). Tâi-oân-lâng kú-tg í-lâi si-tih kok-gí chèng-chhek ê éng-hióng soah tùi gí-giân kap hong-giân g-kái ê ìn-sing, kiò-s kok-gí (Hôa-gí) í-ga ê Tâi-oân pún-th gí-giân lóng s hong-giân. Tàu-tóe gí-giân hm hong-giân siá chha-pit? Kun-kù Crystal (1992:101), hong-giân s kí in-i bûn-hoat i-s sû-li ê chha-k soah tián-hin-chhut t-khu hk si-he pe-kéng bô-kng ê b -chióng gí-giân piàn-thé (variety). Beh án-chóa phòa-ton b ng ê lâng s kóng ê o-gí s gí-giân i-s hong-giân ê chha-pit neh? T gí-giân-hk téng-thâu, it-poa s í ng ê lâng k-thong kau-tâm ê sî s- -s -tàng h-siong lí-kái (mutual intelligible) tùi-hong ê o-gí chòe phòa-ton ê ki-pún phiau-chún (Crystal 1997:25). Ká-sú siang-hong bô-hoat-t hsiong lí-kái, án-ne in kóng ê s ng-chióng tk-l p ê, bô-kng ê gí-giân; n chún kóa sû-li i-s bûn-hoat ê cheng-chha, -koh siang-hong iáu ioh--chhut tùi-hong ê gí-ì ê sî, án-ne in sú-ing ê s kng ch t chióng gígiân -kha ê ng-chióng hong-giân. Lán í Tâi-oân ûi-l, Tâi-gí, Kheh-gí

35 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 33 kap Hôa-gí chi-kan s h-siong b-thong ê gí-giân; Tâi-gí ê t-hng khiu-kháu chhi Gî-lân-khiu, Lk-káng-khiu kap Koan-bi-khiu téng sg s Tâi-gí chit-ê gí-giân -bn ê hong-giân. Sui-bóng gí-giân-hk téng-thâu phiau-chún thang khu-hun gígiân kap hong-giân, -koh hin-s t-sing, tk-pit s chèng-t-lt kàij p ê sî, b-pit-jiân oân-choân ng gí-giân-hk ê phiau-chún lâi khu-hun. kóa chêng-hóng chin bêng-hián s gí-giân ê cheng-chha, soah hông tiau-kang tòng-chò hong-giân khòa-thi, chhi-kóng Kok-bîn-tóng sîkî k Tâi-oân pún-th gí-giân phì-siù chòe hong-giân. Lng-ga ch tchióng chêng-hêng s s t-chè-sing kan-ta hong-giân ê cheng-chha, - koh i-tih týt-hián chèng-t-sing ê chú-koân tk-l p soah k hong-giân thê-seng chòe gí-giân ê chân-chhù. Chhi-kóng pak-au ê Si-tián, Norway, kap Denmark sa kok s sú-ing ê Scandinavian gí-giân s t-chi s b -chióng thêng-t -sái h-siong lí-kái ê hong-giân chha-, -koh in i-tih týt-hián kok-ka ê jn-tông soah kian-chhî in kóng ê ogí s gí-giân ê chha-pit, hun-pit k in ê gí-giân h-chòe Si-tián-gí (Swedish), Norwegian, kap Danish (Crystal 1997:286). S án-chóa Kok-bîn-tóng sî-kî tiau-kang beh k Tâi-oân pún-th gí-giân phì-siù chòe hong-giân? In-i gí-giân kap hong-giân ti pnián bô-kng ê si-he kong-lêng, jî-chhiá hong-giân gâu chiâ-chòe koân-k gí-giân hin-sing (diglossia) li-té ê k gí-giân. K gí-giân ti hông chh-sik, bô chúi-chún ê ìn-sing, m in-i bô si ting-s s -í b t chèng-sek tiû-hp sú-ing, tì-sú iông- h-lâng kám-kak chi sg siau-sit-khì m bô iàu-kín. Kok-bîn-tóng k Hôa-gí tng-chòe kokgí, k kî-tha p-chi-phòe chk-kûn ê gí-giân phì-siù chòe hong-giân kî-s t chi-s beh chìn-hêng chèng-t tàu-cheng, l-ing gí-giân lâi

36 34 kap kiông-hòa chi-phòe-chiá ê bûn-hòa iu-sè, sm-chì ng lâi tá-kek p-chiphòe chk-kûn ê ch-chun-sim thang chìn-ch t-p siau-bit i ê ch-ng jn-tông (Si Chèng-hong 1996: 58) Hàn-gí gí-h ê hun-li kap hun-p± Tâi-oân-o chit-ê ing-sû s- -s thò-tòng leh? Pún chat lán ng kng-sî--ê (synchronic), khah-ta--ê s-iá khòa Hàn-gí gí-h ê gí-giân sêng-oân s án-chóa hông hun-li kap h-miâ. Hàn-gí gí-h (Han language family) -bn ê gí-giân sêng-oân tikhài -sái hun-chòe -bn 7 ta li 1) koa-o, 2) G²-gí, 3) Siong-gí, 4) Kàn-gí, 5) Ot-gí, 6) Kheh-gí, kap 7) Bân-gí 5. Chit 7 ta gí-giân s t-chèsing s h-siong bô-hoat-t k-thong ê gí-giân, -koh Tiong-kok hkchiá ti in-i chèng-t-sing ê khó-l, lóng k in h-chòe Hàn-gí honggiân. Chit 7 ta gí-giân múi ch t-ê gí-giân -bn kî-s t koh b-chió ê chhù gí-kûn, -ê s hong-giân, -ê s gí-giân ê chha-pit. -bn lán kéng koa-o, Ot-gí, Kheh-gí kap Bân-gí chòe kán-kài. Koa-o s Hàn-gí gí-h li-té sing-ch sú-ing jîn-kháu ê gí-giân, hái-li-ga t 1990 nî ti-iok 10 ek jîn-kháu, chiàm Hàn-gí-h jîn-kháu ê 7 siâ (Grimes 1996:544). Tiong-kok hin-chhú-sî choân-kok thonghêng ê ph -thong-o chi-s í koa-o ûi ki-chh s thui-hêng chhut-lâi ê. Koa-o -sái hun-chòe 4 ta gí-khu: 1) Hôa-pak gí-khu, pau-hâm Hô-pak, Hô-lâm, Tang-pak sa-séng, li Bông-k ê ch t-p-hn téng. 2) Sai-pak gí-khu, pau-hâm Soa-se, Siám-sai, Kam-siok, Chheng-hái, Lêng-h téng ê Hàn-chk ki-ch-te. 3) Sai-lâm gí-khu, pau-hâm Sù- 5 Siông-sè chhiá chham-ot Norman (1988); Ramsey (1987); (1991); (2002).

37 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 35 chhoan, Hûn-lâm, Kùi-chiu sa-séng choân-p kap -pak ta p-hn t-khu, Hô-lâm sai-lâm-p, -lâm sai-pak-p, Kg-sai pak-p. 4) Kang-hoâi gí-khu, pau-hâm Kang-s, An-hui ng-séng t Tg-kang í- pak, Hoâi-hô í-lâm t-khu kap Kang-s séng Kang-lâm-tìn sai-pêng, Kiú-kang tang-pêng ê iân-kang it-tài (Chiam Pek-hi 1991:93-99). Ot-gí sik-chheng Kg-tang-o. Ot-gí t Tiong-kok kéngli chú-iàu hun-p± t Kg-tang sai-pêng, Kg-sai tang-lâm-pêng kap Hiong-káng, Oh-mg tk-khu (chham-ot t²-pió 4). Ot-gí hun-p± tkhu pau-hâm Kg-sai, i-siá-m h bô ing Kg-sai ê kán-chheng kùi () lâi h-miâ, tian-tò ng Kg-tang ê kán-chheng Ot? Chú-iàu s in-i Ot-gí jîn-kháu pòa-s± í-sing lóng ch p-tiong t Kg-tang, jî-chhiá choân Kg-tang jîn-kháu ch t-pòa í-sing lóng kóng Ot-gí. Kun-kù Chiam Pek-hi téng-lâng ê pò-t, 2001 nî Tiong-kok kéng-li ê Ot-gí jîn-kháu ti-iok 6,000 chì 6,500 bn lâng, kî-tiong 4,000 bn lâng t Kg-tang-séng kéng-li, chiàm hit séng jîn-kháu ê ch t-pòa; 1,500 bn-lâng t Kg-sai-séng, chiàm Kg-sai chóng jîn-kháu 4,000 bn ê 37% ( 2002:174). Kg-tang-séng kéng-li tû-liáu Ot-gí chi-ga, koh Kheh-gí, Bân-gí kap chió-s± ê Siong-gí. ng Ot-gí hk-chiá Kg-tang-o chit-ê chheng-h chú-iàu s teh týt-hin chit-ê gí-giân k-iú Kg-tang ê ti-piáu-sèng, ah bô h -tng Kheh-gí, Bân-gí, Siong-gí t Kg-tang sú-ng ê s-s t. S án-chóa bô-lâng khòng-g Kg-tang-o s Kg-tang soa-bûn-chú-g ê piáu-hin? Tian-tò Tâioân-lâng tòe chi Tâi Tiong-kok-lâng t hia gih kî-ko khòng-g Tâioân-o ê ing-sû!?

38 36 kap T²-pió 4. Hàn-gí gí-h t lâm-hng ê hun-p±-t² (based on Ramsey 1987). Kheh-gí jîn-kháu t 1995 nî choân-sè-kài ti-iok 3,400 bn lâng (Grimes 1996:544). Hun-p± ê t-khu chin sì-sòa, pau-hâm Kg-tang, Kang-sai, Hok-kiàn, Kg-sai, -lâm, Sù-chhoan, Hái-lâm kap Tâi-oân. Kî-tiong Kheh-lâng sing ch p-tiong ê s -chi s Kg-tang tiong-p kap tang-p, Hok-kiàn se-p kap Kang-sai lâm-p. Kheh-gí t bô-kng s chi bô-kng miâ-chheng, chhi-kóng ngai-o, ma-kai-o, kheh-ka-o, sin-bîn-o, kheh-chh-o, th Kg-tang-o téng ( 2002: ). Sú-ng Kheh-gí ê Kheh-lâng t kok t-khu lóng sg jîn-kháu ê chió-s±, s -í chi chin hán--leh ng t-miâ lâi chheng-h in ê gí-giân, tian-tò ng lk-sú-sing u-lâi-chiá ûi kheh ê kheh ûi

39 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 37 chk-kûn kap gí-giân miâ-chheng. Chiah ch miâ-chheng li-té th Kg-tang-o sg s chió-s± í t-miâ ûi chheng-h ê miâ-h. Chit-ê miâh s Sù-chhoan t-khu kóng sai-lâm koa-o ê chi-t ku-bîn tùi hit-kóa ng sa-pah nî chêng ùi Kg-tang chhian-sóa khì Sù-chhoan ê Khehlâng teh sú-ng ê gí-giân ê chheng-h ( 2002:154). Sú-ng chit-ê miâ-chheng ê goân-in khó-lêng s Sù-chhoan chi-t ku-bîn kiò-s hitkóa ùi Kg-tang î-bîn kòe Sù-chhoan ê lâng kóng ê chi-s Kg-tang-o. Bân-gí s hàn-gí gí-h li-té gí-giân hun-kî sing ta ê gí-h ( 1991:181). Bân-gí chú-iàu hun-p± t-khu s Hok-kiàn, Kg-tang, Háilâm-tó kap lán kok Tâi-oân. Bân-gí jîn-kháu t 1991 nî choân-sè-kài tiiok 6,000 bn lâng (Grimes 1996:545). Kî-tiong ti-iok 1,800 bn lâng hun-p± t Hok-kiàn-séng li, chiàm choân séng 4 hun 3; ti-iok 1500 bn-lâng hun-p± t Kg-tang, chiàm choân Kg-tang-séng jîn-kháu 5 hun 1 ( 2002:207). Hok-kiàn t-khu ê Bân-gí -sái hun-chòe 5 ta hong-giân khu (s-s t-sing s gí-giân), Bân-lâm, Bân-tang, Bân-pak, Bân-tiong, kap P-sian () ( 1992:293). Bânlâm-gí chú-iàu s Hok-kiàn lâm-p it-tài pau-hâm Choân-chiu, Chiangchiu, -mg téng kon-chh ê lâng teh sú-ng ê gí-giân, kî-tiong -mg s Bân-lâm-gí ê ti-piáu khiu-kháu. Bân-lâm-gí tû-liáu t Bân-lâm tkhu sú-ng chi-ga, iáu hun-p± t Kg-tang tang-p kap tang-lâm-a, chhi-kóng Sin-ka-pho, Hui-lýt-pin, Ìn-nî téng kok-ka. In-i t Bân-gí 5 ta hun-ki gí-giân li-té, Bân-lâm-gí ê hun-p± kap éng-hióng-lt sing ta, s -í Bân-lâm-gí m hông kiò chòe Hok-kiàn-o. Tiong-kok Chheng-tiâu thóng-t Tâi-oân ( nî) ê sî Bânlâm it-tài ê Choân-chiu kap Chiang-chiu téng ê Hok-kiàn-lâng tuhtuh-á î-bîn lâi kàu Tâi-oân. T 1887 nî chìn-chêng Tâi-oân s sik Hok-

40 38 kap kiàn-séng teh koán, Tâi-oân t chèng-t, keng-chè, bûn-hòa kok-hongbn iáu khah-su Hok-kiàn, s -í chheng-h hit-tong-sî ê Bân-lâm î-bîn s sú-ng ê gí-giân h-chòe Hok-kiàn-o iáu bô kòe-hn. -koh Tâi-oân chìn-j p 20 sè-kí í-u, ch t-hong-bn s th -tù-hòa ê koan-h, koh ch thong-bn s in-i J t-pún thóng-t kî-kan chhiok-sêng ê kn-ti-hòa, chu-pún-chú-g-hòa tì-sú Tâi-oân si-he hm Tâi-oân-lâng ì-sek ê hêng-sêng (Sú Bêng 1992:220). In-i Choân-chiu-o kap Chiang-chiu-o lâi kàu Tâi-oân í-keng th -tù-hòa, hêng-sêng put-chiang put-chôa ê sin khiu-kháu (Ông Ik-tek 1993:95), koh chham-j p Tâi-oân Pê-p-chk kap J t-pún-gí ê sêng-hn, s -í ch t-chióng sin-ê gí-giân hêng-sek Tâioân-o í-keng kheh-koan-sing sêng-l p à. Tû-liáu gí-giân ê kheh-koan tiâu-ki chi-ga, Tâi-oân t chèng-t, keng-chè kap bûn-hòa téng kokhong-bn lóng lú lâi lú pí Hok-kiàn khah ting-iàu kap iu-sè. Ka-sing Tâi-oân-lâng ì-sek ê chhut-thâu, Tâi-oân-lâng chú-koan-sing jn-tông i s -kóng ê s Tâi-oân-o, -s Hok-kiàn-o, s -í Tâi-oân-o (kánchheng-chòe Tâi-gí) chit-ê ing-sû chi sêng-l p à! 3. Ùi Bân-lâm-gí kàu Tâi-gí Tâi-oân ê gí-giân tû-liáu Lâm-tó gí-h ê goân-ch-bîn-gí chi-ga, chhun=ê lóng s 17 sè-kí í-lâi chiah tòe tih î-bîn chhian-sóa j p-lâi Tâioân. Sui-bóng Kheh-gí kap Tâi-gí ê goân-thâu s t Tiong-kok ê Kgtang kap Hok-kiàn, -koh chit 2 chióng gí-giân lâi Tâi-oân í-keng s±pah tang ê sî-kan jî-chhiá í-keng th -tù-hòa, s -í m chiâ-chòe Tâioân pún-th ê gí-giân. Tâi-oân ê gí-giân t bô-kng sî-kî bô-siá-kng ê chheng-h. Chit-ê hin-sing ch t-hong-bn hoán-èng gí-giân th -tùhòa ê chìn-têng, ch t-hong-bn hoán-èng thóng-t-chiá ê s t-bîn sim-thài.

41 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 39 Pún chat lán t chi lk-sî ê (diachronic) kak-t lâi khòa Tâi-gí t bôkng sî-kî ê chheng-h ê ián-piàn. Kn-lâi b-chió lâng kiò-s Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ê ing-sû s Bînchìn-tóng ch-tóng chit 10 ga nî lâi chiah sin-ch, tòa- H-ló soa-bûnchú-g ì-hâm ê ing-gí. S-s t kám án-ne? Lán n k kú-nî-lâi chhut-pán ê Tâi-gí siong-koan j-tián kap sû-tián lit--chhut-lâi, hon-sè -sái thêking lán ch t-ê kài-lim thang liáu-kái kok sî-kî ê lâng s án-chóa chheng-h Tâi-gí (chhiá chham-ot t 6 phi bûn-chiu ê hù-lk 1). Ùi hù-lk 1 -sái khòa-chhut, J t-pún chiàm-niá Tâi-oân chìn-chêng, gígiân chheng-h ti-khài ùi Hok-kiàn-o Bân-lâm-gí -mg-o; J t-pún sî-kî, gí-giân chheng-h to-s± í Tâi-oân-gí ûi chú; Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok sî-kî chú-iàu s Tâi-gí hk-chiá Bân-lâm-gí. Chheng-kok sî-kî s chhut-pán ê hin-ti j-tián kap sû-tián to-s± s thoân-kàu-s s pian-siá chhut-pán. Ùi j-sû-tián miâ-chheng ê choán-piàn khòa--chhut thoân-kàu-s l-bóe liáu-kái Hok-kiàn png -s tan-it ê gí-giân khu-hk, jî-chhiá tùi Hok-kiàn kok t-hng ê gígiân hun-p± ê chiáng-ap lú lâi lú hó, bóe-chhiú in kéng -mg-o chòe Bân-lâm-gí ê ti-piáu khiu-kháu. Kàu kah J t-pún sî-kî, Tâi-oân-gí chit-ê miâ-chheng -sái kóng í- keng chin ph -phiàn teh sú-ng. Che goân-in ch t-hong-bn s J t-púnlâng iú-ì bô-ì tiau-kang sú-ng Tâi-oân gí thang kap Tiong-kok Hokkiàn chòe khu-keh, ch t-hong-bn s in-i hit-tong-sî Tâi-gí t ch-jiân hoat-tián chi-h í-keng hêng-sêng Tâi-oân ê king-thong-gí. Chhikóng, J t-pún thóng-t Tâi-oân ê t-it nî (1895) chi- Matano Howa ( ) chhut-pán Tâi-oân Gí-ch p, Sano Naoki () chhut-pán Tâi-oân Th -gí, kap Tauchi Yaoyorozu () chhut-pán

42 40 kap Tâi-oân-gí. Sm-chì 1902 nî koh Tâi-oân Gí-hk Tong-chì-he sêngl p kap i ê ki-koan-pò Tâi-oân Gí-hk Chp-chì ê chhòng-khan (Ip Chih-thô 1993:209). Koh, t 1920 sin-k bûn-hk ln-chiàn kap 1930 Tâi-oân-o-bûn ln-chiàn kî-kan, Tâi-oân-o kap Tâi-oân-gí -sái kóng s hông chin ph -phiàn teh sú-ng ê gí-sû ( 2003; 2004; Iû Ún-giân 1993). Sm-chì ch-chheng Tiong-kok-lâng ê Liân Chiàn in kong=á Liân Hêng t 1933 nî pian-siá hó-sè 1957 nî chhut-pán ê Tâi-oân Gí-tián m-sng Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-gí ê chheng-h. J-chhù-ti-chiàn chiàn-u Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok chiàm-niá Tâi-oân. T chit-ê sî-kî, tk-pit s 1987 nî kái-giâm í-chêng, í-keng chin-chió sú- ng ê Bân-lâm-gí ing-sû soah tian-tò koh hông thh-lâi sú-ng. Káigiâm í-u, bîn-kan chhut-pán ê sû-tián choân-p sú-ng Tâi-gí ê chheng-h, kan-ta koa-hong sek-chhái Kok-l p Phian-k-koán s pian ê sû-tián h-chòe Tâi-oân Bân-lâm-gí. Chit-ê hin-sing khòa-chhut Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok chèng-koân thàu-kòe chèng-t-lt tùi Tâi-gí ê h-miâ ê éng-hióng-lt. Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok s Tiong-kok lâi--ê ga-lâi chèng-koân, i phian-hó sú-ng Bân-lâm-gí ing-sû s -sái lí-kái ê. Ch t-kóa Tâi-oân-phài ê léng-t-chiá su-khó bô chhim-j p soah tòe tih Tiong-kok-phài ê H-ló soa-bûn-chú-g ln-tiu teh h-èng, kam-gon ng Tiong-kok khùi chin tng ê Bân-lâm-gí m ng Tâi-gí. Chitkhoán ê hin-sing s t-chi chin koài-kî! 4. Kiat-ln Ùi 1987 nî Tâi-oân kái-giâm í-lâi, pún-th -hòa n-tng lú lâi lú chhia-i, Tâi-oân ì-sek kap kok-ka jn-tông m chiâ-chò choân-bîn koan-sim ê g-tê. Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ing-sû ê cheng-g, ch t-hong-

43 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng 41 bn hián-s pún-th kheh-ka kap goân-ch-bîn chk-kûn si-beh piáutt ka-t kap H-ló-lâng kng-khoán jn-tông Tâi-oân; ch t-hong-bn hián-s chi Tâi Tiong-kok-lâng chk-kûn teh tí-chè pún-th -hòa, hoántùi Tâi-oân ì-sek ê thê-seng. Chi kheh-ka kap goân-ch-bîn lâi kóng, in hoán-tùi Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o ing-sû, Chú-iàu s kia ka-t hông pâi-tû chi pún-th gígiân chk-kûn chi-ga, kia ka-t bô Tâi-oân ti-piáu-sèng. S-s t-sing, Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o png-bô pâi-thiat kheh-ka kap goân-ch-bîn chiâ-chò pún-th chk-kûn ê ì-hâm. G-kái ê goân-in chhut-ch tichiòng tùi Tâi-gí, Tâi-oân-o, kap Tâi-oân gí-giân chit 3 ê ing-sû ê gí-ì sêng-hn bô-kng ê kiàn-kái. Tâi-oân gí-giân s hk-s± ê kàilim, pau-hâm goân-ch-bîn, Kheh-ka kap H-ló chk-kûn ê gí-giân. Tâi-oân-o s iân-sòa J t-pún sî-kî chi ph -phiàn sú-ng ê Tâi-oân-gí kài-lim, kí t ch-jiân hoat-tián h hêng-sêng Tâi-oân choân-kok thong-hêng ê H-ló-o. N kóng-kàu Tâi-gí, che s Tâi-oân-o ê kán-chheng. B-chió-lâng k Tâi-gí tòng-chòe Tâi-oân gí-giân ê kánchheng, s -pí g-he sán-seng. Beh p-bián Kheh-ka kap goân-ch-bîn chk-kûn tùi Tâi-gí ingsû ê hoán-kám, sing-hó ê chò-hoat s k -l Tâi-gí-lâng h Kheh-gí hkchiá goân-ch-bîn-gí; n hòng-khì Tâi-gí ing-sû, kái-ing Bân-lâm-gí, chit-khoán s sing lióng-kong ê chò-hoat, -t bô-hoat-t kái-sin chk-kûn koan-h, tian-tò sit-khì Tâi-oân ì-sek ê gêng-ch-tiám kap sit-khì Tâi-oân chú-thé-sèng ê piáu-hin. Pún ln-bûn hoat-piáu t 2006 nî Tâi-gí Chú-thé-sèng Gián-thó-he, 7 goh chhe 1, Tâi-oân Lk-sú Hk-he

44 42 kap Chham-khó chheh-bk Crystal, David An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Crystal, David The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. (2nd ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grimes, Barbara F Ethnologue. (13 th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ramsey, S. Robert The Language of China. New Jersey: Princeton University Press ( 2 ) ê kap p

45 CH 1. Tâi-oân-o Ì-sek ê Hêng-sêng

46 44 kap

47 Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± : Tâi-gí-bûn-hk n-tng-sú Chh-thàm

48 46 kap 1. Chiân-giân N ùi Benedict Anderson (1991) sióng-sing ê king-tông-thé (imagined communities) koan-tiám chhiat-j p, t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lìn 1, 19 sè-kí í-chêng lóng- ch t-chióng í Tiong-kok ûi tiong-sim, thàukòe Hàn-j s hêng-sêng ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tông-thé (an imagined Hanji cultural community). Chit-chióng Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tông-thé (kán-chheng-chòe Hàn-j king-tông-thé ) ke-ke kiám-kiám lóng éng-hióng tih Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sêng-goân kn-ti ê bîn-chk kok-ka (nation-state) ê kok-chk sióng-sing kiàn-k±. T Tiong-kok, in l-ing Hàn-j king-tông-thé chiâ-chò kn-ti Tiong-hôa bîn-chk hk-chiá Tiong-kok kok-chk ê sióng-sing ki-chh. Hit-kóa bô-hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê Chòng-chk ( ), Biâu-chk () kap Iâu-chk () téng, tong-jiân chi bô hêngsêng in ka-t ê bîn-chk kok-ka. Ah hit-kóa thiàu-thoat Hàn-j kingtông-thé ê k sêng-goân, chhi-kóng Ot-lâm, Hân-kok, Tiâu-sián kap J t-pún, lóng têng-sin kiàn-k± í ka-t ûi chú-thé ê bîn-chk kok-ka sióng-sing. N ln-kàu Tâi-oân, sui-bóng t 17 sè-kí chh in-i Ho-lan thóng-t soah ching Tâi-oân sak chi kok-chè bú-tâi, -koh sòa--lâi ê T Sêng-kong kap Chheng-kok thóng-t soah ching Tâi-oân khiú-j pkhì Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan. Tâi-oân ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa tk-sek soah chiâ-chò J-chhù chiàn-u Tiong-kok Kok-bîn-tóng thang thh lâi chòe 1 Lán s kóng ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan s kí khah chá bat ah-s chín koh teh sú-ing Hàn-j ê t-khu hk-chiá kok-ka, pau-hâm Ot-lâm, Hân-kok (s -i ê Lâm-hân), Tiâu-sián (s -i ê Pak-hân), J t-pún, Sin-ka-pho, Tâi-oân kap Tiong-kok téng.

49 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 47 Tiong-kok kok-chk sióng-sing ê ki-chh. Anderson (1991:37-46) bat hun-sek kóng chhut-pán, chong-kàu kái-kek kap tong-t bó-gí ê chhut-thâu s kn-ti se-au bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek hêng-sêng ê ting-iàu goân-thâu. Davies (1997:482) m kí-chhut kóng Au-chiu Bûn-g hk-heng sî-kî ng bîn-chk bó-gí lâi chhòngchok ê hong-khì l-bóe hoat-tián-chhut kok-bîn bûn-hk (national literatures); ah che s hêng-sêng kok-ka jn-tông (national identity) ê koan-kiàn chi-it. N-chún s án-ne, Tâi-oân-lâng ê bîn-chk bó-gí, it-s Tâi-oân gí-giân 2 t Tâi-oân ê bîn-chk kok-ka ê kiàn-k± tong-tiong s pn-ián siá khoán ê kak-sek? Í Tâi-oân gí-giân ûi su-siá gí-giân ê kokbîn bûn-hk s- -s í-keng hêng-sêng? N-chún iáu be, s siá goân-in? N-chún, s án-chóa iáu be chiâ-chò chú-liû? S t-chi-kóng, Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê hoat-tián chi-s Tâi-oân bîn-chk kok-ka kiàn-k± kòe-thêng ê ch t-ê sok-iá. Chit phi ln-bûn chi-s beh ng Tâi-gí bûn-hk hoattián ê chêng-hêng lâi thàm-thó gí-giân, bûn-hk kap bîn-chk kok-ka ê koan-h. 2. Ki-pún tng-g, kài-lim kap lí-ln kiat-k± Lán chit chat seng chiam-tùi kap ln-bûn chú-tê siong-koan ê ki-pún choan-iú miâ-sû chòe ch t-ê tng-g kap siong-koan kài-lim ê thó-ln Kò-jîn bó-gí vs. chk-kûn bó-gí T gí-giân-hk téng-thâu s -i ê t-it gí-giân (first language) 2 Pau-hâm Lâm-tó-gí, Kheh-gí, kap Tâi-gí.

50 48 kap kap t-j gí-giân (second language) ê kóng-hoat. S -kóng ê t-it gígiân s kí lán-lâng chhut-sì liáu t-it ê h--khí-lâi ê gí-giân. T-j gí-giân s kí seng h -hiáu t-it gí-giân liáu, t it-tng ê nî-hòe liáu chiah koh h ê kî-tha gí-giân. T-it gí-giân thong-siông s kýt-liu ê gí-giân (fluent language), -koh m l-ga ê chêng-hêng. Chhi-kóng hin-chhú-sî b-chió Tâi-oân-lâng sui-jiân sè-hàn chhut-sì sûi h ê gí-giân s Tâi-gí, -koh in khì hk-hu thk-chheh liáu soah kái-ing Hôa-gí, tì-sú i ê t-it gí-giân Tâi-gí pí t-j gí-giân Hôa-gí khah b liàn-tg. N ln-kàu bó-gí, kî-s t -sái hun-chòe kò-jîn bó-gí (personal mother tongue) kap chk-kûn bó-gí (ethnic language; hk-chiá h-chòe bîn-chk bó-gí national language ). T-it gí-giân chi-s lán ê kò-jîn bó-gí. Thong-siông, t chèng-siông ê chêng-hóng h, t-it gí-giân -t s kò-jîn bó-gí, m-s chk-kûn bó-gí. -koh t ch t-kóa tk-sû chênghêng chi-h, chhi-kóng liû-hk ka-têng, î-bîn ka-têng, si ga-lâi chèng-koân s t-bîn téng, t-it gí-giân b-pit-jiân s chk-kûn bó-gí. Khópí kóng, ch t-tùi í Tâi-gí ûi bó-gí ê Tâi-oân liû-hk-seng kàu Bí-kok liû-hk, in t hia thk-chheh kî-kan si ch t-ê gín-á. In-i Eng-gí khoân-kéng ê koan-h, in ê gín-á ch t-chhut-sì chi seng h Eng-gí. ulâi in kiat-sok liû-hk seng-gâi tg-lâi Tâi-oân, gín-á m tòe leh koh k Tâi-gí h--khí-lâi. Án-ne, sui-jiân Eng-gí s in gín-á ê t-it gí-giân, - koh in gín-á ê chk-kûn bó-gí iáu-s Tâi-gí. N-s si ga-lâi chèng-koân s t-bîn ê l, khó-pí kóng J t-pún-sî-ti in-i kok-gí chèng-chhek ê koan-h, t chit-ê chèng-chhek éng-hióng chi-h ta-hàn ê Tâi-gí gín-á soah ching J t-gí tòng-chòe t-it gí-giân, tian-tò ching chk-kûn bó-gí Tâi-gí tòng-chòe t-j gí-giân. Che s kòjîn bó-gí kap chk-kûn bó-gí bô it-tì ê lng-ga ch t-ê l.

51 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± Bó-gí -hòa kap bó-gí choán-o Lán n mg-lâng kóng i ê bó-gí (bô chí-tng s kò-jîn hk-chiá chk-kûn bó-gí) s siá ê sî-chn, thong-siông tit-tih 2 chióng bô-kng koan-tiám ê hôe-èng. T-it, n khi t gí-giân s chk-kûn lk-sú bûnhòa thoân-sêng kong-lêng-ln--chiá, chi sg i ê kò-jîn bó-gí kap chkkûn bó-gí bô it-tì, i kun-kù i ê chk-kûn bó-gí lâi hôe-tap. T-j, n khi t gí-giân kan-ta s k-thong kang-kh--chiá, i thong-siông kunkù i ê kýt-liu ê gí-giân hk-chiá kò-jîn bó-gí lâi hôe-tap. Che chi-s isiá-m h chin ch Tâi-oân siàu-liân-ke sui-jiân in ê chk-kûn bó-gí s Tâi-gí, -koh in ìn lí kóng in ê bó-gí s Hôa-gí. Tng-tong ch t-ê lâng ê kò-jîn bó-gí kap chk-kûn bó-gí bô-kng ê sî, lán -sái k kóng che s ch t-chióng bó-gí -hòa ê hin-sing. Bó-gí -hòa -sái hun-chòe chhi t²-pió 1 án-ne 2 chióng chêng-hêng. T-itchióng s sui-bóng kò-jîn bó-gí kap chk-kûn bó-gí bô-kng, -koh i iáu- khim hit 2 chióng gí-giân ê sú-ing lêng-lk. Lng-ga ch tchióng s tan-gí ê bó-gí -hòa hin-sing, i-t-s (kán-siá chò i.t.s.) kòjîn kan-ta -hiáu kò-jîn bó-gí, -koh í-keng sit-khì chk-kûn bó-gí ê sú-ing lêng-lk; chit-chióng chêng-hêng thong-siông s gí-giân choáno (language shift) ê chiân-tiau. kò-jîn bó-gí chk-kûn bó-gí (1) siang-gí lêng-lk + + (2) tan-gí lêng-lk + - T²-pió 1. Siang-gí kap tan-gí ê bó-gí -hòa chêng-hêng

52 50 kap Tan-gí ê bó-gí -hòa thong-siông 2 ê hi-kó, t-it s kò-jîn iáu t cheng-sîn-sing kap chêng-kám-sing sêng-jn chk-kûn bó-gí ê chûnchi, -koh t s t-chè j t-siông seng-oh lìn lóng ng kò-jîn bó-gí. Chhi-kóng Au-chiu ê Irish king-hô-kok (Irish Republic) pún-té s kóng Irish gí-giân, -koh keng-kòe Eng-kok thóng-t liáu soah piànsêng chin ch Irish lâng kan-ta kóng Eng-gí, b-hiáu kóng Irish gí. 3 Suibóng Irish chèng-t-sing tk-l p liáu kè-sik sú-ing Eng-gí, -koh in t bîn-chk chêng-kám-sing kap cheng-sîn chân-chhù iáu ching Irish gígiân tòng-chòe bîn-chk bó-gí (Fasold 1984:278). 4 T-j ê hi-kó s t cheng-sîn-sing kap chêng-kám-sing hòng-khì goân-iú ê chk-kûn bógí, ching kò-jîn bó-gí tòng-chòe sin-ê chk-kûn bó-gí. O ch t-kù-o lâi kóng, chk-kûn bó-gí í-keng sán-seng gí-giân choán-o hin-sing, ùi A gí-giân piàn-chiâ B gí-giân; lán -sái kóng che s ch t-chióng bógí choán-o hin-sing (vernacular shift). Hoat-seng bó-gí choán-o ê A chk-kûn sêng-goân tú-khai-sí khó-lêng iáu chai-iá ka-t s A chkkûn sêng-goân, -koh sî-kan ch t- kú in soah kiò-s ka-t s B chkkûn ê sêng-goân. hoat-seng chit-chióng chêng-hêng ê chhi-kóng Tâi-oân ê pê-p-chk, Tiong-kok tang-lâm-hong it-tài k -chá ê Pah-ot bîn-chk Gí-giân kap jn-tông Gí-giân kap chk-kûn jn-tông (ethnic identity) hk-chiá kok- 3 Kun-kù Ethnologue (Grimes 1996:489) ê chu-liu, t 1983 s chòe ê gí-giân ph -cha hián-s kan-ta 13% ê Irish lâng ch-jn ka-t ê Irish gí chin kýt-liu. 4 Chhi-kóng, Irish king-hô-kok ê hiàn-hoat (1937 nî chè-tng) kui-tng The Irish language as the national language is the first official language. The English language is recognised as a second official language ( 2002:407; Crowley 2005:7).

53 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 51 chk jn-tông (national identity) kám siá koan-h? Chiam-tùi chit-ê bn-tê, thong-siông chiá hoán 2 chióng oân-choân bô-kng ê tap-àn. Chàn-sêng ê lâng jn-ûi gí-giân tû-liáu s k-thong ê kang-kh chi-ga iáu koh s chk-kûn lk-sú bûn-hòa thoân-sêng ê mûi-kài, chkkûn ch-sìn, ch-chun kap jn-tông ê piáu-hin; chk-kûn bó-gí n-s sí-bông, chk-kûn ì-sek m siau-thè. Hoán-tùi ê lâng chóng thh ch t-kóa chhi Irish án-ne ê l lâi chèng-bêng sui-jiân kóng Eng-gí ms -tàng ûi-chhî Irish lâng jn-tông. N án-ne, tàu-té gí-giân kap jntông koan-h bô? S t-chi kóng, gí-giân kap jn-tông sui-jiân bô chot-tùi ê koanh, -koh siong-tùi ê koan-h. I-s kóng, gí-giân s chk-kûn jntông kap kok-chk jn-tông ê ting-iàu ki-chh chi-it, -koh -s ûi-it (Liebkind 1999:144; 1998:52). Gí-giân tùi chk-kûn, kok-chk jntông s- -s chhui-hòa ê chok-ing ài tùi in chûn-chi ê si-he chêngkéng (social context) lâi koat-tng (Fishman 1999:154; Ross 1979:4). Gí-giân tùi chk-kûn, kok-chk jn-tông ê chok-ing -sái pun 2 hong-bn lâi thó-ln, i.t.s. kiông-hòa gí-giân kong-lêng vs. jik-hòa gí-giân kong-lêng. Kiông-hòa gí-giân kong-lêng s kí l-ing chkkûn bó-gí lâi tng-goân kap kiông-hòa chk-kûn jn-tông. Chhi-kóng soán-kí ián-káng-tiû téng-thâu ng Tâi-gí ih-s Kheh-gí hun-pit lâi tng-goân Tâi-gí kap Kheh-gí chk-kûn sêng-goân. Jik-hòa gí-giân kong-lêng s kí bô l-ing chk-kûn bó-gí lâi chòe chk-kûn tng-goân. b-chió gián-kiù chí-chhut chk-kûn bó-gí ê siau-sit png-bô it-tng ch-sêng chk-kûn jn-tông ê sòng-sit ( 1998:55; Edwards 1985:48; Lu 1988:99). Khó-pí kóng, ch t-ê Kheh-lâng (Hak-ka-ngin), sui-jiân b-hiáu kóng Kheh-o (Hak-fa), -koh i iáu -khó-lêng jn-tông i ka-

54 52 kap t s Kheh-lâng. b-chió lâng chi án-ne chòe kiat-ln kóng gí-giân hm jn-tông bô koan-h. S-s t-sing, sui-jiân jik-hòa gí-giân konglêng iáu -khó-lêng ûi-chhî chk-kûn jn-tông, -koh che png-bô chèng-bêng kóng kiông-hòa gí-giân kong-lêng b-tàng tng-goân kap kiông-hòa chk-kûn jn-tông! Chiú Ûi-bûn (Chiung 2005:377) chiamtùi 244 ê ti-hk-seng s chòe ê tiau-cha hián-s-hiáu Kheh-gí s Khehka jn-tông ê koan-kiàn in-s± chi-it. Che soat-bêng sui-jiân chk-kûn bó-gí ê siau-sit iáu -khó-lêng ûi-chhî chk-kûn jn-tông, -koh chkkûn bó-gí ê kiông-hòa tùi chk-kûn ì-sek ê ka-kiông s pang-chn ê. Jik-hòa gí-giân kong-lêng kám it-tng -tàng ûi-chhî chk-kûn jn-tông? Tong-jiân m bô it-tng. Chk-kûn ì-sek (ethnic consciousness) ê sán-seng -tàng hun-chòe chú-kheh-koan ê in-s± ( 1992:4; 1998:52). Kheh-koan in-s± pau-hâm hiat-iân, gí-giân, chong-kàu, hongsik, king-tông lk-sú kì-ek téng. Tng-tong chk-kûn bó-gí siau-sit-khì ê sî, n-chún kî-tha ê kheh-koan in-s± iáu chûn-chi, tong-jiân t khó-lêng ûi-chhî chk-kûn ì-sek. -koh, n-chún gí-giân s hin-chûn ûi-it ê kheh-koan in-s±, chk-kûn ì-sek khióng-kia-á chá-bn tòe chk-kûn bó-gí ê siau-sit lâi siau-sit. Chhi-kóng Tâi-oân hin-chhú-sî chin ch H-ló-kheh kap pê-p-chk in-i Kheh-gí ih-s Pê-p-gí ê siau-sit soah m sit-khì goân-lâi Kheh-ka kap Pê-p chk-kûn ê ì-sek kap jn-tông Chióng-chk, bîn-chk, chk-kûn Chióng-chk (race), bîn-chk (nation), chk-kûn (ethnicity or ethnic group) s 3 ê bô-kng ê kài-lim, -koh in t seng-oh tongtiong ti hông g-ng ( 1998:3).

55 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 53 T chit phi ln-bûn li-té, chióng-chk s kí thé-chit jîn-li-hk téng-thâu kun-kù lán-lâng ê ga-chi seng-být tk-teng, chhi-kóng phê-hu-sek, ki-in téng s chòe ê hun-li. Bîn-chk m lâng k hoanchòe kok-chk, s chèng-t-hk téng-thâu ê kài-lim. Bîn-chk ê kàilim s se-au si-he t Bûn-g hk-heng chong-kàu kái-kek í-lâi t knti chu-pún-chú-g keng-chè ki-chh téng-thâu tuh-tuh-á hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê. Bîn-chk s kí chiàm-iú it-tng ê niá-th jî-chhiá sêng-goân lk-sú n-mi king-tông-thé ê jn-tông-kám ê si-he kûn-thé tan-i. Bîn-chk kok-ka (nation-state) s tòe tih bîn-chk ì-sek ê hêng-sêng liáu hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê iau-kiû ch t-ê bîn-chk kiàn-l p ch t-ê kok-ka ê kài-lim (Johnson 1995:188). 5 Chk-kûn s 20 sè-kí í-lâi in-i î-bîn si-he, chhi-kóng Bí-kok, s hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê ch t-chióng sin kài-lim (Eriksen 1996:28). Chit-ê kài-lim s kí bô-ln s kun-kù t goân-iú chióng-chk hk-chiá bînchk ki-chh téng-thâu, chí-iàu sêng-goân ch p-thé ch-ng jn-tông jî-chhiá ga-lâng m án-ne jn-ûi ê sî chk-kûn jn-tông chi chûnchi (Fishman 1977:16; Levinson 1994:73). T bô-kng si-he chêngkéng chi-h, chk-kûn chi-kan ê kài-sòa (boundary) png -s k±-tng b piàn ê, jî-chhiá s-khó-lêng kng-sî chûn-chi t-chân jn-tông (Fishman 1977:26-28; Levinson 1994:73-75). Chhi-kóng t Bí-kok ê Tiong-kok-lâng, in t ph-lâng ê gán-tiong khó-lêng lóng s kng-khoán ê chk-kûn, -koh tng Tiong-kok-lâng ka-t tàu-tn chòe-hóe ê sî in iù-hun-chòe Hok-kiàn-lâng, Kg-tang-lâng, Sing-hái-lâng téng; tng Hok-kiàn-lâng tàu-tn ê sî koh hun-chòe -mg, Choân-chiu, Chiang- 5 Chit hong-bn ê Tiong-bûn thó-ln -sái chham-khó Si Chèng-hong (2002), Sú-bêng (1992).

56 54 kap chiu téng Tâi-gí, Tâi-oân-o, Tâi-oân gí-giân Tâi-gí, Tâi-oân-o, kap Tâi-oân gí-giân s ti hông thh lâi sú-ing -koh koh gâu ch-sêng g-kái ê ng-sû. T chit phi ln-bûn li-té, in ê tng-g hun-pit lit t-bn. Tâi-oân gí-giân (Taiwanese languages) s kí t ch-jiân chng-thi ê chhian-sóa chi-h (hui s t-bîn chèng-koân kiông-pek sú-ing), kengkòe th -tù-hòa koh Tâi-oân thoân-thóng lk-sú bûn-hòa ti-piáu-sèng jî-chhiá ga-kài ph -phiàn jn-tông--chiá. S -í Tâi-oân gí-giân pauhâm goân-ch-bîn s - ê gí-giân, Kheh-gí kap Tâi-gí (hk-chiá s s kóng ê H-ló-o). T tng-g chi-h, Eng-gí, Hôa-gí, J t-gí kap Ot-lâm sin-niû s ng ê Ot-lâm-gí lóng bô-sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân, put-kò in sái sg s Tâi-oân kok-bîn teh ng ê gí-giân (languages used by the Taiwanese citizens). 6 Hon-sè lâng kóng chit-khoán ê hun-hoat siukòe sim-heng kheh-h, èng-kai ching Hôa-gí pau-hâm chi Tâi-oân gígiân li-té chiah tih. N-chún Hôa-gí sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân, i-siá-m h pí Hôa-gí khah chá lâi Tâi-oân jî-chhiá koh Tâi-oân-lâng teh ng ê J tgí b-sái sg Tâi-oân gí-giân? N-chún Hôa-gí sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân, m èng-kai kái-miâ chòe Tâi-oân gí-giân. Án-ne tùi-ha ê Tiong-koklâng s- -s -tàng chiap-si in teh ng ê ph -thong-o bô kiò Tiongkok gí-giân, tian-tò hông kiò chòe Tâi-oân gí-giân? Tâi-oân ê Tiong-kok gí-bûn hk-h s- -s gon-ì kái-miâ chòe Tâi-oân gí-bûn hk-h? Iúkoan Tâi-oân gí-giân s- -s èng-kai pau-hâm Hôa-gí ê cheng-ln chi 6 Siông-sè ê thó-ln -sái chham-khó Chiú Ûi-bûn (2004).

57 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 55 s in-i bó-gí -hòa s ch-sêng ê hin-sing. Tâi-oân-o (Taiwanese) s kí chèng Tâi-oân gí-giân tong-tiong thàu-kòe ch-jiân kng-cheng s hêng-sêng ê ch t-chióng Tâi-oân king-thong-gí (Lingua franca 7 ). Tâi-oân-o m-sái kán-chheng-chòe Tâi-gí. Ùi án-ne ê tng-g lâi khòa, Tâi-oân gí-giân s khah ta ê hngbk, li-té ch t-chióng gí-giân kiò Tâi-gí hk-chiá Tâi-oân-o. Tâi-gí chit-ê choan-iú miâ-sû ti ín-khí Kheh-ka hk-chiá Goân-ch-bîn chk-kûn ê khióng-hông chi-s cheng-ln-chiá ching Tâi-gí tòng-chòe s Tâi-oân gí-giân ê kán-chheng. S-s t-sing, Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân gígiân èng-kai hông tòng-chòe 2 ê bô-kng ê kài-lim chhù-lí. Chi chhinchhi Kg-tang-o kap Kg-tang gí-giân s bô-kng ê kài-lim ánne, Kg-tang gí-giân s kí Tiong-kok Kg-tang t-khu ê Kg-tang-o, Kheh-o 8, Bân-lâm-o 9 téng; sui-jiân Kg-tang t-khu m lâng teh sú-ing Kheh-o kap Bân-lâm-o, -koh Kg-tang-o kan-ta choanbûn chí Kg-tang-o niâ, png-bô kí Kheh-o hk-chiá Bân-lâm-o. N chi kok-chè gí-giân lâi kí-l, Hoat-gí kap Hoat-kok gí-giân m-s bô-kng ê kài-lim. Hoat-gí (Francais) s kí í Pa-lê t-khu ê gí-giân chòe phiau-chún s hêng-sêng ê ti-ke ìn-sing-tiong s -kóng ê Hoat-gí; i ti-iok chiàm Hoat-kok choân jîn-kháu ê 90%. Hoat-kok gí-giân s kí 7 Iú-koan Lingua franca, Crystal (1992:230) k tng-g chòe An auxiliary language used to permit routine communication between groups of people who speak different native languages. 8 Kheh-o (Hakfa) t Tiong-kok chú-iàu hun-p± t Kg-tang pak-pêng, Hok-kiàn sai-pêng, Kang-se lâm-pêng (, 1990:8; Ramsey 1987:16-17). 9 Bân-lâm-gí tû-liáu hun-p± t Hok-kiàn lâm-p, iáu koh hun-p± t Kg-tang tang-pêng Sòathâu t-khu, Hái-lâm tó, Lûi-chiu poàn-tó, Chiat-kang lâm-pêng, Chiu-soa kûn-tó téng s chi ( 1991:186).

58 56 kap pau-hâm Breton, Dutch, Gascon, Limousin, Avergnat, Languedocien téng chi-li 24 chióng chió-s± chk-kûn gí-giân (Grimes 1996: ) Th -tù-hòa kap ti-piáu-sèng Téng ch t chat kóng-tih ài th -tù-hòa kap ti-piáu-sèng chiah -tàng sg s Tâi-oân gí-giân. N án-ne, siá-m h h-chòe th -tùhòa kap ti-piáu-sèng? Th -tù-hòa (indigenization) s kí ùi î-bîn si-he (immigrant society) piàn-sêng th -tù si-he (native society) ê choán-piàn kòe-thêng. Chhi-kóng chá-kî Tâi-oân Hàn-jîn ùi Tg-soa î-bîn lâi Tâi-oân ê sî, tú-khai-sí pin-n kòe-nî kòe-chiat in iáu si beh tg-khì k±-hiong Tg-soa hm chhin-lâng thoân-î, sm-chì n kòe-sin khì m si beh lh-hih kui-kin ching si-thé sàng--tg-khì Tg-soa tâi. Che chi-s î- bîn si-he hin-sing, i-t-s î-bîn-chiá iáu kòe-kheh sim-thài, in iáu jn-ûi k±-hiong t Tg-soa, Tâi-oân put-kò s chim-sî thó-thàn ê s chi. -koh keng-kòe it-tng ê sî-kan kap si-he chêng-kéng ê hoattián, hit-kóa Hàn-jîn î-bîn tuh-tuh-á kòe-nî kòe-chiat b koh tg-khì Tg-soa, sí--khì m t t-chiap tâi t Tâi-oân niâ. L-bóe hit-kóa Hàn-jîn î-bîn chi jn-ûi ka-t m-s Tâi-oân-lâng, Tâi-oân s in ê sin k±-hiong. Che chi-s th -tù-hòa ê kòe-thêng. Tâi-oân t 1945 nî í-chêng ê k chbîn li-té : 1) Lâm-tó gí-h ê Goân-ch-bîn, kap 2) Pê-p hm Hàn-jîn î-bîn hn-hiat ê Kheh-ka kap H-ló chk-kûn. Lâm-tó gí-h ê Goânch-bîn t Tâi-oân í-keng kui-chheng-tang, chá chi th -tù-hòa à. Ah Kheh-ka kap H-ló chk-kûn leh? Tân Kî-lâm (1994:92) kí-chhut kóng ùi 1683 kàu 1895 ê 200 ga nî tong-tiong, Tâi-oân ê Hàn-jîn î-bîn si-he

59 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 57 tuh-tuh-á piàn-chiâ th -tù si-he. I-t-s kóng t J t-pún kap Tiongkok Kok-bîn-tóng chèng-koân lâi kàu Tâi-oân chìn-chêng Tâi-oân chi í-keng hêng-sêng th -tù-hòa si-he. Chit-ê th -tù-hòa si-he ki-chh s Tâi-oân bûn-hk, Tâi-oân gí-giân, kap Tâi-oân bîn-chk ì-sek hêngsêng ê ting-iàu in-s±. N chi th -tù-hòa ê kak-t lâi khòa, sú-ing Hôa-gí ê sin chbîn (hk-chiá s -i ê ga-séng-lâng ) ga-ch pí-l jn-tông ka-t s Tâi-oân-lâng? Chit-kóa sin ch-bîn pún-té -khó-lêng t 2 chì 3 ti lìn chi iông-j p Tâi-oân si-he piàn-sêng Tâi-oân-lâng, -koh in-i hitkóa chi Tâi Tiong-kok-lâng ê chèng-t chhau-chok kap tng-goân ê koan-h soah hi in bô-hoat-t chám-tg Tiong-kok jn-tông, ch -gi tih in t Tâi-oân th -tù-hòa ê hoat-tián. O ch t-kù-o kóng, Hôa-gí n beh tiàm Tâi-oân si-thòa hoat-tián, chiâ-chò Tâi-oân gí-giân ê ch tchióng, tû-hui i ê sú-ing-chiá jn-tông ka-t s Tâi-oân-lâng. Beh chiâ-chò Tâi-oân gí-giân, tû-liáu ài th -tù-hòa chi-ga, ài koh ti-piáu-sèng. Ti-piáu-sèng s kí t Tâi-oân ê lk-sú, bûn-hòa hoat-tián tong-tiong sek-tòng ê chú-kheh-koan tiâu-ki chhiok-sú hitê gí-giân Tâi-oân ê chú-thé-sèng, tùi ga -tàng piáu-hin Tâi-oân ê tk-sek, jî-chhiá ga-kài m án-ne jn-ûi. N chi tng-g lâi khòa khó-lêng chin phái lí-kái siá-m h s tipiáu-sèng. Lán -sái ng kî-tha ê l lâi soat-bêng. Chhi-kóng lán n kóng-tih J t-pún liu-lí, ti-ke it-tng si-tih susih, sasimih, chhengchiú. N kóng-tih Tâi-oân liu-lí chi si-tih bí-hún-chhá, l -bahpg, chin-chu ni-tê. N si-tih Bí-kok liu-lí chi-s hamburger kap coca cola. Kám kóng Tâi-oân bô chih susih kap sasimih? Tong-jiân m, -koh i siá-m h lán b kóng he s Tâi-oân liu-lí? In-i he bô Tâi-

60 58 kap oân ê ti-piáu-sèng. Tong-jiân, sui-jiân hin-chhú-sî susih kap sasimih bô Tâi-oân ê ti-piáu-sèng, -koh hon-sè 100 tang u Tâi-oân k hoatiông kong-ti, ga-kài m jn-ûi susih kap sasimih s Tâi-oân liu-lí. -koh che tang-sî chiah hoat-seng ài chú-kheh-koan ê tiâu-ki, - s tan-hong-bn g-bng chi s t-hin. Tn-s, -sái khak-tng ê s chìchió i hin-chhú-sî bô ti-piáu-sèng. N chi gí-giân lâi kóng, lán n si beh h Eng-gí lán khì toh kúi-ê kok-ka h? It-poa lóng si beh khì Bí-kok, Eng-kok, Australia hk-chiá New Zealand. Sui-jiân Ìn-t kap Hui-lýt-pin (Philippine) m teh ng Eng-gí, -koh chin-chió lâng si beh khì hia h. i-siá-m h? In-i Ìn-t kap Hui-lýt-pin bô Eng-gí ê ti-piáu-sèng. N hoan-thâu tg-lâi khòa Tâi-oân gí-giân, i-siá-m h Goân-chbîn-gí, Kheh-gí kap Tâi-gí chiah Tâi-oân ê ti-piáu-sèng? Lán -kha chi í Tâi-gí ûi l lâi soat-bêng. Ch t-ê gí-giân beh h-chòe siá-m h miâ i chú-kheh-koan ê tiâuki. Kheh-koan tiâu-ki li-bn ê chèng-t, keng-chè kap bûn-hòa ins± sing ting-iàu. T Tiong-kok Hok-kiàn t-khu ê Bân-gí -sái hunchòe 5 ta hong-giân (s-s t-sing s gí-giân 10 ): Bân-lâm, Bân-tang, Bân-pak, Bân-tiong, P²-sian ( 1992:293). Bân-lâm-gí chú-iàu s Hok-kiàn lâm-p it-tài pau-hâm Choân-chiu, Chiang-chiu, kap -mg téng kon-chh ê lâng teh sú-ing ê gí-giân, kî-tiong -mg s Bân-lâmgí ê ti-piáu khiu-kháu. Bân-lâm-gí tû-liáu t Bân-lâm t-khu sú-ing chi-ga, iáu hun-p± t Kg-tang tang-p kap Tang-lâm-A chhi-kóng 10 T gí-giân-hk téng-thâu it-poa s ing h-sing hoat-t k-thong, thia bô lâi phòaton siang-hong s gí-giân hk-chiá hong-giân ê khu-pit.

61 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 59 Sin-ka-ph, Hui-lt-pin, Ìn-nî téng kok-ka. In-i t Bân-gí 5 ta hun-ki gí-giân li-té Bân-lâm-gí ê hun-p± kap éng-hióng-lt sing ta, s -í Bânlâm-gí m hông kiò chòe Hok-kiàn-o. Tiong-kok Chheng-tiâu thóng-t Tâi-oân ( nî) ê sî Bânlâm it-tài ê Choân-chiu kap Chiang-chiu téng ê Hok-kiàn-lâng tuhtuh-á î-bîn lâi kàu Tâi-oân 11. T 1887 nî chìn-chêng Tâi-oân s sik Hokkiàn-séng teh koán, Tâi-oân t chèng-t, keng-chè kap bûn-hòa kok hong-bn iáu khah-su Hok-kiàn, s -í chheng-h hit-tong-sî ê Bân-lâm î- bîn s sú-ing ê gí-giân h-chòe Hok-kiàn-o iáu bô kòe-hn. -koh Tâi-oân chìn-j p 20 sè-kí í-u, ch t-hong-bn s th -tù-hòa ê koan-h, koh ch t-hong-bn s in-i J t-pún thóng-t kî-kan chhiok-sêng ê kn-tihòa, chu-pún-chú-g-hòa tì-sú Tâi-oân si-he hm Tâi-oân-lâng ì-sek ê hêng-sêng ( 1992:220). In-i Choân-chiu-o kap Chiang-chiu-o lâi kàu Tâi-oân í-keng th -tù-hòa, hêng-sêng put-chiang put-choân ê sin khiu-kháu ( 1993:95), koh chham-j p Tâi-oân pê-p-chk kap J t-pún-gí ê sêng-hn, s -í ch t-chióng sin-ê gí-giân hêng-sek Tâi-oâno í-keng kheh-koan-sing sêng-l p à. Tû-liáu gí-giân ê kheh-koan tiâuki chi-ga, Tâi-oân t chèng-t, keng-chè kap bûn-hòa 12 téng kok hong-bn lóng lú lâi lú pí Hok-kiàn khah ting-iàu kap iu-sè. Ka-sing 11 Sui-bóng t Hô-lân sî-kî kap T--sì ông-tiâu sî-kî chi- chió-ling hàn-jîn î-bîn, -koh hànjîn ti-ling î-bîn lâi Tâi chú-iàu s Tiong-kok Chheng-tiâu tóng-t sî-kî. 12 Chhi kóng, pit-chiá t 2001 nî bat khì Hok-kiàn -mg chòe Tiân-iá tiu-cha. Hit-tong-sî tk-pit khì in hia ê chhiù-phì-hâng chham-koan, kiat-kó hoat-hin in hia ê Bân-lâm-gí liûhêng-koa ti-iok 95% í-sing lóng-s Tâi-ôan chìn-kháu khì ê Ip Ké-tiân, Kang Hi kap Tân Sió-hûn téng lâng ê Tâi-gí-koa. In chi-t hoat-hêng ê liû-hêng-koa hui-siông chió, n, lóngs ch t-kóa thoân-thóng koa-iâu.

62 60 kap Tâi-oân-lâng ì-sek ê chhut-thâu, Tâi-oân-lâng chú-koan-sing jn-tông i s -kóng ê s Tâi-oân-o, -s Hok-kiàn o, s -í Tâi-oân-o (kánchheng-chòe Tâi-gí) chit-ê ing-sû chi sêng-l p à! Kn-lâi b-chió lâng kiò-s Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o s Bîn-chìn-tóng chh tóng chit 10 ga nî lâi chiah sin ch, tòa- H-ló soa-bûn chú-g ì-hâm ê ing-gí. S-s t-sing, Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-o t 20 sè-kí chh-kî chá chi teh sú-ing à, in-i hit-tong-sî Tâi-gí t ch-jiân chng-thi chih í-keng hêng-sêng Tâi-oân ê king-thong-gí. Chhi-kóng, t 1901 nî chi- Tâi-oân-gí chhòng-khan, 1902 nî Tâi-oân gí-hk chp-chì chhòng-khan kap Tâi-oân-gí Tông-chì-he sêng-l p ( 1993:209). Koh, chhui-sak ph-o-j ê sian-kak Chhòa Pôe-hóe () t i 1925 nî ê tù-chok Chp-hng Koán-kiàn lìn kui pún chheh chi-s ng Tâi-oâno lâi chheng-h Tâi-oân-lâng ê gí-giân. I t ln-soat Tâi-oân kap Lômá-j ê koan-h ê sî kóng: Tâi-oân-lâng i s J t-pún ê peh-sè, s -í J t-pún ê Kok-gú i-s tekkhak tih ài h. -kú Hàn-bûn s chin oh, Kok-gú i-s chin lân, koh-chài chit ng hng kap Tâi-oân-o lóng-s bô koan-h (Chhòa Pôe-hóe 1925:15). Kán-tan kóng, t 1920 sin k bûn-hk ln-chiàn, 1930 Tâi-oân-e ln-chiàn kî-kan Tâi-oân-o, kap Tâi-oân-gí -sái kóng s hông chin ph -phiàn teh sú-ing ê gí-sû ( 2003; 2004). Sm-chì ch-chheng Tiong-kok-lâng ê Liân Chiàn in kong=á Liân Hêng t 1933 nî pian-siá hó-sè ê Tâi-ôan Gí-tián m-s ng Tâi-gí kap Tâi-oân-gí ê chheng-h. N-chún ching Tâi-oân-o kap H-ló soa-bûn chú-g o

63 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 61 téng-h, khióng-kia-á s hoán Tâi-oân ê sim-lí teh chok-koài. 3. Koân-k gí-bûn hin-sing T Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té, gí-giân kap bûn-j ê sú-ing -sái ng koân-k gí-giân (diglossia) kap koân-k bûn-j (digraphia) ê kài-lim lâi hun-sek. Siá-m h h-chòe koân-k gí-giân kap koân-k bûn-j neh? Ki-pún-sing, chit 2 ê ing-sû ê kài-lim s li-s ê, -koh koân-k gí-giân chú-iàu s kí kháu-gí, ah koân-k bûn-j s kí su-bn-gí (i-chi-s bûn-j ). N ln-kàu koân-k gí-giân ê kài-lim, Charles Ferguson (1959) s t-it ê h-thóng-sèng lâi ln-soat diglossia kài-lim ê si-he gí-giân hk-ka. I ching koân-k gí-giân tng-g-chòe ch t-ê gí-giân ê 2 ê gí-giân piàn-thé (two varieties of the same language) hun-pit tam-jn bô-kng ê si-he kong-lêng (social functions). I koh kóng, chit 2 ê gí-giân piànthé tong-tiong, kî-tiong ch t-ê pn-ián Koân gí-giân (High language), lng-ga ch t-ê pn-ián K gí-giân (Low language). Koân gí-giân thong-siông khah-koân ê miâ-sia kap bûn-hk thoân-thóng, jî-chhiá ng t chèng-sek tiû-hp. Siong-tùi chi-h, K gí-giân thong-siông hông khòa khah bô khí, ng t hui chèng-sek kap su-jîn tiû-hp. u-lâi, Joshua Fishman (1967) chiam-tùi Ferguson ê diglossia kàilim thê-chhut siu-kái, i jn-ûi koân-k gí-giân bô it-tng kan-ta -sái hoat-seng t ch t-ê gí-giân li-té ê 2 ê gí-giân piàn-thé; i-chi-s kóng koân-k gí-giân bô it-tng s gí-giân piàn-thé, m khó-lêng hoatseng t gí-giân hm gí-giân chi-kan, jî-chhiá gí-giân s±-bk -sái -n 2 ê. Án-ne, siá-m h s koân-k bûn-j (digraphia)? Dale (1980:5) ùi

64 62 kap Ferguson ê koân-k gí-giân kài-lim iân-sin kàu bûn-j m sek-ing, k tng-g chòe ch t-ê gí-giân sú-ing 2 chióng (hk-chiá í-sing) ê bûn-j su-siá h-thóng. Hàn-hk-ka DeFrancis (1984:59) m chiam-tùi koân-k bûn-j thê-chhut kng-khoán ê tng-g. u--lâi Chiú Ûi-bûn (Chiung 2003:9) k Dale kap DeFrancis ê tng-g siu-kái chòe ch t-ê si-he li-té ch t-ê í-sing ê bûn-j h-thóng hun-pit tam-jn bô-kng ê k-thong kong-lêng. Chiú Ûi-bûn chit-khoán ê tng-g chi chhinchhi Fishman tùi koân-k gí-giân ê tng-g kng-khoán, bô hn-ti t kng ch t-chióng gí-giân ê piàn-thé. N ng téng-bn s kóng-tih ê koân-k gí-giân kap koân-k bûn-j (hp-chheng koân-k gí-bûn ) lâi khòa, Hàn-j bûn-hòakhoan li-té ê chêng-hêng s án-chóa leh? Seng chi kháu-gí lâi kóng, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ch-k í-lâi kok t-hng chi- bô-kng ê gí-giân, chhi-kóng Kg-tang-o, Bân-lâm-o, Kheh-o, Chòng-o, Biâu-o, Iâu-o téng. Sui-jiân in ka-t ka-t ê gí-giân, -koh in hia ê thk-chheh-lâng pin-n si beh chi kia-siâ hù khó, chi ài h hông-tè s -chi siú-t ê gí-giân (hk-chiá s -i ê kháu-im), in-i hông-tè ê gí-giân s hit-tong-sî ê phiau-chún-gí, ng t kàu-ik, hêng-chèng téng chèng-sek tiû-hp. I-chi-s kóng, hit-kóa thk-chheh-lâng pêng-sî seng-oh tong-tiong sui-jiân s ng in t-hng ka-t ê gí-giân, -koh pin-n gîm-si chò-tùi, thk Sù-su Ng -keng chi ài b²-hóng siú-t thng ê gí-im. Sî-kan ch t- kú, hit-kóa thk-chheh-lâng koh ching in b²hóng tih ê siú-t gí-im thoân h in chi-t ê hiong-chhin kap u-ti. Tìsú hit-kóa thk-chheh-lâng ê chi-t gí-giân li-té s -i ê thk-chhehim (bûn-giân-im) kap ph-o-im tông-sî chûn-chi ê hin-sing. Che m-s lán Tâi-gí li-bn s -i bûn-giân-im kap ph-o-im ê iû-lâi. N

65 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 63 ng koân-k gí-giân lâi hun-sek, chi kng ch t-ê gí-giân lâi kóng, bûngiân-im chi-s koân gí-giân, ph-o-im chi-s k gí-giân. N chi bôkng gí-giân chi-kan lâi khòa, hông-tè s -kóng ê gí-giân chi-s koân gí-giân, it-poa peh-sì s ng ê chi-t gí-giân chi-s k gí-giân. Koân gí-giân in-i tg-kî í-lâi ng t chèng-sek tiû-hp kap kho-kí chè-t, s í hông kám-kak khah chúi-chún, hk-bn; k gí-giân in-i seng (siu) pêng-hoân, s -í kám-kak chin chh-sik. Chhi chit-khoán ê sihe sim-lí kî-s t t bk-chêng Tâi-oân ê si-he--lìn iáu chin ph -phiàn. Khó-pí kóng p±-t-hì i-s koa-á-hì ê hì-chhut--lìn, pin-n ti-kiap kap bûn-jîn chhut-hin, in chi ng bûn-giân-im kóng-o; n-s siáuthiú-á teh tak-chhùi-k ching ph-o. N chi su-bn-gí lâi khòa, Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn chi-s koân bûn-j, kî-tha hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê bîn-chk bûn-j, chhin-chhi-kóng Ot-lâm ê J-lâm (Chu-Nom), Tiâu-sián ê Gn-bûn (Hangul), 13 J t-pún ê Kana, kap Tâi-oân ê Koa-á-chheh bûn-j hm ph-o-j téng lóng sg k bûn-j. Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn in-i tg-kî í-lâi hông tòng-chò chèngthóng bûn-j koh kho-kí chè-t ê thé-chè chi-chhî, s -í si-he tichiòng kám-kak sú-ing bûn-giân-bûn khah chúi-chún, hk-bn. Chit-chióng hin-sing t hin-chhú-sî ê Tâi-oân si-he m iáu chin ph -phiàn, chhi-kóng bng-pâi, chè-bûn ng bûn-giân-bûn siá sengpêng kì-s, bi-s mng bûn-giân-bûn siá bi-sú, tùi-liân, sm-chì it- 13 Hangul: Hân-kok (Lâm-Hân) hin-chhú-sî chheng-h Hân-kok bûn-j Hân-bûn ê ì-sù. Hangul s Tiâu-sián gí-bûn gián-kiù kiam chhui-tng-chiá Chiu Sî-keng ( Chu Sigyong) t 1913 nî sing khai-sí sú-ing. Tiâu-sián (Pak-Hân) chheng-h Tiâu-sián bûn-j Chosoncha (Tiâu-sián-j) hk-chiá Chongum (chià-im).

66 64 kap poa-lâng kóng-o, siá-chok ê sî i-tih tián-hong-sîn m lm kóa sêng-gí kap ín-ing k -si, k -bûn. T koân-k gí-bûn ê si-he li-té, koân gí-giân/bûn-j bô it-tng éng-oán koân, k gí-giân/bûn-j m bô it-tng éng-oán k, in ê t-i t it-tng ê tiâu-ki chi-h khó-lêng piàn-tng. -koh, s án-chóa Hànj bûn-giân-bûn hoat-t t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lióng-toàn koân gígiân/bûn-j kui-chheng tang? S án-chóa kàu l-bóe kan-ta J t-pún Kana, Hân-kok Gn-bûn, Ot-lâm Lô-má-j châi-tiu hoan-sin ùi k gí-giân/bûn-j piàn-chiâ koân gí-giân/bûn-j? Hit-kóa Chòng-j, Biâu-j, kap Iâu-j soah bô-hoat-t chhut-thâu-thi? Tû-liáu chèng-t in-s± chiga, bûn-j pún-sin m-s chin ta ê in-s±! Bûn-j s án-chóa énghióng tih koân-k gí-bûn neh? Lán u ch t chat chi lâi thó-ln chit-ê bn-tê. 4. Hàn-j ê bê-su kap tùi kok-bîn bûn-hk hoat-tián ê hn-chè i-siá-m h Hàn-j tùi kok-bîn bûn-hk, bîn-chk ì-sek ê hoattián éng-hióng? Che khan-sip tih Hàn-j ê bûn-j kiat-k± kap púnchit. In-i phian-hk hn-chè ê koan-h, lán t chia kan-ta -sái kéng ting-tiám kóng, siông-sè ê hun-sek thó-ln -sái chham-khó DeFrancis (1990), Gelb (1952), kap Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005c, 2005e, 2005g). Hàn-j s án-chóa hông l-ing lâi hoat-tián-chhut sin-ê bûn-j? Lán -sái ng bn chit-ê l lâi soat-bêng, ká-sú ch t-ê kóng Eng-gí ê Eng-kok-lâng John beh ng Hàn-j thòe Eng-gí siat-kè ch t thò sin-ê Hàn-j sek bûn-j h-thóng. I sing ti-seng khó-lêng ng (1) ê Hàn-j lâi piáu-s (2) ê Eng-gí gí-kù. Chit-chióng hong-sek chi-s Hàn-j ch-j goân-chek

67 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 65 Lik-su li-té ê ká-chioh. I-chi-s chioh-ng Hàn-j ê thk-im (t chia chioh-ng Pak-kia-im) lâi piáu-kì Eng-gí ê gí-im kap gí-ì. (1) (2) I have two dogs. (3) u--lâi, John kia-lâng khòa-tih gí-kù (1) li-té ê Hàn-j si Hàn-j j-bn ê gí-ì g-kái, chhi-kóng khòa-tih g-kái s pi-siong ê chhng -sa ê lông-hu, s -í John chi t goân-iú ê Hàn-j téng-thâu k hêng-pêng --khí-khì, chhi(3) s -siá ê án-ne. Gí-kù (3) chit-chióng chò-hoat chi-s s -i ê hêng-sia-j. u--lâi, lng-ga ch t-ê Eng-kok-lâng Marry, i kám-kak John ê ng-j bô sek-hp, s -í i k (2) siá-chòe (4) ê hong-sek. (4) L-bóe, koh ch t-ê Eng-kok-lâng Joe k (2) siá-chòe (5). (5) Í-sing Marry kap Joe s -siá ê (4), (5) kám -sái? N chi Hàn-j ch-j goân-chek lâi khòa tong-jiân m -sái. N án-ne, siáng siá ê s phiau-chún? Bô-lâng s chot-tùi ê phiau-chún m bô-lâng s chot-tùi ê bô phiau-chún! Che chi-s chit-khoán Hàn-j sek sin j bô-hoat-t phiau-chún-hòa kap ph -phiàn-hòa ê chú-in. T Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lìn, hit-kóa l-ing Hàn-j hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê bîn-chk bûn-j ti-khài -sái hun-chòe 3 li. T-it-li s t Hàn-j ê ki-chh téng-thâu i-chiàu Hàn-j ch-j hong-hoat, tk-pit s hêng-sia-j, lâi chhòng-ch sin j. Chit-khoán ê sin bûn-j kap Hàn-j

68 66 kap kng-khoán sik sû-s± im-chat bûn-j. 14 Chit-khoán ê sin bûn-j Ot-lâm J-lâm, Tâi-oân Koa-á-chheh bûn-j, Tiong-kok Chòng-j (), Biâu-j (), Iâu-j () ( 1997:98-108) téng. Chit-kóa j ê gahêng kap Hàn-j chin li-s, ch-j goân-chek ta-to-s± kap Hàn-j kng-khoán, png-bô thiàu-thoat Hàn-j ê su-khó b²-sek kap ch-j hong-hoat. Chi bûn-j thk-siá ê hu-lýt lâi khòa, chit-kóa sin bûn-j pí Hàn-j koh khah hok-chp kap pháih. N beh thk chit-khoán j, thong-siông chi ài Hàn-j ê ki-chh. In-i bat Hàn-j ê lâng chiàm jîn-kháu pí-l bô koân, jî-chhiá koh -s s bat Hàn-j ê lâng lóng chi-chhî hoat-tián chit-khoán sin j, s -í bat chit-khoán Hàn-j sek sin j ê lâng m bô ch. O ch t-kù-o kóng, hit-kóa chò-sit, thg-chhiah-kha ê ph -lô-ti-chiòng kng-khoán chin phái chiap-kn sú-ing chit-khoán ê Hàn-j sek sin j. N án-ne, s siá khoán ê lâng chiah hoat-t chhauchok chit-kóa Hàn-j sek sin j? Chú-iàu chi-s hit-kóa lk-phek ê bûnjîn. Lk-phek bûn-jîn -sái pun-chò 2 li, ch t-chióng s ùi koân-lk hk-sim hông kóa--chhut-lâi, put-tek-chì ê k bûn-jîn; ch t-chióng s k-p bîn-chk ì-sek, chìn-p ê bûn-jîn. Chit-kóa lk-phek bûn-jîn in-i Hàn-j ê ki-chh, s -í chiah khó-lêng sú-ing Hàn-j sek sin j. Lkphek ê k bûn-jîn in-i ti-ti iáu chûn ta Tiong-kok ê hong-kiàn su-sióng, s -í m ti hoán-èng t in ng sin j chhòng-chok ê chok-phín lìn. Tùi-chiàu chi-h, N-s beh sin su-sióng, bîn-chk tk-l p-koan thong-siông chi ài ùi chìn-p ê lk-phek bûn-jîn ê chok-phín lìn khì chhe. Khó-sioh chit-kóa chìn-p ê lk-phek bûn-jîn ng Hàn-j sek sin j s -siá ê chok-phín in-i thong-l bô ta, bô-hoat-t t thg-chhiah- 14 Iú-koan siá-m h s sû-s± im-chat bûn-j, chham-ot DeFrancis 1990.

69 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 67 kha ê ph -lô-ti-chiòng chi-kan ph -phiàn liû-thoân. L-ing Hàn-j hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê bîn-chk bûn-j ê t-j li s im-chat bûn-j, i tián-hêng ti-piáu s J t-pún ê Kana. T-sa li s im-s± bûn-j, tián-hêng ti-piáu s Hân-kok ê Gn-bûn (Hangul), Ot-lâm t 17 sè-kí í-u thàu-kòe thoân-kàu-s hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê Otlâm Lô-má-j (Chu Quoc Ngu) kap Tâi-oân t 17 sè-kí thàu-kòe thoânkàu-s hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê Sin-káng bûn-j kap 19 sè-kí í-u ê Ph-oj. 15 Chit 2 li ê bûn-j lóng chin hó h, hó ng, in-i bô su-iàu Hàn-j ê ki-chh chi -sái tan-tk hk-s p sú-ing, s -í h ph -lô-ti-chiòng chhin-kn sú-ing ê ki-he ke chin-koân. Tong-tong 19 sè-kí bóe 20 sèkí chh hit-kóa Hân-kok, Ot-lâm, J t-pún chìn-p ê bûn-jîn thêchhiòng ng chit-chióng sin ch ê bûn-j ê sî, it-poa kok-bîn chin kín chi -sái k chit-khoán bûn-j h--khí-lâi. Tong-jiân, bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek chi án-ne in-i thk-siá lêng-lk kap kok-bîn kàu-ik ê kiàn-l p soah chin kín hêng-sêng--khí-lâi. Che chi chhin-chhi se-au kok-ka kn-ti t chong-kàu kái-kek í-u in-i bîn-chiòng thk-siá lêng-lk ê kiàn-l p liân-tài tài-tng kok-bîn bûn-hk kap bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek ê hêng-sêng kng-khoán t-lí (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005h). Siong-tùi chi-h, hitkóa bô-hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j su-khó tiong-sim ê Chòng-chk, Biâuchk, kap Iâu-chk t chèng-t-sing m bô-hoat-t hêng-sêng bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek. Tiong-kok t 1930 nî-ti bat chhì-gim ng Lô-má-j lâi su-siá Hàngí, chìn-hêng s -i ê La-tin-hòa n-tng ( 1992:245). L-bóe-chhiú Tiong-kok King-sán-tóng tit-tih chèng-koân liáu t 1950 nî-ti thêng- 15 Siông-sè chhiá chham-ot Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005c) kap Táng Hong-oán (2004).

70 68 kap chí La-tin-hòa n-tng, kái chhui-sak Hàn-j kán-hòa. i-siá-m h Tiong-kok beh hòng-khì Hàn-gí La-tin-hòa? Chú-iàu chi-s k±-l tih Tiong-kok chèng-t kap bûn-hòa-sing ê it-thóng-sèng (Norman 1988: ; DeFrancis 1950: ; Barnes 1974). In kia n Tiongkok kok te ng tong-t gí-giân lâi su-siá, ch-sêng Kg-tang, Hokkiàn, Sing-hái téng kok te ê t-hng ì-sek hoat-tián chòe kn-ti bînchk kok-ka ì-sek soah lâi ùi Tiong-kok tk-l p chhut-khì. 5. Tâi-gí bûn-hk hoat-tián ê sî-kî kap tk-sek Í Tâi-oân-lâng ê bó-gí ûi bûn-hk gí-giân ê goân-thâu -sái tui-sok kàu 17 sè-kí ê Sin-káng bûn (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005h). Hit-tong-sî hun-p± t Tâi-lâm it-tài ê pê-p-chk Siraya ê gí-giân khó-lêng hêng-sêng Holan sî-kî ê Tâi-oân king-thong-gí, khó-sioh chit-ê gí-giân kap bûn-j soah tuh-tuh-á sí-bông kap sit-thoân-khì. u--lâi kàu 19 sè-kí u-pòakî, lng-ga ch t-pho ê bó-gí bûn-hk koh khai-sí tuh-tuh-á hoat-tián hêng-sêng, he chi-s lán chín s -kóng ê Tâi-gí kap Ph-o-j. Chiàukóng Tâi-gí bûn-hk chi-s Tâi-oân bûn-hk, -koh t hin-chhú-sî chit-chióng bô chèng-siông ê kok-ka t-i chi-h, Tâi-gí bûn-hk soah t ài hông pian-iân-hòa chòe Tâi-gí bûn-hk, Tâi-oân Hôa-gí bûn-hk soah tian-tò khit-chih kóa bi-kong kóng s Tâi-oân bûn-hk. S tchi kóng, Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê chià-miâ kap Tâi-oân kok miâ chià-miâ kng-khoán lóng-s beh hoat-iông Tâi-oân chú-thé-sèng ê chek-kk piáu-hin. -bn lán t chi n-tng-sú ê kak-t hun-sek Tâi-oân (gí) bûn-hk hoat-tián ê kòe-thêng. It-poa n kóng-tih kn-ti Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê khí-goân lóng kóng s tòe tih 1920 nî-ti sin bûn-hk hoat-tián khí-lâi s ín-khí ê Tâi-oân

71 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 69 o-bûn ln-chiàn khai-sí ê ( 1993; 1996; 1996; 1996). S-s t-sing, Tâi-oân ê sin bûn-hk s tòe tih 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî ph-o-j ê chhui-sak chiah khai-sí hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê. Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê hoat-tián -sái hun-chòe -bn kúi-ê bô-kng tk-sek ê sî-kî Tâi-gí Ph-o-j bûn-hk hêng-sêng kî ( s) Sui-jiân Ph-o-j (Tâi-gí Lô-má-j) ê goân-thâu -sái tui-sok kàu Medherst () 1837 nî t Oh-mg chhut-pán ê Hok-kiàn Hong-giân J-tián, sm-chì tui-sok kàu 17 sè-kí Se-pan-gâ-lâng t Hui-lýt-pin thòe Bân-lâm-gí siat-kè ê Lô-má-j h-thóng (Kloter 2004). -koh Ph-o-j tùi Tâi-oân ê éng-hióng èng-kai ùi 1865 nî Tiú-ló kàu-he lâi Tâi-oân thoân kàu, kà Ph-o-j sg khí. N ùi se-au kok-ka kok-bîn bûn-hk hoat-tián tong-tiong ph-o Sèng-keng pn-ián ting-iàu kak-sek lâi khòa, Bân-lâm-gí ph-o Sèng-keng ê hoan-k tùi Tâi-gí ph-o su-siá phiau-chún ê kiàn-l p m chin ting-iàu ê kòng-hiàn. Kun-kù La Éng-siông (1990:73), Bân-lâmgí ê sin-k-iok Sèng-keng hun-pit t 1873 kap 1884 nî chi hoat-hêng. Sui-jiân in s ng -mg khiu s hoan-k koh t ga-t chhut-pán, - koh che tùi Tâi-oân-lâng kiàn-l p chh-kî ê Tâi-gí ph-o-bûn su-siá it-tng ê pang-chn. Ph-o-j su-siá ê pún-th -hòa -sái ùi 1885 nî Tâioân hú-siâ kàu-he-pò t Tâi-lâm khai-sí hoat-hêng sg-khí (Chiú Ûibûn 2005h). Lán chai, gí-giân thk-siá lêng-lk s hoat-tián bûn-hk ê t-it-p. In-i ph-o Sèng-keng, pò-chóa ê chhut-pán, Tâi-oân-lâng ê Tâi-gí thk-siá lêng-lk chi án-ne tuh-tuh-á kiàn-l p khí-lâi, Tâi-gí bûn-hk m án-ne tuh-tuh-á hoat-tián chhut-lâi. In-i Tâi-oân hú-siâ kàu-he-pò thê-kiong Tâi-gí ph-o-j hoat-piáu ê khong-kan, s -í ph-

72 70 kap o Tâi-gí siá-chok ê chok-phín lú lâi lú sêng-sk. Kàu kah 1920 nî-ti sái kóng sng ph-o-j lâi chhòng-chok Tâi-gí ph-o bûn-hk ê sêngsk-kî. Chhi-kóng 1925 nî La Jîn-seng chhut-pán ph-o-j sió-soat Án-niâ ê Bk-sái; 1926 nî T Khe-phoàn chhut-pán sió-soat Chhut Sí- Sòa 16 ; 1925 nî Chhòa Pôe-hóe s chhut-pán ê si-he phêng-ln-ch p Chp-hng Koán-kiàn. Chit-kóa chok-phín lóng-s t 1930 nî-ti Tâi-oân o-bûn, hiong-th bûn-hk ln-chiàn í-chêng chi chhut-pán à. 17 Khó-sioh, hit-tong-sî si Hàn-bûn, J t-bûn kàu-ik ê it-poa tì-sekhn-chú in-i kì-tek l-ek kap Hàn-j ê bê-su soah bô-hoat-t chiap-si Tâi-gí Lô-má-j. Tì-sú chit-ê kai-ta ph-o-j chú-iàu t kàu-he-li teh liû-hêng niâ Hàn-j ph-o-bûn thó-ln kî ( ) Sui-jiân t 1920 nî-ti Ph-o-j í-keng hoat-tián sêng-sk chiâ-chò bûn-hk gí-giân, -koh hit-tong-sî ê Tâi-oân bûn-hk-kài thó-ln ê chú-iàu ting-tiám soah lóng khg t Hàn-j ê kái-kek kap su-siá hongbn. Ùi 1920 nî Tâi-oân chheng-liân chp-chì hoat-hêng, 1924 nî Tiu Ng -kun hoat-piáu Chin hi ê Tâi-ôan bûn-hk-kài () ín-khí ê sin k bûn-hk ln-chiàn kàu kah 1930 nî-ti ê Tâi-oân o-bûn hiong-th bûn-hk ln-chiàn chit 10 ga nî tiong-kan, thó-ln ê chiautiám chú-iàu s Hàn-j ê su-siá hong-sek 18 : 1) beh ng thoân-thóng bûngiân-bûn -s ph-o-bûn, 2) n beh ng ph-o-bûn, s beh ng J t-pún 16 Lí Khîn-ha k hoan-k chòe hàn-lô tâi-bûn pán, choân-bûn -sái t Tâi-oân bûn-hk kang-chok-sek bng-chm lih-tih. < 17 Iú-koan ph-o-j bûn-hk, chham-ot g Ka-hi (2000) kap L Heng-chhiong (1995). 18 Siông-sè chham-ot Nakazima Toshiro ( 2003), Tân Siok-iông ( 2004), Iû Ún-giân ( 1993).

73 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 71 ph-o-bûn, Tiong-kok sek Hàn-j ph-o-bûn -s Tâi-oân sek Hàn-j ph-o-bûn? Í-keng hoat-tián sêng-sk ê bûn-hk gí-giân Ph-o-j soah h hit-kóa Hàn-j kì-tek l-ek-chiá tàn t pi-a, bô si ting-s, l-bóe t si-he-sing soah ch-sêng ch t-chióng khòa-ting Hàn-j, khòa-khin Ph-o-j ê koân-k bûn-j hin-sing. Khaù-tû chió-s± chhi-kóng Chhòa Pôe-hóe, hit-kóa chú-tiu hoat-tián Tâi-oân o-bûn ê chú-iàu léng-t-chiá in-i bô-hoat-t thiàuthoat Hàn-j ê su-khó b²-sek tì-sú Tâi-oân-o ê su-siá si-tih chin ta ê hn-chè kap éng-hióng. T-it, hn-chè tih Tâi-oân o-bûn ê ti-chiòng-sèng kap ph phiàn-sèng. In-i beh thk Hàn-j sek Tâi-oân o-bûn chi ài seng thk Hàn-j. Sik-gú kóng Hàn-j n beh thk bat, chhùi-chhiu chi phah sí-kat, chi-s teh keng-thé Hàn-j pháih ê bn-tê. 19 T 1920 nîti ê Tâi-oân bat Hàn-j ê lâng t bô ch, Tâi-gí ê su-siá n oá-khò bat Hàn-j ê jîn-kháu, ch-jiân lú hông pian-iân-hòa. Ph -phiàn ê kok-bîn bûn-hk ch-jiân chi khah oh sán-seng. T-j, hn-chè tih Tâi-oân o-bûn ê phiau-chún-hòa. Kn-ti kokbîn bûn-hk ê hêng-sêng kap bîn-chk gí-giân phiau-chún-hòa s hsing hû-chhî king-seng ê. Hàn-j sek Tâi-oân e-bûn in-i ng Hàn-j su-siá tì-sú phiau-chún-hòa khang-khòe chin phái chìn-hêng ( 1990:194). Chit-chióng chêng-hêng chi chhin-chhi Ot-lâm sú-ing J-lâm kng-khoán, sui-jiân ng chiâ-chheng-tang -koh iáu-s bô phiau-chún-hòa (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005b:90). In-i Tâi-gí Hàn-j bô phiauchún-hòa, ch-jiân chi kàng-k i chiâ-chò bûn-hk gí-giân ê ph - 19 Iú-koan hàn-j ê hk-s p hu-lýt, -sái chham-ot Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005e) kap Chiung (2003).

74 72 kap phiàn-sèng. T-sa, ch-sêng Tâi-oân o-bûn sú-ing-chiá bô si ting-s, hông khòa-khin. Tâi-oân-lâng beh ng Hàn-j lâi su-siá Tâi-oân o-bûn chjiân tú-tih ch t-kóa ng Hàn-j siá b-chhut-lâi ê gí-sû. Chit-ê sî-chn chin ch lâng ching ch-j, chhe pún-j hk-chiá ng ká-chioh-j ê hong-sek lâi khek-hk. In-i chit-chióng tk-sû j, kap koài-j t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lìn thong-siông lóng s hông tòng-chò k bûnj lâi khòa-thi, tì-sú Tâi-oân gí-bûn m hông tòng-chò bô chúi-chún, k-l ê bûn-j. T-sì, éng-hióng tih Tâi-oân bîn-chk sèng-keh ê bûn-hòa tk-l psèng. Ot-lâm-lâng t Hoat-kok thóng-t chi-h thàu-kòe Hoat-kok ê hip-ch hùi-tû Hàn-j, chhiat-tg Ot-lâm hm Tiong-kok chi-kan ê bûn-hòa t-châi (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005a). Tùi-chiàu chi-h, Tâi-oân t J tpún thóng-t chi-h, chh-kî i-tih beh khiú-kn pê-pê s Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sêng-goân ê Tâi-oân-lâng hm J t-pún-lâng chi-kan ê koan-h, J t-pún-lâng chi l-ing Hàn-j ê chn chhun ê kè-tt (sèng-î kè-tt) h Tâi-oân-lâng kè-sik sú-ing Hàn-j. Sui-jiân l-bóe J t-púnlâng i-tih pâi Hôa, chhim-lik Tiong-kok soah t 1937 nî kìm-ng Hàn- Bûn, -koh í-keng siu-bn à. Tâi-oân bûn-hk-kài t kî-kan cháu-chhe Tâi-oân bûn-hk ê li-hâm kap tng-i ê sî, in-i bô-hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j ê bê-su, tì-sú b-chió lâng jn-ûi Tâi-oân bûn-hk s Tiong-kok bûn-hk ê chi-liû niâ. In-i án-ne soah kiám-jik Tâi-gí bûnhk chiâ-chòe Tâi-oân ê kok-bîn bûn-hk ê kiông-t Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê tìm-b kî ( ) Ùi 1937 kàu 1980 nî-ti chit-ê sî-kî -sái kóng s Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê

75 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 73 tìm-b 20 kî. Tong-tiong 1937 kàu 1945 nî sg s chiàn-cheng sî-kî, chit-ê sî-kî chú-iàu ê chn-chhun ê khan-být s Tâi-oân Kàu-he Kong-pò (goân-lâi ê Tâi-oân Hú-siâ Kàu-he-pò), thàu-kòe chong-kàu ê hongsek lâi seng-chûn. Chiàn-u 1945 kàu 1987 kái-giâm chìn-chêng chit-chm sg s kàigiâm sî-kî. Chit-ê sî-kî s Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê -àm sî-ti, in-i Tâi-oân ebûn ê sú-ing cho-si Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok ê ta Tiong-kok thóng-t kiatk± ê kè-o ê chân-hi. I ê hi-kó s Tâi-gí bûn-hk chok-phín ê ling chin chió jî-chhiá hông é-hòa chòe hong-giân bûn-hk, sin-seng-ti Tâi-oân-lâng ê chk-kûn bó-gí lêng-lk tuh-tuh-á thòe-hòa, tì-sú chin ch bó-gí -hòa kap bó-gí choán-o ê hin-sing. Kài-giâm sî-kî ta-to-s± ê Tâi-oân chok-ka n -s soán ng Tiong-kok-bûn siá-chok chi-s tim-tim chhut-sia. Chió-s± ê chokka chhi-kóng Lîm Chong-goân kap Hiòng Iông t 1970 nî-ti sam-putg-sî phû-chhut chúi-bn ng th -te ê khì-b teh chhòng-chok Tâi-gí-si ( 1985, 1988). Chit-ê sî-chn ch-chit-sèng ê chhui-sak Tâioân o-bûn ê lóng lâi-ch hái-ga, J t-pún Tâi-tk Liân-bêng t 1960 nîti hoat-hêng ê Tâi-oân chheng-liân ( 2003) kap 1977 nî iû Bí-kok ê Tâi-oân tông-hiong T Liông-úi kap Tân Chheng-hong téng-lâng chú-pn ê Tâi-oân Gí-bûn Goh-pò Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê koh-oh kî ( ) 1987 nî Tâi-oân kái-giâm í-u kok-chióng si-he n-tng lóng hiông-hiông chhia-i--khí-lâi. Tâi-oân gí-bûn m ùi hit-chm khai-sí 20 Tìm-b s kí lán lâng ê bn chhàng lòe chúi-té, kìm-khùi ê ì-sù.

76 74 kap si-tih tháu-pàng. Chit-ê sî-kî ê chh-kî khah phian gí-giân n-tng, chú-iàu thàm-thó Tâi-gí su-siá phiau-chún-hòa bn-tê, u-kî phian Tâigí bûn-hk siá-chok ê s t-chin. 21 Chú-iàu ê chhui-sak thoân-thé : 1989 nî iû Âng Ûi-jîn, Lîm Gím-hiân, kap Iû Gím-hong téng-lâng ch-sêng ê Tâi-gí Si kap Tâi-gí Bûn-tiah hk-b-sèng khan-být nî Tâi-oân tông-hiong T Liông-kng kap Lí Hong-bêng téng-lâng t Bíkok Lk-san-ki chhòng-l p Tâi-bûn S p-chok-he, u-lâi t 1991 nî 7 goh chhòng-pn kàu-ta iáu teh hoat-hêng ê Tâi-bûn Thong-sìn. Chithn khan-být tông-sî t Tâi-oân, Bí-kok, kap Canada hoat-hêng. Tâibûn Thong-sìn chá-kî ê chi Tâi chhui-sak-chiá chú-iàu Tân Hong-hi, Tân Bêng-jîn kap Liu Si-bêng téng. Tâi-bûn Thong-sìn chhái-ing Hàn-j kap Ph-o-j hp siá ê Tâi-oân o-bûn su-siá hong-sek, i tùi Hàn-lô su-siá ê thui-kóng kap ching Ph-o-j sak-chhut kàu-he h khah-ch si-he ti-chiòng jn-bat chin ta ê kòng-hiàn. Chit-ê sî-kî sing chá chhiàng-bêng choan-bûn chhòng-chok Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê t-it ê bûn-hk-sèng thoân-thé s 1991 nî 5 goh sêng-l p ê Han-chî Si-si kap i ê ki-koan khan-být Han-chî Si-khan ( ). I chú-iàu ê si-goân Lîm Chong-goân, g Kng-liân, Lí Khîn-ha, Bîn-siông, Chng Pek-lîm, Tân Bêng-jîn, kap g Hêng-chhiu téng. Sing chá chhiàng-bêng choan-bûn khan-chài Tâi-gí bûn-hk chok-phín ê kî-khan s Tâi-bûn Bóng-pò (1996-), i ê chú-iàu sêng-goân Liu Si-bêng, L Chú-bêng, Tân Bêng-jîn, Tân Hong-hi, Iû Ka-hun, 21 Chit-ê sî-kî chh-kî tùi Tâi-gí-bûn ê thó-ln ê siong-koan bûn-hiàn -sái chham-khó Lîm Chìn-hui (1983), L Heng-chhiong (1999) kap Tâi-gí Bûn-tiah tông-jîn hk-b-sèng khan-být (chiong pò-chóa chp-chì tong-tiong iú-koan Tâi-gí-bûn ê thó-lun bûn-chiu siu-ch p iá-ìn, sî-kan pau-hâm 1989 nî 8 goh kàu 1991 nî 7 goh).

77 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 75 Lâu Kit-gk, Lâu Tk-hôa téng. Tû-liáu chia ê thoân-thé kap khan-být chi-ga iáu chin ch, chhikóng Tâi-gí-bûn Thui-tián Hip-he kap Ka-tang Tâi-bûn Goh-khan ( ), Koa-bâng-hoe Tâi-gí-bûn Hk-he kap Koa-bâng-hoe Sikhan (1997-) téng ( 2005). Tû-liáu si-he thoân-thé teh chhui-sak chi-ga, kok ti-hk hu-hg li-té m sêng-l p Tâi-gí siong-koan sithoân, che s Tâi-gí o-bûn chìn-j p kàu-ik thé-chè ê sian-hong. Pauhâm Sêng-ti Tâi-gí Si (1988), Tâi-ti Tâi-oân Gí-bûn Si (1990), Kau-ti Tâi-gián Si (1990), Tm-kang Tâi-oân Gí-giân Bûn-hòa Gián-s p Si (1991), Chheng-hôa Tâi-gí Si (1992) téng ( téng 1995). Chú-iàu ê hk-seng n-tng sêng-goân Iû Ún-giân, L² Tàn-chhun, Teng Hngtin, Lí Ch-kèng, Chiú Ûi-bûn téng. u-lâi chit-kóa hu-hg si-thoân koh chhoàn-liân sêng-l p Hk-seng Tâi-oân Gí-bûn Chhiok-chìn-he (1992). Chit-ê sî-kî in-i tin-náu bng-l khai-sí hoat-tián, Tâi-oân gí-bûn ê su-siá m khai-sí chìn-j p tin-náu chu-sìn sî-ti. In-i tin-náu chuliu-kh± li-bn -sái khim ê Hàn-j iú-hn, s -í hit-kóa Tâi-gí ch-j hk-chiá koài-j chi chin phái tiàm tin-náu téng-thâu chhù-lí. I-t-s kóng beh tiàm tin-náu bng-l téng-thâu oân-choân ng Hàn-j su-siá ch-sêng it-tng ê bn-tê kap khùn-lân. Che bô-hêng-tiong chhiok-chìn Tâi-bûn siá-chok-chiá chiap-si Hàn-lô ê su-siá hong-sek Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê chià-miâ kî (2000-) Tâi-gí bûn-hk keng-kòe 1990 nî-ti ê phah-pià liáu -t kohoh--khí-lâi, jî-chhiá khai-sí chìn-j p hk-hu kàu-ik thé-chè. Ch 1997 nî su-l p Chin-lí Ti-hk siat-l p Tâi-oân bûn-hk-h, 2000 nî kok-l p

78 76 kap Sêng-kong Ti-hk siat-l p Tâi-oân bûn-hk gián-kiù-s í-lâi, choân Tâioân í-keng 10 ga keng ti-hk Tâi-oân bûn-hk, Tâi-oân gí-bûn siong-koan h-s. Sui-jiân chiah ch keng Tâi-bûn kho-h, khó-sioh Tâi-gí bûn-hk soah lóng bô si in ting-s, in sm-chì khit-chih kóa bi-kong ching Hôa-gí bûn-hk tòng-chò Tâi-oân bûn-hk ê ti-piáu bûn-hk (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2004, Lí Khîn-ha 2005). Tâi-gí bûn-hk beh án-chóa chià-miâ s chit-ê sî-kî ting-iàu ê khang-khòe. T chit-ê sî-kî, Tâi-gí bûn-hk m khai-sí si hk-kài chù-ì. T-it ph h-thóng-sèng siu-kài Tâi-gí bûn-hk hoat-tián kòe-thêng koh itit tùi Tâi-gí chok-ka chok-phín chòe kán-phêng ê chheh s Tiu Chhunhông, Kang Éng-chìn kap Sím Tang-chheng hp-siá ê Tâi-gí Bûn-hk Khài-ln (2001). Tâi-gí bûn-hk kàu-châi m khai-sí chhut-hin, pauhâm T Liông-úi, Chan Kim-kim,Lí Eng kap L² Kóng-sêng ê Ti-hk Tâi-gí Bûn-soán (2000), Kang Pó-chhe, Chiu Phek-hiong, Siau Tînchhun kap Táng Ik-jû ê Bân-lâm-gí Bûn-hk (2001), Png Iu-khiân ê Tâi-gí Bûn-hk Thk-pún (2003). Chiam-tùi Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê hk-sýt ln-bûn chhut choan-chheh ê pau-hâm Png Iu-khiân (2004a, 2004c, 2005). 6. Kiat-ln Tâi-gí bûn-hk hoat-tián ê lk-sú chi-s Tâi-oân bîn-chk hêngsêng kòe-thêng ê ch t-ê sok-iá. Tâi-gí bûn-hk hin-chhú-sî sing ta ê gûi-ki chi-s í-keng lú lâi lú ch ê chi-t Tâi-oân-lâng hoat-seng bógí -hòa, kap bó-gí choán-o hin-sing. Tng-tong pàng-sat Tâi-gí, jn-tông Hôa-gí chòe sin bîn-chk bó-gí ê lâng lú lâi lú ch, Tâi-gí bûnhk ê chhòng-chok-chiá kap thk-chiá it-tng lú lâi lú chió, kàu l-bóe

79 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 77 t ài chhi Sin-káng-bûn án-ne chìn-j p lk-sú phok-být-koán. N án-ne, beh án-chóa phiah-bián bó-gí choán-o hin-sing ê khok-ti? Ch t-hong-bin ài ka-kiông thé-chè tùi Tâi-oân gí-bûn ê pó-h, chhi-kóng iau-kiû chèng-hú ching Tâi-oân gí-bûn lp-j p chèng-sek kàu-ik thé-chè kap kong-b jîn-goân khó-chhì, siat-l p Tâi-gí úi-goânhe, Tâi-gí tin-s-tâi. Koh ch t-hong-bn ài ka-kiông ln-soat Tâi-oânlâng sú-ing Hôa-gí ê bái-chhù pí hó-chhù khah ch, ng Hôa-gí bôhoat-t tut-hián Tâi-oân tk-sek, jî-chhiá Tâi-oân bô khó-lêng chú-tó Hôa-gí bûn-hòa ê hoat-tián, ng Hôa-gí kan-ta piàn-chò Tiong-hôa bûn-hòa ê pian-kài niâ. Lng-ga, chek-kk chhui-sak Tâi-gí Lô-má-j kap Eng-gí m-s h Tâi-oân thoat-l Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan, chiâ-chò bûn-hòa tk-l p-kok ê chin hó p-s±. Pún ln-bûn hoat-piáu t 2005 nî Tâi-gí Bûn-hk Gián-thó-he, 10 goh 29-30, Kok-ka Tâi-oân Bûn-hk-koán

80 78 kap Chham-khó chheh-bk Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. New York: Verso. Barnes, Dayle Language planning in Mainland China: standardization. In, Fishman, J.A.(ed.). Advances in Language Planning, Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. Chiung, Wi-vun T Impact of monolingual policy on language and ethnic identity: a case study of Taiwan. In Wi-vun Chiung. Languge, Identity and Decolonization, Tailam: National Cheng Kung University. Crowley, Tony The Politics of Language in Ireland : A Sourcebook. NY: Routledge. Crystal, David An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, Davies, Norman Europe: A History. London: Pimlico. DeFrancis, John Nationalism and Language Reform in China. Princeton University Press. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. (Taiwan edition) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Edwards, John Language, society, and identity. NY: Basil Blackwell. Eriksen, Thomas H Ethnicity, race, class and nation. In John Hutchinson & Anthony D. Smith (ed.). Ethnicity, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fasold, Ralph The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Blackwell Ferguson, Charles Diglossia. Word 15,

81 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± 79 Fishman, Joshua. (ed.) Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishman, Joshua Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 32(2), Fishman, Joshua Language and ethnicity. In Howard Giles (ed.). Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations, London: Academic Press Inc. Gelb, Ignace. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Grimes, Barbara F Ethnologue. (13 th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Johnson, Allan G The Blackwell Dictionary of Society. Oxford: Blackwell. Kloter Henning Early Spanish Romanization system for Southern Min. Levinson, David Ethnic Relations: A Cross-cultural Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, Inc. Liebkind, Karmela Social psychology. In Joshua Fishman (ed.). Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lu, Li-Jung A study of language attitudes, language use and ethnic identity in Taiwan. M.A. Thesis: Fu-jen Catholic University. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ramsey, S. Robert The Language of China. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Ross, Jeffrey A Language and the mobilization of ethnic identity. In Howard Giles & Saint-Jacques Bernard (eds.) Language and Ethnic Relations. NY: Pergamon Press (1)

82 80 kap 2004a 2004b(2) 2004c p ê ùi 41 p : ê ê kap p

83 CH 2. Gí-giân, Bûn-hk kap Bîn-chk Kok-ka ê Kiàn-k± ê kap p a ê hm ê b hm ê p c teh ê p d p e p f ê p g ê ê p

84 82 kap 2005h ê p

85 Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng kap tùi Tâi-oân Bûn-hk, Bûn-hòa Hoat-tián ê Éng-hióng

86 84 kap 1. O-thâu 1492 nî Kholanpos (Christopher Columbus) ti-piáu Au-chiu-lâng t-it pái kiâ-chûn kàu Bí-chiu Ti-lik; kúi nî liáu, Phô-tô-gâ ê kiâchûn-lâng Gama (Vasco da Gama) t 1498 nî thàu-kòe Hó-bng-kak (The Cape of Good Hope) phah-khui Au-chiu kàu Ìn-t ê sin hâng-sòa. Koh lâi Phô-tô-gâ thóng-t-chiá A-bu-khe-khe (Don Affonse de Albuquerque) t 1510 kap 1511 nî hun-pit chiàm-niá -tàng khòng-chè Ìn-t se hái-ha ê Goa kap -tàng khòng-chè tang-lâm-a Ma-la-kah hái-kiap ê Ma-la-kah (Malacca). Ch án-ne, Au-chiu-lâng phah-khui ùi hái-sing lâi-kàu Tang-hng ê sin hâng-l (Hall 1981: 264; 2001:35). Hoan-thâu k khòa, 15 sè-kí ê kiat-sok tú-hó s sin hâng-sòa, ta hâng-hái sî-ti ê khai-sí. Tâi-oân m t chit-khoán ê sî-ti tiâu-liû chi-h hông tòa- chi kok-chè bú-tâi. T che chìn-chêng, Tâi-oân s ùi Lâm-tó gí-h ê goân-ch-bîn s k±-sêng ê goân-sú p-lk si-he. Kàu kah 17 sè-kí ê sî-chn, Ho-lan ùi Phô-tô-gâ, J t-pún, ta Bêng tè-kok kap Sepan-gâ téng kok-chè sè-lk tong-tiong chhut-chiòng ê piáu-hin, tì-sú chhiú ti-seng t 1624 nî chiàm-niá Tâi-oân, kiàn-l p Tâi-oân t-it-ê galâi chèng-koân. Sui-jiân Ho-lan-lâng chiàm-niá Tâi-oân chú-iàu s keng-b ê khól, -koh í Ki-tok kàu-g ûi chú ê bûn-kàu oh-tng m-s in ê tingiàu khang-khòe chi-it (Campbell 1903: vii; 1979: 33-38). Chhikóng, Ho-lan-lâng i tih h hit-tong-sî ê Tâi-oân-lâng, i chi-s pêp-chk-lâng -tàng ng in ka-t ê bó-gí kap Sing-tè chih-chiap, s -í ng Lô-má-j thòe pê-p-chk siat-kè bûn-j koh t 1636 nî siat-l p Tâioân iú-sú í-lâi ê hk-hu (Heylen 2001). Tâi-oân chi-s án-ne pòa ch-

87 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 85 gon, pòa p-pek--ê ùi kháu-thoân goân-sú si-he chìn-j p su-bn-gí sî-ti. Jî-chhiá Tâi-oân ch t-chìn-j p su-bn-gí sî-ti, chi in-i Ho-lan ê koan-h kap se-au ê bûn-j thk-siá thoân-thóng kiàn-l p koan-h. Sui-bóng Tâi-oân ùi goân-sú si-he hông tòa-chi kok-chè bú-tâi, ch t-khai-sí chi si se-au Ki-tok-kàu bûn-hòa éng-hióng. -koh ch 1662 nî Ho-lan-lâng tâu-hâng, o T Sêng-kong t Tâi-oân kiàn-l p Hàn-jîn chèng-koân, ng thé-chè ê lk-ling lâi chhui-sak Hàn-j bûnhòa í-lâi, Tâi-oân-lâng s hián-hin--chhut-lâi ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa tk-chit soah lú lâi lú tng. Tâi-oân-lâng tùi Hàn-j ê bê-su ti-seng piáu-hin t tùi Hàn-j ê chhò-g jn-ti, kiò-s Hàn-j s piáu-ì bûn-j. Tâi-oân-lâng in-i tùi Hànj bê-su soah tì-sú kiò-s Tâi-gí bô ng Hàn-j su-siá b-sái. Phí-jûkóng, t Tâi-oân bûn-hk-sú sing -miâ ê 1930 nî-ti Tâi-oân o-bûn ln-chiàn, ln-chiàn chiau-tiám soah lóng khg t án-chóa sú-ing Hàn-j thang siá Tâi-gí, sm-chì kàu kah 1990 nî-ti chh-kî Tâi-gí-bûn n-tng ê cheng-ln chiau-tiám m-s t Hàn-j pún-j. Tui-kiû Hàn-j pún-j ê kiat-kik s Tâi-gí-bûn chhòng-chok-ling bô-hoat-t thê-seng. Pún gián-kiù chi-s í Gelb (1952) ê bûn-j lí-ln ûi ln-sýt ki-chh, lâi hun-sek Hàn-j bê-su ê bûn-j in-s±, sòa--lâi thàm-thó Hàn-j bê-su tùi Tâi-oân bûn-hk kap bûn-hòa hoat-tián ê éng-hióng. 2. Bûn-j ê hun-li kap hoat-tián 2.1. Bûn-j èng-kai chi i piáu-s gí-im ê tan-i ê ta-sòe lâi hun-li N ln-kàu bûn-j, chin ch lâng lóng ng piáu-im kap piáu-

88 86 kap ì j-hun-hoat lâi khu-hun sè-kài-sing ê bûn-j h-thóng, sòa--lâi jn-ûi Hàn-j s piáu-ì bûn-j, kî-tha sú-ing ABC Lô-má-j-bó ê s piáu-im bûn-j. S-s t-sing, chit-khoán k bûn-j j-hun-hoat ê hun-li honghoat chin bô thò-tòng m bô chún-khak, in-i bô pòa-chióng bûn-j s sûn piáu-im hk-chiá piáu-ì ê. Chhi-kóng, Eng-bûn ê semi kap er chi hun-pit pòa kap lâng ê ì-hâm; Tiong-bûn ê chi sûn-chhùi s l-ing Hàn-j chòe kì-im ê kang-kh lâi piáu-s Engbûn ê McDonald chit-ê sû. N-chún Hàn-j s piáu-ì bûn-j, án-ne Hàn-j ê ot-thk kòethêng èng-kai hm kî-tha s -i ê ABC phin-im bûn-j bô-kng chiah tih. -koh, chin ch sim-lí gí-giân-hk ê gián-kiù pò-kò lóng kí-chhut k Hàn-j ê ot-thk kòe-thêng kap gí-im liân-sióng pun-khui s bô chèng-khak ê koan-lim. Chêng Kàu-ik p-tiú Chan Chì-lóng ê giánkiù pò-kò (Tzeng 1992:128) kí-chhut Hàn-j ê ot-thk kòe-thêng kngkhoán khan-sip tih gí-im ê hoán-si liân-sióng, chit-ê kòe-thêng kap kî-tha s -i ê phin-im bûn-j s li-s ê. Ì-sù chi-s kóng, Hàn-j kap s -i ê phin-im-j t ot-thk kòe-thêng kng-khoán khan-sip tih gíim ê hoán-si liân-sióng. Li-s ê gián-kiù pò-kò b-chió, pau-hâm Flores d Arcais (1992), Cheng (1992), Su and Anderson (1999), kap Li (2000) téng. In-i thoân-thóng piáu-im kap piáu-ì ê bûn-j hun-li-hoat i chin-ta ê khoat-tiám, Gelb (1952) kap Smalley (1963) chi thê-chhut sinê bûn-j hun-li koan-lim. In kí-chhut, sè-kài ê bûn-j èng-kai chi i piáu-s gí-im ê tan-i ê ta-sòe lâi hun-li chiah -tàng h-thóngsèng ê tùi sè-kài bûn-j chòe hun-li kap liáu-kái bûn-j ê ián-piàn chhusè. S -i ê gí-im tan-i chi-s kí gí-giân-hk teh kóng ê im-s±,

89 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 87 (phoneme) im-chat, (syllable) sû-s±, (morpheme) kap gí-sû (word) téng, ùi sòe kàu ta, bô-kng ta-sòe ê o-gí sêng-hun. T chit-ê hun-li phiau-chún chi-h, Hàn-j -sái kóng s gí-sûim-chat (word-syllabic) hk-chiá sû-s±-im-chat (morphosyllabic) ê bûn-j. 1 J t-pún ê Kana s im-chat bûn-j ê tián-hêng ti-piáu. Ot-lâm Lô-má-j, Eng-bûn-j, Tâi-oân Ph-o-j, kap Hân-kok Gn-bûn -sái sg s im-s± bûn-j, in-i t chit-ê h-thóng li-té múi-ch t-ê j-bó s piáu-s ê gí-im tan-i s im-s±. Sui-jiân Ot-lâm Lô-má-j, Eng-bûn-j, Ph-o-j, kap Gn-bûn lóng s im-s± bûn-j, -koh in iáu- tm-ph-á chha-pit; chha-pit ê s -chi chi-s gí-im hm hû-h ê tùi-èng koanh kap hû-h pâi-lit hong-sek ê bô-kng. Chi gí-im hm hû-h ê tùi-èng koan-h lâi khòa, Ot-lâm Lô-má-j kap Tâi-oân Ph-o-j kipún-sing s ch t ê hû-h tùi-èng ch t ê im-s±, -koh Eng-bûn s togoân ê tùi-èng koan-h. Chi im-s± hû-h pâi-lit hong-sek lâi khòa, Ot-lâm Lô-má-j, Tâi-oân Ph-o-j kap Eng-bûn-j lóng s it-ûi ê sòasèng pâi-lit, -koh Hân-kok Gn-bûn kap Hàn-j lóng s j-ûi ê kiat-k±. Hin-chhú-sî sè-kài-sing to-s± ê bûn-j h-thóng, chhi-kóng Engbûn, Tek-bûn, Hoat-bûn, Se-pan-gâ-bûn, Ot-lâm-bûn kap Tâi-oân Ph-o-j, lóng s it-ûi ê im-s± bûn-j. It-ûi ê im-s± bûn-j -sái kóng s sè-kài sing ph -phiàn ê su-siá h-thóng Bûn-j ián-piàn s ùi ta ê tan-i kàu sòe ê tan-i Gelb (1952) chìn-ch t-p thê-chhut kóng, ùi gí-im ê tan-i ê ta-sòe lâi khòa, sè-kài-sing ê bûn-j ián-piàn s ùi ta ê tan-i kàu sòe ê tan-i. 1 Gelb kheng-hiòng ing word-syllabic, DeFrancis kheng-hiòng ing morphosyllabic.

90 88 kap chit-khoán ùi ta kàu sòe ê ián-piàn, s in-i khan-sip tih jîn-li tùi o-gí ê koan-chhat ê lêng-lk. I chi-s kóng, tng-tong lán-lâng tùi o-gí ê gí-im tan-i khah chìn-ch t-p ê liáu-kái liáu, lán-lâng chi chìn-ch t-p hoat-tián-chhut biâu-siá khah-sòe ê gí-im tan-i ê bûn-j h-thóng. Biâu-siá ê gí-im tan-i ê ta-sòe kap hk-s p hu-lýt siá-m h koan-h leh? It-poa-tek lâi kóng, biâu-siá khah-sòe ê gí-im tan-i ê bûn-j h-thóng khah chún-khak (kì-lik gí-im), hu-lýt, iú-l lánlâng ê hk-s p, in-i in -sái thàu-kòe iú-hn=ê, chió-s±=ê j-bó ê pâilit ch-hp lâi biâu-siá bû-hn=ê sin gí-sû ê chhòng-ch. Im-s± bûn-j -tàng chit-chióng kong-lêng s in-i lán jîn-li ê gí-giân lóng s ùi chió-s± ê bó-im (vowels) kap chú-im (consonants) s k±-sêng=ê. Thàukòe bô-kng ê im-s± hû-h lâi ti-piáu bô-kng ê bó-im kap chú-im, chi-sái k hit-ê gí-giân ê gí-im h-thóng oân-chéng biâu-siá--khí-lâi. Smalley (1963:7) kí-chhut, im-s± bûn-j thong-siông kan-ta su-iàu chió-s± ê j-bó (chhi-kóng, Eng-bûn chí-iàu 26 ê j-bó), chi -sái biâu-siá hit-ê gí-giân ê s - gí-im. Siong-tùi lâi kóng, sû-s± bûn-j ê khoat-tiám chi-s chin ch ê j (sû-s± im-chat hû-h), hk-seng chi ài h chiok ch ê j liáu chiah châi-tiu chìn-ch t-p chòe ot-thk èng-ing. Í Tâi-oân ûi l, sió-hk kai-ta ti-khài ài h 2,600 ê Hàn-j; seng--khí-khì tiong-hk liáu, i-tih thk bûn-giân-bûn ê bûn-chiu, hk-seng ài kè-sik h ch t-kóa pêng-sî hán-leh ng tih ê Hàn-j. Nchún sió-hk pit-gip chi sg it-poa ê at-thk-siá-chok lêng-lk, Tâi-oân ê hk-seng sing bô chha-put-to ài h 3,000 j Hàn-j chiah hiáu thk-siá it-poa thêng-t ê Tiong-bûn. Kun-kù Hannas (1997) ê thong-kè, lán chit-mái si-he-sing thong-hêng sú-ing ê Hàn-j ti-iok

91 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 89 7,000 j. Chit 7,000 j chí-s siông-ng ê Hàn-j niâ, n k kî-tha khah-chió lâng ng ê j (chhi-kóng chêng Hêng-chèng- hù -tiú Iû Sek-khun ê ) sg chi-li, s±-ling -sái tt-kàu Khong-hi J-tián s siu-ch p ê 47,035 j. -kha lán chi lâi soat-bêng bûn-j s án-chóa hêng-sêng kap hoat-tián. T k -chá k -chá, lán-lâng iáu sa bô o-gí ê kiat-k± chìn-chêng, jîn-li kan-ta -tàng t tng-khang ê piah--lìn o kóa t²-àn lâi piáu-tt in beh kóng ê o-gí ê li-iông. Chit-ê sî-kî ê chún bûn-j s biâu-siá ê gí-im tan-i s kui-ê k±-s ê li-iông. Kú-l lâi kóng, ká-sú lán hoat-hin ch t-bn-nî chêng ê Siraya lâng t tng-khang li-té o-t² (t²-pió 1), in t piah--lìn o ch t-sian lâng, hit-ê lâng chhiú--lìn thh ch t lip chih-thâu, lâng ê pi-á ch t chiah chhùi-á khui-khui-khui ê sai. O chit-pak t² ê lâng khó-lêng beh piáu-s i t b ch t-kang, b ch t-ê s -chi, chin puthng khì tú-tih ch t chiah sai; i k-put-j-chiong, chih-thâu-á sa--leh chi kap hit chiah sai phià. M-khó-lêng beh piáu-s i chin ióng-kám, i t b ch t-kang chú-tng chhe sai thiau-chiàn hk-chiá s chin ài-sim beh thh m h-ki h sai chih. In-i chit-pak t² biâu-siá ê s kui-ê k±-s, seng ch chu-sìn bô k-thé biâu-siá--chhut-lâi, tàu-té i beh piáu-s siá-m h ì-sù, kan-ta o chit-pak t² ê lâng ka-t chai-iá. Tng-tong kîtha ê chk-jîn khòa tih chit-pak t² ê sî, in chi ài t hia soat-bûn káij, ioh khòa chok-chiá ê ì-sù s siá. T chit-chióng chêng-hêng chi-h, 100 ê lâng lâi khòa, khó-lêng 101 chióng ê bô-kng kái-sek.

92 90 kap T²-pió 1. T²-o (chún) bûn-j s biâu-siá ê gí-im tan-i s kui-ê k±-s ê li-iông. Tng-tong lán-lâng tùi o-gí ê gí-im tan-i týt-phòa-sèng ê koanchhat, liáu-kái gí-sû tan-i ê chûn-chi liáu, lán-lâng chi khai-sí k biâu-siá hit-ê gí-sû ê t²-àn (bûn-j ga-hêng) o--lh-lâi. Lán í téng-bn t²-pió 1 ê k±-s lâi iân-sòa, ká-sú 5 chheng-nî u ê Siraya lâng khai-sí gí-sû ê koan-lim, in chiong goân-pún t²-pió 1 ê k±-s kái-ing t²-pió 2 ê gí-sû t²-àn hong-sek kì-lik--lh-lâi. T²-pió 2 khó-lêng s piáu-s b ch t-kang, b ch t-lâng teh kiâ-l, soah khòa-tih ch t chiah sai chhùi-á khui-khui-khui... Chhi án-ne, goân-pún 101 chióng khó-lêng-sèng ê kóng-hoat, kàu-ta in-i biâu-siá ê gí-im tan-i siong-tùi piàn sòe, s -í khó-lêng chhun 50 chióng kónghoat. O ch t-kù-o kóng, chún-khak-t-tàng thê-seng. T²-pió 2. Gí-sû bûn-j s biâu-siá ê gí-im tan-i s gí-sû.

93 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng Bûn-j hoat-tián kòe-thêng ê tng-hêng, tàu-j kap im-hòa Tng lán-lâng gí-sû ê khài-lim liáu, chèng-sek ê bûn-j chi titbeh chhut-hin. Hit-kóa keng-kòe tng-hêng-hòa kòe-thêng, i chi-s kóng, tk-pái beh piáu-s kng ch t ê gí-sû ê sî, chi ng kng ch t ê t²àn lâi kì-lik piáu-s. Chhi-kóng, o ch t ê î-kh-á, tiong-ng tiám ch t tiám, lâi piáu-s j t-thâu chit-ê gí-sû. Thàu-kòe chit-khoán tng-hêng ê kòe-thêng, jîn-li ê bûn-j chóng sg chhut-sì à. In-i thàu-kòe tnghêng ê kòe-thêng, chok-chiá kap thk-chiá chi-kan chiah hoat-t chhú-tit king-sek thang h bûn-j t bô-kng sî-kan kap khong-kan tong-tiong liû-thoân. Hàn-j li-té ê chhi-hêng-j kap chí-s-j chi-s chit-khoán ê gí-sû bûn-j. Sui-bóng gí-sû tng-hêng s bûn-j chèng-sek hoat-tián ê thâu-ch tp, -koh i n bô chìn-ch t-p hoat-tián-chhut tàu-j kap im-hòa (phonetization) ê kòe-thêng chi bô-hoat-t chìn-hòa-chhut k-p oânchéng kong-lêng ê bûn-j h-thóng (Gelb 1952: ). i-siá-m h ài tàu-j kap im-hòa ê kòe-thêng? In-i lán-lâng -tàng o ê t²-àn iú-hn, bô-khó-lêng pin-n tú tih ch t-ê gí-sû chi o ch t-ê t²-àn, s -í chi ài t goân-iú ê t²-àn ki-chh téng-thâu tng kha-chhiú. Lán n hoan-thâu khòa gí-sû bûn-j, i ch t-khai-sí chhut-hin ittng s í k-thé, khòa tih, bong tih ê sû; chhi-kóng j t, sai, h, hî téng seng hoat-tián chhut-lâi. Chit-kóa gí-sû in-i k-thé ê ga-hêng thang o, s -í t²-àn chin kín chi ti--lh-lâi; chit-kóa sû chi-s Hàn-j li-té ê chhi-hêng-j. -koh, lán-lâng ê gí-sû -n hn-ti t án-ne niâ, koh chin ch thiu-sing ê sû kap kù-hoat téng-thâu ê hi-sû. Chitkóa thiu-sing ê gí-sû kap hi-sû beh án-chóa o? N-s kán-tan ê thiu-

94 92 kap sing-sû, chhi-kóng iáu -sái o th²-kha-téng chhah ch t ki chhi-ki lâi piáu-s téng-koân ê khài-lim; che chi-s s -i ê chí-sj (). -koh chit-khoán o--chhut--lâi ê thiu-sing-sû s±-ling hui-siông iú-hn, s -í chí-hó t hin-iú ê bûn-j t²-àn chòe siu-kái. Tàu-j chi-s chiong hin-iú ê kúi ê bûn-j t²-àn tàu chòe sin-ê bûn-j. Chhi-kóng ng kap tàu chòe j; ng 3 ê tàu chòe j; ng 2 ê kap 1 ê tàu chòe j; che chi-s Hànj li-té s -i ê he-ì-j (). Siá-m h s im-hòa neh? N-s tàu-j ê kòe-thêng khó-l tih goân-sú bûn-j t²-àn hoat-im, chi-s im-hòa. Im-hòa -sái hun-chòe oân-choân im-hò kap p-hn im-hòa. Lán ti-seng ng Eng-gí lâi chòe l, oân-choân im-hòa chi-s hin-ti Eng-gí s -i rebus writing ê kài-lim. T²-pió 3 li-té ê Eng-gí 4U pún-té s 4 ê U ê ì-sù, -koh t rebus writing tong-tiong, bô-koán i goân-lâi s siá ì-sù, chí-iàu in ê hoat-im chin oá, chi k thh-lâi piáu-s sin kài-lim for you (i tih lí ). 4 U 4 ê U for you T²-pió 3. ng Eng-gí 4U chòe rebus ê l. Nng t²-pió 4 ê Tâi-gí lâi chòe l, goân-pún s 7 lip thô-á, -koh i ê hoat-im hm chhit-thô chin oá, s -í chi chioh-ng lâi piáus chhit-thô chit-ê gí-sû. Rebus writing ê chòe-hoat n ng Hàn-j lâi kóng chi-s s -i ê ká-chioh-j. 7 chhit-thô, sg (to play) T²-pió 4. ng Tâi-gí chòe rebus ê l

95 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 93 Siá-m h s p-hn im-hòa neh? Chi-s chioh-ng hin-iú bûnj t²-àn ê sî kan-ta chhú-ng i kî-tiong ê im-s± niâ. T Hàn-j li-té, k -chá ê hoán-chhiat () chi-s chit-khoán p-hn im-hòa ê l. Chhi-kóng t²-pió 5 li-té hun-pit chhú ([t]) kap ([ong]) lâi piáu-kì ê hoat-im [tong]. T se-hong, k Ai-k p-bûn li-té sia-hû bûn-j m-s chit-khoán p-hn im-hòa ê bûn-j. + [to] [chong] [tong] T²-pió 5. Hàn-j hoán-chhiat s p-hn im-hòa ê l Bûn-j hoat-tián kòe-thêng li-té kái-koat tông-im--g-sû ê hoat-t Bûn-j ê hoat-tián kòe-thêng lìn kan-ta tng-hêng, tàu-j kap im-hòa ê kòe-thêng iáu bô kàu. In-i im-hòa ê kòe-thêng sui-jiân -sái khek-hk bûn-j t²-àn iú-hn ê bn-tê, -koh i se-thòa-chhut kngim bô-kng ì-sù ê tông-im--g-sû. i-tih kái-koat chit-ê bn-tê, ch tê sêng-sk ê bûn-j h-thóng chi ài chhe-chhut kái-koat hong-àn. Chit-ê bn-tê thong-siông s ùi piàn-keng phin-j-hoat hk-chiá chengka khu-pit hû-h lâi kái-koat. T im-s± bûn-j li-té to-s± s í piàn-keng phin-j-hoat lâi kái-koat tông-im--g-sû. Í Eng-bûn ûi l, kng hoat-im ê to, too, two hun-pit phin-siá chòe bô-kng j; see kap sea m-s bô-kng phin-j. Sui-bóng im-s± bûn-j to-s± chhái-ing piàn-keng phin-j-hoat, -koh m-s

96 94 kap chhái-ing cheng-ka khu-pit hû-h ê l. Tâi-oân Tân Khèng-chiu ( ) s hoat-bêng ê Tâi-gí kho-kin () chi-s chit-ê chòe-hoat, i chiong Tâi-gí gí-sû hun-chòe 60 li, múi-ch t-li ch t-ê hû-h piáu-s (h-chòe kho-kin ), chhi-kóng % piáu-s s±-j, z piáu-s tng-být. Sòa--lâi i k kho-kin ka t gí-sû u-piah, chhi-kóng kau% kap kauz, án-ne chi-sái khu-pit kng-im ê kap. Hàn-j li-té ê hêng-sia-j chi-s ng cheng-ka khu-pit hû-h lâi kái-koat tông-im--g-sû ê bn-tê. Chhi-kóng kap pê-pê hoat chòe /kang/, -koh hun-pit ng khu-pit hû-h kap lâi khupit gí-ì Im-chat kap im-s± bûn-j ê chhut-hin Tng-tong lán-lâng hoat-kak gí-sû s ùi khah-sòe ê im-chat (syllable) k±-sêng=ê, keng-kòe im-chat tng-hêng kap kán-hòa ê kòethêng liáu, im-chat bûn-j chi chhut-hin à. J t-pún ê Kana s tián-hêng ê im-chat bûn-j ti-piáu. J t-pún-lâng chioh-ng Hàn-j liáu, in hoat-kak gí-sû s ùi im-chat k±-sêng, in ch t-khai-sí chi seng ng bô-kng ê Hàn-j lâi kì-lik múich t-ê J t-gí im-chat; che chi-s s -i bn-hih Kana () ê iûlâi (Habein 1984:12). u-lâi in hoat-kak kng ch t-ê im-chat ng kng ch t-ê Hàn-j lâi piáu-s chi hó, koh chìn-ch t-p chiong hit-ê Hàn-j ê pit-o kán-hòa, chi hêng-sêng sûn im-chat bûn-j Kana (Seeley 1991:59). Chhi-kóng, in ch t-khai-sí kéng j lâi piáu-s /a/ im-chat, l-bóe k kán-hòa-chòe ; k j (/ri/) kán-hòa-chòe ; k j (/no/) kán-hòa-chòe. Hân-kok-lâng chioh-ng Hàn-j liáu ch t-khai-sí m-s chioh-ng

97 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 95 kui-ê Hàn-j tòng-chòe piáu-kì im-chat hk-chiá sû-s± (morpheme) ê hû-h; chit-khoán ê chòe-hoat piáu-hin t in ê hiong-chat () kap l-thk () téng-thâu (Ledyard 1966; Taylor and Taylor 1995). Lbóe in chìn-ch t-p hoat-kak im-chat s ùi khah-sòe ê im-s± (phoneme) k±-sêng=ê, keng-kòe chéng-lí kap kán-hòa, in ng ch t-ê kán-hòa ê hûh lâi piáu-kì múi-ch t-ê im-s±, che chi-s Hân-kok im-s± bûn-j Gnbûn (Hangul) ê iû-lâi (Shin et al. 1990). Chhi-kóng, Hân-kok-j s ùi sa-ê im-s± hû-h,, kap s tàu--khí-lâi; koh in-i si Hàn-j j-ûi pâi-lit hong-sek ê éng-hióng, s -í Gn-bûn m-s j-ûi ê pâi-lit hong-sek. + + [h] [a] [n] [han] T²-pió 6. Í ûi l ê Hân-kok Gn-bûn bûn-j kiat-k±. 3. Hàn-j ê bûn-j kiat-k± 3.1. Hàn-j Lik-su ê goân-lí kap pún-chit Téng ch t-chat lán hun-sek kòe bûn-j ê hoat-tián kòe-thêng liáu, koh hoan-thâu tg-lâi t -tàng chin chheng-chhó khòa-chhut Hàn-j ê bûn-j kiat-k±. Thian-liông-kóng, Hàn-j put-kò s ùi gí-sû bûn-j iánchìn kàu im-chat bûn-j kòe-thêng-tiong ê Tiong-toat-seng (); in-i poàn-t²-jî-hùi, chìn-hòa bô-oân-choân, s -í Hàn-j sg s ch tchióng kòe-t-kî ê sû-s± im-chat bûn-j. N chi bûn-j ê sêng-sk-t lâi kóng, Hàn-j ê goân-thâu it-poa

98 96 kap s ùi Siong-tiâu u-kî ( se-goân chêng 14 kàu chêng 11 sè-kí) ê Kahkut-bûn () sg khí. Kah-kut-bûn keng-kòe Chiu-tiâu, Chhun-chiu, Chiàn-kok sî-kî ê hoat-tián, kàu kah Chîn-sí-hông thun-pèng lik kok, kui-tng sió-thon () chiâ-chò phiau-chún ê bûn-j liáu, Hàn-j ê j-hêng kap kiat-k± chiah ti-khài ún-tng--lh-lâi. 2 K -chá-lâng hun-sek Hàn-j ê bûn-j kiat-k±, kui-lp-chhut Liksu ê Hàn-j ch-j goân-chek. Bô-kng ê hk-chiá tùi Lik-su tmph-á bô-kng ê kiàn-kái. N chiàu tong-hàn sî-ti Kh Sn () ê tùchok Soat-bûn Kái-j () ê kóng-hoat, Lik-su s: B-chió lâng kiò-s Lik-su s Hàn-j ch-j ê tk-iú tk-sek, t k Lik-su tòng-chò s piáu-ì bûn-j ê piáu-hin. S-s t-sing, Hàn-j pngbô khah gâu, i m-s tòe tih téng-bn s -kóng ê sè-kài bûn-j hoat-tián ê kha-jiah teh kiâ niâ. -bn lán chi lâi hun-sek Lik-su ê pún-chit kap ián-chìn kòe-thêng. Hàn-j li-bn chin-chià piáu-ì kong-lêng ê kî-s t kan-ta kí chhi-hêng-j, chí-s-j kap he-ì-j ; chit 3 p-pun hp--khí-lâi bô chhiau-kòe Hàn-j chóng-s± ê 6%. Chhi-hêng-j chú-iàu s kun-kù hit- 2 Sui-jiân Hàn-j ùi chit-chm khai-sí khah k±-tng ê j-hêng, -koh lán m -thang b-kì-tit i t lk-sú ián-piàn kòe-thêng tiong iáu s keng-kòe l-su, chhó-su, khái-su, pòachhó-khái téng bô-kng ê j-hêng piàn-hòa.

99 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 97 kóa k-thé (concrete) ê s t-sû ê ga-hêng tk-teng lâi chhòng-ch, chhi-kóng chhi), (lk), (hî), s -í s í gí-sû ûi tan-i ê t²-hêng bûn-j. Chí-s-j ê iû-lâi chú-iàu s beh b²-hóng chhi-hêng-j ê chòe-hoat lâi biâu-siá kán-tan ê thiu-sing (abstract) gí-sû; in-i beh ng t²-àn lâi biâu-siá thiu-sing ê gí-sû bô hiah kán-tan chòe, s -í chí-sj t Lik-su li-té chiàm bô kah 1%. He-ì-j hoat-tián chhut-lâi m-s beh chhù-lí kán-tan ê thiusing gí-sû. He-ì-j chi-s téng-bn s -kóng ê tàu-j, i ê chò-hoat s l-ing hin-iú ê bûn-j hû-h k tàu chòe sin-ê bûn-j ch-hp. Chhikóng (chhi-nâ) ji-tih piáu-s kóng s ùi chin ch chhi-bk hêng-sêng ê, chi ùi, kap tàu--khí-lâi. Chiàu kóng s ài siá chòe, -koh i-tih phòe-hp Hàn-j sì-kak chng-á ê thoânthóng tk-sek, s -í chi k tiông-sin pâi-lit chòe sì-kak hêng ê. N k he-ì-j ê ch-j hong-hoat èng-ing t Eng-gí téng-thâu s siá khoán ê chêng-hêng leh? Ká-sú Eng-bûn s chhái-ing j-ûi ê pâi-lit hong-sek, án-ne forest (chhi-nâ) t sin Eng-bûn-j lìn -sái siá chòe t²-pió 7 s piáu-hin ê ùi 3 ê wood tàu--khí-lâi ê b²-i. T²-pió 7. He-ì-j èng-ing t Eng-gí forest téng-thâu. He-ì-j pún-té bô it-tng s tan-im-chat (chhi-kóng Eng-gí forest ê l), -koh si thoân-thóng Hàn-j ch t j ch t im-chat ê énghióng soah piàn-chiâ í tan-im-chat ûi goân-chek. Hin-ti kî-s t m b-chió í to-im-chat ûi chú ê he-ì-j, chhi-kóng chio-châi-chìn-pò

100 98 kap () t Tâi-oân si-he-sing siá chòe t²-pió 8 án-ne. T²-pió 8. ê sin he-ì-j N kóng-kàu ká-chioh-j, i chi-s lán téng-bn s -kóng ê bûn-j im-hòa kòe-thêng, i chi-s -koán bûn-j goân-pún piáu-kì ê gí-ì, kan-ta k i tòng-chò kì-im hû-h lâi sú-ing. Ot-lâm ê J-lâm t hoat-tián ê chá-kî m-s í ká-chioh-j ûi chú (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005a). Tâioân ê Kha-la-OK Tâi-gí koa-sû kap thoân-thóng koa-á-chheh li-té ê Tâi-gí ng-j chin ch chi-s ng ká-chioh-j lâi chhù-lí; bk-chêng Tâi-oân si-he-sing chin liû-hêng ê hóe-chhi-bûn chin ch m-s n-ing ká-chioh-j ê goân-lí. Chin ch lâng phoe-phêng Tâi-gí-koa ê Hàn-j ká-chioh-j s-ph tàu-j, -koh ká-chioh-j m-s hû-hp Lik-su goân-lí neh! S án-chóa k -chá-lâng ng ká-chioh-j t-sái, hin-ti-lâng t b-sái? N k ká-chioh-j ê ch-j hong-hoat èng-ing t Eng-gí téng-thâu s siá khoán ê chêng-hêng leh? N ng Lô-má-j lâi su-siá, án-ne back 2 school li-té ê 2 chi-s to ê ká-chioh-j. Nng Hàn-j lâi siá Eng-gí, chi-s I have two dogs ê ká-chioh-j. Tong-jiân, m khó-lêng lâng ng -bn (2) ê ká-chioh-j lâi su-siá. Tàu-té beh ng siá-m h j chiah hó? Tong-jiân, chi lâng kah-ì!? Che chi-s Hàn-j ê giâm-ting bn-tê! (1) = I have two dogs (2) = I have two dogs

101 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 99 Sui-bóng ká-chioh-j -sái ng lâi piáu-kì s - ê kháu-gí gí-sû, - koh i ch-chiâ sin k bûn-j j-g ê hn-lon. Chhi-kóng Eng-gí ê khó-lêng si j-bn ê éng-hióng hông g-he chòe pi-ai ê chhng -sa ê lông-hu t hia koah th²-tu. In-i ká-chioh-j ch-sêng sin k j-g ê hn-lan, s -í hêng-siaj chi chhut-hin à. Chhi-kóng, khó-lêng lâng ching téng-bn (1) kap (2) ê l l-ing hêng-sia goân-lí kái-siá chòe -bn ê (3) : (3) Sui-bóng (3) hû-hp hêng-sia-j ê goân-lí, -koh bô it-tng s - ê lâng lóng jn-tông chit-khoán j, khó-lêng lâng kái-siá chòe -bn (4) kap (5) ê ng-j. (4) (5) Í-sing (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) ê l lóng teh piáu-kì I have two dogs, m lóng hû-hp Lik-su ê ch Hàn-j goân-chek. Tàu-té siá-lâng ê ng-j khah tih? Bô-lâng -tih, m bô-lâng tih! Che s Hàn-j ê giâm-ting bn-tê! M-s i-siá-m h Tâi-gí Hàn-j phái phiau-chún-hòa ê bûn-j in-s± chi-it. Lik-su li-té ê choán-chù, s kí kui-ê Hàn-j hông tòng-chòe kng j sú-ing. Choán-chù kî-s t chi-s -hêng-tông-g-j () hk-chiá s kóng Hàn-j ê piàn--thé (). K -chá ê gián-kiù-chiá ts -chai i-siá-m h chit kúi j -sái h thong, t k kóng s -tàng h choán ê choán-chù-j. Kî-s t, s -i ê choán-chù-j, s t bô-kng sîkhong, bô-kng khong-kan, bô-kng sú-ing-chiá ê chêng-hêng chi-h pit-jiân ê piàn--thé sán-být. S -í choán-chù kî-s t -s siá-m h ch-j goân-chek. Bk-koài kn-lâi ê Lik-su gián-kiù-chiá í-keng tuh-tuh-á

102 100 kap chiong choán-chù pâi-tû t Hàn-j ch-j hong-hoat chi-ga ( 1995:125). Chóngkè Kahkut bûnj 2 nd A.D. Liksu ngâu -lit 12 th A.D. Liksulik He-ì 3.2. Hàn-j s chìn-hòa bô-oân-choân ê sû-s± im-chat bûn-j N àn Lik-su ê goân-chek, k Hàn-j chòe hun-li, múi-ch t-li chiàm ê pasiantoh ga-ch leh? Àn-chiàu Lí Hàu-tng (1992:21) kunkù Kah-kut-bûn (), Lik-su Ngâu-lit (), Lik-su-lik ( ), sa chióng hun-pit ti-piáu bô-kng sî-kî ê Hàn-j s chòe ê thóng-kè chéng-lí, -sái ùi -bn t²-pió 9 kap t²-pió 10 chit 2 tiu pió khòa-chhut múi-ch t-li s chiàm ê pasiantoh, m-tàng ùi chia khòachhut Hàn-j ê bûn-j kiat-k± t lk-sú hoat-tián-tiong ê ián-piàn kòethêng. Tipiáu nîti 14 th -11 th B.C. Chhihêng Chís Kachioh Hêngsia Choánchù Putsiông j-s± % pasiantoh kiông kiông jik kiông jik kiông J-s± % pasiantoh kiông jik kiông kiông jik kiông J-s± % pasiantoh kiông kiông kiông jik jik kiông T²-pió 9. Hàn-j Lik-su ch-j pí-l ián-piàn.

103 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 101 T²-pió 10. Hàn-j Lik-su ch-j pí-l ián-piàn. Ùi t²-pió 9 kap t²-pió 10 -sái khòa-chhut kóng Lik-su li-té ê hêng-sia-j pí-l lú lâi lú koân, chhun=ê hit kúi li lóng lú lâi lú k. Lán n k Lik-su (bô pau-hâm choán-chù) kun-kù in ê gí-im tan-i kap ián-chìn kai-ta lâi k khòa, -sái hun-sek chòe t²-pió 11 án-ne. In-i hêng-sia-j pí-l lú lâi lú koân, t chit-ê t²--lìn -sái khòa-chhut Hàn-j s ùi gí-sû bûn-j óng sû-s± im-chat bûn-j hoat-tián. Ián-chìn kai-ta Gí-im tan-i Gí-sû (Word) T²-àn im-chat (Logosyllable) Sû-s± im-chat (Morphosyllable) T²-hêng bûn-j Ì-hû bûn-j Chhi-hêng-j Chí-s-j He-ì-j Ká-chioh-j Sia-hû bûn-j ( im-hòa ) Hêng-sia-j T²-pió 11. Hàn-j ián-chìn ê kai-ta kap s piáu-s ê gí-im tan-i.

104 102 kap i-siá-m h Hàn-j bô kè-sik óng sûn im-chat bûn-j hk-chiá ims± bûn-j ê s -i phin-im bûn-j hoat-tián? In-i Hàn-j hoat-tiánchhut hêng-sia-j í-u, bô koh kè-sik chiong sia-pêng kap hêngpêng chìn-ch t-p phiau-chún-hòa kap kán-hòa, s -í bô-hoat-t hêngsêng sûn im-chat bûn-j. Chhi-kóng, hêng-sia-j,,, téng t Hôa-gí lìn lóng thk chòe [ku] (), -koh soah hun-pit ng [ku ], [ku ], [ku ],[kau] bô-kng ê sia-pêng piáu-s. Koh, pê-pê ch t-ê sia-pêng j, -sî piáu-kì hoat-im [ku ], -sî piáu-kì [ku] (eg.,), -sî piáu-kì [ku] (,), -sî koh khah hàm piáu-kì [hu] (,). Í-sing s -kóng ê s ch t ê sia-im iû kúi-ê sia-pêng piáu-kì, ch t ê sia-pêng piáu-kì kúi-ê bô-kng sia-im ê bô phiau-chún-hòa hinsing. N-chún k -chá-lâng chiong i phiau-chún-hòa, chhi-kóng [ku ] im t iû piáu-kì t hó; j chi kan-ta piáu-kì [ku ], bô koh piáu-kì [hu]. Sòa--lòe koh ching j pit-o kán-hòa, chhi-kóng. Án-ne chi-s im-chat j-bó ê chhut-sì. Hêng-sia-j beh án-chóa phiau-chún-hòa kap kán-hòa -sái koh ng tong-ti chù-im hû-h lâi kú-l. Chhi-kóng,,, -sái ng chòe sia-pêng, siá chòe chhi t²-pió 12 ánne. T²-pió 12. ng chòe sia-pêng, í,,, ûi l. Hêng-sia-j -t sia-pêng bn-tê, hêng-pêng m-s -lkbk-chè: ch t ê hêng-pêng khó-lêng kúi-ê bô-kng ê gí-ì, ch t-ê gí-ì khó-lêng ùi kúi-ê bô-kng ê hêng-pêng piáu-s. Chhi-kóng, ê

105 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 103 hêng-pêng s thâng ê ì-sù, -koh li-té ê kap thâng bô koan-h; ê hêng-pêng kap koan-h, -koh,, li-té ê kap chúi bô koan-h. Koh chhi-kóng, pêpê beh piáu-s ê ì-hâm, soah,, li-té 3 chióng bôkng ê hêng-pêng,, ; chiàu kóng hêng-pêng èng-kai phiau-chún-hòa, pí-jû -sái it-lýt ng lâi piáu-s, án-ne, tàng kái-siá chòe kap. 4. Hàn-j ê bê-su kap tùi bûn-hk bûn-hòa hoat-tián ê ch -gi Sui-bóng Hàn-j s ch t-chióng chìn-hòa bô-oân-choân ê sû-s± imchat bûn-j, -koh chin ch lâng iáu-s tùi i piáu-ì bûn-j ê bê-su. In- i bê-su, s -í -bn chit-kóa hin-sing chhut-hin Gí-sû Hàn-j hòa hin-sing Si Hàn-j kàu-ik ê lâng kheng-hiòng jn-ûi múi-ch t-ê gí-sû tan-im-chat sû-s± hk-chiá ng-j, lán -sái kóng che s ch t-chióng imchat Hàn-j hòa ê sim-lí -kî ê hin-sing (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005c). Che s in-i si Hàn-j kàu-ik ê lâng khah gâu si Hàn-j ê ch t j ch t imchat, múi j k-p hêng, im, g ê éng-hióng, hoan-thâu lâi jn-ûi múi-ch t-ê gí-sû (word) ê im-chat (syllable) lóng- hêng, im, g ê Hànj. Pí-jû kóng, cha-b (female) chit-ê sû s- -s lâi ch s -i ê Hàngí, s- -s pún-j iáu chin cheng-ln, -koh Hàn-j ê sú-ingchiá iû-kî s Tâi-gí gí-goân gián-kiù-chiá, chi-kî tk-ê im-chat lóng- Hàn-j, chi chhe chhut hk-chiá tòng-chò cha-b ê Hàn-j siá-hoat. Koh pí-jû kóng, chhit-thô (to play) chi-,

106 104 kap kap téng ê siá-hoat. Im-chat Hàn-j-hòa ê sim-lí -kî ê hin-sing -sái kái-sek i-siá-m h bk-chêng Tâi-oân si-he chin ch lâng ài chòe Tâi-gí sok-goân, tui-kiû pún-j ê khang-khòe. Siá-m h s pún-j? Kám chin-chià pún-j? Lán -sái ng téngbn Eng-gí (I have two dogs) lâi soat-bêng. Ká-sú b m h-lâng, khó-pí kóng A-sn-á t k -chheh lìn thk-tih, i t jn-ûi s I ê pún-j. Ká-sú lng-ga ch t-ê lâng, khó-pí kóng A-hoe-á t pt-pún k -chheh lìn thk-tih, án-ne A-hoe-á chi jn-ûi chiah s I ê pún-j. Tâi-oân ê bûn-jîn in-i si Hàn-j-hòa ê éng-hióng soah tîm-bê t chhe Tâi-gí pún-j ê khang-khòe, tian-tò bô sá chù-ting Tâi-gí bûnhk chok-phín ê chhòng-chok. Khó-pí kóng 1930 nî-ti ê Tâi-oân o-bûn ln-chiàn kap 1990 nî-ti ê Tâi-gí-bûn n-tng lóng ching chiau-tiám khg t Hàn-j ng-j ê cheng-g ( 1999, 2003). In-i kòethâu chù-ting pún-j, bô-hêng-tiong soah éng-hióng tih Tâi-gí bûnhk chok-phín ê s±-ling bô-hoat-t ti-ling cheng-ka Hàn-j tùi gí-sû jn-ti kap gí-ì piáu-tt ê éng-hióng Hàn-j tùi gí-sû jn-ti kap gí-ì piáu-tt ê éng-hióng -bn kúi hong-bn: T-it, khiàm-khoeh tan-sûn piáu-im kong-lêng, g-t gí-sû ê ì- hâm. In-i Hàn-j s sû-s± im-chat bûn-j, múi-ch t-j -sái kóng lóng s ch t ê sû-s±, tng thk-chiá thk-tih chit-ê gí-sû ê sî, khah gâu si-tih kî-tiong ê sû-s± éng-hióng. Ká-sú, sû-s± ê ê kò-pit ì-g hm gí-sû ê chéng-thé ì-g kng-khoán, án-ne chi bô bn-tê. Tn-s, ká-sú in bôkng-khoán, chi sán-seng hn-iâu. Pí-jû-kóng, (Sam-tiau-

107 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 105 kak), gí-goân lâi-ch Se-pan-gâ-bûn San Diego, goân-pún kap bô koan-h, -koh ng Hàn-j liáu khó-lêng g-t thk-chiá liân-sióng tih sa chiah tiau. Koh chhi-kóng, Tâi-lâm kon ê t-miâ goân-té s pê-p-chk Siraya chk chk-gí mata i chi-s bkchiu (eyes) ê ì-sù; -koh ng Hàn-j liáu khó-lêng hông g-he kap ng -kok ê môa-á, tu-á, koan-h. T-j, khiàm-khoeh to-im-chat gí-sû ê koan-lim, sok-pk gí-giân hoat-tián. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê su-siá h-thóng t tg-kî ê gí-im hm gí-ì tan-i thoat-l ê lk-sú hoat-tián chi-h, ch t ê gí-sû thongsiông lóng iû ch t ê im-chat ê Hàn-j piáu-s. I sán-seng ê éng-hióng -sái chi ng hong-bn lâi kóng. T-it, chi sin ch gí-sû ê kòe-thêng lâi kóng, in-i tan-im-chat -tàng chhòng-ch chhut-lâi ê hoat-im ch-hp chin iú-hn, tn-s jîn-li su-iàu ê gí-sû s tk-kang teh cheng-ka, itih l-ing iú-hn ê hoat-im ch-hp lâi biâu-siá bû-hn ê gí-sû, k-putj-chiong chí-hó thàu-kòe hù-ch ê pn-hoat, chhin-chhi cheng-ka sia-tiu, cheng-ka hêng-sia-j, thang phiah-bián kng im bô-kng ì-sù ê kng-im-sû ê chhut-hin. T-j, chi goân-iú ê kháu-gí gí-sû lâi kóng, gí-sû tg-kî t tan-im-chat ê Hàn-j ê éng-hióng chi-h, kháu-gí chim-chim si su-bn-gí éng-hióng, l-bóe hêng-sêng kháu-gí ê to-imchat gí-sû hông tan-im-chat-hòa. Che s bûn-j sok-pk gí-giân hoattián ê s t-l. Lán n týt-phòa kòe-khì í tan-im-chat ch sû ê koan-lim t -tàng kiám-chió tông-im-sû sán-seng ê ki-he! Ch t-kóa-lâng jn-ûi itih phiah-bián tông-im-sû ê khùn-jiáu, s -í ài kè-sik sú-ing Hàn-j. Chit-khoán koan-lim -sái kóng s tó kó ûi in, ching ch-sêng ê kiat-kó tòng-chòe ín-khí ê goân-in. T-sa, gí-sû hm gí-sû chi-kan ê pian-kài bô chheng-chhó, ch-

108 106 kap sêng gí-ì hâm-h² put-chheng. Hàn-j in-i tg-kî ê gí-im hm gí-ì tan-i thoat-l, u--lâi hêng-sêng bûn-giân-bûn chit-chióng chhùi kóng--ê ch t thò, chhiú siá--ê koh ch t thò ê tk-sû b²-sek. Bûn-giân-bûn ê su-siá hong-sek png-bô k-thé hoán-èng kháu-gí, kan-ta thàu-kòe té-té kúi-ê Hàn-j chi chiong khài-lim piáu-s chhut-lâi, chi li-s t²-pió 2 s piáu-s ê bûn-j hoat-tián kai-ta. Chit-chióng piáu-s hong-hoat ê sióng-sing khong-kan chin ta, gí-ì chin bô chheng-chhó, bô-knglâng -tàng bô-kng ê kái-soeh. 20 sè-kí í-u, sui-jiân ph-o-bûn ntng kap kháu-gí hm su-bn-gí kiat-hp chò-hóe, -koh tk j Hàn-j lóng -tàng tòng-chò sû-s± ê tk-sek iáu-s chûn-chi. Chit-ê sû-s± ê tksek, kóng hó-thia s-tàng h Hàn-j bû-hn ê ch-sû kong-lêng; kóng phái-thia s ch-sêng gí-sû hm gí-sû chi-kan ê pian-kài bô chheng-chhó. Chhi-kóng: (6) (7) (8) L-kù (6) li-té ê tàu-té s (sad) -s (difficult to cross)? L-kù (7) li-té ê tàu-té s (safely trade) -s (sex trade in safety)? Chit-chióng gí-sû kài-sòa b²-h² ê chêng-hêng n ng Lô-má-j chi -sái chin kín kái-koat, chhi-kóng nan-kuo ( ) kap nan kuo (). L-kù (8) s bûn-giân-bûn gí-ì b²-h² ê l. L-kù (8) n chi i ê gíkù kiat-k± lâi khòa, -sái chin ch kái-soeh, chhi-kóng -bn (8a) kàu (8d). Tàu-té tó ch t-chióng kái-sek khah tih? Lóng tih, m lóng - ih! Che t ài khòa siáng kái-soeh-koân. N-chún lí s kho-kí khóchhì ê chú-khó-koa, lí kóng tó ch t-chióng kái-soeh tih i t tih!

109 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 107 (8a) (?) (8b) (8c) (8d) S t-chi-kóng, bûn-giân-bûn s ch t-chióng chìn-hòa bô-oân-choân ê su-siá hong-sek. Bûn-giân-bûn ch-sêng gí-ì b²-h² chiàu kóng s i ê tì-mi-siong, -koh tg-kî í-lâi soah h hit-kóa Hàn-j kì-tek l-ekchiá thh-lâi soan-thoân Hàn-j kap bûn-giân-bûn ko-chhim-bhchhek () ê ká-sing chià-kháu Hàn-j sok-pk Tâi-oân bûn-hk bûn-hòa ê hoat-tián Tâi-oân-lâng in-i tùi Hàn-j bê-su, soah bô-hêng-tiong tùi Tâioân bûn-hk kap bûn-hòa hoat-tián sán-seng éng-hióng. Lán kú-l soatbêng jû h. T-it, hn-chè tih Tâi-oân o-bûn ê ti-chiòng-sèng kap ph -phiàn-sèng. In-i beh thk Hàn-j-sek Tâi-oân o-bûn chi ài seng thk Hàn-j, tì-sú -hiáu Tâi-oân o-bûn Hàn-j su-siá ê jîn-s± pí it-poa Hàn-bûn ê jîn-kháu khah-chió. Sik-gí kóng Hàn-j n beh thk bat, chhùi-chhiu t phah sí-kat, chi-s teh keng-thé Hàn-j phái h ê bn-tê 3. T 1920 nî-ti ê Tâi-oân bat Hàn-j ê lâng t bô ch, Tâi-gí ê su-siá n oá-khò bat Hàn-j ê jîn-kháu, ch-jiân lú hông pian-iân-hòa. Ph -phiàn ê kok-bîn bûn-hk ch-jiân chi khah oh sánseng. T-j, hn-chè tih Tâi-oân e-bûn ê phiau-chún-hòa. Kn-ti kokbîn bûn-hk ê hêng-sêng kap bîn-chk gí-giân phiau-chún-hòa s h- 3 Iú-koan Hàn-j ê hk-s p hu-lýt, -sái chham-ot Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005d) kap Chiung (2003).

110 108 kap sing hû-chhî king-sengê. Hàn-j-sek Tâi-oân o-bûn in-i ng Hànj su-siá tì-sú phiau-chún-hòa khang-khòe chin phái chìn-hêng ( 1990:194). Chit-chióng chêng-hêng chi chhin-chhi Ot-lâm sú-ing J-lâm kng-khoán, sui-jiân sú-ing chiâ-chheng-tang=à -koh iáu-s bô phiau-chún-hòa (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005a:90). In-i Tâi-gí Hàn-j bô phiau-chún-hòa, ch-jiân t kàng-k i chiâ-chò bûn-hk gí-giân ê ph phiàn-sèng. T-sa, ch-sêng Tâi-oân o-bûn sú-ing-chiá bô si ting-s, hông khòa-khin. Tâi-oân-lâng beh ng Hàn-j lâi su-siá Tâi-oân o-bûn chjiân tú tih ch t-kóa ng Hàn-j siá-b-chhut--lâi ê gí-sû. Chit-ê sî-chn chin ch lâng chi ng ch-j, chhe pún-j hk-chiá ng ká-chioh-j ê hong-sek lâi khek-hk. In-i chit-chióng tk-sû-j kap koài-j t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lìn thong-siông lóng s hông tòng-chò k bûn-j lâi khòa-thi, tì-sú Tâi-oân gí-bûn m hông tòng-chò bô chúi-chún koh kl ê bûn-j. T-sì, hn-chè ga-lâi-sû ê khip-siu. Ga-lâi-sû (loanwords) s ch t ê gí-giân ê sû-li cheng-ka kap seng-tióng ê ting-iàu lâi-goân chi-it. N bô hó-ê bûn-j kang-kh thang khip-siu ga-lâi-sû, án-ne chit-ê gí-giân chi chhut-hin sêng-tióng thêng-tùn ê chêng-hêng. Í J t-pún ûi l, t 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî Bêng-t ûi-sin í-chêng, J t-pún s í Hàn-j ûi chèngsek su-siá bûn-j. Bêng-t ûi -sin sî-kî in-i ta khui mg-h hm se-au kok-ka chìn-hêng kau-liû, s -í múi-j t chin ch ê kài-lim kap s-být ê chhut-hin. Beh án-chóa chin kín, chin hu-lýt koh chin chèng-khak ê su-siá chit-kóa kài-lim kap s-být neh? Chi-s chit-ê su-kiû chiah chhiok-sú J t-pún-lâng chek-kk chìn-hêng gí-bûn kái-kek, ting-s Kana ê sú-ing. i-siá-m h kóng Hàn-j bô sek-hp ng lâi piáu-kì ga-

111 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 109 lâi-sû? In-i i khah gâu ch-sêng gí-ì hâm-h² koh bô iông- phiauchún-hòa. Chhi-kóng, Eng-gí-miâ Bush t Tâi-oân hoan-chòe, t Tiong-kok hoan-chòe ; -t bô phiau-chún-hòa koh hông g-he kap (p±) koan-h. Koh, ch t-chióng pháng kiò-chòe croissant, t Tâi-oân Tiong-bûn lìn hoan-chòe ; kám kóng croissant kap koan-h? ch t-chióng pháng kiò-chòe bagel, n hoan-chòe kám khòa-kháu--chit? T g, éng-hióng tih Tâi-oân bîn-chk sèng-keh ê bûn-hòa tkl p-sèng. Ot-lâm-lâng t Hoat-kok thóng-t chi-h thàu-kòe Hoat-kok ê hip-ch hùi-tû Hàn-j, chhiat-tg Ot-lâm hm Tiong-kok chi-kan ê bûn-hòa t-châi (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005b). Tùi-chiàu chi-h, Tâi-oân t J tpún thóng-t chi-h, chh-kî i tih beh khiú-kn pê-pê s Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sêng-goân ê Tâi-oân-lâng hm J t-pún-lâng chi-kan ê koan-h, J t-pún-lâng chi l-ing Hàn-j ê chn-chhun ê kè-tt (sèngî kè-tt) h Tâi-oân-lâng kè-sik sú-ing Hàn-j. Sui-jiân l-bóe J t-púnlâng i tih pâi-hôa, chhim-lik Tiong-kok, soah t 1937 nî kìm-ng Hàn-bûn, -koh í-keng siu-bn=à. Tâi-oân-lâng in-i sú-ing Hàn-j kap siong-koan Hàn-j bûn-hòa sán-phín soah Hàn bîn-chk sióng-sing ê kheh-koan tiâu-ki. Che tùi u--lâi Tâi-oân bûn-hk, bûnhòa kap kok-ka kiàn-k± chin ta ê éng-hióng. Chhi-kóng, Tâi-oân bûn-hk ê hoat-tián ch t-khai-sí s si 17 sèkí sî-ti Ho-lan-lâng chah--j p-lâi ê Sèng-keng bûn-hk kap u--lâi 19 sèkí u-pòa-kî í Tâi-gí Ph-o-j ûi chú ê Ph-o-j bûn-hk ê éng-hióng (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005e). -koh Tâi-oân bûn-hk-kài b-chió lâng soah khi t Hàn-j ê bûn-hk sú-koan, kóng Tâi-oân k -tián bûn-hk ùi Sím Kong-bûn khai-sí, kàu kah 1920 nî-ti koh si Tiong-kok kn-ti ph-

112 110 kap o-bûn n-tng éng-hióng chiah hoat-tián-chhut Tâi-oân sin bûn-hk. In-i bô-hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j ê bê-su, tì-sú b-chió lâng jn-ûi Tâi-oân bûn-hk s Tiong-kok bûn-hk ê chi-liû niâ. In-i án-ne soah kiám-jik Tâi-gí bûn-hk chiâ-chòe Tâi-oân ê tk-l p ê kok-bîn bûnhk ê kiông-t. Tâi-oân-lâng ê Hàn bîn-chk sióng-sing kap kn-ti ê Tiong-kok bîn-chk sióng-sing kî-s t s bô oân-choân kng ê kài-lim, -koh Hàn bîn-chk sióng-sing soah h 1945 nî chiàm-niá Tâi-oân ê Chiú Kàichih tiông-sin kiàn-k± Tâi-oân-lâng ê kok-chk sióng-sing ê ki-chh. Chiú Kài-chih ch t-hong-bn l-ing Tâi-oân goân-iú ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé tk-sek, chhi-kóng sú-ing Hàn-j, chông-pài Jû-hk, kòe k-lk-nî, Tiong-chhiu, Chheng-bêng téng, k choán-o chòe Tiong-kok king-tông-thé ê sióng-sing ki-chh ; lng-ga ch t-hong-bn chi chn-lt chám-tg Tâi-oân pún-th -hòa ê kun, chhi-kóng kìmchí kóng Tâi-oân gí-giân, kìm-chí sú-ing Lô-má-j. Thàu-kòe chhutpán-phín, mûi-thé soan-thoân kap ta Tiong-kok ê kàu-ik h-thóng, Tâi-oân chin kín chi kiàn-l p í Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok ûi ki-chh ê Tiongkok king-tông-thé sióng-sing (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005b). 5. Kiat-ln Pún ln-bûn í Gelb (1952) ê bûn-j hoat-tián lí-ln ûi ln-sýt kichh, kí-chhut Hàn-j png -s it-poa ti-chiòng s jn-ûi ê piáu-ì bûn-j, tian-tò s ch t-chióng chìn-hòa bô oân-choân ê sû-s± im-chat bûn-j. Hàn-j tùi Tâi-oân-lâng ê éng-hióng -t t gí-giân chân-chhù, m t bûn-hk kap bûn-hòa ê hoat-tián téng-thâu. Tâi-oân-lâng in-i sú-ing Hàn-j su-siá, s -í t ga-lâi-sû téng-

113 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 111 thâu ê seng-sán kap chhù-lí sok-t chin bn; jî-chhiá in-i Hàn-j ê b²h²-sèng tì-sú Tâi-oân-lâng teh n-ing su-bn-gí ê sî khah bô kù-hoat ê kài-lim, khah gâu siá-chhut gí-ì b²-h² ê gí-kù. Koh khah giâm-ting=ê s in-i Hàn-j phái h phái siá, tì-sú bûn-j su-siá ê kái-soeh-koân khah gâu hông chiáng-ap t chió-s± ê Hàn-j kì-tek l-ek-chiá chhiú-thâu, hêng-sêng bat Hàn-j=ê kap bat Hàn-j=ê ê kai-kip tùi-l p. Tâi-oân-lâng in-i sú-ing Hàn-j su-siá, s -í ph-o bûn-hk ê hoat-tián ke chin bn nî-ti hit-kóa cháu-chhe Tâi-gí Hàn-j ê lâng n chai-iá ch 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî í-lâi chi lâng ng Tâi-gí Lômá-j chiông-s chhut-pán kap chhòng-chok, n -tàng mài kian-chhî ng Hàn-j, -tàng ching sî-kan cheng-lk ng t Tâi-gí chhòng-chok, án-ne Tâi-gí bûn-hk ê hoat-tián chot-tùi -tàng ke chin chhia-i. Tâi-oân-lâng in-i sú-ing Hàn-j su-siá, s -í it-t t bô-hoat-t kiànl p bûn-hòa tk-l p ê bîn-chk kok-ka (nation-state). Tng-tong 19 sè-kí bóe 20 sè-kí chh hit-kóa Hân-kok, Ot-lâm kap J t-pún chìn-p ê bûnjîn hun-pit thê-chhiòng ng Ot-lâm Lô-má-j, Gn-bûn, kap Kana ê hui-hàn-j bûn-j ê sî, it-poa kok-bîn chin kín chi -sái k chitkhoán bûn-j h--khí-lâi. Tong-jiân, bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek chi án-ne in-i thk-siá lêng-lk kap kok-bîn kàu-ik ê kiàn-l p soah chin kín hêng-sêng--khí-lâi. Che chi chhin-chhi kn-ti se-au kok-ka t chong-kàu kái-kek í-u in-i bîn-chiòng thk-siá lêng-lk ê kiàn-l p liântài tài-tng kok-bîn bûn-hk kap bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek ê hêng-sêng kng-khoán t-lí (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005e). Siong-tùi chi-h, hit-kóa bôhoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j su-khó tiong-sim ê Tiong-kok chió-s± bînchk Chòng-chk, Biâu-chk kap Iâu-chk téng, in-i bô kian-chhî gígiân bûn-hòa ê tk-l p-sèng, s -í t chèng-t-sing m bô-hoat-t hêng-

114 112 kap sêng bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek. Che -tàng h lán khé-s, Tâi-oân-lâng beh chiâ-chò bûn-hòa tk-l p ê kok-ka -s Tiong-kok ê ch-t-khu? Chóng kóng ch t-kù, Tâi-oân-lâng èng-kai thiàu-thoat Hàn-j ê su-khó b²-sek chiah hoat-t t gí-giân, bûn-hk kap bûn-hòa téng-thâu tit-tih tháupàng. Pún ln-bûn hoat-piáu t 2006 nî t-it kài Tâi-oân gí-bûn kap bûn-hòa gián-thó-he, 4 goh j t, Tiong-sang I-hk Ti-hk

115 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng 113 Chham-khó chheh-bk Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chen, Hsuan-Chinh; and Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) Language Processing in Chinese. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Cheng, Chao-Ming Lexical access in Chinese: evidence from automatic activation of phonological information. In Hsuan-Chih Chen & Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) pp Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. (Taiwan edition) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. DeFrancis, John How efficient is the Chinese writing system? Visible Language. Vol.30, No.1, p Flores d Arcais, Giovanni B Graphemic, phonological, and semantic activation processes during the recognition of Chinese characters. In Hsuan-Chih Chen & Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) pp Gelb, I. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Habein, Yaeko Sato The History of The Japanese Written Language. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Hall, Daniel George E A History of South-East Asia. (4 th ed.) London: The Macmillan Press. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in

116 114 kap Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Ledyard, Gari Keit The Korean Language Reform of 1446: the Origin, Background, and Early History of the Korean Alphabet. Ph.D. Dissertation: University of California, Berkeley. Li, Ledong The Role of Phonology in Rading Chinese Single Characters and Two-characters Words with High, Medium and Low phonological Regularities by Chinese Grades 2 and Grade 5 Students. Ph.D. dissertation: Oakland University. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Shih, Sang-Soon; Don-ju Lee; and Hwan-Mook Lee. (eds.) Understanding Hunmin-jong-um. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company. Shu, Hua; and Richard C. Anderson Learning to read Chinese: the development of metalinguistic awareness. In Jian Wang; Albrecht W. Inhoff; and Hsuan-Chih Chen pp Smalley, William. et al Orthography Studies. London: United Bible Societies. Taylor, Insup; and Taylor, Martin M Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins. Tzeng, Ovid. et al Auto activation of linguistic information in Chinese character recognition. Advances in Psychology. Vol.94, p Wang, Jian; Albrecht W. Inhoff; and Hsuan-Chih Chen Reading Chinese Script. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2 ) (2 )

117 CH 3. Hàn-j Bê-su ê Hêng-sêng a hm ê p b ê hm ê c ê ê p d p e ê p

118 116 kap

119 Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka: í Tâi-oân ûi Kò-àn Gián-kiù

120 118 kap 1. Chiân-giân Lán s -kóng ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan s kí khah-chá bat -s chín koh teh sú-ing Hàn-j ê t-khu hk-chiá kok-ka, pau-hâm Otlâm, Hân-kok, Tiâu-sián 1, J t-pún, Sin-ka-ph, Tâi-oân kap Tiong-kok téng. N ùi Benedict Anderson (1991) sióng-sing ê king-tông-thé (imagined communities) koan-tiám chhiat-j p, t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lìn, 19 sè-kí í-chêng lóng- ch t-chióng í Tiong-kok ûi tiong-sim, thàukòe Hàn-j s hêng-sêng ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tông-thé (an imagined Hanji cultural community). Chit-chióng Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tông-thé (kán-chheng-chòe Hàn-j king-tông-thé) ke-kiám lóng éng-hióng tih Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sêng-goân kn-ti ê bîn-chk kok-ka 2 (nation-state) ê kok-chk sióng-sing kiàn-k±. T Tiong-kok, in l-ing Hàn-j king-tông-thé chiâ-chòe kn-ti Tiong-hôa bîn-chk hk-chiá Tiong-kok kok-chk ê sióng-sing kichh. Hit-kóa bô-hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê Chòngchk (), Biâu-chk () kap Iâu-chk () téng, tong-jiân chi bô hêng-sêng in ka-t ê bîn-chk kok-ka. Ah hit-kóa thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê k sêng-goân, chhi-kóng Ot-lâm, Hân-kok, Tiâusián kap J t-pún, lóng tiông-sin kiàn-k± í ka-t ûi chú-thé ê bîn-chk 1 Tiâu-sián chí Tâi-oân ti ing ê ing-sû Pak-hân, Hân-kok chí Lâm-hân. 2 Pún-bûn li-té ê bîn-chk kok-ka s kí 19 sè-kí í-lâi se-hong ê nation-state kài-lim. Nation s kí a society that occupies a particular territory and includes a sense of common identity, history, and destiny, nation-state s kí a nation governed by a state whose authority coincides with the boundaries of the nation (Johnson 1995:188). Chit-hong-bn ê thó-ln m -sái chham-khó Si Chèng-hong (2000).

121 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 119 kok-ka sióng-sing. N ln-kàu Tâi-oân, sui-bóng t 17 sè-kí chh in-i Ho-lan thóng-t soah chiong Tâi-oân sak chi kok-chè bú-tâi, -koh sòa--lâi ê T Sêng-kong kap Chheng-kok thóng-t soah ching Tâi-oân khiú-j p-khì Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan. Tâi-oân ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa tk-sek soah chiâ-chòe J-chhù Ti-chiàn chiàn-u Tiong-kok Kok-bîn-tóng thang thh-lâi chòe Tiong-kok kok-chk sióng-sing ê ki-chh. Sui-jiân t Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok thóng-t sî-ti Tâi-oân ê Tiong-kok-hòa khì-b chin-tng, -koh í Tâi-oân ûi bîn-chk kok-ka sióng-sing ê pún-th hòa lk-ling m it-t t teh thê-seng. Chi án-ne, Tâi-oân ch t-hong-bn Tiong-kok-hòa ê lk-ling teh k khiú, lng-ga ch t-hong-bn m lâi-ch Tâi-oân pún-sin ê púnth -hòa lk-ling teh sio-ián. Ch t ê sin=ê king-tông-thé tang-sî chiah kiàn-k± oân-sêng t ài khòa i kái-k± k king-tông-thé ê sok-t. O ch t-kù-o kóng, í Tâi-oân ûi chú-thé ê bîn-chk kok-ka sióng-sing tang-sî chiah kiàn-l p chi ài khòa Tâi-oân hô-sî chiah kiâ-chhut Hàn-j king-tông-thé. Chit phi ln-bûn ê gián-kiù bk-tek chi-s beh ùi Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê s-iá thàm-thó Hàn-j bûn-hòa tùi kn-ti kap tong-ti Tâi-oân teh kiàn-k± kok-ka ì-sek tong-tiong s ch-sêng ê éng-hióng kap i kái-koat ê hoat-t. 2. Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé ê sióng-sing ki-chh 2.1. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê lk-sú pe-kéng Beh liáu-kái Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê lk-sú pe-kéng, -sái ùi 2 ê hong-hiòng lâi khòa, t-it, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê kok-ka hm Hàn-j hoat-goân-t Tiong-kok ê h-tng koan-h; t-j,hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan

122 120 kap kok-ka li-p ê hoán hong-kiàn, hoán chai-bat lióng-ton, kap tui-kiû bûn-hòa hoat-tián ê s±-kiû (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005f). T-it, ùi Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê kok-ka hm Hàn-j hoat-goân-t Tiong-kok ê h-tng koan-h lâi khòa, Ot-lâm, Hân-kok kap Tiâusián t k -chá lóng bat h Tiong-kok t t-chiap thóng-t--kòe, chi sg u--lâi thoat-l Tiong-kok lâi tk-l p, m lóng it-t t ûi-chhî s Tiong-kok ê sik-kok ê hù-sik t-i. Kong-goân chêng 111 nî, Hàn-tiâu ê Hàn Bú-tè chhut-peng chiàm-niá Ot-lâm 3, ching Ot-lâm lp-j p Tiongkok ê t t-chiap thóng-t. It-t t-kàu Kong-goân 939 nî, Ot-lâm l-ing Tông-tiâu ti-lon ê sî-chn chiah thoat-l Tiong-kok ê t t-chiap thóng-t (Hodgkin 1981). Sui-jiân Ot-lâm-lâng thoat-l Tiong-kok lâi tk-l p, -koh Ot-lâm pit-su sêng-jn Tiong-kok ê chong-chú-kok ê t-i, chit-ê chêng-hêng it-t t iân-sòa kàu 19 sè-kí (SarDesai 1992:19). Konggoân chêng 108 nî, Hàn Bú-tè cheng-hk k Tiâu-sián, siat-l p Gk-lng (), Chin-hoan (), Lîm-tn () kap Hiân-th± () 4 kn. Kong-goân 4 sè-kí, tòa t Ah-lk-kang () lâm-pak it-tài ê Ko-kùl-lâng () kong-chiàm Gk-lng kn, kiat-sok lâi-ch Tiong-kok ê t t-chiap thóng-t, Tiâu-sián poàn-tó sio-sòa hêng-sêng Ko-kù-l (), Pah-chè () kap Sin-lô () 3 ê ông-kok; sui-jiân thoat-l Tiong-kok thóng-t, ti-thé-sing iáu-s Hàn-sek chè-t. Kong-goân 668 nî, Sin-lô thóng-it Tiâu-sián liáu, chek-kk b²-hóng Tông-tiâu chè-t; sòa--lâi ê Ko-l ông-tiâu ( ) koh khak-l p kho-kí chè-t, Tiong-kok ê kengsu piàn-chòe Tiâu-sián-lâng pit-siu ê khò-têng, Hàn-j ê chèng-thóng t-i m t chit-chm ún-k±--khí-lâi (Taylor and Taylor 1995:203, Hit-tong-sî chiàm-niá ê khu-k s téng-û chit-mái ê Ot-lâm pak-p.

123 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka ). N ln-kàu J t-pún, J t-pún ùi sian-chîn sî-ti t hm Tiong-kok chiap-chhiok ê kì-lik, Hàn-tiâu Bú-tè () ê sî-chn koh bat sù h J tpún Hàn-úi-n² kok-ông kim-ìn. Sui-jiân J t-pún -bat si Tiong-kok thóng-t, -koh in-i Hàn-tiâu hm Tông-tiâu ê éng-hióng-lt, Tiongkok m piàn-chòe J t-pún ín-chìn bûn-být chè-t, b²-hóng ê tùi-siòng. Chhi-kóng, J t-pún t 7 sè-kí ê sî-chn s chìn-hêng ê Ti-hòa Kek-sin chi-s b²-hóng Tiong-kok kiàn-l p tiong-iong ch p-khoân thé-chè ê khai-sí (Seeley 1991:40). Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê kok-ka tû-liáu chèng-t téng-thâu si Tiong-kok chi-phòe chi-ga, lng-ga ch t-ê king-tông tk-sek chi-s chioh-ng Hàn-j, ín-chìn Jû-ka su-sióng kap kho-kí chè-t. T chioh- ng Hàn-j ê sî-chn, in lóng tú-tih Hàn-j bô-hoat-t oân-choân piáutt in ka-t ê gí-giân ê bn-tê. In t l-ing Hàn-j chòe hùn-thk, 4 im-thk, 5 hk-chiá ch sin Hàn-j lâi èng-hù chit-ê bn-tê, sm-chì u--lâi kun-kù Hàn-j ê j-hêng bn-bn hoat-tián-chhut in ka-t ê sin bûn-j h-thóng, chhin-chhi-kóng Ot-lâm ê J-lâm (Chu-Nom), Tiâusián ê Gn-bûn 6 (Hangul), kap J t-pún ê Kana. Sui-jiân in hoat-tiánchhut ka-t ê bûn-j, -koh chit-kóa sin bûn-j -t t ta Tiong-kok ê chèng-t kap bûn-hòa kè-k± -bn chin phái seng-chûn, sm-chì t in 4 Hùn-thk (): chioh-ng Hàn-j ê ì-sù, ng pún-kok gí-giân hoat-im. 5 Im-thk (): Bô chhap Hàn-j ê ì-sù, kan-ta chioh-ng Hàn-j ê hàn-gí hoat-im, lâi piáutt pún-kok-gí ê li-s hoat-im. 6 Hangul: Hân-kok (Lâm-Hân) hin-chhú-sî chheng-h Hân-kok bûn-j Hân-bûn ê ì-sù. Hangul s Tiâu-sián gí-bûn gián-kiù kiam chhui-tng-chiá Chiu Sî-keng ( Chu Sigyong) t 1913 nî sing khai-sí sú-ing. Tiâu-sián (Pak-Hân) chheng-h Tiâu-sián bûn-j Chosoncha (Tiâu-sián-j) hk-chiá Chongum (chià-im).

124 122 kap ka-t ê kok-ka li-bn m cho-si kì-tek l-ek ê bûn-jîn thóng-t kai-kip ê khin-s kap tá-ap. Chit-khoán sin bûn-j chiâ-chò Hàn-j ê hù-sik t-i ê chêng-hêng, iân-sòa kàu 19 kap 20 sè-kí, tng-tong hoán s t-bîn, hoán tè-kok ê bîn-chk-chú-g chhia-i--khí-lâi, chiah tuh-tuh-á khai-sí choán-piàn (Chiú Ûi-bûn2005f; Hannas 1997). Ùi kok-ka li-p ê hoán hong-kiàn, hoán chai-bat lióng-ton, tuikiû bûn-hòa hoat-tián ê li-p in-s± lâi khòa, chit kúi-ê kok-ka in-i tg-kî chioh- ng Hàn-j kap bûn-giân-bûn su-siá hong-sek, ch-sêng chiáng-ap Hàn-j ê bûn-jîn thóng-t kai-kip hm thg-chhiah-kha ê chò-sit-lâng ê kai-kip tùi- l p. O ch t-kù-o kóng, Hàn-j -t phái h, phái siá, jî-chhiá chit-chióng k -tián ê bûn-giân-bûn su-siá hongsek hm chò-sit-lâng chhùi kóng ê ph-o hêng-sek oân-choân bô-kng, ch-sêng k -tián keng-su ê kái-soeh-koân chiáng-ap t bûn-jîn kai-kip ê chhiú-thâu. Thg-chhiah-kha ê chò-sit-lâng pêng-sî chò-sit to chò-beliáu--á, ná sî-kan thang khì h siá Hàn-j, hk-s p k -tián? Chit-chióng chêng-hêng l-bóe ián-piàn chòe chiáng-ap Hàn-j ê thóng-t-chiá kap -bat Hàn-j ê p-thóng-t-chiá ê kai-kip chha-pit Koân-k gí-bûn hin-sing T Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té, gí-giân, bûn-j ê sú-ing -sái ng koân-k gí-giân (diglossia) kap koân-k bûn-j (digraphia) ê kàilim lâi hun-sek. Siá-m h h-chòe koân-k gí-giân kap koân-k bûn-j neh? Ki-pún-sing, chit 2 ê ng-sû ê kài-lim s li-s=ê, -koh koân-k gí-giân chú-iàu s kí kháu-gí, koân-k bûn-j s kí su-bn-gí (i-chi-s bûn-j ). N ln-kàu koân-k gí-giân ê kài-lim, Charles Ferguson (1959) s

125 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 123 t-it ê h-thóng-sèng lâi ln-soat diglossia kài-lim ê si-he gí-giân hk-ka. I k koân-k gí-giân tng-g chòe ch t-ê gí-giân ê 2 ê gí-giân piàn-thé (two varieties of the same language), hun-pit tam-jm bôkng ê si-he kong-lêng (social functions). I koh kóng, chit 2 ê gí-giân piàn-thé tong-tiong, kî-tiong ch t-ê pn-ián Koân gí-giân (High language), lng-ga ch t-ê pn-ián K gí-giân (Low language). Koân gí-giân thong-siông khah-koân ê miâ-sia kap bûn-hk thoân-thóng, jî-chhiá ng t chèng-sek tiû-hp. Siong-tùi chi-h, k gí-giân thongsiông hông khòa khah bô khí, ng t hui chèng-sek kap su-jîn tiûhp. u--lâi, Joshua Fishman (1967) chiam-tùi Ferguson ê diglossia kàilim thê-chhut siu-kái, i jn-ûi koân-k gí-giân bô it-tng kan-ta -sái hoat-seng t ch t-ê gí-giân li-té ê 2 ê gí-giân piàn-thé ; i chi-s kóng koân-k gí-giân bô it-tng s gí-giân piàn-thé, m khó-lêng hoat-seng t gí-giân hm gí-giân chi-kan, jî-chhiá gí-giân s±-bk -sái put-chí 2 ê. Án-ne, siá-m h s koân-k bûn-j (digraphia)? Dale (1980:5) ùi Ferguson ê koân-k gí-giân kài-lim iân-sin kàu bûn-j m sek-ing, k tng-g chòe ch t-ê gí-giân sú-ing ng-chióng (hk-chiá í-sing) ê bûn-j su-siá h-thóng. Hàn-hk-ka DeFrancis (1984:59) m chiam-tùi koân-k bûn-j thê-chhut kng-khoán ê tng-g. u--lâi Chiú Ûi-bûn (Chiung 2003:9) k Dale kap DeFrancis ê tng-g siu-kái chòe ch t-ê si-he li-té ch t ê í-sing ê bûn-j h-thóng hun-pit tam-jn bô-kng ê k-thong kong-lêng. Chiú Ûi-bûn chit-khoán ê tng-g chi chhinchhi Fishman tùi koân-k gí-giân ê tng-g kng-khoán, bô hn-ti t kng ch t chióng gí-giân ê piàn-thé. N ng téng-bn s kóng tih ê koân-k gí-giân kap koân-k bûn-

126 124 kap j (hp-chheng koân-k gí-bûn ) lâi khòa, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lité ê chêng-hêng s án-chóa leh? Seng chi kháu-gí lâi kóng, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ch-k í-lâi kok t-hng chi- bô-kng ê gí-giân, chhi-kóng Kg-tang-o, Bân-lâm-o, Kheh-o, Chòng-o, Biâu-o, Iâu-o téng. Sui-jiân in ka-t ka-t ê gí-giân, -koh in hia ê thkchheh-lâng pin-n si beh chi kia-siâ hù khó, chi ài h hông-tè s -chi kia-siâ ê gí-giân (hk-chiá s -i ê kháu-im), in-i hông-tè ê gígiân s hit-tong-sî ê phiau-chún-gí, ng t kàu-ik kap hêng-chèng téng chèng-sek tiû-hp. I chi-s kóng, hit-kóa thk-chheh-lâng pêng-sî seng-oh tong-tiong sui-jiân s ng in t-hng ka-t ê gí-giân, -koh pin-n gîm-si chò-tùi, thk Sì-su Ng -keng t ài b²-hóng kia-siâ thng ê gí-im. Sî-kan ch t--kú, hit-kóa thk-chheh-lâng koh k in b²hóng tih ê kia-siâ gí-im thoân h in chi-t ê hiong-chhin kap u-ti. Tì-sú hit-kóa thk-chheh-lâng ê chi-t gí-giân li-té s -i ê thkchheh-im ( bûn-giân-im ) kap ph-o-im tông-sî chûn-chi ê hinsing. Che m-s lán Tâi-gí li-bn s -i bûn-giân-im kap ph-o-im ê iû-lâi. N ng koân-k gí-giân lâi hun-sek, chi kng ch t ê gí-giân lâi kóng, bûn-giân-im chi-s koân gí-giân, ph-o-im chi-s k gígiân. N chi bô-kng gí-giân chi-kan lâi khòa, hông-tè s -kóng ê gígiân chi-s koân gí-giân, it-poa peh-sì s ng ê chi-t gí-giân chis k gí-g giân. Koân gí-giân in-i tg-kî í-lâi ng t chèng-sek tiûhp kap kho-kí chè-t, s -í hông kám-kak khah chúi-chún, hk-bn; k gí-giân in-i seng (siu) pêng-hoân, s -í kám-kak chin chh-sik. Chhi chit-khoán ê si-he sim-lí kî-s t t bk-chêng Tâi-oân ê si-he lìn iáu chin ph -phiàn. Khó-pí kóng p±-t-hì i s koa-á-hì ê hì-chhut lìn, pin-n ti-kiap kap bûn-jîn chhut-hin, in chi ng bûn-giân-im

127 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 125 kóng-o; n-s siáu-thiú-á teh tak-chhúi-k ching ph-o. N chi su-bn-gí lâi khòa, Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn chi-s koân bûn-j, kî-tha hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê bîn-chk bûn-j lóng sg k bûnj. Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn in-i tg-kî í-lâi hông tòng-chò chèng-thóng bûn-j koh kho-kí chè-t ê thé-chè chi-chhî, s -í si-he ti-chiòng kám-kak sú-ing bûn-giân-bûn khah chúi-chún, hk-bn. Chitchióng hin-sing t hin-chhú-sî ê Tâi-oân si-he m iáu chin ph phiàn, chhi-kóng bng-pâi, chè-bûn, ng bûn-giân-bûn siá seng-pêng kì-s; bi-s mng bûn-giân-bûn siá bi-sú, tùi-liân, sm-chì it-poalâng kóng-o, siá-chok ê sî i tih tián-hong-sîn m lm kóa sêng-gí kap ín-ing k -si, k -bûn. T koân-k gí-bûn ê si-he li-té, koân gí-giân/bûn-j bô it-tng éng-oán koân, k gí-giân/bûn-j m bô it-tng éng-oán k, in ê t-i t it-tng ê tiâu-ki chi-h khó-lêng piàn-tng. -koh, s án-chóa Hànj bûn-giân-bûn hoat-t t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lióng-ton koân gígiân/bûn-j kui-chheng tang? S án-chóa kàu l-bóe kan-ta J t-pún Kana, Hân-kok Gn-bûn, Ot-lâm Lô-má-j châi-tiu hoan-sin ùi k gí-giân/bûn-j piàn-sêng koân gí-giân/bûn-j? Hit-kóa Chòng-j, Biâu-j, Iâu-j soah bô-hoat-t chhut-thâu-thi? Tû-liáu chèng-t in-s± chi-ga, bûn-j pún-sin m-s chin ta ê in-s±! Bûn-j s án-chóa éng-hióng tih koân-k gí-bûn neh? Lán u ch t chat chi lâi thó-ln chit-ê bn-tê Hàn-j ê bê-su kap tùi bîn-chk ì-sek hoat-tián ê sok-pk i-siá-m h Hàn-j tùi bîn-chk ì-sek ê hoat-tián éng-hióng? Che khan-sip tih Hàn-j ê bûn-j kiat-k± kap pún-chit. In-i phian-hk hn-chè ê koan-h, lán t chia kan-ta-sái kéng ting-tiám kóng, siông-

128 126 kap sè ê hun-sek thó-ln -sái chham-khó DeFrancis (1990), Gelb (1952) kap Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005c, 2005e, 2005g). Hàn-j s án-chóa hông l-ing lâi hoat-tián-chhut sin-ê bûn-j? Lán -sái ng -bn chit-ê l lâi soat-bêng, ká-sú ch t-ê kóng Eng-gí ê Eng-kok-lâng John beh ng Hàn-j thòe Eng-gí siat-kè ch t thò sin-ê Hàn-j sek bûn-j h-thóng. I sing ti-seng khó-lêng ng (1) ê Hàn-j lâi piáu-s (2) ê Eng-gí gí-kù. Chit-chióng hong-sek chi-s Hàn-j ch-j goân-chek Lik-su li-té ê ká-chioh. I chi-s chioh-ng Hàn-j ê thk-im (t chia chioh-ng Pak-kia im) lâi piáu-kì Eng-gí ê gí-im kap gí-ì. (1) (2) I have two dogs. (3) u--lâi, John kia lâng khòa-tih gí-kù (1) li-té ê Hàn-j si Hàn-j j- bn ê gí-ì g-kái, chhi-kóng khòa-tih g-kái s pi-siong ê chhng -sa ê lông-hu, s -í John chi t goân-iú ê Hàn-j téng-thâu ke hêng-pêng --khí-khì, chhi (3) s siá=ê án-ne. Gí-kù (3) chit-chióng chòe-hoat chi-s s -i ê hêng-sia-j. u--lâi, lng-ga ch t-ê Eng-kok-lâng Marry, i kám-kak John ê ng-j bô sek-hp, s -í i k (2) siá-chòe (4) ê hong-sek. (4) L-bóe, koh ch t-ê Eng-kok-lâng Joe k (2) siá-chòe (5). (5) Í-sing Marry kap Joe s siá ê (4) kap (5) kám -sái? N chi Hànj ch-j goân-chek lâi khòa tong-jiân m-sái. N án-ne, siáng siá=ê s phiau-chún? Bô-lâng s chot-tùi ê phiau-chún m bô-lâng s chot-tùi ê bô phiau-chún! Che chi-s chit-khoán Hàn-j-sek sin j bô-hoat-t

129 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 127 phiau-chún-hòa kap ph -phiàn-hòa ê chú-in. T Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan--lìn, hit-kóa l-ing Hàn-j hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê bîn-chk bûn-j ti-khài -sái hun-chò 3 li. T-it li s t Hàn-j ê ki-chh -téng-thâu i-chiàu Hàn-j ch-j hong-hoat, tk-pit s hêng-sia-j, lâi chhòng-ch sin j. Chit-khoán ê sin bûn-j kap Hàn-j kng-khoán sik sû-s± im-chat bûn-j. 7 Chit-khoán ê sin bûn-j Otlâm J-lâm, 8 Tâi-oân Koa-á-chheh bûn-j, 9 Tiong-kok Chòng-j, Biâuji, 10 Iâu-j ( 1997:98-108) téng. Chit-kóa j ê ga-hêng kap Hàn-j chin li-s, ch-j goân-chek ta-to-s± kap Hàn-j kng-khoán, png-bô thiàu-thoat Hàn-j ê su-khó b²-sek kap ch-j hong-hoat. Chi bûn-j thk siá ê hu-lýt lâi khòa, chit-kóa sin bûn-j pí Hàn-j koh-khah hokchp, phái h. N beh thk chit-khoán j, thong-siông chi ài Hànj ê ki-chh. In-i bat Hàn-j ê lâng chiàm jîn-kháu pí-l bô koân, jîchhiá koh -s s - bat Hàn-j ê lâng lóng chi-chhî hoat-tián chitkhoán sin j, s -í bat chit-khoán Hàn-j-sek sin j ê lâng m bô ch. O ch t-kù-o kóng, hit-kóa chò-sit, thg-chhiah-kha ê ph -lô-ti-chiòng kng-khoán chin phái chiap-kn kap sú-ing chit-khoán ê Hàn-j-sek sin j. N án-ne, s siá khoán ê lâng chiah hoat-t chhau-chok chitkóa Hàn-j-sek sin j? Chú-iàu chi-s hit-kóa lk-phek ê bûn-jîn. Lkphek bûn-jîn -sái hun-chò 2 li, ch t-chióng s ùi koân-lk hk-sim hông kóa--chhut-lâi, put tek-chì ê k bûn-jîn; ch t-chióng s k-p bînchk ì-sek, chìn-p ê bûn-jîn. Chit-kóa lk-phek bûn-jîn in-i Hàn-j 7 Iú-koan siá-m h s sû-s± im-chat bûn-j, chham-ot DeFrancis Chhi-kóng, (/ba/) s s±-j 3 ê ì-sù. 9 Chhi-kóng, (b), (lò). 10 Chhi-kóng, (/pa/) s h-lú ê ì-sù.

130 128 kap ê ki-chh, s -í chiah khó-lêng sú-ing Hàn-j-sek sin j. Lk-phek ê k bûn-jîn in-i ti-ti iáu chûn-iú ta Tiong-kok ê hong-kiàn su-sióng, s -í m ti hoán-èng t in ng sin j chhòng-chok ê chok-phín lìn. Tùichiàu chi-h, n-s beh sin su-sióng kap bîn-chk tk-l p-koan, thongsiông chi ài ùi chìn-p ê lk-phek bûn-jîn ê chok-phín lìn khì chhe. Khó-sioh chit-kóa chìn-p ê lk-phek bûn-jîn ng Hàn-j-sek sin j s siá ê chok-phín in-i thong-l bô ta, bô-hoat-t t thg-chhiah-kha ê ph -lô-ti-chiòng chi-kan ph -phiàn liû-thoân. L-ing Hàn-j hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê bîn-chk bûn-j ê t-j li s im-chat bûn-j, i tián-hêng ti-piáu s J t-pún ê Kana. T-sa li s im-s± bûn-j, tián-hêng ti-piáu s Hân-kok ê Gn-bûn, Ot-lâm t 17 sè-kí í-u thàu-kòe thoân-kàu-s hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê Ot-lâm Lô-má-j (Chu Quoc Ngu) kap Tâi-oân t 17 sè-kí thàu-kòe thoân-kàu-s hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê Sin-káng bûn-j kap 19 sè-kí í-u ê Ph-o-j. 11 Chit 2 li ê bûn-j lóng chin hó h, hó ng, in-i bô su-iàu Hàn-j ê ki-chh t -sái tan-tk hk-s p sú-ing, s -í h ph -lô-ti-chiòng chhin-kn sú-ing ê ki-he ke chin-koân. Tng-tong 19 sè-kí bóe 20 sè-kí chh hit-kóa Hânkok, Ot-lâm kap J t-pún chìn-p ê bûn-jîn thê-chhiòng ng chit-chióng sin-ch ê bûn-j ê sî, it-poa kok-bîn chin-kín chi -sái k chit-khoán bûn-j h--khí-lâi. Tong-jiân, bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek chi án-ne in-i thk siá lêng-lk kap kok-bîn kàu-ik ê kiàn-l p soah chin-kín hêngsêng--khí-lâi. Che t chhin-chhi se-au kok-ka kn-ti t chong-kàu kái-kek í-u in-i bîn-chiòng thk siá lêng-lk ê kiàn-l p liân-tài tài-tng kok-bîn bûn-hk kap bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek ê hêng-sêng kng-khoán 11 Siông-sè chhiá chham-ot Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005c) kap Táng Hong-oán (2004).

131 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 129 t-lí (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005h). Siong-tùi chi-h, hit-kóa bô-hoat-t thiàuthoat Hàn-j su-khó tiong-sim ê Chòng-chk, Biâu-chk kap Iâu-chk t chèng-t-sing m bô-hoat-t hêng-sêng bîn-chk kok-ka ì-sek. Tiong-kok t 1930 nî-ti bat chhì-gim ng Lô-má-j lâi su-siá Hàn-gí, chìn-hêng s -i ê La-tin-hòa n-tng ( 1992:245). L-bóechhiú Tiong-kok King-sán-tóng tit-tih chèng-koân liáu t 1950 nî-ti thêng-chí La-tin-hòa n-tng, kái chhui-sak Hàn-j kán-hòa. i-siám h Tiong-kok beh hòng-khì Hàn-gí La-tin-hòa? Chú-iàu chi-s k±-l tih Tiong-kok chèng-t kap bûn-hòa-sing ê it-thóng-sèng (Norman 1988: ; DeFrancis 1950: ; Barnes 1974). In kia n Tiongkok kok-te ng tong-te gí-giân lâi su-siá, ch-sêng Kg-tang, Hokkiàn kap Sing-hái téng kok-t ê t-hng ì-sek hoat-tián chòe kn-ti bînchk kok-ka ì-sek soah lâi ùi Tiong-kok tk-l p chhut-khì. 3. Tâi-oân ùi sè-kài ê ch t-p-hn kàu Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan 3.1. Tâi-oân peh-chi kok-chè bú-tâi 1492 nî Kholanpos (Christopher Columbus) ti-piáu Au-chiu-lâng t 1 pái kiâ-chûn kàu Bí-chiu ti-lik; kúi-nî u, Phô-tô-gâ ê kiâ-chûnlâng Gama (Vasco da Gama) t 1498 nî keng-iû Hó-bng-kak (The Cape of Good Hope) phah-khui Au-chiu kàu Ìn-t ê sin hâng-sòa. 15 sè-kí ê kiat-sok tú-hó s sin hâng-sòa sî-ti ê khai-sí. T A-chiu, tòe sin hângsòa sî-ti kha-u-táu lâi ê s se-au ê thoân-kàu oh-tng, kok-chè b- k kap l-bóe ê s t-bîn chú-g. Ho-lan-lâng t 1579 nî thoat-l Se-pan-gâ ê thóng-t, kiàn-l p Holan king-hô-kok, sòa--lâi liân-hp Eng-kok tuh-tuh-á hêng-sêng

132 130 kap sin=ê hái-iû pà-koân. Ho-lan-lâng t 17 sè-kí chh pún-té beh chiàm-niá Phê-² thang chò-ûi hm Tiong-kok bóe-be ê k-tiám, in-i Tiong-kok Bêng-tiâu ê kiông-lit hoán-tùi kap tí-khòng, tì-sú bô sêng-kong. L-bóe Tiong-kok hm Ho-lan tt-sêng thêng-chiàn hip-g, Ho-lan ài thèchhut Bêng-tiâu thóng-t chi-h ê Phê-²; ah Ho-lan n-s beh chiàm-niá bô sik Bêng-tiâu ê Tâi-oân, Bêng-tiâu png b kan-sip (Sú Bêng 1980:58). T chit-ê iân-k± chi-h, Ho-lan-lâng t 1624 nî choán-chìn Tâi-oân, t bô tú tih Tiong-kok-peng ê tí-khòng chi-h, chin kán-tan chi chiàm-niá Tâi-oân. T Ho-lan-lâng lâi kàu Tâi-oân chìn-chêng, Tâi-oân s Lâm-tó gíh bîn-chk ê thian-h. In-i Tâi-oân goân-ch-bîn hit-tong-sî png-bô hêng-sêng kn-ti bîn-chk kok-ka ê chèng-t ch-chit, tì-sú bô-hoat-t chin -lt tí-khòng Ho-lan-lâng ê j p-chhim. Ho-lan-lâng t Tâi-oân tû-liáu pak-siap keng-chè chu-goân chi-ga, iáu chiông-s Ki-tok kàu-g ê thui-kóng (Campbell 1903:vii). In thòe Tâi-oân pê-p-chk siat-kè Lô-má-j ê bûn-j h-thóng, ìn kàu-gchheh, koh t 1636 siat-l p t-it keng ng pê-p-chk Sin-káng-gí ûi kàu-hk gí-giân ê hk-hu (Campbell 1903:147; Heylen 2001; Lîm Gikthé 2003:20). Che s Tâi-oân iú-sú í-lâi t-it pái ê hk-hu kàu-ik hthóng. Sui-jiân chit-ê h-thóng tm-ph-á pái-kha, kong-lêng iú-hn, -koh i thê-king hit-tong-sî Tâi-oân hm sè-kài sa-chiap ê sòa (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005h). Anderson (1991:37-46) hun-sek kóng chhut-pán, chong-kàu kái-kek kap tong-t bó-gí ê chhut-thâu s kn-ti bîn-chk kok-ka ì- sek hêng-sêng ê ting-iàu goân-thâu. N chiàu chit-chióng koan-tiám lâi khòa, hit-tong-sî Ho-lan-lâng n bô t 1661 nî ching Tâi-oân ni h T

133 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 131 Sêng-kong, Sin-káng-gí ê chhut-pán kap kàu-ik khó-lêng lú lâi lú ting-iàu, sm-chì Sin-káng-gí khó-lêng hêng-sêng Tâi-oân pê-p-chk chi-kan ê king-thong-gí, pn-ián í pê-p-chk ûi chú-thé ê Tâi-oân bîn-chk ì-sek ê chhui-hòa-che T--sì Ông-tiâu kap Hàn-j bûn-hòa Sui-bóng Tâi-oân pê-p-chk khó-lêng chiâ-chòe Tâi-oân t-it pái ê bîn-chk kok-ka ê chú-thé, khó-sioh Tâi-oân pê-p-chk thàukòe Sin-káng-gí sióng-sing n-mi king-tông-thé ê sî-kan bô-kàu-tg, chi in-i Tiong-kok Bêng-tiâu î-chiòng T Sêng-kong t 1661 nî niákun chìn-kong Tâi-oân lâi tiong-ton. T Sêng-kong chi li-s Ot-lâm lk-sú-tiong ê Ti Tô, s thàukòe kun-s, chèng-t chiong Tâi-oân óng Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sak ê thâu-ch t-lâng (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005a,2005d). T T--sì Ông-tiâu (Konggoân ) thóng-t Tâi-oân sî-kî, in thui-hêng Hàn-j, Jû-hk, siatl p kho-kí chè-t (Lîm Gik-thé 2003:37). Tâi-oân chi án-ne hông giú-- j p-khì Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan, it-t t kàu 1895 nî Chheng-kok koah-ni Tâi-oân h J t-pún. T T--sì Ông-tiâu kap sòa--lh ê Chheng-kok thóng-t kî-kan, koa-hong it-lýt sú-ing Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn. Sui-bóng koa-hong ng bûn-giân-bûn, -koh bîn-kan m chhut-hin li-s Ot-lâm J-lâm ê bûn-j, he t chia lán k thong-chheng-chòe Koa-á-chheh bûn-j. 12 Chit-khoán Koa-á-chheh bûn-j sui-bóng kóng s ng lâi siá ph-o Tâi- 12 In-i chit-khoán bûn-j ti-to-s± ing t koa-á-chheh. Iú-koan koa-á-chheh ê hoat-tián, -sái chham-ot Teng Hng-tin (2005).

134 132 kap gí, -koh hit-khoán ê ph-o kap hin-ti s -kóng ê ph-o bô-kng, sing-ke kan-ta -sái kóng s pòa ph-o. Che s in-i Koa-á-chheh bûn-j pún-sin ê bûn-j khoat-hm s ch-sêng=ê. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan chi-s l-ing Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn chò-ûi king-tông ê sióng-sing gêng-ch-thé. Bîn-kan hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê Jlâm hk-chiá Koa-á-chheh sui-jiân hun-pit tùi Ot-lâm kap Tâi-oân ê kò-pit bîn-chk ì-sek (national consciousness) pang-chn, -koh in- i koa-hong ê tá-ap kap pún-sin ê bûn-j khoat-hm (phái h, phái thk) soah bô-hoat-t hoat-hui li-s Lô-má-j t Au-chiu tài-tng knti se-au kok-ka kok-bîn bûn-hk, kok-bîn ì-sek ê hêng-sêng ê kònghiàn. Chóng kóng ch t kù, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té 2 khoán lkling, ch t-khoán s thàu-kòe Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn kiàn-k±--khí-lâi ê í Tiong-kok hông-tè ûi tiong-sim ê Tiong-kok khip-ín-lt; lng-ga ch tkhoán s thàu-kòe J-lâm hk-chiá Koa-á-chheh chit-khoán ê í chi-t ûi tiong-sim ê pún-th -hòa lk-ling. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ê sênggoân s- -s hoat-t thoat-l Tiong-kok hêng-sêng kn-ti ê bîn-chk kok-ka chi ài khòa chit 2 k lk-ling siáng khah-kiông. Ot-lâm kn-ti in-i ga-lk ê kài-j p, pang-chn in chhiat-tg thàu-kòe Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn liân--khí-lâi ê hit tiâu Ot-lâm hm Tiong-kok chi- kan ê sòa. Koh in-i Hoat-kok thui-hêng Lô-má-j soah h Ot-lâm chhe-mê-ke tok tih bí tit-tih kái-sin Ot-lâm-gí su-siá hu-lýt ê kang-kh thang thê-seng pún-th -hòa lk-ling. S -í Ot-lâm hoat-t t 20 sè-kí kái-k± Hàn-j king-tông-thé, kiâ-hiòng bîn-chk kok-ka ê kiàn-k± (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005a).

135 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka J t-pún tè-kok kap Hàn-j bûn-hòa Tâi-oân sui-jiân t 19 sè-kí bóe m ga-lk kài-j p, -koh in-i chiàm-niá Tâi-oân ê J t-pún pún-sin m-s Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê kokka, s -í tùi Tâi-oân beh thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê pang-chn png-bô ta. N-chún 1884 nî hit-tong-sî Chheng-kok hm Hoat-kok chi-kan i tih Ot-lâm chong-chú-koân kui-sik bn-tê s hoat-seng ê Chheng Hoat chiàn-cheng iân-sòa lh-khì jî-chhiá Hoat-kok tông-sî chiàm-niá Tâi-oân kap Ot-lâm, án-ne Tâi-oân ê kn-ti-sú chi ài káisiá, jî-chhiá Tâi-oân khó-lêng ng Ph-o-j chhú-ti Hàn-j. Án-chóa kóng J t-pún thóng-t tùi Tâi-oân thoat-l Hàn-j bûnhòa-khoan bô kài ta ê pang-chn? Sui-jiân J t-pún ch 1868 nî Bêng-t ûi-sin í-u chi hui-siông chù-ting thoat-hôa j p-au jî-chhiá chin ting-s gí-bûn kái-kek hm kok-bîn kàu-ik ê ting-iàu-sèng (Seeley 1991: ). -koh, J t-pún ê gí-bûn kái-kek kan-ta bêng-hián thêseng Kana ê sú-ing pí-l, png-bô oân-choân hùi-tû Hàn-j. i-siám h J t-pún bô oân-choân hòe-tû Hàn-j neh? In-i ch 1931 nî J t-pún hoat-tng Boán-chiu s-ki, khai-sí choân-lk j p-chhim Tiong-kok tang-pak í-u, J t-pún kun-kok-chú-g-chiá khì-sè tng chhia-i. In-i tih kì-lik s chiàm ê Tiong-kok t-miâ kap lâng-miâ ê s t-chit su-iàu, soah hoán-tùi hùi-tû Hàn-j (Gottlieb 1995:75-88; Seeley 1991: ). J t-pún chiàm-niá Tâi-oân kî-kan sui-jiân ch t-khai-sí chi- ànsg thui-hêng J t-pún-o, -koh in tùi Hàn-j iáu -s chin tk-s. Tâioân chóng-tok sm-chì ti kú-pn Hàn-si liân-gîm ti-he, chio Tâichk bûn-jîn lâi koa-thia gîm-si chò-tùi thang giú-kn Tâi-oân-lâng hm J t-pún-lâng ê k-l ( 2000: ). J t-pún-lâng chi-s l-

136 134 kap ing Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té Hàn-j ê sèng-î kè-tt lâi chò-ûi nghòa Tâi-oân-lâng hoán-khòng ê kang-kh. Che kap Hoat-kok-lâng ching Hàn-j tòng-chò phò-hoi Hoat-kok kap Ot-lâm koan-h ê tsa-chiá oân-choân bô-kng ê koan-tiám. In-i J t-pún chèng-hú tùi Hàn-j bô pâi-thek 13, koh ka-sing hittong-sî ê Tâi-oân tì-sek-hn-chú tùi ng Lô-má-j lâi chòe Tâi-oân obûn ê su-siá kang-kh m bô chin khòa-ting, tì-sú Tâi-oân sit-khì ng Lô-má-j chhú-ti Hàn-j thang chhiat-tg hm Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê koan-h ê ki-he. Chhi-kóng, j t-pún sî-kî thui-hêng Lô-má-j sing -lt ê Chhòa Pôe-hóe t 1924 nî Tông-hòa-he tng teh nu-jit kún-kún ê sî kiàn-g thui-hêng Lô-má-j soah bô tit-tih ting-s; t 1931 nî tùi J tpún koa-goân Izawa Takiro () iû-soeh sú-ing Lô-má-j m tit-tih hoán-tùi ê hôe-èng (Tiu Hàn-j 2000:19-20). 4. Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok kap Tâi-oân king-hô-kok sióng-sing ê kiàn-k± Kong-goân 1945 nî J t-pún tâu-hâng liáu, Chiú Kài-chih ti-piáu Liân-kun chiap-siu Tâi-oân kap Ot-lâm pak-p 14. i-siá-m h hit-tongsî ê Tâi-oân-lâng chhut-hin s -i ê hoan-gêng ch -kok ê hin-sing? N beh kóng he s hoan-gêng ch -kok Tiong-kok, khah-su kóng he s ch t chióng tùi Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé ê g-bng. Lán chìn-chêng kóng--kòe, Tâi-oân sui-jiân keng-kòe J t-pún thóng-t, -koh Tâi-oân png-bô oân-choân thoat-l Hàn-j bûn-hòa 13 It-t t kàu 1937 nî Tâi-oân chóng-tok chiah kìm-chí sú-ing hàn-bûn ( 1993:59). 14 Iú-koan Chiú Kài-chih kun-ti chiàm-niá Ot-lâm ê ti-chì, -sái chham-ot Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005).

137 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 135 king-tông-thé. Sui-jiân Tâi-oân iáu- Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé ê tk-sek, -koh he koh hm Chiú Kài-chih s sióng-sing ê Tiong-hôa bîn-chk hk-chiá Tiong-kok king-tông-thé bô oân-choân kng-khoán. Chiú Kài-chih k chit-ê bô-kng koài-che tùi Tâi-oân-lâng si J t-pún ê n²-hòa, soah bô jn-chheng Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé kap Tiong-kok king-tông-thé pún-chiâ chi-s 2 ê bô oân-choân kng ê chân-chhù. In-i bûn-hòa ê chha-, ka-sing keng-chè ê pak-siap kap chèng-t ê lióng-ton, soah ín-khí Tâi-oân 1947 nî ê 228 khí-g. In-i 228 khí-g ê kàu-hùn, Tâi-oân-lâng chiah kak-chhí kóng Tâi-oân hm Tiong-kok s bô-kng ê 2 ê kò-thé. Chiú Kài-chih m ch án-ne chiah thé-he kàu ài thiat-té tùi Tâi-oân-lâng s t-hêng Tiong-kokhòa chèng-chhek chiah -tàng ún-tng Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok t Tâi-oân ê seng-chûn khong-kan. Chiú Kài-chih chi ch t-hong-bn l-ing Tâioân goân-iú ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé tk-sek, chhi-kóng súing Hàn-j, chông-pài Jû-hk, kòe k-lk-nî, Tiong-chhiu, Chhengbêng téng, k choán-o-chòe Tiong-kok king-tông-thé ê sióng-sing ki-chh ; lng-ga ch t-hong-bn chi chn-lt chám-tg Tâi-oân púnth -hòa ê kun, chhi-kóng chhui-sak Hôa-gí, kìm-chí kóng Tâi-oân gígiân, kìm-chí sú-ing Lô-má-j. Thàu-kòe chhut-pán-phín, mûi-thé soan-thoân kap ta Tiong-kok ê kàu-ik h-thóng, Tâi-oân chin-kín chi kiàn-l p í Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok ûi ki-chh ê Tiong-kok king-tôngthé sióng-sing. Chit-ê Tiong-kok king-tông-thé sui-jiân t 1980 nî-ti í-u cho-si giâm-ting ê thiau-chiàn, -koh kàu-ta í Tâi-oân ûi chú ê sióng-sing king-tông-thé png iáu be oân-sêng. Sui-jiân pún-th chèng-tóng Bîn-chú Chìn-p-tóng t 2000 nî chip-chèng kàu-ta í-keng 7 tang, -

138 136 kap koh Tâi phài kap Tiong-kok phài soán-kí tùi-koat iáu-s 5 hun 5 hun, sm-chì iáu koh lâng cháu-khì tùi-ha Tiong-hôa Jîn-bîn King-hôkok hoah hoán-tùi Tâi-tk. S án-chóa í Tâi-oân ûi chú ê n-mi kingtông-thé iáu bô-hoat-t hêng-sêng chú-liû? Che ti-khài -bn kúi tiám goân-in. T-it, Tâi-oân ch-k í-lâi iáu -bat sêng-kong kiàn-l p ka-t ê kok-ka hk-chiá ông-tiâu, khiàm-khoeh ch t ê kong-êng ê lk-sú kòekhì. Tùi ch t ê si-kûn lâi kóng, bat king-tông ê lk-sú keng-gim s kiò-chhí sêng-goân ê ch p-thé kì-ek sòa--lâi chìn-ch t-p chòe-hóe hêng-tng lâi tt-sêng si-kûn ê king-tông bk-piau ê ting-iàu in-s±. Che m-s i-siá-m h t Chheng-tiâu thóng-t Tâi-oân ê lk-sú tongtiong, s - ê ch-hoán hk-chiá kek-bng ê léng-t-chiá lóng ài ng hoán Chheng hk Bêng téng chit-khoán ê kháu-h lâi kh kûn-chiòng. Khó-sioh hoán Chheng hk Bêng chit-khoán ê kháu-h tùi kiàn-l p sin=ê bîn-chk kok-ka ê khip-ín-lt iú-hn. Tâi-oân ch t kù sik-gú kóng sa-nî ch t sió-hoán, g-nî ch t ti-lon. Chit-kù-o chú-iàu teh biâu-siá Chheng-tiâu thóng-t Tâi-oân kî-kan, Tâi-oân-lâng khí-g chhoán ê chhù-s± put-chí-á ch. Sui-jiân Tâi-oân-lâng khí-g ch-hoán ê chhù-s± chin ch, i-siá-m h bô-pòa-pái khí-g sêng-kong sm-chì chìn-ch t-p kiàn-l p tk-l p ê ông-tiâu? Chit-ê goân-in -n in-i Chheng-tiâu kun-ti pí khí-g ê bîn-peng khah ch-chit, m in-i hitchn ê lâng iáu-be hêng-sêng chéng-hp kok chk-kûn (ethnic groups) king-tông tùi-khòng Chheng-kok hk-chiá ga-lâi-chiá ê hin-ti ê Tâi-oân-lâng ì-sek. Ka-sing, Jû-ka su-sióng kap Tiong-kok-sek Sti-hu kàu-ik s hit-chn ê si-he chú-liû, kui-ê Tâi-oân hk-chiá Tiong-kok si-he -bat chiap-chhiok hit-tong-sî se-au si-he tng teh

139 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 137 liû-hêng ê bîn-chk kok-ka kài-lim, bk-koài khí-g ê léng-t-chiá lóng thêng-liû t hong-kiàn koan-lim g-bng ch t kang -tàng teng-ki chò hông-tè. Phí-jû, 1721 nî -miâ ê Chu It-kùi khí-g. Tng-tong Chu It-kùi t chh-kî phah-iâ Chheng-tiâu kun-ti ê sî-chn, i chin-kín chi chhong Tiong-hin-ông, -koh tng i hm chòe-hóe phah thian-h ê Kheh-ka-chk léng-t-jîn T Kun-eng hoat-seng chhiong-týt ê sî, bô ga-kú i chi h Chheng-tiâu tìn-ap--lh-lâi. Tâi-oân m in-i khiàm-khoeh ch t ê kong-êng ê lk-sú bûn-hòa, tì-sú Tâi-oân tùi k-t m bô ch-sìn, thò-hip sèng-keh khah-kiông. sî-chn Tâi-oân ki-he chhut-thâu, -koh soah ka-t hòng-khì ki-he. Chhi-kóng, tùi tih J-chhù Ti-chiàn chiàn-u Chiú Kài-chih chiàm-niá Tâi-oân chit ki ti-chì, Tâi-oân-lâng kèng-jiân bô-lâng Chì-bêng hit-khoán ê gán-kong iau-kiû Tiong-kok thiat-kun (Chiú Ûibûn 2005a). Koh chhi-kóng, 2000 nî í-u Tâi-oân sui-jiân o Bînchìn-tóng chip-chèng, -koh tùi tih kàu-ik Tâi-oân-hòa, pún-th gígiân ê chai-pôe soah lóng bô siá chù-táu, bô ting-s; kok ti-hk Tâioân bûn-hk-h tùi Tâi-oân bó-gí m bô khòa-ting (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2004). T-j, Tâi-oân t J-chhù Ti-chiàn chiàn-u ch t-phoe sin î-bîn ka-j p, chit-kóa sin î-bîn (Tiong-kok-lâng) ê lk-sú kì-ek tú-hó kap k î- bîn (Tâi-oân-lâng) ê kì-ek chhut-hin mâu-tún ê hin-sing. Hit-kóa sin î-bîn lk-sú kì-ek li-té tùi Tiong-kok ê hiáng-óng kap g-bng tú-hó s Tâi-oân-lâng t khí-ch bîn-chk kok-ka tong-tiong si beh tàn-tiu ê ch t-p-hn. Che m-s bk-chêng Tâi-oân chèng-t-sing tk-l p kap thong-it hun-cheng, kok-ka jn-tông bô it-tì ê chú-in. Án-chóa kái-koat chit-ê mâu-tún hin-sing s Tâi-oân mi-hiòng chèng-siông kok-ka

140 138 kap chin ting-iàu ê khò-tê. T-sa, Tâi-oân-lâng iáu- kiông-lit ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan tksek. Chin ch chèng-t Tâi-tk ê jîn-s sui-jiân chi-chhî Tâi-oân kiàn-l p chú-koân tk-l p ê kok-ka, -koh bûn-hòa-sing iáu-s jn-ûi in ka-t s Hôa-jîn, ch -sian lâi-ch Tiong-kok. Chit-chióng ê tk-l p hong-sek kîs t s ng ê Tiong-kok, hk-chiá Hoan-sik-kok ê tk-l p b²-sek, kap J t-pún chiap-siu Tâi-oân chìn-chêng s sêng-l p ê té-mi ê Tâi-oân Bîn-chú-kok kng-khoán b kú-tg. Li-s chit-khoán chèng-t Tâioân, bûn-hòa Tiong-kok ê hin-sing kî-s t t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan lìn m bat hoat-seng--kòe. Chhi-kóng, Hân-kok Lí Sè-chong t 15 sè-kí tiong-kî tiàu-ch p hk-chiá gián-kiù hoat-bêng Hân-kok bûn-j Gn-bûn ê sî chi- hong-kiàn bûn-jîn Chhui Bn-lí í it-chun Hôa-chè ûi lí-iû sing-s± hoán-tùi chhui-hêng Gn-bûn (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005f). 5. Kiat-ln N-chún-kóng hit-kóa Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê k sêng-goân pauhâm J t-pún, Hân-kok kap Ot-lâm téng t bîn-chk kok-ka ê kiàn-k± l-t² téng-thâu í-keng chhut-sì ta-hàn, án-ne Tâi-oân sg s ch t ê chásán-jî. Chit-ê chá-sán-jî beh án-chóa khah ióng-ki ta-hàn leh? Tâi-oân bîn-chk án-ne g-sng g-sng, chh b ta-hàn chi s in-i iáu teh suh Hàn-j bûn-hòa ê lu-ni-p! Tâi-oân bîn-chk n beh hó io-chh koh gâu ta-hàn chi ài s t-hêng thoat-hàn chèng-chhek, pau-hâm thui-hêng Tâi-oân gí-giân (pau-hâm goân-ch-bîn-gí, Khah-gí kap Tâi-gí) kap hùi-tû Hàn-j. Tâi-oân-lâng n bô thiàu-thoat Hôa-gí kap Hàn-j ê su-khó b²-sek, i ê h-tiû khióng-kia-á kap Tiong-kok Chòng-chk, Biâu-chk kap Iâu-chk kng-khoán bô-hoat-t kiàn-l p

141 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 139 chèng-t kap bûn-hòa oân-choân tk-l p ê bîn-chk kok-ka. lâng kóng, Tâi-gí kap Kheh-gí s Hàn-gí-h ê gí-giân, n bô ing Hàn-j lâi siá bsái. Che s t-chi-kóng s ch t-chióng tùi Hàn-j ê bê-su niâ. Ot-lâm í- chêng m-sng Hàn-j, u--lâi in t-sái hùi Hàn-j, kái-ing Lô-má-j, i-siá-m h Tâi-oân t b-sái? T gí-giân-hk téng-thâu beh siat-kè ch t thò Lô-má-j lâi su-siá Tâi-gí kap Kheh-gí chot-tùi bô bn-tê. Tâi-gí kap Kheh-gí n bô-hoat-t kái-ing Lô-má-j, che -s gí-giân-hk ê bn-tê, s si-he sim-lí ê bn-tê, s Tâi-oân-lâng iáu k Hàn-j tòng-chò koân bûn-j, Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê m²-sîn-á teh chok-koài ê koanh! lâng koh kóng, Tiong-kok hit-pêng m lâng teh ng Kheh-gí kap Bân-lâm-gí, án-ne lán n chhui-sak Tâi-gí kap Kheh-gí m bô Tâioân tk-sek. Lán ài chai-iá, thoat-hàn png -s Tiong-kok siám h lán chi ài hòng-khì siá-m h. N-chún án-ne, Tiong-kok-lâng chih pg, lán Tâi-oân-lâng -t bián chih pg? Thoat-Hàn ê ki-pún goân-chek s thoat-l Tiong-kok ê su-khó-koan, -ài hm Tiong-kok che ti-piáu-sèng. I chi-s kóng lán ài hòng-khì hit-kóa bô-hoat-t chú-t ê m h-ki, hoat-iông hit-kóa Tâi-oân -tàng hoat-hui ê tk-sek, án-ne Tâi-oân chiah châi-tiu kiàn-l p bûn-hòa ê chú-thé-sèng. Hôa-gí kap Hàn-j chi-s lán Tâi-oân bô-hoat-t chú-t ê m h-ki! Chêng ch tchm-á Bîn-chìn-tóng chèng-hú kóng beh h Tâi-oân hoat-tián chiâchò sè-kài ê Hôa-gí kàu-hk tiong-sim. Che chi ká-ná kóng Ìn-t beh hoat-tián chòe sè-kài ê Eng-gí kàu-hk tiong-sim kng-khoán, m chhin-chhi kòe-khì Tiong-kok Kok-bîn-tóng kóng Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok chèng-hú s Tiong-kok ûi-it ti-piáu-sèng ê chèng-hú kng-khoán hàmka-ka. S án-chóa kóng Tâi-gí kap Kheh-gí chiah Tâi-oân tk-sek?

142 140 kap In-i Tâi-oân hoat-t chú-t! Lán t chia kú ch t-ê l soat-bêng, pitchiá t 2000 nî-té bat khì Tiong-kok -mg chòe chhân-iá tiu-cha. Chiàu kóng -mg s Bân-lâm-gí bûn-hòa ê tiong-sim, -koh hinchhú-sî t -mg ke-á, kong-king tiû-s téng s -chi chin hán--leh thia -mg-lâng kóng Bân-lâm-gí, thia-tih--ê ta-to-s± s Tiong-kok ph -thong-o. In hia ê chhiù-phì-hâng b ê koa (Pak-kia-o bô sg) ti-iok 95% í-sing lóng s Tâi-oân koa-chiú Ip Khé-tiân kap Kang Hi chit-kóa-lâng ê Tâi-gí-koa. Chit-ê hin-sing soat-bêng Tâi-oân í-keng chhú-ti -mg chiâ-chò s -i Bân-lâm bûn-hòa ê tiong-sim. I chis kóng, Tâi-oân-lâng thàu-kòe Tâi-gí, -t kiàn-l p Tâi-gí bûn-hòa ê chú-thé-sèng, koh hoat-t chiong bûn-hòa sán-phín siau-si kàu Tiong-kok hk-chiá tang-lâm-a. Pún ln-bûn hoat-piáu t 2005 nî Tiong-hôa Bûn-hòa kap Tâi-oân Pún-th -hòa Gián-thó-he, 10 goh h, Bîn-chìn-tóng tiong-iong tóng-p

143 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka 141 Chham-khó chheh-bk Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. (Originally published in 1983). New York: Verso. Barnes, Dayle Language planning in Mainland China: standardization. In Advances in Language Planning, Fishman, J.A.(ed.), Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, DeFrancis, John Nationalism and Language Reform in China. Princeton University Press. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. (Taiwan edition) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Ferguson, Charles Diglossia. Word 15, Fishman, Joshua Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 32(2), Gelb, I. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Gottlieb, Nanette Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in

144 142 kap Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Hodgkin, Thomas Vietnam: The Revolutionary Path. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd Johnson, Allan G The Blackwell Dictionary of Society. Oxford: Blackwell. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SarDesai D. R Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Taylor, Insup; and Taylor, Martin M Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins () San Jose: p

145 CH 4. Ùi Hàn-j Bûn-hòa King-tông-thé kàu Bîn-chk Kok-ka a ê hm ê b hm ê p c teh ê p d p e p f ê p g ê ê p h ê p

146 144 kap

147 King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu

148 146 kap 1. Chiân-giân Ot-lâm hm Tâi-oân kng-khoán, lóng bat h Tiong-kok thóngt--kòe. Ot-lâm bat si Tiong-kok 1000 ga nî ê t t-chiap thóng-t (konggoân chêng 111 kàu Kong-goân u 939), liáu-u sui-jiân thoat-l Tiongkok ê thóng-t lâi tk-l p, -koh iáu hm Tiong-kok ûi-chhî it-tng ê hoan-sik koan-h. Chit-ê hoan-sik koan-h it-t t ûi-chhî kàu 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî Hoat-kok ê kài-j p liáu chiah khai-sí piàn-hòa. T Hoat-kok thóng-t beh kah 100 tang liáu, Ot-lâm bîn-chk chú-g léng-t-chiá Chì-bêng (Ho Chi Minh) t 1945 nî soan-p± tk-l p, kiàn-l p Ot-lâm Bîn-chú King-hô-kok. O tg-lâi khòa Ot-lâm tang-pak-pêng ê Formosa. Ùi Tiong-kok lâi ê T--sì chèng-koân t 1662 nî chèng-sek chiàm-niá thóng-t Tâi-oân. Sòa--lâi ùi 1683 kàu 1895 nî Tâi-oân iû Tiong-kok Chheng-tiâu thóng-t. Koh lâi, 1945 nî kàu-ta (2007) Tâi-oân koh ch t pái h Tiong-kok lâi ê chèng-koân Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok thóng-t. N ùi Benedict Anderson (1991) ê sióng-sing ê king-tông-thé (imagined communities) chhiat-j p, t Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan 1 li-té, 19 sè-kí í-chêng lóng- ch t-chióng í Tiong-kok chòe tiong-sim, thàu-kòe Hàn-j s hêng-sêng ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tông-thé (an imagined Hanji cultural community). Chit-chióng Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tông-thé ke-kiám lóng- éng-hióng tih chit-ê bûn- 1 S -i ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan s kí bat ing hk-chiá iáu teh sú-ing Hàn-j chòe su-siá htóng ê kok-ka hk-chiá t-khu. Chhin-chhi, Tai-ôan, Ot-lâm, Tiâu-sián, J t-pún, Tiongkok, Hiong-káng, kap Sin-ka-pho (Chiú Ûi-bûn2005).

149 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 147 hòa-khoan li-té ê sêng-goân in u-lâi ê kn-ti bîn-chk kok-ka (nationstate) ê kok-chk sióng-sing kiàn-k±. T Tiong-kok, in l-ing Hàn-j bûn-hòa sióng-sing king-tôngthé chiâ-chòe in kn-ti Tiong-hôa bîn-chk hk-chiá Tiong-kok kokchk ê sióng-sing ki-chh. Hit kóa thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê k sêng-goân, chhi-kóng Ot-lâm, Hân-kok, 2 Tiâu-sián 3 kap J t-pún, lóng tiông-sin kiàn-k± í in ka-t ûi chú-thé ê bîn-chk kok-ka sióngsing. N kóng-kàu Tâi-oân, i iáu t Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê pian-iân kiâ-sh, che tong-jiân chi hoán-èng t chèng-t-sing ê tk-l p kap thong-it ê hun-cheng. -koán Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm s ch-gon i p-pek, lóng kengkòe Tiong-kok kok-chk sióng-sing ê sî-ta. Tùi Ot-lâm lâi kóng, hin-chhú-sî in í-keng thiat-té kái-k± Tiong-kok kok-chk sióng-sing, thoat-l Tiong-kok sióng-sing king-tông-thé, sêng-kong tiông-kiàn Ot-lâm sióng-sing king-tông-thé. -koh tùi Tâi-oân lâi kóng, kok-li kok chk-kûn 4 tùi Tiong-kok iáu bô-kng thêng-t ê sióng-sing kap g-bng. Sui-jiân Tâi-oân n-mi king-tông-thé ê ì-sek tùi tih 1980 nî-ti í-lâi ê chèng-t n-tng ê hoat-tián m chhia-i, phû-thâu ê chhu-sè, -koh n beh kóng Tâi-oân kok-chk king-tông-thé í-keng oân-sêng sióng-sing, khióng-kia-á ài koh táng ch t-ta sî-kan. Ch t-ê sin-ê king-tông-thé tang-sî chiah kiàn-k± oân-sêng t ài 2 Kí s -i ê Lâm-hân. 3 Kí s -i ê Pak-hân. 4 T chia kí goân-ch-bîn, Kheh-ka, H-ló kap s -i ga-séng-lâng ê sin ch-bîn. Chim-sî bô pau-hâm chit 10 ga tang lâi-ch tang-lâm-a, Tiong-kok hk-chiá kî-tha t-khu ê sin sinî-bîn.

150 148 kap khòa i kái-k± k king-tông-thé ê sok-t. Chit phi ln-bûn ê bk-tek chi-s beh thàm-thó Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm chi-kan, t kái-k± Hàn-j king-tông-thé, Tiong-kok kok-chk sióng-sing ê kòe-thêng tong-tiong siá-m h kng-khoán hk-chiá bôkng chiah ch-sêng hin-chhú-sî chit-chióng bô-kng ê chèng-t kiksè. -bn lán chi chiam-tùi Ot-lâm hm Tâi-oân hông lp-j p Tiongkok king-tông-thé kap Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê lk-sú pe-kéng chòe siu-kài kap hun-sek. Tâi-oân thk-chiá tùi Tâi-oân ê lk-sú pe-kéng khah liáu-kái, s -í lán siu-kài Tâi-oân ê p-hn khah kán-séng, thang k ke--chhut-lâi ê phian-hk ng lâi siu-kài Ot-lâm. 2. Ot-lâm 2.1. Ot-lâm ê Tiong-kok king-tông-thé sî-kî Ot-lâm thoân-soat-tiong t-it ê kok-ka miâ-h h-chòe Bûn-lông ( Vn Lang), he s sik Ot-lâm ê Hông-pâng sî-ti ( Hông Bàng), ti-khài s Kong-goân chêng 2879 kàu chêng 258 nî; sòa--lâi ê Kong-goân chêng 257 kàu chêng 207 nî s iû An-iông-ông () kiànl p Au-lk kok ( Âu Lac) (Tran 1921:15). Chîn-sí-hông () t Kong-goân chêng 221 nî thun-chih likkok, thóng-it tiong-goân liáu, i koh kè-sik chhut-peng cheng-hk Léng-lâm 5 (), jî-chhiá t Kong-goân chêng 214 nî thun-pèng Léng- 5 Ti-khài siong-tong hin-chhú-sî Tiong-kok ê Kg-tang, Kg-sai, Hái-lâm-tó kap Ot-lâm pak-p téng khu-k.

151 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 149 lâm t-khu. Chîn tè-kok t Kong-goân chêng 207 nî pang-pôa liáu, i chìn-chêng ê chiòng-niá Ti Tô ( Ot-lâm-o h-chòe Triu à) thàn ki-he chiàm-niá Léng-lâm, t Kong-goân chêng 204 nî 6 kiàn-l p Lâm-ot kok (), ng Hoan-gû 7 () chòe siú-t (, 1995:56-68; téng 1988: ). Kong-goân chêng 111 nî Tiong-kok Hàn-tiâu ê Hàn Bú-tè chhut-peng siau-bit Lâm-ot kok, koh t tong-t siat Kau-chí p () hun-chòe 9 kn. Kî-tiong 3 kn Kau-chí (), Kiú-chin () kap J t-lâm () siong-tong chit-mái Ot-lâm ê pak-p kap tiong-pak-p t-khu (Tran 1921:47). Ùi hit-chm khai-sí Ot-lâm tit pái h Tiong-kok lp-j p pán-t²; che t hin-chhú-sî Ot-lâm chú-liû sú-koan lìn k h-chòe t-it pái Pak-sik sî-kî 8 (Tran 2002:47). Ti Tô tàu-té beh sg s Tiong-kok-lâng i-s Ot-lâm-lâng? Che t Ot-lâm m bat cheng-ln--kòe. 9 Chi góa lâi khòa, Ti Tô t Ot-lâm lk-sú lìn s pn-ián ê kak-sek kap t-i t chhin-chhi T Sêng-kong tùi Tâi-oân kng-khoán, lóng-s k Tâi-oân/Ot-lâm hm Tiong-kok liâm chòe-hóe ê thâu-ch t-lâng. N -s beh siau-bit Ti Tô ê Lâm-ot kok, Hàn Bú-tè khó-lêng b hiah-kín t k Ot-lâm lp-j p Tiong-kok pán-t²; n -s beh siau-bit hoán Chheng hk Bêng ê T Sêng-kong, Chheng-tiâu m b hiah-kín t ching Tâi-oân tòng-chò thok-tián pán Ti Tô kiàn-l p Lâm-ot kok ê nî-ti bô-kng ê kóng-hoat. Ot-lâm hk-chiá Trân Trong Kim (1921:39), ô c Hùng (2001:13), kap Ti Ot Sú Kì Choân Su ()(1697 pán) ê kì-chi s Kong-goân chêng 207 nî. Siong-tong hin-chhú-sî Tiong-kok Kg-tang séng Kg-chiu chh. In-i Tiong-kok i t Ot-lâm ê pak-pêng, s -í Ot-lâm-lâng m ti ing Pak-hong lâi piáu-s Tiong-kok. Chok-chiá hm Ot-lâm Hàn Lâm gián-kiù- Nguyn Quang Hng () gián-kiù-oân ê kò-jîn hóng-tâm.

152 150 kap t² ê bk-piau. Ch Kong-goân chêng 111 nî Tiong-kok Hàn Bú-tè ching Otlâm lp-j p Tiong-kok pán-t² liáu, it-t t-kàu kah Kong-goân u 939 nî chit 1000 thóng tang tong-tiong, tû-liáu chió-s± té-chim sî-kan (Konggoân 40-43, ) khí-g khòng-pok sêng-kong chi-ga, chhun--ê lóng-s Ot-lâm h Tiong-kok t t-chiap thóng-t ê sî-kî. Chit-ta sî-kî s Ot-lâm hông ng kun-s kap chèng-t ê lk-ling lp-j p Tiong-kok king-tông-thé ê sî-chn. Chit-ê sî-kî s -kóng ê Tiong-kok king-tôngthé kî-s t s G-hk-chè () lìn hit chióng í Tiong-kok hông-tè ûi tiong-sim ê siu-pian h-thóng. Che hm 20 sè-kí í-u ê k-iú nation-state koan-lim ê king-tông-thé kài-lim bô oân-choân kng-khoán. T Pak-sik sî-kî, Tiong-kok ching Hàn-j thoân j p-khì Ot-lâm. Hit-tong-sî ê Hàn-j chú-iàu s ng t hêng-chèng kap koa-goân ê bûnkàu hùn-lin. Hit-tong-sî chhui-hêng Hàn-j bûn-kàu-sing -miâ ê s Kau-chí thài-siú S Gip ( S Nhip). In ch -sian s L -kok lâng, in-i beh phiah Ông Bóng () ch-hoán ê chiàn-lon chiah cháu-lâi Chhong-ng-kn () (qun Thng Ngô) ê Kóng-sìn ( Qung Tín) hit kha-tau. Ùi L -kok () chhian-sóa lâi Kóng-sìn kàu S Gip hit-ti í-keng s t chhit ti. S Gip in-i T-bîn iú hong s -í Ot-lâmlâng chun-chheng i h-chòe S-ông ( S Vng)(Tran 1921:53). T Pak-sik thâu-á hit 200 ga tang sî-kî, Ot-lâm-lâng chi sg khah bat Hàn-j, khah gâu thk-chheh m bô-hoat-t chòe-koa thang hun-hióng thóng-t koân-lk. It-t t-kàu tang Hàn bot-nî Lêng-tè () chi-i (kong-goân ) ê sî chiah Kau-chí pún-t-lâng Lí Chìn ( Lý Tiên) hông thê-miâ chòe Kau-chí chhì-sú (). Lí Chìn kap u-lâi ê Lí Khîm ( Lý Cm) lóng s chhui-sak Kau-chí-lâng -sái chòe-

153 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 151 koa ê ting-iàu jîn-být. Kau-chí-lâng kap Tiong-kok-lâng kng-khoán -sái chòe-koa t s ùi in 2 lâng khai-sí (Tran 1921:52). T Tiong-kok thóng-t ê sî-kî, Ot-lâm m-s sa-nî ch t sió-hoán, g-nî ch t ti-lon. Lk-sú-sing kì-chi ê sing-chá khí-g ê s Teng Chhek ( Trng Trc) kap Teng G ( Trng Nh) ng ê chímoi-á. In 2 lâng thui-hoan Hàn-tiâu phài-ch Kau-chí ê thài-siú S Tng (), tit-tih té-chim tk-l p (Kong-goân u 40-43). Lng-ga, m chin -miâ ê khí-g s-ki pau-hâm lâi-ch Kiú-chin-kn ê lú-sèng Trieu Au ( Triu u), i t Kong-goân 248 nî khí-g tí-khòng hittong-sî Tiong-kok Sam-kok sî-ti ê Tong G² kok, khó-sioh bô sêngkong. Ly Bon ( Lý Bôn) t kong-goân 542 nî khí-g, koh t 544 nî kiàn-kok h-chòe Bn Chhun (), ch h Lí Lâm-tè (), chi-i sî-kan Kong-goân Lí Lâm-tè í-u hun-pit iû Ti Ot Ông ( kong-goân ) kap u Lí Lâm-tè (kong-goân ) chi-i; in l-bóe koh h Tiong-kok Niû-tiâu thun-chih khì. Tiong-kok Tông-tiâu sî-kî chin -miâ ê khí-g pau-hâm Pâng Heng ( Phùng Hng) léngt ê tí-khòng oh-tng. Pâng Heng m h-chòe Bo Cai Ti-ông ( B Cái i Vng), tk-l p sî-kî ùi kong-goân nî. i-siá-m h h-chòe Bo Cai Ti-ông? Che s in-i in ng Hàn-j lâi kì Ot-lâm im; (Bô) s lu-p, (Cái) s lu-bú ê ì-sù. Bo Cai Ti-ông chitê sî-kî s Ot-lâm J-lâm ( Ch Nôm) khai-sí puh-í hoat-tián ê sîchn Ot-lâm ê Hàn-j king-tông-thé sî-kî Pak-sik ê chit-chióng kik-sè it-t t ûi-chhî kàu Kong-goân 939 nî,

154 152 kap Ot-lâm-lâng Ng² Koân ( Ngô Quyên) chiah l-ing Tông-tiâu botnî ti-lon ê sî-ki thoat-l Tiong-kok t t-chiap thóng-t lâi tk-l p. Suijiân kóng s tk-l p, -koh Ot-lâm iáu-s ài tng-kî k Tiong-kok hông-tè tiâu-kòng, sêng-jn Tiong-kok ê chong-chú-kok t-i. Chitchióng hoan-sik koan-h it-t t-kàu kah 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî chiah iû Hoat-kok chhú-ti Tiong-kok chiâ-chòe sin chong-chú-kok (SarDesai 1992:19). T Ot-lâm thoat-l Tiong-kok ê t t-chiap thóng-t liáu hit 1000 thóng tang, Ot-lâm b²-hóng Tiong-kok kiàn-l p in ka-t ê hong-kiàn si-he chè-t kap ông-tiâu. Ot-lâm Lí-tiâu (kong-goân ) kap Tân-tiâu (kong-goân ) kî-kan ùi Tiong-kok ín-chìn kok-sek chèng-t kap bûn-být chè-t, tk-pit s kho-kí chè-t kap Jû-ka susióng thang ún-tng Ot-lâm tiâu-ti ê hong-kiàn ki-chh. O ch t-kùo kóng, sui-jiân Ot-lâm bô koh si Tiong-kok t t-chiap thóng-t, tn-s Tiong-kok tùi Ot-lâm iáu-s chin ta ê éng-hióng (SarDesai 1992:21). Bk-koài Ot-lâm -miâ ê lk-sú hk-ka Tân Ting Kim ( Tran Trong Kim ) kám-khài kóng -koán ta-lâng, gín-á, khì kàu hk-hu lóng bô teh h Ot-lâm-sú, kan-ta h Tiong-kok-sú. Si-hù bûn-chiu m t chhú-châi Tiong-kok, chiàu Tiong-kok kè-tt-koan lâi kiâ... (Tran 1921:8). In-i ín-chìn kho-kí chè-t kap tk-chun Jû-ka ê koan-h, Otlâm kok tiâu-ti kè-sik iân-ing Hàn-j sm-chì ching Hàn-j tòng-chò ûi-it ê chèng-sek bûn-j. O ch t-ê kak-t lâi khòa, Hàn-j t Ot-lâm ê sú-ing hông hp-hoat-hòa kap chèng-thóng-hòa; che s ch-sêng Hànj t Ot-lâm pún-th -hòa ê ting-iàu in-s±. Ot-lâm t chioh-ng Hàn-j liáu, in hoat-kak Hàn-j bô-hoat-t

155 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 153 oân-chéng piáu-tt Ot-lâm ê j t-siông ing-gí, s -í bîn-kan bn-bn-á hoat-tián-chhut k-iú Ot-lâm tk-sek ê J-lâm. S -i ê J-lâm s kí lâmhong (siong-tùi Tiong-kok lâi kóng) ê bûn-j ê ì-sù; in-i khiàm phiauchún-hòa, J-lâm -sái siá-chòe,, hk-chiá téng. Chá-kî ê J-lâm chú-iàu s chòe Hàn-j ê p -ch kang-kh, ng lâi kì-lik t-miâ, lâng-miâ, kap t-hng tk-sán téng (Nguyen 1999:2). T lúi-chek kúi-pahnî sú-ing ê keng-gim liáu, t 13 sè-kí chiah J-lâm ê bûn-hk chokphín ê chhut-hin, 10 ah t sè-kí chi-kan tt-kàu ko-tiâu. 11 J-lâm ê sú-ing-chiá chú-iàu s thg-chhiah-kha ê pêng-bîn, lk-phek bûn-jîn, he-si nî-k, kap chió-s± kiông-lit bîn-chk ì-sek ê cheng-eng. Itpoa lâi kóng, J-lâm chú-iàu ng t kì-lik bîn-kan kháu-thoân bûn-hk, chhòng-chok sûn Ot-lâm-o bûn-hk, hoan-k Hýt-keng, kap thè Hàn-j chò chù-im kap chù-kái (Nguyen 1999). Sui-jiân t Bo Cai Ti-ông sî-kî t chhut-hin J-lâm, jî-chhiá ùi 10 sè-kí í-u, lú lâi lú ch J-lâm chhut-hin, -koh J-lâm -t bô tit-tih tong-koân ê Ot-lâm tiâu-têng ê chi-chhî, sm-chì cho-si lâi-ch kok-li kap kok-ga (Tiong-kok) ê tá-ap. i-siá-m h chit-khoán hoán púnth hin-sing neh? -sái hun-sek chòe -bn chit kúi tiám in-s±. T-it, si Tiong-kok Hàn-j bûn-hòa kè-tt-koan ê éng-hióng. In-i Hàn-j t Tiong-kok s ûi-it ê bûn-j chèng-thóng, ah Ot-lâm koh hng Tiong-kok chòe chong-chú-kok, tì-sú Ot-lâm kok tiâu-têng -ká chhim-hon Hàn-j ê chèng-thóng t-i. O ch t-ê kak-t lâi khòa, Ot-lâm kok tiâu-têng ng chiap-si Ot-lâm hông lp-j p Hàn-j bûn- 10 Kun-kù hin-chhûn ê bûn-hk chok-phín nî-ti s ln-ton. 11 Hm Nguyen Thanh Xuan ê kò-jîn hóng-tâm.

156 154 kap hòa king-tông-thé chò-ûi kau-o in chèng-t-sing tk-l p ê tiâu-ki. ng hin-chhú-sî Tâi-oân ê ing-gí lâi kóng chi-s chèng-t Ot-lâm, bûn-hòa Tiong-kok! Chit-chióng hin-sing t hin-chhú-sî ê Tâi-oân chèng-t-kài kap bûn-hòa-kài m-s hui-siông ph -phiàn, chi-s s -i ê chèng-t Tâi-oân, bûn-hòa Tiong-kok! Chin ch Tâi-oân phài ê chèngkheh kap bûn-hòa-jîn sui-jiân pêng-sî kóng Tâi-gí, -koh chin-chià kàu chèng-sek tiû-hp, chè-tng bûn-hòa chèng-chhek ê sî, soah lóng jn-ûi Tâi-gí bô-hoat-t teng ti-ngá chi-tông, k Tâi-gí tòng-chò àu kiâm-chhài tàn t pi-á. T-j, h kho-kí chè-t sok-pk ê koan-h. In-i Ot-lâm kok tiâuti lóng k Hàn-j tòng-chòe chèng-thóng, m k lit t kho-kí khó-chhì li-té, s -í hit kóa si beh chòe-koa, thong-kòe khó-chhì ê lâng chi b-sái bô h. Tng-tong chit kóa lâng khó-chhì j p-chhú, kong-sêng bêng-chi liáu, in i-tih ûi-h ka-t ê kì-tek l-ek, tong-jiân chi kè-sik ióng-h Hàn-j ê chèng-thóng t-i. Che chi kap hin-chhú-sî Tâi-oânlâng tú tih ê chêng-hêng kng-khoán, hit kóa keng-kòe Tiong-hôa Bînkok ê Tiong-kok gí-bûn kàu-ik chhut-lâi ê sing-chân cheng-eng, chèng-t jîn-být, chok-ka, lu-su lóng-s Tiong-bûn ê kì-tek l-ek-chiá. Tû-liáu chió-s± ê l-ga, beh kiò hit kóa Tiong-bûn kì-tek l-ek-chiá chichhî sú-ing Tâi-bûn, khióng-kia-á s chin oh. T-sa, J-lâm sian-thian ê bûn-j kiat-k± khoat-hm. J-lâm chúiàu s àn hêng-sia ê hong-sek, kiat-hp 2 ê Hàn-j (1 ê piáu im, 1 ê piáu ì) chiâ-chòe 1 ê sin-ê J-lâm-j. J-lâm tû-liáu kè-sêng Hàn-j pún-sin ê khoat-tiám, m si-thoà-chhut koh-khah ch ê bn-tê. Chhi-kóng, Tâi-gí ê j () t J-lâm lìn siá-chòe ; siàu-liân siá-chòe. t Ot-lâm-o hoat-im /tre/; lìn ê (Hàn Ot im /le/) ng lâi

157 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 155 àm-s ê hoat-im, ng lâi piáu-s siàu-liân ê ì-sù. Ùi chia -tàng khòa-chhut J-lâm kî-s t s pí Hàn-j khah hk-chp, phái h--ê. Itpoa lâi kóng, beh thk J-lâm, chi ài seng bat Hàn-j chiah châitiu thk. In-i J-lâm hk-chp kap bô phiau-chún-hòa, s -í ch-sêng i ê thui-tián ê khùn-lân, m h hit kóa ióng-h Hàn-j-chiá chià-kháu thui-hêng J-lâm. Lán -sái kóng, Ot-lâm ùi 10 kàu 19 sè-kí tong-tiong, sui-jiân t chèng-t-sing thoat-l Tiong-kok thóng-t, put-kò t bûn-hòa-sing iáus hông lp-j p Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé li-té Ot-lâm ê Ot-lâm sióng-sing Ot-lâm-lâng hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé, che kap Hoat-kok t 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî í-u kài-j p Ot-lâm kap Tiongkok koan-h. Kong-goân 1858 nî, Hoat-kok l-ing thoân-kàu-s si pek-hi chòe chià-kháu liân-hp Se-pan-gâ kun-lm hiòng Ot-lâm tiong-p ê Da Nang ( à Nng) chhut-peng (Tran 1921: ). Ot-lâm bot-ti tiâu-têng g-tiâu phah b kòe Hoat-kun, i-tih kiû-hô chí-hó t 1862 nî chhiam-tng t-it chhù Se-Kòng tiâu-iok koah-ni lâm-p Ka-tng ( ), Pian-hô (), kap Tng-siông () sa séng h Hoat-kok (Tran 1921:523). Tong-jiân Hoat-kok png-bô án-ne chi boán-chiok, in koh kè-sik chhim-chiàm kî-tha kok séng, l-bóe t 1885 nî oân-choân cheng-hk Ot-lâm. Ot-lâm cho-si Hoat-kok s p-kk ê sî m bat hiòng Tiong-kok kiû-oân, -koh hit-tong-sî ê Tiong-kok í-keng ch-sin nânpó, bô-hoat-t iú-hu ch -tòng Hoat-kun ê chhim-lit ( 1996). Lbóe Tiong Hoat siang-hong t 1885 nî chhiam-tng hip-g thêng-chiàn ê

158 156 kap Thian-tin tiâu-iok. T tiâu-iok li-té, Tiong-kok chèng-sek hòng-khì tùi Ot-lâm ê chong-chú-kok t-i koh sêng-jn Ot-lâm kái-iû Hoat-kok pó-h (Tran 1921:577). Hoat-kok s t-bîn-chiá thóng-t Ot-lâm ê sî, in jn-ûi Tiong-kok s Hoat-kok kap Ot-lâm chi-kan ê t-sa-chiá, tùi Hoat-kok thóng-t Otlâm chiâm-chi ê ui-hip. N beh ching Ot-lâm kap Tiong-kok éngkú koah-khui, chi ài ching liân-chiap in 2 kok chi-kan ê sòa chhiattg. In-i Ot-lâm tg-kî í-lâi lóng k Tiong-kok hng chòe chong-chúkok, m thàu-kòe Hàn-j hk-s p Tiong-kok bûn-hòa kap kè-tt-koan, ká-sú h Ot-lâm-lâng kè-sik sú-ing Hàn-j chi téng-î s h Ot-lâm pó-chhî hm Tiong-kok ê chhin-b t koan-h. S -í Hoat-kok jm-tng liân-chiap Ot-lâm kap Tiong-kok chi-kan ê hit tiâu sòa chi-s Hànj. i-tih h Ot-lâm ton-chot hm Tiong-kok ê koan-h, thang chhin-kn Hoat-kok, bô ching Hàn-j thh-tiu b-sái (DeFrancis 1977:77). 12 Hoat-kok-lâng si--chhut-lâi ê chhek-lik s ng Lô-má-j chhú-ti Hàn-j. In jn-ûi Ot-lâm-lâng n -tàng chiap-si Lô-má-j, án-ne b-lâi beh koh chìn-ch t-p chiap-si Hoat-bûn ê khó-lêng-sèng chi lú koân. Hoat-kok-lâng s thui-hêng ê Lô-má-j chi-s t 17 sè-kí keng-iû thoân-kàu-s thoân-j p Ot-lâm, t Ot-lâm kàu-he-kài sú-ing 200 ga tang ê Lô-má-j (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005a, 2005b). Sui-jiân Hoat-kok s t-bîn-chiá chhui-sak Lô-má-j ê chòe-u bk- 12 Chhi-kóng 1866 nî, 1 ê Hoat-kok s t-bîn-t hêng-chèng koa-oân Paulin Vial t 1 tiu phoe lìn theh-khí kóng From the first days it was recognized that the Chinese language was a barrier between us and the natives; it is the only one which can bring close to us the Annamites of the colony by inculcating in them the principles of European civilization and isolating them from the hostile influence of our neighbors (quoted in DeFrancis 1977:77).

159 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 157 tek s thui-kóng Hoat-bûn, -koh i bô-hêng-tiong soah thê-kiong Otlâm Lô-má-j chh-kî sêng-tióng ê ni-chúi. Chhi-kóng, Hoat-kok s tbîn-chiá k Lô-má-j lit-j p hk-hu khò-têng, sòa--lâi t 1865 nî iû koa-hong hoat-hêng t-it hn ê Lô-má-j pò-chóa Ka-tng-pò ( Gia Dinh Bao); Ot-lâm Lô-má-j m ùi hit chm khai-sí h-chòe Ch Quôc Ng ( Kok-gí-j) (Vien Van Hoc 1961:22). Ka-tng-pò chi hm Tâi-oân 1885 nî chhut-pán ê t-it hn Lô-má-j pò-chóa Tâi-oân Hú-siâ Kàu-he-pò kng-khoán, chha-thâu ph -k p Lô-má-j ê kòng-hiàn. Lng-ga ch t-ê thui-kóng Lô-má-j ê l s, lâm-p chóngtok t 1882 nî chhiam-tng ch t hn kui-tng s - Ot-lâm-o ê kongbûn ài ng Lô-má-j siá ê g-tng (Vien Van Hoc 1961:22-23). Hoat-koklâng i-tih phah-phòa kho-kí chè-t tùi Hàn-j ê pó-h, in t 1915 kap 1919 nî hun-pit hùi-tû Ot-lâm pak-p kap tiong-p ê kho-kí khó-chhì (Nguyen 1998:48). Sui-jiân t Hoat-kok s t-bîn-chiá ê chhui-sak chi-h, Ot-lâm Lômá-j t 19 sè-kí u-pòa-kî pí í-chêng khah ph -phiàn, -koh chéngthé lâi kóng i ê thui-hêng hu-kó iáu chin iú-hn (DeFrancis 1977:69). Lô-má-j ê thui-hêng ài 20 sè-kí chh í-u t Ot-lâm pún-th ê bînchk chú-g-chiá ê k -chhui chi-h chiah bêng-hián ê chìn-tián (DeFrancis 1977:159). Che goân-in s t hoán-tùi Hoat-kok s t-bîn chú-g ê khì-hun chi-h, pin-n ng ga-lâi ê Lô-má-j chi hông tong-chòe s oá-hù ga-lâi chèng-koân ê hêng-ûi. -koh t Ot-lâm bîn-chk chúg-chiá kám-si-tih Lô-má-j kán-tan, hó ng, s kàu-ik bîn-chiòng ê hó kang-kh liáu, in t hòa-kái tùi Lô-má-j ê ok-kám, k Lô-má-j pún-th -hòa, chiâ-chòe tùi-khòng ga-lâi thóng-t ê li-khì. T 1900 nî chìn-chêng, Ot-lâm ê bûn-jîn, koa-goân iáu kiò-s

160 158 kap sui-jiân Ot-lâm t chèng-t-sing si Hoat-kok khòng-chè, -koh iáu hoat-t ûi-chhî bûn-hòa hm cheng-sîn-sing ê tk-l p. Tn-s sin ch t pòe ê kái-kek phài chù-ì tih s t-bîn thóng-t s ch-sêng ê kàu-ik kap bûn-hòa chhiong-kek ê gûi-hiám-sèng; in tùi hit kóa pa-kiat Hoat-kok ê koa-goân kap kùi-chk kám-kak chin sim hân, m khióng-kia piànchòe bông-kok-n². S -í chia ê koa-goân ti-khài pun-chò 3 khoán, t-it s hm Hoat-kok thóng-t-chiá hp-chok; t-j s kui-khì ún-ki--khí-lâi, chò siau-kk tí-khòng; t-sa s chek-kk hoán-khòng Hoat-kok s t-bîn thóng-t (SarDesai 1992:14). Ki-pún-sing, Ot-lâm ê bîn-chk-chú-g n-tng s ùi 20 sè-kí chh khai-sí chhia-i òng-kóng--khí-lâi. Chú-iàu ê goân-in s, t-it, Hoat-kok ê se-sek kàu-ik ê éng-hióng. Sui-jiân s t-bîn-chiá thê-kiong ê s ch t-chióng pái-kha ê s t-bîn kàu-ik, -koh h Ot-lâm-lâng thàukòe chit-ê sin-sek kàu-ik -tàng pí thoân-thóng kàu-ik khah ch ki-he lâi chiap-chhiok bîn-chk-chú-g, bîn-chk kok-ka, bîn-chú kap khohk téng ê sin koan-lim. T-j, 20 sè-kí chh bîn-chk-chú-g tiâu-liû ê éng-hióng. Chhiau-kòe 10 bn ê Ot-lâm-lâng Hoat-kok-peng t T-itchhù Sè-kài Ti-chiàn ( ) thè Hoat-kok chòe kun-hu ê sî-chn tùi hit-tong-sî ê bîn-chk-chú-g jit-tiâu chin chhim ê ìn-sing. Ka-sing hit chn Bí-kok chóng-thóng Hui-o-son (W. Wilson) hoat-piáu bîn-chk ch-koat ê sia-bêng, m h kok te ê bîn-chk n-tng chin ta ê k bú. 20 sè-kí chh k -chhui Lô-má-j ê bîn-chk-chú-g n-tng ê thâu-ch t-ê ti-piáu-sèng thoân-thé sg s Tang-kia G-sik () Hm Nguyen Quang Hong ê kò-jîn hóng-tâm. Iú-koan Tang-kia G-sik, m -sái chham-

161 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 159 Tang-kia G-sik t Ot-lâm s pn-ián ê kak-sek t ká-ná 1920 nî-ti ê Tâi-oân Bûn-hòa Hip-he; Lióng-chiá ê chha-pit s Bûn-hòa Hip-he png-bô chù-ting Lô-má-j, kan-ta chhiòng-t Hàn-j ph-o-bûn. Chit-ê chha-pit tú-hó chù-ti Lô-má-j t Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm bôkng ê hoat-tián mi-n. Tang-kia G-sik ê sêng-goân chú-iàu s ch t-kóa liû-hk J t-pún ê Ot-lâm tì-sek-hn-chú. In t 1907 nî t Hô-li 14 (Hà Ni) siat-l p Tangkia G-sik hk-hu, bk-tk thang thoân-si se-hng su-sióng kap khohk sin-ti téng. In jn-tng n beh tt-sêng khé-hoat bîn-tì ê bk-tk, bô kà Lô-má-j b-sái. S -í Tang-kia G-sik ê t-it iàu-b chi-s beh ph -k p Lô-má-j; in beh thàu-kòe Lô-má-j lâi kàu-ik bîn-chiòng, h ti-chiòng chai-bat thang tùi-khòng Hoat-kok s t-bîn thóng-t. Tangkia G-sik sui-jiân sêng-l p bô kàu 1 tang t h Hoat-kok s t-bîn-chiá kiông-pek koai-mg, -koh in ê chú-tiu soah t tì-sek-hn-chú tangtiong ph -phiàn tit-tih jn-tông hm chi-chhî. T in ê éng-hióng chi-h, chhui-kóng Lô-má-j soah chiâ-chòe Ot-lâm bîn-chk-chú-g-chiá ê ph -phiàn chú-tiu kap chhui-tng iàu-tiám, m ín-khí ch t chn henghk, pn Lô-má-j pò-chóa ê hong-tiâu (Vuong & Vu 1980:20-32). Kunkù k -kè, kàu kah 1930 nî ûi-chí, choân Ot-lâm ling-iok-á 75 chióng ê Lô-má-j pò-chóa (Hannas 1997:86). Sui-jiân Lô-má-j t Ot-lâm bîn-chk-chú-g-chiá ê chhui-sak chih chin ta ê sêng-chi, -koh che png-bô ti-piáu Lô-má-j t hitchn í-keng oân-choân chhú-ti Hàn-j. Ti 1945 nî chìn-chêng, Ot-lâmot Marr (1971: ). 14 Hô-li s Ot-lâm bk-chêng ê siú-t.

162 160 kap o ham Ot-lâm Lô-má-j siong-tùi Hoat-bûn kap Hàn-bûn lâi kóng iáus hông chin khòa-khin, iû-kî s pó-siú-phài ê tì-sek-hn-chú kap koagoân koh-khah khòa in bô khí. Phí-jû kóng, ch t-ê Ot-lâm ê chèng-t jîn-být h-chòe Ho Duy Kien, t 1931 nî Kau-chí Chi-ná s t-bîn-t he-g thó-ln ki-pún kàu-ik ê sî chí-chhut, Ot-lâm-o s kap t Hoat-kok ê Gascogne, Brittany, Normandy hk-chiá Provence s hoat-hin ê th o kng-khoán bô chúi-chún, k-l ê o, N-s beh ching Ot-lâm-o thê-seng kàu chhin-chhi Hoat-kok-o hk-chiá Tiong-kok-o ê chúichún, ài liáu 500 tang ê sî-kan (DeFrancis 1977). Lô-má-j ê t-i t 1945 nî Chì-bêng soan-p± Ot-lâm tk-l p liáu chiah chìn-ch t-p thê-seng chòe kok-ka ûi-it ê chèng-sek su-siá bûn-j. Chì-bêng t 1945 nî 9 goh chhe 2 soan-p± sêng-l p Ot-lâm Bîn-chú King-hô-kok liáu, sin chèng-hú t 9 goh chhe 8 t sûi soan-p± choânbn thui-hêng Lô-má-j kàu-ik ê chèng-chhek. Kun-kù k -kè, 1945 nî choân-kok bat-j ê jîn-kháu ti-iok 20%; t choân-bn thui-hêng Lômá-j liáu, 1953 nî í-keng thê-seng kàu 70% (DeFrancis 1977:240). Chóng kóng ch t-kù, Ot-lâm -tàng ùi Hàn-j, J-lâm sêng-kong choán-o chòe Lô-má-j ê goân-in chin ch, kî-tiong sing ting-iàu koan-kiàn ê s ga-chi kap li-chi 2 in-s±. Ga-chi in-s± s kí Ot-lâm t tg-kî si Tiong-kok kap Hoat-kok s t-bîn thóng-t chi-h, àn-sg l-ing Ot-lâm Lô-má-j chiâ-chòe bûnhòa tk-l p ê ki-chh, thang chìn-ch t-p pó-chiong bîn-chk chèng-t ê tk-l p. T 1940 nî-ti, J t-pún-kun i-tih chhim-lik Tiong-kok soah lâi chhut-peng kàu Ot-lâm, àn-sg thh Ot-lâm chòe kong-kek Tiongkok se-lâm t-khu ê kun-kù-t. Tùi Tiong-kok lâi kóng, phài-kun chìnj p Ot-lâm thang sàu-tû J t-kun ê kun-kù-t s su-iàu--ê. -koh tùi

163 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 161 hit-tong-sî iáu chiàm-niá Ot-lâm ê Hoat-kok lâi kóng, i kia Tiong-kok kun-ti n koh j p-lâi cháu, sm-chì k Ot-lâm koh thh tg-khì Tiong-kok ê chhiú--lìn. Tùi Ot-lâm ê léng-t-jîn lâi kóng, án-choá ling kok-kok ê mâu-tún thang h Ot-lâm tit-tih tk-l p s iàu-kín ê ti-chì. Chì-bêng tùi Tiong-kok siong-tong liáu-kái, i m kia Tiongkok l-ing sàu-tû J t-kun chòe chià-kháu soah chiàm-niá Ot-lâm. S -í i ê chhek-lik s ch t-hong-bn ch -tòng Tiong-kok kun-ti chìn-j p Otlâm ( 1971:107), ch t-hong-bn chhek-tng hoán Tiong-kok ê ntng ( 1971: ). T chit-chióng pn-sè chi-h, Lô-má-j tongjiân chiâ-chòe khak-pó chèng-t kap bûn-hòa tk-l p ê sing-hó soántk. T 1945 nî J t-pún tâu-hâng liáu, Chiú Kài-chih kun-ti ti-piáu Liân-kun chiap-siu Tâi-oân kap Ot-lâm pak-p (pak-úi 16 t í-sing), kng-sî-chn Ot-lâm lâm-p s iû Eng-kok ti-piáu chiap-siu (Le 2001:10; Bo 2003:69; 1998:103). Hit-tong-sî Chiú Kài-chih phài L² Hàn () kun-ti 20 bn peng chìn-j p Ot-lâm Hô-li. Chiú Kàichih ê kun-ti ch t chìn-j p Hô-li, kap hit-kóa lâi Tâi-oân ê kun-ti kng-khoán, kun-kì chin bái. Chhi-kóng chih m h-ki, ch-chhia hù-chî, jî-chhiá koh ching thoân-jiám-p chah--j p-lâi Ot-lâm 15. Chiú Kài-chih chiàm-niá Ot-lâm pak-p ê sî iau-kiû Ot-lâm ài htam s - kun-niû ê khai-siau, koh tông-sî hû-chhî Ot-lâm Kok-bîntóng (Vit Nam quc dân ng) kap Ot-lâm Kek-bng Tông-bênghe (Vit Nam cách mng ng minh hi), thang beh kài-j p Ot-lâm ê chèng-t (Le 2001:10; Bo 2003:76-77). Chì-bêng bat t Tiong-kok 15 Hm Ot-lâm lu-peng, -miâ chok-ka g Chìn (Hoàng Tiên) ê kò-jîn hóng-tâm.

164 162 kap tòa--kòe, m bat ch-kòe Tiong-kok Kok-bîn-tóng ê ka 13 kò-gh, s -í i tùi Tiong-kok-lâng ê iá-sim chin liáu-kái. I bat kóng--kòe, n beh ch tsì-lâng chih Tiong-kok-lâng ê sái, khah-su chim-sî ph Hoat-koklâng ê chhàu-phùi ( 1998:105). Chì-bêng khòa -s sè, kia Chiú Kài-chih ê Ot-lâm ê lk-ling lú lâi lú ta, s -í i ng kè h Chiú Kài-chih l-khui Ot-lâm. I t 1946 nî 3 goh chhe 6 hm Hoat-kok tipiáu Sainteny chhiam-tng Lik Sam Hip-tng (Hip nh s b 6-3), li-iông pau-hâm: sêng-jn Ot-lâm Bîn-chú King-hô-kok s France Liân-hp ê ch t-p-hn; hiáng-iú tk-l p ê chèng-hú, kok-he, kun-ti kap châi-chèng; Ot-lâm chèng-hú tông-ì Hoat-kok 1 bn 5 chheng miâ kun-ti chìn-j p pak-p thang o-tiu Tiong-kok Kok-bîn-tóng ê kunti, jî-chhiá chit 1 bn 5 chheng miâ Hoat-kok-peng ài t 5 tang-li thiat-thè (Bo 2003:78). Chì-bêng chi-s l-ing Hoat-kok kap kok-chè kik-sè pek Chiú Kài-chih thè-chhut Ot-lâm. Tng Chiú Kài-chih thè-chhut Ot-lâm ê sî, Chì-bêng tông-sî koh chún-p kap Hoat-kok phah iû-kk-chiàn. Che s hit-tong-sî chin -miâ ê k±-s, t Ot-lâm ê ko-tiong lk-sú kàu-kho-su lóng- kì-chi (Bo 2003). Hit-tong-sî ê Tâioân tì-sek-hn-chú chi-s bô chit-khoán ê tùi Tiong-kok ê kài-sim chiah h Chiú Kài-chih khit-chih kóa bi-kong chiàm-niá Tâi-oân hêng. Li-chi in-s± s kí hoán hong-kiàn, hoán tì-sek lióng-ton ê kóngta su-kiû. T chhin-chhi Chì-bêng s -kóng--ê, án-choá h hiah ch bô si kàu-ik ê kûn-chiòng sin chai-bat thang h kok-ka pùkiông s chiok iàu-kín ê ti-chì (Ho 1994:64-65). T 19 sè-kí í-chêng ê Otlâm hong-kiàn si-he--lìn, in ûi-it ga-lâi ê chú-iàu ui-hip s Tiongkok; t hit-chióng chêng-hêng chi-h, chhái-ing Hàn-j sui-jiân ch-

165 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 163 sêng to-s± ê lô-kh kai-kip chiâ-chòe chhe-mê-gû, -koh án-ne chò sái siau-tû Tiong-kok ê chhim-lik-ik koh -tàng boán-chiok Ot-lâm hong-kiàn tiâu-têng ê kì-tek l-ek. -koh kàu kah 20 sè-kí liáu, Ot-lâm ài èng-hù--ê -t Tiong-kok niâ, ài koh èng-hù sio-sòa lâi ê se-au kap J t-pún tè-kok-chú-g. J-lâm sui-jiân Ot-lâm bîn-chk tk-sek, - koh soah siu hk-chp kap pháih. Tùi-chiàu chi-h, kán-tan, hó h ê Lô-má-j chi chiâ-chòe khé-hoat bîn-tì, tùi-khòng ga-lâi thóng-t ê sing-hó soán-tk. Sui-jiân Chì-bêng t 1945 nî chi soan-p± Ot-lâm tk-l p, -koh ch t-khai-sí png-bô jn-hô kok-ka sêng-jn, jî-chhiá ínkhí Hoat-kok têng-thâu lâi ê kong-kek; l-bóe koh Bí-kok kài-j p lâmpak Ot li-chiàn. -sái kóng ch 1945 kàu 1975 nî chi-kan Ot-lâm lóngs sik-t chiàn-lon ê sî-kî. Chiàn-lon sî-kî ná- siá-m h ling-sing ê chu-goân thang hó chòe bat-j ê kàu-ik. T chu-goân iú-hn ê chnghóng chi-h, Lô-má-j tong-jiân s sing-hó ê soán-tk. Ot-lâm ê bînchk-chú-g léng-t-chiá t kak-ng tih sî-ti ê piàn-chhian liáu, chhânchhân koat-tng chhái-ing Lô-má-j. T chiáng-ap tih to-s± bînchiòng s chhe-mê-gû, kan-ta chió-s± kì-tek l-ek-chiá bat Hàn-j 16 ê chêng-hêng chi-h, ng choân-kok ê lk-ling lâi chhui-sak Lô-má-j, tong-jiân chin kín t siu-tih hu-kó. 3. Tâi-oân Tâi-oân ê king-tông-thé lk-sú keng-gim tú-hó kap Ot-lâm tò- 16 It-poa lâi kóng, iau-kiû í-keng -hiáu b chióng bûn-j ê lâng h sîn-ê bûn-j h-tóng pí h -bat j ê chhe-mê-gû khì chiap-si sin bûn-j h-tóng khah khùn-lân. Chhi-kóng, Stubbs (1980:72) chi kí-chhut tong-chh Bí-kok ê pheng-im kái-kek bô sêng-kong ê chú-iàu koan-kiàn chi-s bîn-chiòng bô beh kái-piàn k koàn-s p.

166 164 kap péng. Tâi-oân ùi sè-kài ê ch t-p-hn t 17 sè-kí u-pòa-kî hông lp-j p Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té; sui-jiân J t-pún t chit-ta kîkan kài-j p thóng-t Tâi-oân, -koh i tùi Tâi-oân thoat-l Hàn-j bûnhòa king-tông-thé ê pang-chn chin iú-hn, tì-sú Chiú Kài-chih kunti t 1945 nî ti-piáu Liân-kun chiap-siu Tâi-oân ê sî hoat-tng Hànj bûn-hòa-khoan ê tk-sek chè-ch Tiong-kok king-tông-thé ê kásing Ùi sè-kài ê ch t-p-hn kàu Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé 1492 nî Kholanpos (Christopher Columbus) ti-piáu Au-chiu-lâng t 1 pái kiâ-chûn kàu Bí-chiu Ti-lik; kúi-nî u, Phô-tô-gâ ê kiâ-chûnlâng Gama (Vasco da Gama) t 1498 nî keng-iû Hó-bng-kak (The Cape of Good Hope) phah-khui Au-chiu kàu Ìn-t ê sin hâng-sòa. 15 sè-kí ê kiat-sok tú-hó s sin hâng-sòa sî-ti ê khai-sí. T A-chiu, tòe sin hângsòa sî-ti kha-u-táu lâi ê s se-au ê thoân-kàu oh-tng, kok-chè b- k kap l-bóe ê s t-bîn chú-g. Ho-lan-lâng t 1579 nî thoat-l Se-pan-gâ ê thóng-t, kiàn-l p Holan king-hô-kok, sòa--lâi liân-hp Eng-kok tuh-tuh-á hêng-sêng sin-ê hái-iû pà-koân. Ho-lan-lâng t 17 sè-kí chh pún-té beh chiàm-niá Phê- ² thang chò-ûi hm Tiong-kok bé-b ê k-tiám, in-i Tiong-kok Bêngtiâu ê kiông-lit hoán-tùi kap tí-khòng, tì-sú bô sêng-kong. L-bóe Tiong-kok hm Ho-lan tt-sêng thêng-chiàn hip-g, Ho-lan ài thèchhut Bêng-tiâu thóng-t chi-h ê Phê-²; Hô-lân N-s beh chiàm-niá bô sik Bêng-tiâu ê Tâi-oân, Bêng-tiâu png b kan-sip (Sú Bêng 1980:58). T chit-ê iân-k± chi-h, Ho-lan-lâng t 1624 nî choán-chìn Tâi-oân, t bô tú tih Tiong-kok-peng ê tí-khòng chi-h, chin kán-tan

167 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 165 chi chiàm-niá Tâi-oân. T Ho-lan-lâng lâi kàu Tâi-oân chìn-chêng, Tâi-oân s Lâm-tó gíh bîn-chk ê thian-h. In-i Tâi-oân goân-ch-bîn hit-tong-sî png-bô hêng-sêng kn-ti bîn-chk kok-ka ê chèng-t ch-chit, tì-sú bô-hoat-t chin -lt tí-khòng Ho-lan-lâng ê j p-chhim. Ho-lan-lâng t Tâi-oân tû-liáu pak-siap keng-chè chu-goân chi-ga, iáu chiông-s Ki-tok kàu-g ê thui-kóng (Campbell 1903:vii). In thòe Tâi-oân pê-p-chk siat-kè Lô-má-j ê bûn-j h-thóng, ìn kàu-gchheh, koh t 1636 siat-l p t-it keng ng pê-p-chk Sin-káng-gí ûi kàu-hk gí-giân ê hk-hu (Campbell 1903:147; Heylen 2001; Lîm Gikthé 2003:20). Che s Tâi-oân iú-sú í-lâi t-it pái ê hk-hu kàu-ik hthóng. Sui-jiân chit-ê h-thóng tm-ph-á pái-kha, kong-lêng iú-hn, -koh i thê-king hit-tong-sî Tâi-oân hm sè-kài sio-chiap ê sòa (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2005d). Anderson (1991:37-46) hun-sek kóng chhut-pán, chong-kàu kái-kek kap tong-t bó-gí ê chhut-thâu s kn-ti bîn-chk kok-ka ì- sek hêng-sêng ê ting-iàu goân-thâu. N chiàu chit-chióng koan-tiám lâi khòa, hit-tong-sî Ho-lan-lâng n bô t 1661 nî ching Tâi-oân ni h T Sêng-kong, Sin-káng-gí ê chhut-pán kap kàu-ik khó-lêng lú lâi lú ting-iàu, sm-chì Sin-káng-gí khó-lêng hêng-sêng Tâi-oân pê-p-chk chi-kan ê king-thong-gí, pn-ián í pê-p-chk ûi chú-thé ê Tâi-oân bîn-chk ì-sek ê chhui-hòa-che. Khó-sioh Tâi-oân pê-p-chk thàu-kòe Sin-káng-gí sióng-sing n-mi king-tông-thé ê sî-kan bô-kàu-tg, chi in-i Tiong-kok Bêngtiâu ûi-chiòng T Sêng-kong t 1661 nî niá-kun chìn-kong Tâi-oân lâi tiong-ton.

168 166 kap T Sêng-kong chi li-s Ot-lâm lk-sú-tiong ê Ti Tô (), s thàu-kòe kun-s chèng-t k Tâi-oân óng Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan sak ê thâu-ch t-lâng. T T--sì Ông-tiâu (kong-goân ) thóng-t Tâioân sî-kî, in thui-hêng Hàn-j, Jû-hk, siat-l p kho-kí chè-t (Lîm Gikthé 2003:37). Tâi-oân chi án-ne hông giú--j p-khì Hàn-j bûn-hòakhoan, it-t t-kàu 1895 nî Chheng-tiâu koah Tâi-oân h J t-pún. T Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ch t-ê king-tông ê tk-sek, chis koa-hong t bûn-kàu, hêng-chèng, chèng-sek tiû-hp it-tng s ng Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn su-siá; -koh t bîn-kan, in -khó-lêng siu-kái Hàn-j, hk-chiá ch sin bûn-j thang phòe-hp in ê kháu-gí (Chiú Ûibûn 2005c). Che bô-hêng-tiong chi hêng-sêng ch t-chióng koân-k bûn-j (digraphia 17 ) ê hin-sing. Chit-chióng hin-sing t chá-kî ê Ot-lâm chi-s Hàn-j (ko-kai bûn-j ) vs. J-lâm ( k-kai bûn-j ). N ln-kàu Tâi-oân, chá-kî bîn-kan m chhut-hin li-s J-lâm ê bûn-j, he t chia lán k thong-chheng-chòe Koa-á-chheh bûn-j. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan chi-s l-ing Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn chò-ûi king-tông ê sióng-sing gêng-ch-thé. Bîn-kan hoat-tián chhut-lâi ê Jlâm hk-chiá Koa-á-chheh sui-jiân hun-pit tùi Ot-lâm kap Tâi-oân ê kò-pit bîn-chk ì-sek (national consciousness) pang-chn, -koh in- i koa-hong ê tá-ap kap pún-sin ê bûn-j khoat-hm (phái h, phái thk) soah bô-hoat-t hoat-hui li-s Lô-má-j t Au-chiu tài-tng kn- 17 Dale (1980:5) chiong digraphia tng-g chòe the use of two (or more) writing systems for representing a single language. DeFrancis (1984:59) tng-g chòe the use of two or more different systems of writing the same language. Chiung (2003:9) k in ê tng-g siu-kái chòe the use of more than one writing varieties to serve different communicational tasks within a society.

169 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 167 ti se-au kok-ka kok-bîn bûn-hk kap kok-bîn ì-sek ê hêng-sêng ê kòng-hiàn. Chóng kóng ch t-kù, Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té 2 khoán lk-ling, ch t-khoán s thàu-kòe Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn kiàn-k±--khí-lâi ê í Tiong-kok hông-tè ûi tiong-sim ê Tiong-kok khip-ín-lt; lng-ga ch tkhoán s thàu-kòe J-lâm hk-chiá Koa-á-chheh chit-khoán ê í chi-t ûi tiong-sim ê pún-th -hòa lk-ling. Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té ê sênggoân s- -s hoat-t thoat-l Tiong-kok hêng-sêng kn-ti ê bîn-chk kok-ka chi ài khòa chit 2 k lk-ling siáng khah kiông. Ot-lâm kn-ti in-i ga-lk ê kài-j p, pang-chn in chhiat-tg thàu-kòe Hàn-j bûn-giân-bûn liân--khí-lâi ê hit tiâu Ot-lâm hm Tiong-kok chi-kan ê sòa. Koh in-i Hoat-kok thui-hêng Lô-má-j soah h Ot-lâm chhe-mê-ke tok tih bí tit-tih kái-sin Ot-lâm-gí su-siá hu-lýt ê kang-kh thang thê-seng pún-th -hòa lk-ling. S -í Ot-lâm Hoat-t t 20 sè-kí kái-k± Hàn-j king-tông-thé, kiâ-hiòng bîn-chk kok-ka ê kiàn-k±. Tâi-oân sui-jiân t 19 sè-kí bóe m ga-lk kài-j p, -koh in-i chiàm-niá Tâi-oân ê J t-pún pún-sin m-s Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê kokka, s -í tùi Tâi-oân beh thiàu-thoat Hàn-j king-tông-thé ê pang-chn png-bô ta. N-chún 1884 nî hit-tong-sî Chheng-kok hm Hoat-kok chi-kan i-tih Ot-lâm chong-chú-koân kui-sik bn-tê s hoat-seng ê Chheng Hoat chiàn-cheng (Tiong Hoat chiàn-cheng) iân-sòa lh-khì jîchhiá Hoat-kok tông-sî chiàm-niá Tâi-oân kap Ot-lâm, án-ne Tâi-oân ê kn-ti-sú chi ài kái-siá, jî-chhiá Tâi-oân khó-lêng ng Ph-o-j (Tâi-gí Lô-má-j 18 ) chhú-ti Hàn-j. 18 Siông-sè chhiá chham-ot Chiú Ûi-bûn (2005a), Táng Hong-oán (2004)

170 168 kap Án-chóa kóng J t-pún thóng-t tùi Tâi-oân thoat-l Hàn-j bûnhòa-khoan bô kài ta ê pang-chn? Sui-jiân J t-pún ch 1868 nî Bêng-t ûi-sin í-u t hui-siông chù-ting thoat-hôa j p-au, jî-chhiá chin ting-s gí-bûn kái-kek hm kok-bîn kàu-ik ê ting-iàu-sèng (Seeley 1991: ). -koh, J t-pún ê gí-bûn kái-kek kan-ta bêng-hián thêseng Kana ê sú-ing pí-l, png-bô oân-choân hùi-tû Hàn-j. i-siám h J t-pún bô oân-choân hùi-tû Hàn-j neh? In-i ch 1931 nî J t-pún hoat-tng Boán-chiu s-ki khai-sí choân-lk j p-chhim Tiong-kok tang-pak í-u, J t-pún kun-kok chú-g-chiá khì-sè tng chhia-i. In itih kì-lik s chiàm ê Tiong-kok t-miâ kap lâng-miâ ê s t-chit su-iàu, soah hoán-tùi hùi-tû Hàn-j (Gottlieb 1995:75-88; Seeley 1991: ). J t-pún chiàm-niá Tâi-oân kî-kan sui-jiân ch t-khai-sí chi- ànsg thui-hêng J t-pún-o, -koh in tùi Hàn-j iáu -s chin tk-s. Tâioân chóng-tok sm-chì ti kú-pn Hàn-si liân-gîm ti-he, chio Tâichk bûn-jîn lâi koa-thia gîm-si chò-tùi thang giú-kn Tâi-oân-lâng hm J t-pún-lâng ê k-l ( 2000: ). J t-pún-lâng chi-s ling Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan li-té Hàn-j ê chn-chhun ê kè-tt lâi chòûi ng-hòa Tâi-oân-lâng hoán-khòng ê kang-kh. Che kap Hoat-koklâng ching Hàn-j tòng-chò phò-hoi Hoat-kok kap Ot-lâm koan-h ê t-sa-chiá oân-choân bô-kng ê koan-tiám. In-i J t-pún chèng-hú tùi Hàn-j bô pâi-thek 19, koh ka-sing hittong-sî ê Tâi-oân tì-sek-hn-chú tùi ng Lô-má-j lâi chòe Tâi-oân obûn ê su-siá kang-kh m bô chin khòa-ting, tì-sú Tâi-oân sit-khì ng Lô-má-j chhú-ti Hàn-j thang chhiat-tg hm Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan ê 19 It-t t-kàu 1937 nî Tâi-ôan chóng-tok chiah kìm-chí sú-ing hàn-bûn ( 1993:59).

171 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 169 koan-h ê ki-he. Chhi-kóng, J t-pún sî-kî thui-hêng Lô-má-j sing -lt ê Chhòa Pôe-hóe t 1924 nî Tông-hòa-he tng teh nu-jit kún-kún ê sî kiàn-g thui-hêng Lô-má-j soah bô tit-tih ting-s; t 1931 nî tùi J tpún koa-goân Izawa Takiro () iû-soeh sú-ing Lô-má-j m tit-tih hoán-tùi ê hôe-èng (Tiu Hàn-j 2000:19-20) Tâi-oân ê Tiong-kok king-tông-thé Kong-goân 1945 nî J t-pún tâu-hâng liáu, Chiú Kài-chih ti-piáu Liân-kun chiap-siu Tâi-oân kap Ot-lâm pak-p. i-siá-m h hit-tong-sî ê Tâi-oân-lâng chhut-hin s -i ê hoan-gêng ch -kok ê hin-sing? N beh kóng he s hoan-gêng ch -kok Tiong-kok, khah-su kóng he s ch t-chióng tùi Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé ê g-bng. Lán chìn-chêng kóng-kòe, Tâi-oân sui-jiân keng-kòe J t-pún thóng-t, -koh Tâi-oân png-bô oân-choân thoat-l Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé. Sui-jiân Tâi-oân iáu Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé ê tk-sek, -koh he koh hm Chiú Kài-chih s sióng-sing ê Tiong-hôa bîn-chk hk-chiá Tiong-kok king-tông-thé bô oân-choân kng-khoán. Chiú Kài-chih k chit-ê bô-kng koài-che tùi Tâi-oân-lâng si J t-pún ê n²-hòa, soah bô jn-chheng Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé kap Tiong-kok king-tông-thé pún-chiâ chi-s 2 ê bô oân-choân kng ê chân-chhù. In-i bûn-hòa ê chha-, ka-sing keng-chè ê pak-siap kap chèng-t ê lióng-ton, soah ín-khí Tâi-oân 1947 nî ê 228 khí-g. In-i 228 khí-g ê kàu-hùn, Tâi-oân-lâng chiah kak-chhí kóng Tâi-oân hm Tiong-kok s bô-kng ê 2 ê kò-thé. Chiú Kài-chih m ch án-ne chiah thé-he kàu ài thiat-té tùi Tâi-oân-lâng s t-hêng Tiong-kokhòa chèng-chhek chiah -tàng ún-tng Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok t Tâi-oân ê

172 170 kap seng-chûn khong-kan. Chiú Kài-chih chi ch t-hong-bn l-ing Tâioân goân-iú ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé tk-sek, chhi-kóng súing Hàn-j, chông-pài Jû-hk, kòe k-lk-nî, Tiong-chhiu, Chhengbêng téng, k choán-o chòe Tiong-kok king-tông-thé ê sióng-sing ki-chh ; lng-ga ch t-hong-bn chi chn-lt chám-tg Tâi-oân púnth -hòa ê kun, chhi-kóng kìm-chí kóng Tâi-oân gí-giân, kìm-chí súing Lô-má-j. Thàu-kòe chhut-pán-phín, mûi-thé soan-thoân kap ta Tiong-kok ê kàu-ik h-thóng, Tâi-oân chin kín chi kiàn-l p í Tionghôa Bîn-kok ûi ki-chh ê Tiong-kok king-tông-thé sióng-sing. Chit-ê Tiong-kok king-tông-thé sui-jiân t 1980 nî-ti í-u cho-si giâm-ting ê thiau-chiàn, -koh kàu-ta í Tâi-oân ûi chú ê sióng-sing king-tông-thé png iáu-be oân-sêng. Sui-jiân pún-th chèng-tóng Bîn-chú Chìn-p-tóng t 2000 nî chip-chèng kàu-ta í-keng 7 tang, - koh Tâi phài kap Tiong-kok phài soán-kí tùi-koat iáu-s 5 hun 5 hun, sm-chì iáu koh lâng cháu khì tùi-ha Tiong-hôa Jîn-bîn King-hôkok hoah hoán-tùi Tâi-tk. S án-chóa í Tâi-oân ûi chú ê n-mi king-tông-thé iáu bô-hoat-t hêng-sêng chú-liû? Che ti-khài -bn kúi tiám goân-in: T-it, Tâi-oân ch-k í-lâi iáu -bat sêng-kong kiàn-l p ka-t ê kok-ka hk-chiá ông-tiâu, khiàm-khoeh ch t-ê kong-êng ê lk-sú kòekhì. Tùi ch t ê si-kûn lâi kóng, bat king-tông ê lk-sú keng-gim s kiò-chhí sêng-goân ê ch p-thé kì-ek sòa--lâi chìn-ch t-p chòe-hóe hêng-tng lâi tt-sêng si-kûn ê king-tông bk-piau ê ting-iàu in-s±. Che m-s i-siá-m h t Chheng-tiâu thóng-t Tâi-oân ê lk-sú tongtiong, s - ê ch hoán hk-chiá kek-bng ê léng-t-chiá lóng ài ng hoán Chheng hk Bêng téng chit-khoán ê kháu-h lâi kh kûn-chiòng.

173 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 171 Khó-sioh hoán Chheng hk Bêng chit-khoán ê kháu-h tùi kiàn-l p sin-ê bîn-chk kok-ka ê khip-ín-lt iú-hn. Tâi-oân m in-i khiàm-khoeh ch t ê kong-êng ê lk-sú bûn-hòa, tì-sú Tâi-oân tùi k-t m bô ch-sìn, thò-hip sèng-keh khah-kiông. sî-chn Tâi-oân ki-he chhut-thâu, -koh soah ka-t hòng-khì ki-he. Chhi-kóng, tùi tih J-chhù Tichiàn chiàn-u Chiú Kài-chih chiàm-niá Tâi-oân chit ki ti-chì, Tâioân-lâng kèng-jiân bô-lâng Chì-bêng hit khoán ê gán-kong iau-kiû Tiong-kok thiat-kun. Koh chhi-kóng, 2000 nî í-u Tâi-oân sui-jiân o Bîn-chìn-tóng chip-chèng, -koh tùi tih kàu-ik Tâi-oân-hòa, púnth gí-giân ê chai-pôe soah lóng bô siá chù-táu, bô ting-s. Kok ti-hk Tâi-oân bûn-hk-h tùi Tâi-oân bó-gí m bô khòa-ting (Chiú Ûi-bûn 2004). T-j, Tâi-oân t J-chhù Ti-chiàn chiàn-u ch t-phoe sin î-bîn ka-j p, chit kóa sin î-bîn ê lk-sú kì-ek tú-hó kap k î-bîn (Tâi-oân-lâng) ê kì-ek chhut-hin mâu-tún ê hin-sing. Hit kóa sin î-bîn lk-sú kì-ek li-té tùi Tiong-kok ê hiáng-óng kap g-bng tú-hó s Tâi-oân-lâng t khí-ch bîn-chk kok-ka tong-tiong si beh tàn-tiu ê ch t-p-hn. Ánchóa kái-koat chit-ê mâu-tún hin-sing s Tâi-oân mi-hiòng chèngsiông kok-ka chin ting-iàu ê khò-tê. T-sa, Tâi-oân-lâng iáu kiông-lit ê Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan tksek. Chin ch chèng-t Tâi-tk ê jîn-s sui-jiân chi-chhî Tâi-oân kiàn-l p chú-koân tk-l p ê kok-ka, -koh bûn-hòa-sing iáu-s jn-ûi in ka-t s Hôa-jîn, ch -sian lâi-ch Tiong-kok. Chit-chióng ê tk-l p hong-sek kîs t s ng ê Tiong-kok, hk-chiá Hoan-sik-kok ê tk-l p b²-sek, kap J t-pún chiap-siu Tâi-oân chìn-chêng s sêng-l p ê té-mi ê Tâi-oân Bîn-chú-kok kng-khoán b kú-tg. Tâi-oân-lâng eng-kai ka-kiông

174 172 kap kok-chè-hòa kap hoe-hk goân-ch-bîn Lâm-tó gí-h bûn-hòa ê tk-sek chiah hoat-t thiàu-thoat Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tông-thé ê sok-pk. 4. Kiat-ln Ot-lâm hm Tâi-oân pê-pê lóng bat h Tiong-kok thóng-t--kòe. Ot-lâm ùi Tiong-kok king-tông-thé kap Hàn-j bûn-hòa king-tôngthé choán-piàn kàu kah Ot-lâm bîn-chk kok-ka ê kiàn-l p. Tâi-oân goân khí-thâu hm Tiong-kok bô koan-h, l-bóe soah hông chha-j p Hàn-j bûn-hòa-khoan, sm-chì s Tiong-hôa Bîn-kok ê kok-chk sióngsing. Tâi-oân ch t-kù sik-gú kóng, sa-nî ch t sió-hoán, g-nî ch t ti-lon. Chit-kù-o chú-iàu teh biâu-siá Chheng-kok thóng-t Tâi-oân kî-kan, Tâi-oân-lâng khí-g ch-hoán ê chhù-s± put-chí-á ch. Sui-jiân Tâi-oân-lâng khí-g ch-hoán ê chhù-s± chin ch, i-siá-m h bô-pòapái khí-g sêng-kong sm-chì chìn-ch t-p kiàn-l p tk-l p ê ông-tiâu? Chit-ê goân-in -n in-i Chheng-tiâu kun-ti pí khí-g ê bîn-peng khah ch-chit,m in-i hit-chn ê lâng iáu-be hêng-sêng chéng-hp kok chk-kûn (ethnic groups) king-tông tùi-khòng Chheng-kok hkchiá ga-lâi-chiá ê hin-ti ê Tâi-oân-lâng ì-sek. Ka-sing, Jû-ka susióng kap Tiong-kok sek S-ti-hu kàu-ik s hit-chn ê si-he chú-liû, kui-ê Tâi-oân hk-chiá Tiong-kok si-he -bat chiap-chhiok hit-tongsî se-au si-he tng teh liû-hêng ê bîn-chk kok-ka khài-lim, bk-koài khí-g ê léng-t-chiá lóng thêng-liû t hong-kiàn koan-lim g-bng ch t kang -tàng teng-ki chò hông-tè. Phí-jû, 1721 nî -miâ ê Chu It-kùi khí-g. Tng-tong Chu It-kùi t chh-kî phah-iâ Chheng-kok kun-ti ê sî-chn, i chin kín chi ch-hong Tiong-heng-ông, -koh tng i hm

175 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 173 chòe-hóe phah thian-h ê Kheh-ka-chk léng-t-jîn T Kun-eng hoatseng chhiong-týt ê sî, bô ga-kú i chi h Chheng-kok tìn-ap lh-lâi. Kán-tan kóng, Tâi-oân n beh chiâ-chòe hin-ti ê chú-koân tkl p ê kok-ka chi ài kiông-hòa pún-th -hòa ê kàu-ik kap chhòng-ch sek-hp pún-th bûn-hòa seng-chûn ê thé-chè, khó-pí kóng hùi-tû Hànj, kái ing Tâi-oân Lô-má-j téng. Tông-sî m ài chù-ì chk-kûn koanh ê hoat-tián, phiah-bián in-i chk-kûn chhiong-týt soah chió-s± chk-kûn liân-hp Tiong-kok lâi chè-hêng Tâi-oân. Pún ln-bûn hoat-piáu t 2005 nî Hi S t-bîn ln-sýt kap kok-kok tk-l p n-tng gián-thó-he, 5 goh 21, Tâi-oân lk-sú hk-he

176 174 kap Chham-khó chheh-bk Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. (Originally published in 1983). New York: Verso. Bô Giáo Duc và ào Tao Lich S 12 Tâp hai []. Hà Nôi: NXB Giáo Duc. Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, DeFrancis, John Colonialism and Language Policy in Vietnam. The Hague. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), ô, c Hùng Biên Niên S Viêt Nam []. Hà Nôi: NXB Thanh Niên. Gottlieb, Nanette Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Ho Chi Minh Ho Chi Minh: Selected Writings Hanoi: The Gioi. Lê, Mâu Han & Trân Bá ê & Nguyên Vn Th ai Cng Lich S Viêt Nam []. Hà Nôi: NXB Giáo Duc. Marr, David G Vietnamese Anticolonialism: California: Univ. of California Press. Nguyên, Q. Thng Khoa C và Giáo Duc Viêt Nam [ kap ]. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá.

177 CH 5. King-tông-thé ê Kái-k± : Tâi-oân hm Ot-lâm ê Pí-kàu 175 Nguyên, Quang Hông Ch Hán và ch Nôm vi vn hiên cô iên Viêt Nam [ hm ]. Ngôn Ng & i Sóng 6(5), 2-7. SarDesai D. R Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Trân, Trong Kim Viêt Nam S Lc []. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá Thông Tin. (2002 ) Viên Vn Hoc Vân ê Cai Tiên Ch Quôc Ng [ ê ]. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá. Vng, Kiêm Toàn & V Lân Hi Truyn Bá Quc Ng [ ]. Hà Ni: NXB Giáo Dc. 1980() San Jose: p a hm ê p

178 176 kap 2005b p c ê p d ê p

179 ê kap ê

180 178! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 台灣 ùi 1987 年解嚴以後 包含台灣母語在內 ê 各種本土化運動 lóng hiông-hiông chhia-i 起來 像講 1988 年由客家社團發起解嚴以來第 一 chân 有關母語 ê 還我母語運動 上街頭抗議活動 1989 年由洪惟 仁 林錦賢 楊錦鋒等人組成 台語社 koh 發行 台語文摘 服務 性刊物 年台灣同鄉鄭良光 李豐明等人 t 美國洛杉磯創立 台 文習作會 後來 t 1991 年 7 月創辦到 ta iáu teh 發行 ê 台文通訊 Chit 份刊物同時 t 台灣 美國 Canada 發行 台文通訊 早期 ê 在台 chhui-sak 者主要有陳豐惠 陳明仁 廖瑞銘等 台文通訊 採用漢 字 白話字合寫 ê 台灣話文書寫方式 伊對 漢羅 書寫 ê 推廣 kap 將 白話字 sak 出教會 hþ khah ch 社會大眾認 bat 有真大 ê 貢獻 除了社會團體 teh chhui-sak 之外 各大學校園 l i-té m 有成立台語 相關社團 che 是台灣話文進入教育體制 ê 先鋒 包含成大台語社 (1988) 台灣大學台灣語文社(1990) 交通大學台研社(1990) 淡江大學台 灣語言文化研習社(1991) 清華大學台語社(1992)等 除了台語社團之 外 後來 koh 有 客家社 kap 以原住民為主 ê 原社 等社團 ê 成 立 後來 chit-kóa 校園台語社團 koh 串聯成立 學生台灣語文促進會 (1992) (楊允言等 1995) 相 對 客 家 kap 原 住 民 來 講 台 語 人 ( 或 者 所 謂 ê H -lólâng 鶴佬人 福佬人 閩南人) ti 1990 年代所進行 ê 母語運動比較 t k ke 真深 m ke 真闊 所得 tiáh ê 回應 m ke 真大 Chit-ê 時期台語人 ê 母語運動主要有二大方面 第一是要求實施母語教育 kap 進行母語書 1 π ኴρ ٵ ո ೭ࢤ ע ढ ê փ୲ਢല ᠧ ᅝխ ڶ ᣂ ê ಘᓵ گ ᐙ ٱ Ι ழ ץ 1989 ڣ ڣ 7 )Ζ

181 CH 6.ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ ê ם Ԛ kap ӁҔ ܓ ê!! 179 寫 ê 標準化 第二是主張台灣文學 ài 建立 t 台灣母語 ê 基礎頂頭 2其 中有關母語文學 ê 訴求引起正 反雙方真大 ê 爭論 爭論 -sái 分做 語言名稱 kap 台灣文學代表性 二部份來討論 就語言名稱來 講 雖罔 台語 台灣話 chit 2 個用詞 t 台灣社會已經 hông 普遍 使用真久 -koh soah 遭受其他族群甚至部分台語族群成員 ê 質疑 In 質疑 koh 認為講台語人使用 台語 台灣話 ê 用詞是心肝 kheh h 福佬沙文主義 ê 表現 就台灣文學代表性來講 有三大 bôk ng ê 主張 像講林宗源 林央敏主張 台語文學 代表台灣文學 mâ有完全否定台語文學存在 ê 必要性--ê 像講廖咸浩 陳若曦 iâ有 像李喬 彭瑞金 án-ne -nâ消極面對母語文學 顛倒支持華語 chiâ 做 台灣文學 ê 主要文學語言 ê 維持現狀派 3 對主張使用 台語 台灣話 用詞 ê 人來講 che 是 beh 凸顯 ka-t 是 台灣 人 是中國 閩南 人 是強調台灣認同 kap 台灣意識 ê 表現 對反對 ê 人來講 in 認為客語 原住民語 甚至華語 m 是新 ê 台語 所以 H -ló 人講 H -ló 話是台語 是 teh 否定其他族群語言 chiâ 做本土語言 ê 排他性 ê 作法 台語 台灣話 用詞 kám 有嚴重到 chiâ 做排他性 ê 沙文主 義 當原住民有權利使用 原住民 取代 番仔 ê 稱呼 ê 時 kám 講 台語人就有接受歧視意涵 ê 閩南人 或者接受語義不清 ê H -ló 人 ê 義務 本論文 ê研究目的 beh ùi 語言學 ê 角度分析 台語 台灣話 ê 語意內涵 koh 會 ùi k ng-sî kap 歷時 ê 視野來探討 台語 台灣 話 用詞 ê 正當性 2 ڶ ᣂ 1980 זڣ kap 1990 זڣ ኙ ئ kap ᖂ êಘᓵ -sái ᔹ ᔕ (1983)Ε ܨ ᘋ (1999)Ζ 3 ڶ ᣂ chit-kóa Գढ ê ז ࢤᓵ૪ Δᓮ ᔹ ܨ ᘋ (1999)Ζ

182 180 kap 2. kap 2.1. T lìn ê(componential analysis)he ê ê sî-chn hit-ê tih ê lóng ê chit-ê ê tih tih tih 1 lìn hit 9 ê kan-ta hit 9 kúi ài bô-kng ê chit-ê kap ê hm ê kap -bat bang-gah Mickey mseê b Mickey mse ê ê lóng bô-kng pê-pê tih ê m b kng-khóan ê ê lú ê che hit-ê ê lú bô-kng ê kap ê ê beh phì-siù ê k ê i ê Che t iáu ê

183 CH 6. ê kap ê ê ê chit 2 in ê kám kan-ta H-ló ê ah kap lóng ê hit-kóa ê () -sái kap án-ne án-chóaê ê hiah ê bôkng chit 3 ti hông -koh koh gâu ê t (Taiwanese languages) t ê sóa ( )koh ê kap T kap ê

184 182! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 語 lóng 無算是台灣語言 不過 in -sái 算是 國民 ê 語言 也就是台 灣國民有 teh 用 ê 語言(languages used by the Taiwanese citizens) 4咱分別用 圖表 2 kap 圖表 3 來解釋 台灣語言 kap 國民 ê 語言 ê 語意成份 4 ᇡา ê ಘᓵ -sái ە ᓏ 2004Ζ

185 CH 6. ê kap ê 183 Hon-sè chit-khoán ê seng-kòe kheh-h li-té chiah tih khah koh teh ê b-sái m Án-ne ê -tàng in teh ê hông ê (Taiwanese) ê (Lingua franca)m -sái Ùi án-ne ê khah ê li-té chit-ê ti ê ê kap hông 2 bô-kng ê kap bô-kng ê ánne ê m teh kap -kohkan-taniâ kapm bô-kng ê (Francais) ê ê ê ê 90% BretonDutchGasconLimousinAvergnat Languedocien 24 (Grimes 1996: ) 2.2. kap (indigenization) ùi (immigrant society) (native society) ê ùi

186 184! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 來台灣 ê 時 tú 開始 pi n 若過年 過節 in iáu 會想 beh 轉去故鄉唐山 h m 親人團䨟 甚至若過身去 m 想 beh 落葉歸根將屍體送轉去唐山 埋 這就是移民社會現象 i -t 是移民者 iáu 有過客心態 in iáu 認為 故鄉 t 唐山 台灣不過是暫時討賺 ê 所在 -koh 經過一定 ê 時間 kap 社會情境 ê 發展 hit-kóa 漢人移民 t u-t u-á 過年 過節 b koh 轉去唐 山 死去 m 直接埋 t 台灣 niâ LÞ-bóe hit-kóa 漢人移民就認為 ka-t m 是台灣人 台灣是 in ê 新故鄉 這就是土著化 ê 過程 台灣 t 1945 年以 前 ê 舊住民 l i-té 有 1) 南島語系 ê 原住民 kap 2)平埔 h m 漢人移民混 血 ê 客家 H -ló 族群 南島語系 ê 原住民 t 台灣已經 kui 千 冬 早就土著化 à Ah 客家 kap H -ló 族群 leh?陳其南(1994:92)指出講 ùi 1683 到 1895 ê 200 外年當中 台灣 ê 漢人移民社會 t u-t u-á 變成土著社 會 I -t 是講 t 日本 kap 中國國民黨政權來到台灣 chìn-chêng 台灣就已 經形成土著化社會 Chit-ê 土著化社會基礎是 台灣文學 台灣語 言 台灣民族 意識形成 ê 重要因素 若就土著化 ê 角度來看 使用 華語 ê 新住民(或者所謂 ê 外省 人 )有 g a-ch 比例認同 ka-t 是台灣人 Chit-kóa 新住民本底有可能 t 2 3 代 lìn 就融入台灣社會變成台灣人 -koh 因為 hit-kóa 在台中國人 ê 政治操作 kap 動員 ê 關係 soah 害 in 無法度斬斷中國認同 阻礙 tiáh in t 台灣土著化 ê 發展 換一句話講 華語若 beh ti m 台灣生湠發展 chiâ -chò 台灣語言 ê 一種 除非伊 ê 使用者有認同 ka-t 是台灣人 Beh chiâ -chò 台灣語言 除了 ài 有 土著化 之外 ài koh 有 代 表性 代表性是指 t 台灣 ê 歷史 文化發展當中有適當 ê 主 客觀條 件促使 hit 個語言有台灣 ê 主體性 對外 -tàng 表現台灣 ê 特色 而且 外界 m án-ne 認為 T chit-ê定義之下 目前為止 有台灣 ê 代表性 ê 就是原住民語 客語 kap 台語 (蔣為文 2006) 若就定義來看可能真歹理解啥物是 代表性 咱 -sái 用其他 ê

187 CH 6. ê kap ê 185 tih tih susih () sasimih tih tih tih hamburgercoca colakám susihsasimih? m -koh b he he ê susihsasimih ê -koh hon-sè 100 k m susih sasimih -koh che tang-sî chiah ài ê g-bng -sái ê beh kúi lóng beh Australia New Zealand m teh -koh beh hia ê 2.3. ê kap ê kap án-chóa ê neh? tk ê ê ê ê t ê hit-ê ê kap ê chit-kóa ê koh gâu ê ê ê ài (language) kap (dialect) tih ê soah kap ê kiò-s () ê lóng hm Crystal (1992:101) i ê soah bô-kng ê

188 186 kap (variety)beh án-chóa ê i ê neh? T ê -tàng (mutual intelligible) ê ê (Crystal 1997:25)án-ne in ê ê bô-kng ê kóa i ê -koh iáu ioh ê ê án-ne in ê kng -kha ê kap b ê ê chit-ê ê thang -koh ê ê kóa ê soah hông tiau-kang k phì-siù kanta ê -koh tih ê soah k ê ênorwaydenmark ê Scandinavian -sái ê koh in tih ê soah in ê ê k in ê (Swedish)NorwegiankapDanish (Crystal 1997:286) án-chóa tiau-kang beh k phì-siù kap ti bô-kng ê gâu chiâ (diglossia) li-té ê ti hông ê m b t m kk ê phì-siù beh ê ê

189 CH 6.ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ ê ם Ԛ kap ӁҔ ܓ ê!! 187 自尊心 thang 進一步消滅伊 ê 自我認同 (施正鋒 1996: 58) 2.4. 漢語語系 ê 分類 kap 分佈 台 灣 話 chit-ê 用 詞 是 是 妥 當 leh? 本 節 咱 用 k ng 時 ê (synchronic) khah 大 ê 視野看漢語語系 ê 語言成員是 án-chóa hông 分類 kap 號名 漢語語系(Han language family)下面 ê 語言成員大概 -sái 分做下面七 大類 1) 官話 2)吳語 3)湘語 4)贛語 5)粵語 6)客語 7)閩語 5 Chit 七大語言 實際上是互相無法度溝通 ê 語言 -koh 中國學者 ti 因為政治上 ê 考慮 lóng k in 號做 漢語方言 Chit 七大語言每一個語言下面其實 koh 有 b -chió ê 次語群 有 ê 是方言 有 ê 是語言 ê 差別 下面咱 kéng 官話 粵語 客語 kap 閩語做簡介 官話 是漢語語系 l i-té si ng-ch 使用人口 ê 語言 海內外 t 1990 年大約有 10 億人口 佔漢語系人口 ê 七成 (Grimes 1996:544)中國現此 時全國通行 ê 普通話 就是以官話為基礎所推行出來 ê 官話 -sái 分 做四大語區 1)華北語區 包含河北 河南 東北三省 內蒙古 ê 一部 份等 2) 西北語區 包含山西 陜西 甘肅 青海 寧夏等 ê 漢族居 住地 3) 西南語區 包含四川 雲南 貴州三省全部 kap 湖北大部分 地區 河南西南部 湖南西北部 廣西北部 4) 江淮語區 包含江 蘇 安徽二省 t 長江以北 淮河以南地區 kap 江蘇省江南鎮西 pêng 九江東 pêng ê 沿江一帶 (詹伯慧 1991:93-99) 粵語 俗稱 廣東話 粵語 t 中國境內主要分佈 t 廣東 西 pêng 廣西 東南 pêng kap 香港 澳門特區(參閱圖表 4) 粵語分 佈地區包含廣西 為啥物無用廣西 ê 簡稱 桂 來號名 顛倒用廣東 ê 5 ᇡาᓮ ᔹ Norman ʻ1988ʼ; Ramsey ʻ1987ʼˎʳᇯ ᐝʻ ˌˌ ʼˎʳঀ壄ԫʻ ʼΖ

190 188 kap lóng t lóng ê 2001 ê 6,000 6,500 4,000 t hit ê 1,500 t 4,000 ê 37%( 2002:174)koh kap ê chit-ê teh chit-ê êah t ê án-chóa ê tòe t hia gih ê 4. t ê (based on Ramsey 1987)

191 CH 6.ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ ê ם Ԛ kap ӁҔ ܓ ê!! 189 客語 人口 t 1995 年全世界大約有 3,400 萬人 (Grimes 1996:544) 分佈 ê 地區真四散 包含廣東 江西 福建 廣西 湖南 四川 海 南 kap 台灣 其中客人上集中 ê 所在是廣東中部 kap 東部 福建西部 kap 將西南部 客語 t bô-k ng 所在有 bô-k ng 名稱 像講 ngai 話 ma-kai 話 客家話 新民話 客籍話 土廣東 話 等 (侯精一 2002: )使用客語 ê 客人 t 各地區 lóng 算人口 ê 少 數 所以就真罕 leh 用地名來稱呼 in ê 語言 顛倒用歷史上 後來者為 客 ê 客 為族群 kap 語言名稱 Chiah ch 名稱 l i-té 土廣東話 算 是少數以地名為稱呼 ê 名號 Chit-ê 名號是四川地區講西南官話 ê 在地 居民對 hit-kóa 二 三百年前 ùi 廣東遷 sóa 去四川 ê 客人 teh 使用 ê 語言 ê 稱呼 (侯精一 2002:154)使用 chit-ê 名稱 ê 原因可能是四川在地居民 kiò-s hit-kóa ùi 廣東移民過四川 ê 人講 ê 就是廣東話 閩語 是漢語語系 l i-té 語言分歧上大 ê 語系(詹伯慧 1991:181) 閩語主要分佈地區是福建 廣東 海南島 kap 咱國台灣 閩語人口 t 1991 年全世界大約有 6,000 萬人 (Grimes 1996:545)其中大約 1800 萬人分 佈 t 福建省內 佔全省 4 分 3 大約 1500 萬人分佈 t 廣東 佔全廣東 省人口 5 分 1 (侯精一 2002:207)福建地區 ê 閩語 -sái 分做 5 大 方 言 區(事實上是語言) 閩南 閩東 6 閩北 閩 中 莆仙 (季羨林 1992:293) 閩南語 主要是福建南部一帶包 含 泉州 漳州 廈門 等縣市 ê 人 teh 使用 ê 語言 其中廈 門是閩南語 ê 代表腔口 閩南語除了 t 閩南地區使用之外 iáu 分佈 t 廣東東部 kap 東南亞像講新加坡 菲律賓 印尼等國家 因為 t 閩語 5 大分支語言 l i-té 閩南語 ê 分佈 kap 影響力上大 所以閩南語 m hông 叫做 福建話 6 壂 ڠ ᇩਢᎸ ê ז Ζ

192 190! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 中國清朝統治台灣( 年) ê 時閩南一帶 ê 泉州 漳州等 ê 福建 人 t u-t u-á 移民來到台灣7 T 1887 年 chìn-chêng 台灣是屬福建省 teh 管 台灣 t 政治 經濟 文化各方面 iáu khah 輸福建 所以稱呼 hit 當 時 ê 閩南移民所使用 ê 語言號做 福建話 iáu 無過份 -koh 台灣進 入 20 世紀以後 一方面是土著化 ê 關係 koh 一方面是因為日本統治 期間促成 ê 近代化 資本主義化致使 台灣社會 h m 台灣人意識 ê 形 成(史明 1992:220) 因為泉州話 漳州話來到台灣已經土著化 形成不 漳不泉 ê 新腔口(王育德 1993:95) koh 摻入台灣平埔族 日本語 ê 成 份 所以一種新 ê 語言形式 台灣話 已經客觀上成立 à 除了語言 ê 客觀條件之外 台灣 t 政治 經濟 文化8等各方面 lóng lú 來 lú 比福建 khah 重要 kap 優勢 加上台灣人意識 ê 出頭 台灣人主觀上認同伊所 講 ê 是 台灣話 是 福建話 所以 台灣話 (簡稱做台語) chit-ê 用詞就成立 à 3. Ùi 閩南語到台語 台灣 ê 語言除了南島語系 ê 原住民語之外 chhun=ê lóng 是 17 世紀 以來 chiah tòe tiáh 移民遷 sóa 入來台灣 雖罔客語 kap 台語 ê 源頭是 t 中國 ê 廣東 kap 福建 -koh chit 2 種語言來台灣已經有數百冬 ê 時間而 且已經土著化 所以 m chiâ 做台灣本土 ê 語言 台灣 ê 語言 t bô-k ng 時期有無啥 k ng ê 稱呼 Chit-ê 現象一方面反映語言土着化 ê 進程 一 方面反映統治者 ê 殖民心態 本節咱 t 就 l k-sî ê (diachronic)角度來看台 7 8 ឈ t ᥞழཚ kap ᔤ ཛழཚ ڶ ၦዧԳฝ ا Δ -koh ዧԳՕၦฝ ࠐا ਢխഏ堚ཛอएழཚΖ ቝᝑΔ t 2001 ڣ bat װ 壂৬ლ ض ມᓳ ΖHit ᅝழ ڶ װ in hia ê ᨠΔ in hia ê ϘᎸত ϙ ዚՕપ 95% א Ղ lóng ਢ Ց װ ê ᆺඔ ض Ε ۂ ᘏΕຫ Գ ê ዚΖIn چڇ ê ዚॺ Δ ڶ lóng ਢԫኒ อዚ Ζ

193 CH 6.ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ ê ם Ԛ kap ӁҔ ܓ ê!! 191 語 t bô-k ng 時期 ê 稱呼 ê 演變 近來 b -chió 人 kìo-s 台語 台灣話 是民進黨組黨 chit 10 外 年來 chiah 新造 帶有 福佬沙文主義 意涵 ê 用語 事實 kám án-ne? 咱若 k 久年來出版 ê 台語相關字典 詞典列出來 h an-sè -sái 提供咱 一個概念 thang 了解各時期 ê 人是 án-chóa 稱呼台語 (請參閱附錄一) Ùi 附錄一 -sái 看出 日本占領台灣 chìn-chêng 語言稱呼大概 ùi 福建 話Æ閩南語Æ廈門話 日本時期 語言稱呼多數以台灣語為主 中華 民國時期主要是台語或者閩南語 清國時期所出版 ê 現代字典 詞典多數是傳教士所編寫出版 Ùi 字 詞典名稱 ê 轉變看會出傳教士 lþ-bóe 了解福建並 是單一 ê 語言區 域 而且對福建各地方 ê 語言分佈 ê 掌握 lú 來 lú 好 尾手 in kéng 廈門 話做閩南語 ê 代表腔口 到 kah 日本時期 台灣語 chit-ê 名稱 -sái 講已經真普遍 teh 使 用 Che 原因一方面是日本人有意無意 tiau-kang 使用 台灣 語 thang kap 中國福建做區隔 一方面是因為 hit 當時台語 t 自然發展之下已經 形成台灣 ê 共通語 像講 日本統治台灣 ê 第一年(1895)就有 俁野保 和 出版 台灣語集 佐野直記 出版 台灣土語 kap 田內 八百久万 出版 台灣語 甚至 1902 年 koh 有 台灣語學同志會 成立 kap 伊 ê 機關報 台灣語學雜誌 ê 創刊(葉石濤 1993:209) Ko t 1920 新舊文學論戰 1930 台灣話文論戰期間 臺灣話 台灣 語 -sái 講是 hông 真普遍 teh 使用 ê 語詞(中島利郎 2003 陳淑容 2004 楊允言 1993) 甚至自稱 中國人 ê 連戰 in 公仔 連橫 t 1933 年編寫好勢 1957 年出版 ê 臺灣語典 m 是用 臺語 臺灣 語 ê 稱呼 二次大戰戰後中華民國佔領台灣 T chit-ê 時期 特別是 1987 年解 嚴以前 已經真少使用 ê 閩南語 用詞 soah 顛倒 koh hông 提來使

194 192 kap ê ê kan-ta ê Chit-ê ê ê ê -sái êch t-kóa ê soah tòe tih ê teh khùi êm Chit-khoán ê 4. Ùi 1987 lú lú chhia-i kap m chiâ-chò ê ê kap beh ka-t kap H-ló kng-khoán teh ê kap in ka-t hông ka-t kap kap chiâ-chò ê êchit 3 ê bô-kng ê ê kap H-ló ê ê t êhlóche êb-chió k ês -í Beh kap ê ê chitkhoán sing lióng-kong ê -t

195 CH 6. ê kap ê 193 ê kap ê t

196 194! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 參考冊目 Crystal, David An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Crystal, David The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. (2nd ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grimes, Barbara F Ethnologue. (13th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ramsey, S. Robert The Language of China. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. խ ܓ 2003π1930 זڣ Ւ ᖂᓵᖏρ Κਞᄇ נ ठषΖ ߛ ᐚ 1993π Κ ༠ऱᖵ ρ ק Κ م ඡ षΖ 1992π ا ග ګݮ ፖ ا ගρ ܨ ᘋ ᒳ 1999π ᖂሎ೯ᓵ ρ ק ΚছᓡΖ ࡌ ᦊΕ ڿ 1990π ߢፖխഏ ρ ק Κত Ζ ᆡ ᒳ 1992πխഏՕ ۍ ઝ٤ Κ ߢ ڗ ρ ࠇק ΚխഏՕ ۍ ઝ٤ נ ठषΖ ᔕᒳ 1983π ߢ ᠲಘᓵ ρ ק Κ ᢌᠧ षΖ ঀ壄ԫ ᒳ 2002π ז ዧ ߢᄗᓵρՂ௧ΚՂ௧ඒߛ נ ठषΖ ਜ إ ᔴ ᒳ 1996π ߢਙएፖਙ ρ ק Κছᓡ נ ठषΖ ൫ո 1996π ؾ ᇞᠲΚ ߢᣊρ ק Κխ ቹ 塢 塢Ζ ຫ ত 1994π ऱ อխഏषᄎρ(ร 2 ठ) ק Κւඣ נ ठषΖ ຫ ୲ 2004π ᇩ ᓵञ 塒 ρ তΚ ত م ቹ 塢Ζ ᄘւߢ 1993τ ڗ ê መ װ kap ڇ υπ றઔߒρรԫཚΔ p.57-75ζ ᄘւߢ 1995τ Ϥ ࠐאזڣ Ⴜ ሎ೯ᄗउυรԮ ᄅ س ז ᓵ ઔಘᄎᓵ Δ ઔߒഗ८ᄎΖ ᆺ ف ᛑ 1993π ᖂ ጼρ Κ ᖂ ᠧ Ζ ᇯ ᐝ 1991π ז ዧ ߢρ ק Κᄅᖂᢝ ඒ נ ठխ Ζ ᓏ 2004τ گ ᒳࢨ گ ᒳΛ³ᅝছ ࢬߓ ኙ ئ ᖂ ߢԳᦞ ኪ৫հ υδ ߢԳᦞፖ ߢ ᖂ ઔಘᄎΔ Δ Օᖂ

197 CH 6. ê kap ê

198 נ ठ ڣ 1837 ټם Dictionary of the Hok-keen Dialect of the Chinese Languages, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms (壂৬ ߢ ) ڗ A vocabulary of the Hok-keen Dialect as spoken in the cönty of Tsheang-tshew (ዜ ڠ ნ) Anglo-Chinese Manual with Romanized Colloquial in the Amoy Dialect ( ဎლ ნ) A Vocabulary of the Hokien Dialect, as Spoken at Amoy and Singapore Chinese-English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy (ლ Օ ) Carstairs DÖglas ( ޙ ቯᐚ) J.A. Win Elihu Doty (ᢅ໓) S. Dyer ᒳထ W. H. Medhurst (ຽຟ৸) ߢ ټ ጠ 壂৬ᇩ 壂৬ዜ ڠ ᇩ ლ ᇩ 壂৬ᇩ ლ ᇩ փ ࠌ ش ê ߢ Ꮈত Ε ዜ ڠ ᇩΕ ლ ᇩΕ Ꮈত Ε ლ ᇩΕ 附錄一 歷年來台語相關字 詞典 kap 伊所使用 ê 語言名稱 ཉ ᄅ ࡕף ᐖ ڠ Malacca ڇࢬ ٱ ᖾ Missionary of the Presbyterian Church in England S. Wells Williams AngloChinese College Press נ ठ Honorable East India Company ( ഏ ٱ ৫ֆ ) 196! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н

199 CH 6. ê kap ê A Syllabic Dictionary of the Chinese Language with the Pronunciations of Peking, Conton, Amoy, Shanghai () 1882 Chineesch-Hollandsh Voordenbook van het Emoi Dialect () Nederlandsch-Chineesch Woorden Book Met de Transcriptie der Chineesche Karaters in het Tsiang-tsiu Dialect () 1883 English and Chinese Dictionary of the Amoy Dialect () 1874 Chinese Romanized 1891 Dictionary of the Formosan Vernacular () mg-im ê j-tián ( ê ) S.W. Williams () J.J.C Franken & C.F.M. de Grijs Bata-via Landsdrukkerij Gustave.Schlegel Leiden John Macgowan George L. Makay () John Talmange () 1898 E.J.Brill Fruber & Co Formosan

200 198 kap 1900 Diccinario Tonico Sino-Espanol, Del Dialecto de Emoy, Chiang-chiu, Choan-chiu Formosa R.P.Fr. Ramon Colomer For-mo-sa (A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken Thrghout the Prefectures of Chin-chiu Chiang-chiu and Formosa (Taiwan)) 1923 Supplement to Dictionary of the Vernecular or Spoken Language of Amoy ( ) William Campbell () Thomas Barclay () Formosa ()() 1932

201 CH 6. ê kap ê () A Dictionary of Sthern Bernard L.M. Min Embree 1976 The Maryknoll The Maryknoll (Amoy-English Dictionary) Language Service Language Service Center Center 1979 (English-Amoy The Maryknoll The Maryknoll Dictionary) Language Service Language Service Center Center etc

202 200 kap *Chit-ê (1996) kap ka-t ê ê

203 kap ê

204 202! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 若 ùi Benedict Anderson (1991) 想像 ê 共同體 (imagined communities) 觀點切入 t 漢字文化圈1lìn 19 世紀以前 lóng 有一種以中國為中心 透過漢字所形成 ê 漢字文化想像共同體 (an imagined Hanji cultural community) Chit 種 漢字文化想像共同體 (簡稱做 漢字共同體 ) 加加減減 lóng 影響 tiáh 漢字文化圈成員近代 ê 民族國家 (nation-state) ê 國族想像建構 T 中國 in 利用 漢字共同體 chiâ 做近代 中華民族 或者 中國國族 ê 想像基礎 Hit-kóa 無法度跳脫漢字共同體 ê 壯族 苗族 瑤族 等 當然就無形成 in ka-t ê 民族國家 Ah hit-kóa 跳脫 漢字共同體 ê 舊成員 像講越南 韓國 朝鮮 kap 日本 lóng 重新建構以 ka-t 為主體 ê 民族國家 想像 若論到台灣 雖罔 t 17 世紀初因為荷蘭統治 soah 將台灣 sak chi 國際舞台 -koh sòa--lâi ê 鄭 成功 kap 清國統治 soah 將台灣 khiú 入去漢字文化圈 台灣 ê 漢字文化 特色 soah chiâ 做二次戰後中國國民黨 thang th h 來做中國國族想像 ê 基 礎 Anderson (1991:37-46) bat 分析講 出版 宗教改革 kap 當地 母 語 ê 出 頭 是 近 代 西 歐 民 族 國 家 意 識 形 成 ê 重 要 源 頭 Davies (1997:482) m 指出講 歐洲文藝復興時期用民族母語來創作 ê 風氣 lþbóe 發展出國民文學(national literatures) ah 這是形成國家認同(national identity) ê 關鍵之一 若準是 án-ne 台灣人 ê 民族母語 台灣語 1 হࢬᝑ êψዧ ڗ എωਢਐ ڰ bat ah ਢ chín koh teh ࠌ ش ዧ ڗ ê چ ࢨ ഏ ୮Δ ץ তΕឌഏ(ࢬᘯ ê তឌ)Εཛធ(ࢬᘯ ê ק ឌ)Ε ء Εᄅ ࡕף Ε kap խഏ Ζ

205 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 203 言2 t 台灣 ê 民族國家 ê 建構當中是扮演啥款 ê 角色 以台灣語言 為書寫語言 ê 國民文學是 是已經形成 若準 iáu b e 是啥原因 若準 有 是 án-choá iáu b e chiâ 做主流 實在講 台語文學 ê 發展就是台灣 民族國家建構過程 ê 一個縮影 即篇論文就是 beh 用台語文學發展 ê 情 形來探討語言 文學 kap 民族國家 ê 關係 2. 基本定義 概念 kap 理論架構 咱即節會先針對 kap 論文主題有相關 ê 基本專有名詞做一個定義 kap 相關概念 ê 討論 2.1. 個人母語 vs.族群母語 T 語言學頂頭有所謂 ê 第一語言 (first language) kap 第二語 言 (second language) ê 講法 所講 ê 第一語言 是指咱人出世 liáu 第 一個學起來 ê 語言 第二語言 是指先學 -hiáu 第一語言 liáu t 有 一定 ê 年歲 liáu chiah koh 學 ê 其他語言 第一語言 通常是 滑溜 ê 語言 (fluent language) -koh m 有例外 ê 情形 像講現此時有 b chió 台灣人雖然 sè-hàn 出世 sûi 學 ê 語言是台語 -koh in 去學校讀冊 liáu soah 改用華語 致使伊 ê 第一語言 台語 比第二語言 華語 khah b 輪轉 若論到母語 其實 -sái 分做個人母語(personal mother tongue) kap 族 群母語(ethnic language 或者號做 民族母語 national language ) 第一語言就是咱 ê 個人母語 通常 t 正常 ê 情況下 第一語言 -t 是 個人母語 m 是族群母語 -koh t 一寡特殊情形之下 像講留學家 庭 移民家庭 受外來政權殖民等 第一語言未必然是族群母語 可 2 ץ ত Εড় Εkap Ζ

206 204! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 比講 有一對以台語為母語 ê 台灣留學生到美國留學 in t hia 讀冊期 間有生一個囝仔 因為英語環境 ê 關係 in ê 囝仔一出世就先學英語 後來 in 結束留學生涯 t g 來台灣 囝仔 m tòe leh koh k 台語學起來 Án-ne 雖然英語是 in 囝仔 ê 第一語言 m-koh in 囝仔 ê 族群母語 iáu 是 台語 若是受外來政權殖民 ê 例 可比講日本時代因為國語政策 ê 關 係 t chit-ê 政策影響之下 t a-hàn ê 台語囝仔 soah 將日語當做第一語 言 顛倒將族群母語--台語當做第二語言 這是個人母語 kap 族群母語 無一致 ê 另外一個例 2.2. 母語異化 kap 母語轉換 咱若問人講伊 ê 母語 (無指定是個人或者族群母語)是啥 ê sîch n 通常會得 tiáh 2 種 bô-k ng 觀點 ê 回應 第一 若 khi t 語言是 族群歷史文化傳承功能論 者 就算伊 ê 個人母語 kap 族群母語無 一致 伊會根據伊 ê 族群母語 來回答 第二 若 khi t 語言 kan-ta 是 溝通工具 者 伊通常會根據伊 ê 滑溜 ê 語言 或者 個人母 語 來回答 這就是為啥物真 ch 台灣少年家雖然 in ê 族群母語是台 語 -koh in 會 ìn 你講 in ê 母語是華語 Tng-tong 一個人 ê 個人母語 kap 族群母語 bô-k ng ê 時 咱 -sái k 講這是一種 母語異化 ê 現象 母語異化 -sái 分做像圖表ʳ ʳ án-ne 2 種情形 第一種是雖罔個人母語 kap 族群母語 bô-k ng -koh 伊 iáu 有 khi m hit 2 種語言 ê 使用能力 另外一種是單語 ê 母語異化現象 i -t 是個人 kan-ta -hiáu 個人母語 -koh 已經失去族群母語 ê 使用能力 即種情形通常是語言轉換(language shift) ê 前兆

207 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 205 (1) ᠨ ౨Ժ (2) ౨Ժ ଡԳ ئ + + ගᆢ ئ + - შߓ 1. ᚗᇮ kap ᇮ ê ҕᇮ Ͼ ם 單語 ê 母語異化通常有 2 個後果 第一是個人 iáu 會 t 精神上 kap 情感上承認族群母語 ê 存在 -koh t 實際日常生活 lìn lóng 用個人母 語 像講歐洲 ê Irish 共和國(Irish Republic)本底是講 Irish 語言 -koh 經 過英國統治 liáu soah 變成真 ch Irish 人 kan-ta 講英語 b -hiáu 講 Irish 語 3雖罔 Irish 政治上獨立 liáu 繼續使用英語 -koh in t 民族情感上 精神層次 iáu 將 Irish 語言當做民族母語(Fasold 1984:278) 4第二個後果是 t 精神上 情感上放棄原有 ê 族群母語 將個人母語當做新 ê 族群母 語 換一句話來講 族群母語已經產生語言轉換現象 ùi A 語言變成 B 語言 咱 -sái 講這是一種 母語轉換現象 (vernacular shift) 發生母 語轉換 ê A 族群成員 tú 開始可能 iáu chai-iá ka-t 是 A 族群成員 -koh 時間 ch t-l h 久 in soah kiò-s ka-t 是 B 族群 ê 成員 有發生即種情形 ê 像 講台灣 ê 平埔族 中國東南方一帶古早 ê 百越民族 2.3. 語言 kap 認同 語言 kap 族群認同(ethnic identity)或者國族認同(national identity) kám 有啥關係 針對 chit-ê 問題 通常會有正反二種完全無 k ng ê 答案 3 4 ᖕ Ethnologue (Grimes 1996:489) ê ᇷறΔt 1983 ࢬ ê ߢཏ ق kan-ta 13% ê Irish Գ ᎁ ka-t ê Irish iáu టᄶᄸΖ ቝᝑΔIrish ٥ࡉഏ ê ᖆऄ(1937 ) ڣ ϘThe Irish language as the national language is the first official language. The English language is recognised as a second official languageϙ(ਜ إ ᔴ 2002:407; Crowley 2000:5)Ζ

208 206 kap ê ê iáu koh ê kap ê m ê ch t-kóa Irish án-ne ê m -tàng Irish án-ne kap kap ê -koh ê I kap ê -koh (Liebkind 1999:144; 1998:52) ê ài in ê (social context)(fishman 1999:154; Ross 1979:4) ê -sái 2 i.t.s. vs. kap b chió ê ê ( 1998:55; Edwards 1985:48; Lu 1988:99) (Hak-ka-ngin) b-hiáu (Hak-fa) -koh iáu ka-t b chió án-ne hm iáu -koh b-tàng kap (Chiung 2005:377) 244 ê -hiáu ê ê iáu -koh ê ê ê kám -tàng m (ethnic consciousness) ê -tàng ê ( 1992:4; 1998:52)

209 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 207 同歷史記憶等 Tng-tong 族群母語消失去 ê 時 若準其他 ê 客觀因素 iáu 存在 當然就有可能維持族群意識 -koh 若準語言是現存唯一 ê 客觀因素 族群意識恐驚 á 早晚會 tòe 族群母語 ê 消失來消失 像講台 灣現此時真 ch 鶴佬客(H -ló-kheh) kap 平埔族因為客語 平埔語 ê 消失 soah m 失去原來客家 平埔族群 ê 意識 kap 認同 2.4. 種族 民族 族群 種族 (race) 民族 (nation) 族群 (ethnicity or ethnic group) 是 3 個 bô-k ng ê 概念 -koh t 生活當中 ti hông 誤用(施正鋒 1998:3) T 即篇論文 l i-té 種族 是指體質人類學頂頭根據咱人 ê 外在 生物特徵 像講皮膚色 基因等所做 ê 分類 民族 m 有人 k 翻 做 國族 是政治學頂頭 ê 概念 民族 ê 概念是西歐社會 t 文藝復 興 宗教改革以來 t 近代資本主義經濟基礎頂頭 t u-t u-á 發展出來 ê 民族是指佔有一定 ê 領土而且成員有歷史 運命共同體 ê 認同感 ê 社會 群體單位 民族國家 (nation-state)是 tòe tiáh 民族意識 ê 形成 liáu 發 展出來 ê 要求一個民族建立一個國家 ê 概念(Johnson 1995:188) 5 族群 是 20 世紀以來因為移民社會 像講美國 所發展出來 ê 一種新概念(Eriksen 1996:28) Chit-ê 概念是指無論是根據 t 原有種族或 者民族基礎頂頭 只要成員集體 自我認同而且外人 m án-ne 認為 ê 時族群認同就存在(Fishman 1977:16; Levinson 1994:73) T bô-k ng 社會情 境之下 族群之間 ê 界線(boundary)並 是固定 b 變 ê 而且是有可能 k ng 時存在多層認同(Fishman 1977:26-28; Levinson 1994:73-75) 像講 t 美國 ê 中國人 in t 白人 ê 眼中可能 lóng 是 k ng-khoán ê 族群 -koh tng 中國 人 ka-t tàu-t n 做伙 ê 時 in 會幼分做福建人 廣東人 上海人等 tng 福 5 Chit ê խ ಘᓵ -sái ە ਜ إ ᔴ(2000)Ε ( 1992)Ζ

210 208! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 建人 tàu-t n ê 時 koh 分做廈門 泉州 漳州等 2.5. 台語 台灣話 台灣語言 台語 台灣話 台灣語言 是 ti hông 提來使用 -koh koh gâu 造成誤解 ê 用詞 T 即篇論文 l i-té in ê 定義分別列 t 下面 台灣語言 (Taiwanese languages)是指 t 自然狀態 ê 遷 sóa 之下(非 殖民政權強迫使用) 經過土著化 koh 有台灣傳統歷史文化代表性而且 外界普遍認同者 所以台灣語言包含原住民所有 ê 語言 客語 kap 台 語(或者是所講 ê H -ló-o ) T 定義之下 英語 華語 日語 kap 越南新 娘所用 ê 越南語 lóng 無算是台灣語言 不過 in -sái 算是台灣國民有 teh 用 ê 語言(languages used by the Taiwanese citizens) 6Ho n-sè 有人會講 chitkhoán ê 分法 seng-kòe 心胸 kheh- h 應該將華語包含在台灣語言 l i-té chiah tiáh 若準華語算是台灣語言 為啥物比華語 khah 早來台灣而且 koh 有台灣人 teh 用 ê 日語 b -sái 算台灣語言 若準華語算是台灣語 言 m 應該改名做台灣語言 Án-ne 對岸 ê 中國人是 是 -tàng 接受 in teh 用 ê 普通話 無叫中國語言 顛倒 hông 叫做台灣語言 台灣 ê 中 國語文學系是 是願意改名做台灣語文學系 有關台灣語言是 是應該 包含華語 ê 爭論就是因為母語異化所造成 ê 現象 台灣話 (Taiwanese)是指眾台灣語言當中透過自然競爭所形成 ê 一種台灣共通語(Lingua franca 7 ) 台灣話 m -sái 簡稱做 台 語 Ùi án-ne ê 定義來看 台灣語言 是 khah 大 ê 項目 l i-té 有一 種語言叫 台語 或者 台灣話 台語 chit-ê 專有名詞 ti 會引 起客家或者原住民族群 ê 恐惶就是爭論者將 台語 當做是 台灣語 6 7 ᇡา ê ಘᓵ -sái ە ᓏ 2004Ζ ڶ ᣂ Lingua francaδcrystal (1992:230) k ᆠ ϘAn auxiliary language used to permit routine communication between groups of people who speak different native languages.ϙ

211 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 209 言 ê 簡稱 事實上 台語 kap 台灣語言 應該 hông 當做 2 個 bô-k ng ê 概念處理 就親像 廣東話 kap 廣東語言 是 bô-k ng ê 概 念 án-ne 廣東語言 是指中國廣東地區 ê 廣東話 客話8 閩南話 9 等 雖然廣東地區 m 有人 teh 使用 客話 kap 閩南 話 -koh 廣東話 kan-ta 專門指 廣東話 niâ 並無指 客話 或者 閩南話 若就國際語言來舉例 法語 kap 法國語言 m 是 bô-k ng ê 概念 法語 (Francais)是指以巴黎地區 ê 語言做標準所形成 ê 大家印 象中所講 ê 法語 伊大約佔法國全人口 ê 90% 法國語言是指包含 Breton Dutch Gascon Limousin Avergnat Languedocien 等在內 24 種少數族群語言(Grimes 1996: ) 2.6. 土著化 kap 代表性 頂一節講 tiáh ài 有 土著化 kap 代表性 chiah -tàng 算是台灣 語言 若 án-ne 啥物號做土著化 代表性 土著化 (indigenization)是指 ùi 移民社會(immigrant society)變成 土著社會 (native society) ê 轉變過程 像講早期台灣漢人 ùi 唐山移民 來台灣 ê 時 tú 開始 pi n 若過年 過節 in iáu 會想 beh 轉去故鄉唐山 h m 親人團圓 甚至若過身去 m 想 beh 落葉歸根將屍體送轉去唐山 埋 這就是移民社會現象 i -t 是移民者 iáu 有過客心態 in iáu 認為 故鄉 t 唐山 台灣不過是暫時討賺 ê 所在 -koh 經過一定 ê 時間 kap 社會情境 ê 發展 hit-kóa 漢人移民 t u-t u-á 過年 過節 b koh 轉去唐 8 9 ড়ᇩ(Hakfa) t խഏ t ᐖ ק pêngε壂৬ pêngε ۂ ত pêng (ࡌ ᦊΕ ڿ 1990:8; Ramsey 1987:16-17)Ζ Ꮈতᇩ Ա t 壂৬তຝΔiáu koh t ᐖ pêng ۅ ᙰ چ Ε௧ত Εሼ ڠ ת Ε௨ ۂ ত pêngε ᆢ ࢬ (ڇ ᇯ ᐝ 1991:186)Ζ

212 210 kap m t niâl-bóe hit-kóa ka-t m in ê ê t 1945 ê li-té 1) êkap 2) hm êh-ló ê t kui àah kap H-ló leh(1994:92) ùi ê 200 ê tu-tu-á I-t t kap chìn-chêng Chit-ê ê ê ê ( ê ) ga-ch ka-tchit-kóa t 23 lìn -koh hit-kóa ê kap ê soah in tih in t ê beh tim chiâ-chò ê ê ka-t Beh chiâ-chò ài ài koh t ê ê hit ê -tàng ê m án-ne -sái ê tih tih susuh ( )sasimih tih tih tih hamburgercoca colakám susihsasimih m -koh b he he ê susihsasimih ê -koh hon-sè 100 k m susih

213 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 211 sasimih 是台灣料理 -koh che tang-sî chiah 會發生 ài 有主 客觀 ê 條 件 是單方面¹g-b ng 就會實現 但是 -sái 確定 ê 是至少伊現此時 無代表性 若就語言來講 咱若想 beh 學英語咱會去叨 kúi 個國家學 一般 lóng 會想 beh 去美國 英國 Australia 或者 New Zealand 雖然印度 菲 律賓 m 有 teh 用英語 -koh 真少人會想 beh 去 hia 學 為啥物 因為 印度 菲律賓無英語 ê 代表性 若 hoan 頭轉來看台灣語言 為啥物原住民語 客語 kap 台語 chiah 有台灣 ê 代表性 咱 -kha 就以台語為例來說明 一個語言 beh 號做啥物名有伊主 客觀 ê 條件 客觀條件 l i 面 ê 政治 經濟 文化因素上重要 T 中國 福建地區 ê 閩語 -sái 分做 5 大 方言 (事實上是語言 10 ) 閩南 閩東 閩北 閩中 莆仙 (季羨林 1992:293) 閩南語 主要是福建南部一 帶包含 泉州 漳州 廈門 等縣市 ê 人 teh 使用 ê 語言 其 中廈門是閩南語 ê 代表腔口 閩南語除了 t 閩南地區使用之外 iáu 分 佈 t 廣東東部 kap 東南亞像講新加坡 菲律賓 印尼等國家 因為 t 閩 語 5 大分支語言 l i-té 閩南語 ê 分佈 kap 影響力上大 所以閩南語 m hông 叫做 福建話 中國清朝統治台灣( 年) ê 時閩南一帶 ê 泉州 漳州等 ê 福建 人 t u-t u-á 移民來到台灣11 T 1887 年 chìn-chêng 台灣是屬福建省 teh 管 台灣 t 政治 經濟 文化各方面 iáu khah 輸福建 所以稱呼 hit 當 時 ê 閩南移民所使用 ê 語言號做 福建話 iáu 無過份 -koh 台灣進 T ߢᖂ ᙰԫ ਢ ش Ϙյઌ ڶ ऄ৫ᄮ Εᦫ ڶ ϙࠐ ܒ ឰᠨ ਢ ߢࢨ ߢ ê Ζ ឈ t ᥞழཚ kap ᔤ ཛழཚ ڶ ၦዧԳฝ ا Δ -koh ዧԳՕၦฝ ࠐا ਢխഏ堚ཛอएழཚΖ

214 212! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 入 20 世紀以後 一方面是土著化 ê 關係 koh 一方面是因為日本統治 期間促成 ê 近代化 資本主義化致使 台灣社會 h m 台灣人意識 ê 形 成(史明 1992:220) 因為泉州話 漳州話來到台灣已經土著化 形成不 漳不泉 ê 新腔口(王育德 1993:95) koh 摻入台灣平埔族 日本語 ê 成 份 所以一種新 ê 語言形式 台灣話 已經客觀上成立 à 除了語言 ê 客觀條件之外 台灣 t 政治 經濟 文化12等各方面 lóng lú 來 lú 比福建 khah 重要 kap 優勢 加上台灣人意識 ê 出頭 台灣人主觀上認同伊所 講 ê 是 台灣話 是 福建話 所以 台灣話 (簡稱做台語) chit-ê 用詞就成立 à 近來 b chió 人 kìo-s 台語 台灣話 是民進黨組黨 chit 10 外 年來 chiah 新造 帶有 福佬沙文主義 意涵 ê 用語 事實上 台 語 台灣話 t 20 世紀初期早就 teh 使用 à 因為 hit 當時台語 t 自 然狀態之下已經形成台灣 ê 共通語 像講 t 1901 年就有 台灣語 創 刊 1902 年 台灣語學雜誌 創刊 kap 台灣語同志會 成立(葉石濤 1993:209) Koh chhui-sak 白話字 ê 先覺 Chhòa Pôe-hóe (蔡培火) t 伊 1925 年 ê 著作 Ch p-h ng Koán-kiàn lìn kui 本冊就是用 Tâi-oân- e (台灣話)來稱呼台灣人 ê 語言 伊 t 論說台灣 kap 羅馬字 ê 關係 ê 時 講 Tâi-oân-lâng i s J t-pún ê peh-sè, s -í J t-pún ê Kok-gú i -s tekkhak tiáh ài Áh. -kú Hàn-bûn s chin oh, Kok-gú i s chin lân, kohchài chit n½g hang kap Tâi-oân- e lóng s bô koan-h (Chhòa Pôe-hóe 1925:15). 12 ቝᝑΔ t 2001 ڣ bat װ 壂৬ლ ض ມᓳ ΖHit ᅝழ ڶ װ in hia ê ᨠΔ in hia ê ϘᎸত ϙ ዚՕપ 95% א Ղ lóng ਢ Ց װ ê ᆺඔ ض Ε ۂ ᘏΕຫ Գ ê ዚΖIn چڇ ê ዚॺ Δ ڶ lóng ਢԫኒ อዚ Ζ

215 CH 7. kap ê 213 t sái hông the ê ( 2003; 2004)êin t 1933 êm ê kap á ê teh 3. T li-té ê -sái (diglossia) kap(digraphia) ê kapchit 2 ê ê -koh (i ) ê Charles Ferguson (1959) diglossia ê ê 2 (two varieties of the same language) bôkng ê (social functions) koh chit 2 (High language) (Low language) khah ê kap t hông khah t kap Joshua Fishman (1967) Ferguson ê diglossia kan-t -sái t li-té ê 2 i m thm -sái 2 Án-ne(digraphia)Dale (1980:5) ùi Ferguson ê

216 214 kap m k () ê DeFrancis (1984:59) m kng-khoán ê (Chiung 2003:9) k Dale kap DeFrancis ê li-té ê bô-kng ê chit-khoán ê Fishman ê kng-khoán t kng ê tih ê( ) li-té ê án-chóa leh li-té bô-kng ê in ka-t ka-t ê -koh in hia ê pin beh ài ê ( ê ) ê hit ê t I hit-kóa in ka-t ê -koh pin ài ê ch t-lh hit-kóa koh in tih ê in ê kap hit-kóa ê li-té ê() kap ê Che m ê kng bô-kng ê ê t kap hông khah seng chit-khoán ê t ê lìn iáu i ê lìnpin in teh tak

217 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 215 若就 書面語 來看 漢字文言文就是 高文字 其他發展出 來 ê 民 族 文 字 親 像 講 越 南 ê 字 喃 Chu-Nom 朝 鮮 ê Hangul 13 日本 ê 假名 Kana kap 台灣 ê 歌仔冊文字 白話字 等 lóng 算 低文字 漢字文言文因為長期以來 hông 當作 正統 文字 koh 有科舉制度 ê 體制支持 所以社會大眾感覺使用文 言文 khah 有水準 有學問 Chit 種現象 t 現此時 ê 台灣社會 m iáu 真 普遍 像講墓牌 祭文用文言文寫生平紀事 廟寺 m 用文言文寫廟 史 對聯 甚至一般人講話 寫作 ê 時為 tiáh 展風神 m 會 l m kóa 成語 kap 引用古詩 古文 T 高低語文 ê 社會 l i-té 高語言/文字無一定永遠高 低語言/ 文字 m 無一定永遠低 in ê 地位 t 一定 ê 條件之下有可能變動 koh 是 án-choá 漢字文言文有法度 t 漢字文化圈壟斷高語言/文字 kui 千冬 是 án-choá 到路尾 kan-t 日本 假名 韓國 諺文 越南 羅馬字 有才調翻身 ùi 低語言/文字變成高語言/文字 Hit-kóa 壯 字 苗字 瑤字 soah 無法度出頭天 除了政治因素之外 文字本身 m 是真大 ê 因素 文字是 án-choá 會影響 tiáh 高低語文呢 咱後一節就來討論 chit-ê 問題 4. 漢字 ê 迷思 kap 對國民文學發展 ê 限制 為啥物漢字對國民文學 民族意識 ê 發展有影響 這牽涉 tiáh 漢 字 ê 文字結構 kap 本質 因為篇幅限制 ê 關係 咱 t chia kan-ta -sái kéng 重點講 詳細 ê 分析討論 -sái 參考 DeFrancis (1990) Gelb (1952) 蔣 為文(2005c 2005e 2005g) 漢字是 án-choá hông 利用來發展出新 ê 文 13 Hangul:ψতឌω ڼ ழጠࡅឌഏ ڗ ψឌ ωê რ৸ΖHangul ਢཛធ ઔߒଫ ೯ ψࡌழᆖωΰchu Si-gyongαt 1913 ڣ Ղ ࠌ ش Ζ ק ឌጠࡅཛធ ڗ Chosoncha ΰཛធ ڗ αࢨ Chongum ΰ إ αζ

218 216! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 字 咱 -sái 用下面 chit-ê 例來說明 假使有一個講英語 ê 英國人 John beh 用漢字替英語設計一套新 ê 漢字式文字系統 伊上代先有可能用(1) ê 漢字來表示(2) ê 英語語句 Chit 種方式就是漢字造字原則 六書 l ité ê 假借 I 就是借用漢字 ê 讀音(t chia 借用北京音)來表記英語 ê 語音 kap 語意 (1) ႕ Ւߤ ཎ (2) I have two dogs. (3) Գ ڶ ႕ ڶ ՒԲ 䵜ߤ 䵜 ڍ ཎ 後來 John 驚人看 tiáh 語句(1) l i-té ê 漢字會受漢字字面 ê 語意誤 解 像講看 tiáh 哀黑夫 會誤解是 悲傷 ê 穿黑衫 ê 農夫 所以 John 就 t 原有 ê 漢字頂頭加 形旁 起去 像(3)所寫 ê án-ne 語句(3) chit 種做法就是所謂 ê 形聲字 後來 有另外一個英國人 Marry 伊感覺 John ê 用字無適合 所以 伊 k (2)寫做(4) ê 方式 (4) Գ ڶ ݺ ႕ ٷ ݗڶ 䵜 䵜 ڍ LÞ-bóeΔkoh ڶ ԫଡ ഏԳ Joe k (2)ᐊ (5)Ζ (5) ݺ Ꮾ Ց ݗ Բ 䵜 䵜 ڍ ٺ ৸ 以上 Marry kap Joe 所寫 ê (4) (5) kám -sái 若就漢字造字原則來看 當然 m -sái 若 án-ne siáng 寫 ê 是標準 無人是絕對 ê 標準 m 無人 是絕對 ê 無標準 這就是 chit-khoán 漢字式新字無法度標準化 普遍化 ê 主因 T 漢字文化圈 lìn hit-kóa 利用漢字發展出來 ê 民族文字大概 -sái 分做 3 類 第一類是 t 漢字 ê 基礎頂頭依照漢字造字方法 特別是形聲 字 來創造新字 Chit-khoán ê 新文字 kap 漢字 k ng-khoán 屬 詞素音

219 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 217 節文字14 Chit-khoán ê 新文字有越南 字喃15 台灣 歌仔冊文字 16 中國 壯字 苗字 17 瑤字 (周有光 1997:98-108)等 Chit-kóa 字 ê 外形 kap 漢字真類似 造字原則大多數 kap 漢字 k ngkhoán 並無跳脫漢字 ê 思考模式 kap 造字方法 就文字讀寫 ê 效率來 看 chit-kóa 新文字比漢字 koh khah 複雜 歹學 若 beh 讀有 chit-khoán 字 通常就 ài 有漢字 ê 基礎 因為 bat 漢字 ê 人佔人口比例無高 而且 koh 是所有 bat 漢字 ê 人 lóng 會支持發展 chit-khoán 新字 所以 bat chitkhoán 漢字式新字 ê 人 m 無 ch 換一句話講 hit-kóa chò-sit 脫赤腳 ê 普羅大眾 k ng-khoán 真歹接近 使用 chit-khoán ê 漢字式新字 若 ánne 是啥款 ê 人 chiah 有法度操作 chit-kóa 漢字式新字 主要就是 hit-kóa 落魄 ê 文人 落魄文人 -sái 分作 2 類 一種是 ùi 權力核心 hông 趕出 來 不得志 ê 舊文人 一種是具備民族意識 進步 ê 文人 Chit-kóa 落 魄文人因為有漢字 ê 基礎 所以 chiah 有可能使用漢字式新字 落魄 ê 舊文人因為 ti -ti iáu 存有大中國 ê 封建思想 所以 m ti 反應 t in 用 新字創作 ê 作品 lìn 對照之下 若是 beh 有新思想 民族獨立觀通常 就 ài ùi 進步 ê 落魄文人 ê 作品 lìn 去 chh e 可惜 chit-kóa 進步 ê 落魄文 人用漢字式新字所寫 ê 作品因為通路無大 無法度 t 脫赤腳 ê 普羅大眾 之間普遍流傳 利用漢字發展出來 ê 民族文字 ê 第二類是 音節文字 伊典型 代表是日本 ê 假名 (Kana) 第三類是 音素文字 典型代表是韓 國 ê 諺文 (Hangul) 越南 t 17 世紀以後透過傳教士發展出來 ê 越南 14 ڶ ᣂ ढਢ ᆏ ڗ Δ ᔹ DeFrancis 1990Ζ ቝᝑΔψ Կω(/ba/) ਢᑇ ڗ Ϙ3ϙê რ৸Ζ ڶ ᣂ ڗ ê ୶Δ -sái ᔹᓏ (2005d) Ζ 16 ቝᝑΔψ ᄎω(b )Εψߪ९ω(lò)Ζ ڶ ᣂዚ םג ê ୶Δ -sái ᔹԭᏕੴ(2005)Ζ 17 ቝᝑΔψՖԶω(/pa/) ਢϘഡՖϙê რ৸Ζ 15

220 218! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 羅馬字 (Chu Quoc Ngu) kap 台灣 t 17 世紀透過傳教士發展出來 ê 新 港文字 kap 19 世紀以後 ê 白話字18 (P h- e-j ) Chit 2 類 ê 文字 lóng 真好學 好用 因為無需要漢字 ê 基礎就 -sái 單獨學習使用 所以乎 普羅大眾親近使用 ê 機會加真高 Tng-tong 19 世紀尾 20 世紀初 hit-kóa 韓國 越南 日本進步 ê 文人提倡用 chit 種新造 ê 文字 ê 時 一般國民 真緊就 -sái k chit-khoán 文字學起來 當然 民族國家意識就 án-ne 因 為讀寫能力 kap 國民教育 ê 建立 soah 真緊形成起來 這就親像西歐國 家近代 t 宗教改革以後因為民眾讀寫能力 ê 建立連帶帶動國民文學 kap 民族國家意識 ê 形成 k ng-khoán 道理(蔣為文 2005h) 相對之下 hit-kóa 無法度跳脫漢字思考中心 ê 壯族 苗族 瑤族 t 政治上 m 無法度形成民族國家意識 中國 t 1930 年代 bat 試驗用羅馬字來書寫漢語 進行所謂 ê 拉丁 化 運動(季羨林 1992:245) LÞ-bóe-chhiú 中國共產黨得 tiáh 政權了 t 1950 年代停止拉丁化運動 改推 sak 漢字簡化 為啥物中國 beh 放棄漢 語拉丁化 主要就是顧慮 tiáh 中國政治 kap 文化上 ê 一統性 (Norman 1988: ; DeFrancis 1950: ; Barnes 1974) In 驚若中國各地 用當地語言來書寫 會造成廣東 福建 上海等各地 ê 地方意識發展 做近代民族國家意識 soah 來 ùi 中國獨立出去 5. 台語文學發展 ê 時期 kap 特色 以台灣人 ê 母語為文學語言 ê 源頭 -sái 追溯到 17 世紀 ê 新港文 (蔣為文 2005h) Hit 當時分佈 t 台南一帶 ê 平埔族 Siraya ê 語言有可 能形成荷蘭時期 ê 台灣共通語 可惜 chit-ê 語言 kap 文字 soah t u-t u-á 死亡 kap 失傳去 後來到 19 世紀後半期 另外一波 ê 母語文學 koh 開 18 ᇡาᓮ ᔹᓏ (2005c) Εᇀ (2004)Ζ

221 CH 7. kap ê 219 tu-tu-á he chín ê kap -koh t ê soah t ài hông soah ê kap kng-khoán lóng beh ê t ê () ê tih ê lóng tòe tih 1920 ê ê ( 1993; 1996; 1996; 1996) ê tòe tih 19 (Ph-o-j) ê chhui-sak chiah ê ê sái kúi bô-kng ê s () ê -sái Medherst () 1837 t ê 17 t ê (Kloter 2004)-koh ê ùi 1865 ùi ê ê m ê (1990:73) ê t in koh t -koh che ê ê ê -sái ùi 1885 Tâi-oân-hú-siâ Kàu-he-pò() t ( 2005h) chaiê ê ê án-ne tu-tu-á m án-ne tu-tu-á

222 220! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 府城教會報 提供台語白話字發表 ê 空間 所以白話台語寫作 ê 作品 lú 來 lú 成熟 到 kah 1920 年代 -sái 講是用白話字來創作台語白話文學 ê 成熟期 像講 1925 年 L a Jîn-seng (賴仁聲)出版白話字小說 Án-niâ ê B k-sái (阿娘 ê 目屎) 1926 年 T n Khe-phoàn (鄭溪泮)出版小說 Chhut Sí-Soàn (出死線19) 1925 年 Chhoà Poê-hoé (蔡培火)所出版 ê 社會評論集 Ch p-h ng Koán-kiàn (十項管見) Chit kóa 作品 lóng 是 t 1930 年代台 灣話文 鄉土文學論戰以前就出版 à 20 可惜 hit 當時受漢文 日文教育 ê 一般知識份子因為既得利益 kap 漢字 ê 迷思 soah 無法度接受台語羅馬字 致使 chit-ê 階段白話字主 要 t 教會內 teh 流行 niâ 5.2. 漢字白話文討論期 雖然 t 1920 年代 P h-o -j (白話字)已經發展成熟 chiâ -chò 文學語 言 -koh hit 當時 ê 台灣文學界討論 ê 主要重點 soah lóng kh½g t 漢字 ê 改革 kap 書寫方面 Ùi 1920 年 台灣青年 雜誌發行 1924 年 張我 軍 發表 糟糕的台灣文學界 引起 ê 新舊文學論戰到 ʳ ˌˆ 年代 ê 台灣話文 鄉土文學論戰 chit 10 外年中間 討論 ê 焦點主要是漢字 ê 書 寫方式21 1) beh 用傳統文言文 是白話文 2) 若 beh 用白話文 是 beh 用日本白話文 中國式漢字白話文 是台灣式漢字白話文 已經發展 成熟 ê 文學語言 白話字 soah hþ hit-kóa 漢字既得利益者 tàn t 邊仔 無受重視 lþ-bóe t 社會上 soah 造成一種看重漢字 看輕白話字 ê 高 低文字現象 19 ޕ Ⴇ ڶ k ዧ ᢅ ठ Δ ٤ -sái t ᖂ ጻ ൲ ထ < 20 ڶ ᣂ ػ ᇩ ڗ ᖂΔ ᔹ㹂ࠋ༡(2000)Ε ܨ ᘋ (1995)Ζ 21 ᇡา ᔹխ ( ܓ 2003)Εຫ ୲(2004)Εᄘւߢ(1993)Ζ

223 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 221 扣除少數像講蔡培火 hit-kóa 主張發展台灣話文 ê 主要領導者因 為無法度跳脫漢字 ê 思考模式致使台灣話 ê 書寫受 tiáh 真大 ê 限制 kap 影響 第一 限制 tiáh 台灣話文 ê 大眾性 kap 普遍性 因為 beh 讀有漢字 式台灣話文就 ài 先讀有漢字 俗語講 漢字若 beh 讀會 bat 嘴鬚就 phah 死結 就是 teh keng-thé 漢字歹學 ê 問題22 T 1920 年代 ê 台灣 bat 漢字 ê 人 t 無 ch 台語 ê 書寫若倚靠 bat 漢字 ê 人口 自然會 lú hông 邊緣化 普遍 ê 國民文學自然就 khah oh 產生 第二 限制 tiáh 台灣話文 ê 標準化 近代國民文學 ê 形成 kap 民族 語言標準化是互相扶持共生 ê 漢字式台灣話文因為用漢字書寫致使 標準化 khang-khòe 真歹進行(鄭良偉 1990:194) 即種情形就親像越南使 用 字喃 k ng-khóan 雖然用 chiâ 千冬 -koh iáu 是無標準化(蔣為文 2005b:90) 因為台語漢字無標準化 自然就降低伊 chiâ -chò 文學語言 ê 普遍性 第三 造成台灣話文使用者無受重視 hông 看輕 台灣人 beh 用 漢字來書寫台灣話文自然會 tú tiáh ch t-kóa 用漢字寫 b 出來語詞 Chitê sî-ch n 真 ch 人就用造字 chh e 本字 或者用假借字 ê 方式來克 服 因為即種 特殊字 怪字 t 漢字文化圈 lìn 通常 lóng 是 hông 當作 低文字 來看待 致使台灣語文 m hông 當作無水準 低路 ê 文 字 第四 影響 tiáh 台灣民族性格 ê 文化獨立性 越南人 t 法國統治之 下透過法國 ê 協助廢除漢字 切斷越南 h m 中國之間 ê 文化 tþ-châi (蔣 為文 2005a) 對照之下 台灣 t 日本統治之下 初期為 tiáh beh khiú 近 pê -pê 是漢字文化圈成員 ê 台灣人 h m 日本人之間 ê 關係 日本人就利 22 ڶ ᣂዧ ڗ ê ᖂ ய Δ -sái ᔹᓏ (2005e)ΕChiung (2003)Ζ

224 222! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 用漢字 ê ch n chhun ê 價值 (剩餘價值)乎台灣人繼續使用漢字 雖然 lþ-bóe 日本人為 tiáh 排華 侵略中國 soah t 1937 年禁用漢文 -koh 已 經 seng 慢 à 台灣文學界 t 期間走 chh e 台灣文學 ê 內涵 kap 定位 ê 時 因為無法度跳脫漢字 ê 迷思 致使有 b chió 人認為台灣文 學是中國文學 ê 支流 niâ 因為 án-ne soah 減弱台語文學 chiâ 做台灣 ê 國 民文學 ê 強度 5.3. 台語文學 ê tìm-b 期 Ùi 1937 到 1980 年代 chit-ê 時期 -sái 講是台語文學 ê tìm-b 23期 1937 到 1945 年算是 戰爭時期 chit-ê 時期主要 ê ch n-chhun ê 刊物是 台 灣教會公報 (原來 ê 台灣府城教會報 透過宗教 ê 方式來生存 戰後 1945 到 1987 解嚴 chìn 前 chit-ch m 算是 戒嚴時期 chit-ê 時期是台語文學 ê 黑暗時代 因為台灣話文 ê 使用遭受中華民國 ê 大中 國統治結構 ê 有計畫 ê 殘害 伊 ê 後果是台語文學作品 ê 量真 chió 而且 hông 矮化做 方言文學 新生代台灣人 ê 族群母語能力 t u-t u-á 退 化 致使有真 ch 母語異化 kap 母語轉換 ê 現象 戒嚴時期 大多數 ê 台灣作家若 是選用中國文寫作就是 ti mti m 做聲 少數 ê 作家像講 林宗源 向陽 t 1970 年代就三不 五時浮出水面用土地 ê 氣味 teh 創作台語詩(向陽 1985 鄭良偉 1988) Chit-ê sî-ch n 有組織性 ê chhui-sak 台灣話文 ê lóng 來自海外 日本 台 獨聯盟 t 1960 年代發行 ê 台灣青年 (張學謙 2003) kap 1977 年由美國 ê 台灣同鄉鄭良偉 陳清風等人主辦 ê 台灣語文月報 23 Tìm-b ਢਐহԳ ê chhàng lòe Εᆃ ê რ৸Ζ

225 CH 7. ᇮ ȃнᏱ kap Җఋ ঢ় ê ᄻșșѯᇮНᏱၽ ѭߒ!! 台語文學 ê koh 活期 年台灣解嚴以後各種社會運動 lóng hiông-hiông chhia-i 起來 台灣語文 m ùi hit-ch m 開始受 tiáh tháu-pàng Chit-ê 時期 ê 初期 khah 偏 語言運動 主要探討台語書寫標準化問題 後期偏台語文學寫作 ê 實 踐24 主要 ê chhui-sak 團體有 1989 年由洪惟仁 林錦賢 楊錦鋒等人組成 ê 台語社 kap 台 語文摘 服務性刊物 1990 年台灣同鄉鄭良光 李豐明等人 t 美國洛 杉磯創立 台文習作會 後來 t 1991 年 7 月創辦到 ta iáu teh 發行 ê 台文通訊 Chit 份刊物同時 t 台灣 美國 Canada 發行 台文 通訊 早期 ê 在台 chhui-sak 者主要有陳豐惠 陳明仁 廖瑞銘等 台文通訊 採用漢字 白話字合寫 ê 台灣話文書寫方式 伊對 漢 羅 書寫 ê 推廣 kap 將白話字 sak 出教會 hþ khah ch 社會大眾認 bat 有 真大 ê 貢獻 Chit-ê 時期上早 chhiàng 明專門創作台語文學 ê 第一個文學性團體 是 1991 年 5 月成立 ê 蕃薯詩社 kap 伊 ê 機關刊物 蕃薯詩刊 ( ) 伊主要 ê 社員有林宗源 黃勁連 李勤岸 胡民祥 莊柏林 陳明仁 黃恒秋等 上早 chhiàng 明專門刊載台語文學作品 ê 期刊是 台文罔報 (1996) 伊 ê 主要成員有廖瑞銘 呂子銘 陳明仁 陳豐惠 楊嘉芬 劉杰 岳 劉德樺 除了 chia ê 團體 刊物之外 iáu 真 ch 像講 台語文推展協會 kap 茄苳台文月刊 ( ) 管芒花台語文學會 kap 管芒花 詩刊 (1997-)等(方耀乾 2005) 除了社會團體 teh chhui-sak 之外 各大學 24 Chit-ê ழཚ ཚኙ ê ಘᓵ ê ઌᣂ -sái ە ᔕ(1983)Ε ܨ ᘋ (1999) kap π ኴρ ٵ ո ೭ࢤ ע ढ(ല ᠧ ᅝխ ڶ ᣂ ê ಘᓵ گ ᐙ ٱ Δழ ץ 1989 ڣ ڣ 7 )Ζ

226 224 kap li-té m che ê (1988)(1990)(1990) (1991)(1992)( 1995) ê chit-kóa koh (1992) Chit-ê ê m li-bn -sái khim ê hitkóa tim I-t beh tim ê kap Che ê 5.5. ê ê liáu -t koh chiah ch soah lóng in in ê ( ) beh án-choá chit-ê ê khang-khòe T chit-ê m koh ê ê(2001) m ê (2000) ê(2001) ê(2003) ê ê (2004a2004c2005)

227 CH 7. kap ê ê ê ê lú lú ch ê Tng-tong sat ê lú lú ch ê kap lú lú chió l-bóe t ài án-ne án-ne beh án-choá ê ài ê kap Koh ài ê bái khah ch ê kan-ta ê niâ chhui-sak kap m chiâ-chò ê t

228 226 kap Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. New York: Verso. Barnes, Dayle Language planning in Mainland China: standardization. In, Fishman, J.A.(ed.). Advances in Language Planning, Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. Chiung, Wi-vun T Impact of monolingual policy on language and ethnic identity: a case study of Taiwan. In Wi-vun Chiung. Languge, Identity and Decolonization, Tailam: National Cheng Kung University. Crowley, Tony The Politics of Language in Ireland : A Sourcebook. NY: Routledge. Crystal, David An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, Davies, Norman Europe: A History. London: Pimlico. DeFrancis, John Nationalism and Language Reform in China. Princeton University Press. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. (Taiwan edition) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Edwards, John Language, society, and identity. NY: Basil Blackwell. Eriksen, Thomas H Ethnicity, race, class and nation. In John Hutchinson & Anthony D. Smith (ed.). Ethnicity, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fasold, Ralph The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Blackwell Ferguson, Charles Diglossia. Word 15, Fishman, Joshua. (ed.) Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishman, Joshua Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 32(2),

229 CH 7. kap ê 227 Fishman, Joshua Language and ethnicity. In Howard Giles (ed.). Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations, London: Academic Press Inc. Gelb, Ignace. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Grimes, Barbara F Ethnologue. (13 th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Johnson, Allan G The Blackwell Dictionary of Society. Oxford: Blackwell. Kloter Henning Early Spanish Romanization system for Southern Min. Levinson, David Ethnic Relations: A Cross-cultural Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, Inc. Liebkind, Karmela Social psychology. In Joshua Fishman (ed.). Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lu, Li-Jung A study of language attitudes, language use and ethnic identity in Taiwan. M.A. Thesis: Fu-jen Catholic University. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ramsey, S. Robert The Language of China. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Ross, Jeffrey A Language and the mobilization of ethnic identity. In Howard Giles & Saint-Jacques Bernard (eds.) Language and Ethnic Relations. NY: Pergamon Press (1) 2004a 2004b(2) 2004c

230 228 kap 1995 p ê ùi : ê ê kap p ê kap p

231 CH 7. kap ê a ê hm ê b hm ê p c teh ê p d p e p f ê p g ê ê p h ê p

232 230 kap

233 kap ê

234 232! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 話頭 1492 年 Kholanpos Christopher Columbus 代表歐洲人第一 pái 行船 到美洲大陸 Kúi 年 liáu 葡萄牙 ê 行船人 Gama Vasco da Gama t 1498 年透過 好望角 The Cape of Good Hope phah 開歐洲到印度 ê 新航線 Koh 來葡萄牙統治者 A-bu-khe-khe (Don Affonse de Albuquerque) t 1510 kap 1511 年分別佔領 -tàng 控制印度西海岸 ê Goa kap -tàng 控 制東南亞 Ma-la-kah 海峽 ê Ma-la-kah (Malacca) 自 án-ne 歐洲人 phah 開 ùi 海上來到東方 ê 新航路(Hall 1981: 264; 湯錦台 2001:35)Ζ Hoan 頭 k 看 15 世紀 ê 結束 tú 好是新航線 大航海時代 ê 開始 台灣 m t chit-khoán ê 時代潮流之下 hông 帶 chi 國際舞台 T che chinchêng 台灣是由南島語系 ê 原住民所構成 ê 原始部落社會 到 kah 17 世紀 ê sî-ch n 荷蘭 ui 葡萄牙 日本 大明帝國 西班牙等國際勢力 當中有出眾 ê 表現 致使搶 t i-seng t 1624 年佔領台灣 建立台灣第一 個外來政權 雖然荷蘭人佔領台灣主要是經貿 ê 考慮 -koh 以基督教義為主 ê 文教活動 m 是 in ê 重要 khang-khòe 之一 (Campbell 1903: vii; 曹永和 1979: 33-38) 像講 荷蘭人為 tiáh hþ hit 當時 ê 台灣人 也就是平埔族人 tàng 用 in ka-t ê 母語 kap 上帝 chih-chiap 所以用羅馬字替平埔族設計文 字 koh t 1636 年設立台灣有史以來 ê 學校(Heylen 2001) 台灣就是 án-ne 半自願 半被迫--ê ùi 口傳原始社會進入書面語時代 而且台灣一進入 書面語時代 就因為荷蘭 ê 關係 kap 西歐 ê 文字讀寫傳統建立關係 雖罔台灣 ùi 原始社會 hông 帶 chi 國際舞台 一開始就受西歐基 督教文化影響 -koh 自 1662 年荷蘭人投降 換鄭成功 t 台灣建立漢 人政權 用體制 ê 力量來 chhui-sak 漢字文化以來 台灣人所顯現出來 ê 漢字文化特質 soah lú 來 lú 重

235 CH 8. kap ê 233 ê t ê kiò-s soah kiò-s b-sáit ê 1930 soah lóng khg t án-choá thang kah 1990 ê m t ê Gelb (1952) ê ê sòa--lâi ê 2. ê kap 2.1. ê ê ch lóng kap ê sòa--lâi ABC ê chit-khoán k ê m ê ê semi kap er kapê êê ê McDonald chit-ê án-ne ê hm ê ABC kng chiah tih-koh ch ê lóng k ê kap ê ê Tzeng 1992: 128 ê kng-khoán ê chit-ê kap ê ê kap ê t kngkhoán ê ê b-chió Flores

236 234! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н d Arcais (1992) Cheng (1992) Su and Anderson (1999) Li (2000)等 因為傳統表音 表意 ê 文字分類法有伊真大 ê 缺點 Gelb 1952 kap Smalley 1963 就提出新 ê 文字分類觀念 In 指出 世界 ê 文字應 該就伊 表示語音 ê 單位 ê 大細 來分類 chiah -tàng 有系統性 ê 對世界 文字做分類 kap 了解文字 ê 演變趨勢 所謂 ê 語音單位 就是指語言 學 teh 講 ê 音素 phoneme 音節 syllable 詞素 morpheme kap 語詞 word 等 ùi 細到大 無 k ng 大細 ê 話語 成分 T chit-ê 分類標準之下 漢字 -sái 講是 語詞-音節 wordsyllabic 或者 詞素-音節 morphosyllabic ê 文字 1日本 ê 假名 是 音節 文字 ê 典型代表 越南羅馬字 英文字 台灣 白話 字 kap 韓國 諺文 -sái 算是 音素 文字 因為 t chit-ê 系統 l ité 每一個字母所表示 ê 語音單位是 音素 雖然越南羅馬字 英文 字 白話字 kap 諺文 lóng 是音素文字 -koh in iáu 有 t m-páh-á 差 別 差別 ê 所在就是 語音 h m 符號 ê 對應關係 kap 符號排列方 式 ê 無 k ng 就 語音 h m 符號 ê 對應關係 來看 越南羅馬字 kap 台灣白話字基本上是一個符號對應一個音素 -koh 英文是多元 ê 對應 關係 就音素符號排列方式來看 越南羅馬字 台灣白話字 kap 英文 字 lóng 是一維 ê 線性排列 -koh 韓國諺文 kap 漢字 lóng 是二維 ê 結 構 現此時世界上多數 ê 文字系統 像講英文 德文 法文 西班牙 文 越南文 kap 台灣白話字 lóng 是一維 ê 音素文字 一維 ê 音素文字 -sái 講是世界上普遍 ê 書寫系統 1 Gelb شٻ Ϙword-syllabicϙΔDeFrancis شٻ ϘmorphosyllabicϙΖ

237 CH 8. kap ê ùi ê ê Gelb1952ùi ê ê ê ùi ê ê chit úi ê ê ê tng-tong ê khah ê khah êê ê ê kap leh khah ê ê khah ê in -sái ê êê ê ê -tàng chit ê lóng êvowelskap consonants ê kng ê kng ê kap -sái k hit-ê ê Smalley1963:7 kan-ta n ê 26 -sái hit-ê ê ê ch ê ài ch ê chiah châi-tiu ài 2,600 ê ài ch t-kóa leh ê ê ê ài 3,000 chiah ê Hannas1997ê chit-mái ê 7,000 Chit 7,000 ê niâ k khah ê ê -sái ê 47,035 án-chóa kap

238 236 kap T iáu sa ê chìn-chêng kan-ta n -tàng t ê lìn in beh êê Chit-ê ê ê kui ê ê ê Siraya t li-té ( 1)in t lìn hit ê lìn ê ê chit pak ê beh t sa leh kap hit M beh t beh thh h chit pak ê kui-ê seng ch beh kan-ta n chit pak ê ka-t Tng-tong ê chit pak ê in ài t hia ioh ê T chit ê bô-kng 1. ê kui-ê ê Tng-tong ê ê ê liáu k hit-êê 1 ê 5 ê

239 CH 8. kap ê 237 Siraya ê in 1 ê 2 ê 2 teh soah tih... án-ne 101 ê ta ê chhun 50 tàng 2. ê 2.3. êtàu kap Tng ê liáuê tit-beh Hit-kóa ê l-bóe ê ê tk-pái beh kng ê kng chit-ê chit ê ê à ê kap chiah thang h t bô-kng kap li-té êkap chit-khoán ê ê -koh tàu kap(phonetization) ê ê (Gelb 1952: )

240 238 kap ài tàu kapê -tàng ê pin tú tih ài t ê hoan tih tih ê Chit-kóa ê thang kín Chit-kóa li-té ê -koh ê -n t án-ne niâkoh ch ê kap ê Chit-kóa ê kap beh ánchóa ê iáu -sái koânê ê-koh chit-khoán ê t ê Tàu ê kúi tàu ê kaptàu 3 tàu 2 kap 1 tàu li-té ê Tàu ê tih -sái kap ti-seng rebus writing ê 3 li-té ê 4U 4 U ê koh t rebus writing in ê oá k thh for you( tih ) 4 U 4 U for you 3. 4U rebus ê 4 ê 7 -koh ê

241 CH 8. ᅖԆଝ kap ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ê ኈ! 239 發音 h m chhit-thô 真 oá 所以就借用來表示 chhit-thô chit-ê 語詞 Rebus writing ê 做法若用漢字來講就是所謂 ê 假借字 七桃Æ 7 粒桃仔Æ chhit-thô, s g (to play) შߓ 4. ңѯᇮȶν ȷ rebus ê پ 啥物是 部分音化 呢 就是借用現有文字圖案 ê 時 kan-ta 取用 伊其中 ê 音素 niâ T 漢字 l i-té 古早 ê 反切 就是 chit-khoán 部分音 化 ê 例 像講圖表 5 l i-té 分別取 都 ([t]) kap 宗 ([ong])來表記 冬 ê 發音[tong] T 西方 古埃及文 l i-té ޟ 聲符 文字 m 是 chitkhoán 部分音化 ê 文字 都 [tto] + 宗 Æ [choong] 冬 [tong] შߓ 5. ᅖԆЇϹ ഌӌॲϾ ê پ 2.4. 文字發展過程 l i-té 解決 同音異義詞 ê 法度 文字 ê 發展過程 lìn kan-ta 有 定形 tàu 字 kap 音化 ê 過 程 iáu 無夠 因為 音化 ê 過程雖然 -sái 克服文字圖案有限 ê 問題 -koh 伊會 se -thòa 出 k ng 音 bô-k ng 意思 êψ ٵ ฆᆠ ωζ tiáh ᇞ 決 chit-ê 問題 一個成熟 ê 文字系統就 ài chh e 出解決方案 Chit-ê 問題 通常是由變更拼字法或者增加區別符號來解決 T 音素文字 l i-té 多數是以變更拼字法來解決同音異義詞 以英文 為例 k ng 發音 ê to too two 分別拼寫做 bô-k ng 字 ʳ ʳ ʳ m

242 240! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 是 bô-k ng 拼字 雖罔音素文字多數採用變更拼字法 -koh m 是有 採用增加區別符號 ê 例 台灣 陳慶洲 所發明 ê 台語 科根 就是 chit-ê 做法 伊將台語語詞分做 60 類 每一類有一個符號表示(號做 科根 ) 像講 % 表示 數字 z 表示 動物 Sòa--lâi 伊 k 科根加 t 語詞後壁 像講 kau% kap kauz án-ne 就 -sái 區別 k ng 音 ê 九 kap 狗 漢字 l i-té ê 形聲字 就是用增加區別符號來解決同音異義詞 ê 問 題 像講 江 kap 杠 pê -pê 發做/kang/ -koh 分別用區別符號 kap 木來區別語意 2.5. 音節 kap 音素文字 ê 出現 Tng-tong 咱人發覺語詞是由 khah 細 ê 音節 (syllable)構成 ê 經過 音節定形 kap 簡化 ê 過程 liáu 音節文字就出現 à 日本 ê 假名 (Kana)是典型 ê 音節文字代表 日本人借用漢字 liáu in 發覺語詞是由音節構成 in 一開始就先用 bô-k ng ê 漢字來紀錄每一個日語音節 這就是所謂 萬葉假名 (万葉 仮名) ê 由來 (Habein 1984: 12)後來 in 發覺 k ng 一個音節用 k ng 一個漢 字來表示就好 koh 進一步將 hit 個漢字 ê 筆劃簡化 就形成純音節文 字 假名 (Seeley 1991: 59)像講 in 一開始 kéng 安 字來表示/a/音 節 lþ-bóe k 簡化做 將 利 字(/ri/)簡化做 ࠅ 將 乃 字(/no/)簡化做 ߩ 韓國人借用漢字 liáu 一開始 m 是借用 kui-ê 漢字當做表記音節或 者詞素(morpheme) ê 符號 chit-khoán ê 做法表現 t in ê 鄉扎 kap 吏 2 ᅝ ڶ kóa ნ ਢԫ t tiau-kang beh ᇞ ٵ ฆᆠ chiah ڗ bô-k ngδ -koh ᆖመᖵ ዝ liáuδ ڼ ழ ڶ b -chió ნ k ng-khoán soah ڗ bô-k ng ê chit-khoán ݮ խ -sái ᇞ ٵ ฆᆠ ê ᠲΖ

243 CH 8. ᅖԆଝ kap ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ê ኈ! 241 讀 頂頭(Ledyard 1966; Taylor and Taylor 1995) LÞ-bóe in 進一步發覺音節 是由 khah 細 ê 音素 (phoneme)構成 ê 經過整理 kap 簡化 in 用一個 簡化 ê 符號來表記每一個音素 這就是韓國音素文字 諺文 (Hangul) ê 由 來 (Shin et al. 1990) 像 講 韓 國 字 䞲 是 由 三 個 音 素 符 號 ය ර ච 所 tàu 起來 Koh 因為受漢字二維排列方式 ê 影響 所以諺文 m 是二維 ê 排列方式 ය [h] + ර + චÆ 䞲 [a] [n] [han] შߓ 6. пȶ䞲ȷ پ ê ᗻ ᒕННԆ๗ᄻ 3. 漢字 ê 文字結構 3.1. 漢字 六書 ê 原理 kap 本質 頂一節咱有分析過文字 ê 發展過程 liáu koh hoan 頭 t g 來就 -tàng 真清楚看出漢字 ê 文字結構 天良講 漢字不過是 ùi 語詞文字演進到 音節文字過程中 ê 中輟生 因為半途而廢 進化無完全 所以漢 字算是一種過渡期 ê 詞素音節 文字 若就文字 ê 成熟度來講 漢字 ê 源頭一般是 ùi 商朝後期 西元前 14-前 11 世紀 ê 甲骨文 算起 甲骨文 經過周朝 春秋 戰國時 期 ê 發展 到 kah 秦始皇吞併六國 規定 小篆 chiâ -chò 標準 ê 文字 了 漢字 ê 字形 kap 結構 chiah 大概穩定落來 3 3 ឈ ዧ ڗ ùi chit-ch m ڶ khah ࡐ ê ݮڗ Δ -koh হ m -thang b ಖ t ᖵ ዝ መ խ iáu ਢᆖመψជ ωεψ౻ ωεψᄒ ωεψ ω k ng ê ݮڗ Ζ

244 242 kap ê ê kng ê tm-ph-á kng ê ê ê B-chió kiò-s ê ê khah gâu m tòe tih ê ê teh kiâ niâê kap ê kan-ta kapchit ê 6 % hit-kóa (concrete) ê ê ê ê beh ê ê(abstract) beh ê hiah t li-té kah 1 % m beh ê ê tàu ê ê k tàu ê tih ch ê kaptàu ài -koh tih ê k ê k ê t ê leh

245 CH 8. kap ê 243 ê án-ne forest () t lìn sái 7 ê 3 wood tàu ê 7. t forest ( forest ê ) -koh ê soah m b-chió ê t 8 ánne 8. ê ê i ê kan-ta ê t ê m ( 2005a) ê OK kap li-té ê ch ê ch m ê ch ê tàu -koh m neh án-choá -sái b-sái k ê t ê leh án-ne back 2 school li-té ê 2 to ê

246 244! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 漢字來寫英語 哀黑夫土豆割撕 就是 I have two dogs ê 假借字 當然 m 有可能有人會用下面(2) ê 假借字來書寫 到底 beh 用啥物字 chiah 好 當然 ch i 人 kah 意 這就是漢字 ê 嚴重問題 (1) 哀黑夫土豆割撕 = I have two dogs (2) 埃黑膚兔鬥戈斯= I have two dogs 雖罔假借字 -sái 用來表記所有 ê 口語語詞 -koh 伊會造成新舊 文字字義 ê 混亂 像講英語 ê 哀黑夫土豆割撕 可能會受字面 ê 影響 hông 誤會做 悲哀 ê 穿黑衫 ê 農夫 t hia 割土豆 因為假借字會造成新 舊字義 ê 混亂 所以形聲字就出現 à 像 講 可能有人會將頂面(1)(2) ê 例利用形聲原理改寫做下面 ê (3) (3) 人哀 有黑 有夫 土二 䵜豆 䵜戈 多斯 雖罔(3)符合形聲字 ê 原理 -koh 無一定所有 ê 人 lóng 認同 chitkhoán 字 可能有人會改寫做下面(4)(5) ê 用字 (4) 人我 有黑 有孚 吐 䵜鬥 䵜哥 多司 (5) ݺ Ꮾ Ց ݗ Բ 䵜 䵜 ڍ ٺ ৸ 以上(1)(2)(3)(4)(5) ê 例 lóng teh 表記 I have two dogs m lóng 符合六 書 ê 造漢字原則 到底啥人 ê 用字 khah tiáh 無人 -tiáh m 無人 tiáh 這是漢字 ê 嚴重問題 M 是為 siá -m h 台語漢字歹標準化 ê 文字 因素之一 六書 l i-té ê ޟ 轉注 ޠ 是指 kúi 個漢字 hông 當做 k ng 字使 用 轉注 其實就是 異形同義字 或者是講 漢字 ê 變異體 古早 ê 研究者就是 -chai 為啥物 chit kúi 字 -sái 互通 就 k 講是 -tàng 互轉 ê 轉注字 其實 所謂 ê 轉注字是 t 無 k ng 時空 無 k ng 空間 無 k ng 使用者 ê 情形之下必然 ê 變異體產物 所以轉注其實 是啥物 造字原則 莫怪近來 ê 六書研究者已經 t u-t u-á 將轉注排除在漢字造

247 CH 8. ᅖԆଝ kap ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ê ኈ! 245 字方法之外(裘錫圭 1995:125) 3.2. 漢字是進化無完全 ê 詞素音節文字 若按 六書 ê 原則 將漢字做分類 每一類佔 ê pasiantoh 有 g ach leh 按照李孝定 根據 甲骨文 六書爻列 六書略 三種分別代表無 k ng 時期 ê 漢字所做 ê 統計整理 -sái ùi 下面圖表 9 圖表 10 chit 2 張表看出每一類所佔 ê pasiantoh m -tàng ùi chia 看出漢字 ê 文字結構 t 歷史發展中 ê 演變過程 ք ฃ 12th A.D. ք ٨ 2nd A.D. ظ ڗ 14th-11th B.C. ڗ ᑇ ۍ ൎ 1.63 ൎ இ ൎ இ ൎ 100 ڗ ᑇ ۍ 3.84 ൎ 1.32 இ ൎ 1.21 ൎ ڗ ᑇ ۍ 2.50 ൎ 0.44 ൎ 3.05 ൎ 2.47 இ இ 0.07 ൎ இ 1.53 ൎ შߓ 9. ᅖԆϳਫആԆЩ پ ᅌᡑȄ

248 246! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н შߓ 10. ᅖԆϳਫആԆЩ پ ᅌᡑȄ Ùi 圖表 9 圖表 10 -sái 看出講 六書 l i-té ê 形聲字 比例 lú 來 lú 高 chhun--ê hit kúi 類 lóng lú 來 lú 低 咱若將六書(無包含 轉注 ) 圖表 11 án根據 in ê ޟ 語音單位 kap 演進階段 來 k 看 -sái 分析做圖 ne 因為形聲字比例 lú 來 lú 高 t chit-ê 圖 lìn -sái 看出漢字是 ùi 語詞文 字往詞素音節文字發展 ዝ ၸ ቹ ڗ ݮ რฤ ڗ Pictographic step Ideographic step ۯ Word ቹ ᆏ Logosyllable ᆏ Morphosyllable ڗݮ ਐࠃ ڗ ᜢฤ (ڗ ) Phonographic step ᄎრ ڗ ଗ ڗ შߓ 11. ᅖԆᅌ ê kap ߓܛ ұ ê ᇮॲ Ȅ ݮ ᜢ ڗ

249 CH 8. kap ê 247 ê koh kap kap t lìn lóng [ku ] () -koh soah [ku ] [ku ] [ku ] [kau] kng ê Kohpê-pê [ku ][ku] (eg. )[ku] () koh khah hàm [hu]() ê kúi kúi kng ê [ku ] kan-ta [ku ] koh [hu]sòa--lòe koh Án-ne ê beh án-choá kap -sái koh -sái 12 án-ne 12. -tm -lk-bk-chè kúi kng ê kúi kng ê ê ê -koh li-té êkap ê kap -kohli-té ê kap Koh pê-pê beh ê soah li-té 3 kng ê

250 248 kap -sái án-ne-tàng 4. ê kap ê ê -koh ch iáu ê chit-kóa 4.1. ê -sái ê ê ( 2005c) ê khah gâu ê ê hoan wordê syllable lóng ê cha-b female chit-ê ê iáu -koh ê tkê lóng chhe cha-b ê Koh chhit-thô to play ê ê ê sái ch ài ê khang-khòe Kám -sái (I have two dogs) m h t lìn tihiê t lìn tih án-ne chiah Iê

251 CH 8. kap ê 249 ê ê soah t chhe ê khang-khòe sá ê 1930 ê kap 1990 ê lóng khg t ê ( ) soah tih ê 4.2. ê kap ê kúi ê -sái lóng morpheme tih ê tih ê ê hm ê kng-khoánán-ne in kng-khoán/sam-tiau-kak/ San Diego kap -koh liáu tihkoh ê Siraya mata(eyes) ê -koh liáu hông kap ê polysyllablêê ê t êhm ê lóng ê ê -sái ê -tàng ê ê tkkang teh tih ê ê ê thang kng kng ê ê ê

252 250 kap têê l-bóe êhông ê ê -tàng ê Ch t-kóa tih ê ài Chit -sái ê ê hm ê hâm-h² êhm chit ê ê koh ê ê kan-ta kúi ê Chit ê kng -tàng kng ê 20 kap hm -koh tk lóng -tàng ê iáu Chit-êê -tàng ê hm ê (6) (7) (8) (6) li-té ê(sad) (difficult to cross)(7) li-té ê (safely trade) (sex trade in safety)chit ê -sái kín nan-kuo () nan kuo () (8) ê (8) ê sái ch (8a)(8d) tó khah tihlóng

253 CH 8. ᅖԆଝ kap ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ê ኈ! 251 tiáh m lóng -iáh 這 t ài 看 siáng 有 解釋權 若準你是科舉考試 ê 主考官 你講 tó 一種解釋 tiáh 伊 t tiáh (8a) 尊敬 孝敬 別人的長輩就像尊敬我們的長輩 (8b) 尊敬我們的長輩以及別人的長輩 (8c) 老 我確實很老了 但是還有很多人像我這麼老 (8d) 我雖然老 但是還有人比我老 實在講 文言文是一種進化無完全 ê 書寫方式 文言文會造成 語意模糊 照講是伊 ê 致命傷 -koh 長期以來 soah hþ hit-kóa 漢字既 得利益者 th h 來宣傳漢字 文言文 高深莫䳒 ê 假象藉口 4.3. 漢字束綁台灣文學 文化 ê 發展 台灣人因為對漢字有迷思 soah 無形中對台灣文學 kap 文化發展 產生影響 咱舉例說明如下 第一 限制 tiáh 台灣話文 ê 大眾性 kap 普遍性 因為 beh 讀有漢字 式台灣話文就 ài 先讀有漢字 致使 -hiáu 台灣話文漢字書寫 ê 人數比 一般 漢文 ê 人口 khah 少 俗語講 漢字若 beh 讀會 bat 嘴鬚就 phah 死結 就是 teh keng-thé 漢字歹學 ê 問題 4 T 1920 年代 ê 台灣 bat 漢字 ê 人 t 無 ch 台語 ê 書寫若倚靠 bat 漢字 ê 人口 自然會 lú hông 邊緣化 普遍 ê 國民文學自然就 khah oh 產生 第二 限制 tiáh 台灣話文 ê 標準化 近代國民文學 ê 形成 kap 民族 語言標準化是互相扶持共生 ê 漢字式台灣話文因為用漢字書寫致使 標準化 khang-khòe 真歹進行(鄭良偉 1990:194) 即種情形就親像越南使 用 字喃 k ng-khóan 雖然使用 chiâ 千冬=à -koh iáu 是無標準化(蔣 為文 2005a:90) 因為台語漢字無標準化 自然就降低伊 chiâ -chò 文學 4 ڶ ᣂዧ ڗ ê ᖂ ய Δ -sái ᔹᓏ (2005d)ΕChiung (2003)Ζ

254 252 kap ê hông beh tú tih ch t-kóa b Chitê sî-chn ch chhe ê t lìn lóng hông m hông ê ê (loanwords) ê ê ê thang án-ne chit-ê ê t 19 hm ch ê ê Beh án-choá kín koh ê chit-kóa kap neh chit-ê chiah (Kana) ê koh Bush t t -t koh hông kap Koh pháng croissant t lìn kám croissant kap pháng bagel kám khoà-kháu--chit tih ê t ê hm ê t-châi ( 2005b) t tih beh khiú pê-pê ê hm ê ê chn chhun ê () l-bóe tih soah t koh

255 CH 8. kap ê 253 seng à kap soah ê kap ê ê 17 chah ê kap 19 () ê ê ( 2005e)-koh b-chió soah khi t ê ùi kah 1920 koh chiah ê b chió ê niâ ánne soah chiâ ê ê ê ê kap ê kng ê -koh soah h 1945 ê ê ê ê k ê ê kap ê kín ê ( 2005b) 5. Gelb (1952) ê ê ê ê -t tm t kap ê t ê kap ê teh ê khah

256 254 kap ê ê Koh khah ê ê t ê bat =êkap bat =êê ê ke 1930 hit-kóa ê chai-iá 19 kap -tàng mài -tàng tán-ne ê -tàng ke chhia-i ê (nation-state)tng-tong hit-kóa ê ê ê -sái k chit-khoán án-ne kap ê soah t ê kap ê kng-khoán ( 2005e)hit-kóa ê kap ê t m -tàng h beh chiâ-chò ê ê ê chiah t tih tháu-pàng t

257 CH 8. kap ê 255 Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chen, Hsuan-Chinh; and Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) Language Processing in Chinese. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Cheng, Chao-Ming Lexical access in Chinese: evidence from automatic activation of phonological information. In Hsuan-Chih Chen & Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) pp Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. (Taiwan edition) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. DeFrancis, John How efficient is the Chinese writing system? Visible Language. Vol.30, No.1, p Flores d Arcais, Giovanni B Graphemic, phonological, and semantic activation processes during the recognition of Chinese characters. In Hsuan-Chih Chen & Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) pp Gelb, I. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Habein, Yaeko Sato The History of The Japanese Written Language. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Hall, Daniel George E A History of South-East Asia. (4 th ed.) London: The Macmillan Press. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in

258 256 kap Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Ledyard, Gari Keit The Korean Language Reform of 1446: the Origin, Background, and Early History of the Korean Alphabet. Ph.D. Dissertation: University of California, Berkeley. Li, Ledong The Role of Phonology in Rading Chinese Single Characters and Two-characters Words with High, Medium and Low phonological Regularities by Chinese Grades 2 and Grade 5 Students. Ph.D. dissertation: Oakland University. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Shih, Sang-Soon; Don-ju Lee; and Hwan-Mook Lee. (eds.) Understanding Hunmin-jong.um. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company. Shu, Hua; and Richard C. Anderson Learning to read Chinese: the development of metalinguistic awareness. In Jian Wang; Albrecht W. Inhoff; and Hsuan-Chih Chen pp Smalley, William. et al Orthography Studies. London: United Bible Societies. Taylor, Insup; and Taylor, Martin M Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins. Tzeng, Ovid. et al Auto activation of linguistic information in Chinese character recognition. Advances in Psychology. Vol.94, p Wang, Jian; Albrecht W. Inhoff; and Hsuan-Chih Chen Reading Chinese Script. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2 )

259 CH 8. kap ê a hm ê p b ê hm ê c ê ê p d p e ê p

260 258 kap

261 Ùi

262 260! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 咱所講 ê 漢字文化圈 是指卡早 bat ah 是 chín koh teh 使用漢字 ê 地區或者國家 包含越南 韓國 朝鮮1 日本 新加坡 台灣 kap 中 國等 若 ùi Benedict Anderson (1991) 想像 ê 共同體 (imagined communities) 觀點切入 t 漢字文化圈 lìn 19 世紀以前 lóng 有一種以中國為中心 透過漢字所形成 ê 漢字文化想像共同體 (an imagined Hanji cultural community) Chit 種 漢字文化想像共同體 (簡稱做 漢字共同體 ) 加加減減 lóng 影響 tiáh 漢字文化圈成員近代 ê 民族國家2 (nation-state) ê 國族想像建構 T 中國 in 利用 漢字共同體 chiâ 做近代 中華民族 或者 中國國族 ê 想像基礎 Hit-kóa 無法度跳脫漢字共同體 ê 壯族 苗族 瑤族 等 當然就無形成 in ka-t ê 民族國家 Ah hit-kóa 跳脫 漢字共同體 ê 舊成員 像講越南 韓國 朝鮮 kap 日本 lóng 重新建構以 ka-t 為主體 ê 民族國家 想像 若論到台灣 雖罔 t 17 世紀初因為荷蘭統治 soah 將台灣 sak chi 國際舞台 -koh sòa--lâi ê 鄭 成功 kap 清國統治 soah 將台灣 khiú 入去漢字文化圈 台灣 ê 漢字文化 特色 soah chiâ 做二次戰後中國國民黨 thang th h 來做中國國族想像 ê 基 礎 雖然 t 中華民國 統治時代台灣 ê 中國化 氣味真重 -koh 以台灣為民族國家想像 ê 本土化力量 m 一直 teh 提升 1 2 ψཛធωਐ ti ش ê ش ψ ק ឌωΔψឌഏωਐψতឌωΖ ء l i-té ê ا ගഏ୮ਢਐ 19 ધ ࠐא ê nation-state ᄗ ΖNation ਢਐ a society that occupies a particular territory and includes a sense of common identity, history, and destiny, nation-state ਢਐ a nation governed by a state whose authority coincides with the boundaries of the nation (Johnson 1995:188). Chit ê ಘᓵ m -sái ە ਜ إ ᔴ(2000)Ζ

263 CH 9. Ùi ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșпѯᢋ ঐ!ف 261 就 án-ne 台灣一方面有中國化 ê 力量 teh k khiú 另外一方面 m 有來自台灣本身 ê 本土化力量 teh 相 ián 一個新 ê 共同體 tang-sî chiah 會建構完成 t ài 看伊解構 舊共同體 ê 速度 換一句話講 以台灣 為主體 ê 民族國家想像 tang-sî chiah 會建立就 ài 看台灣何時 chiah 會行出 漢字共同體 Chit 篇論文 ê 研究目的就是 beh ùi 漢字文化圈 ê 視野探討 漢字文化 對近代 kap 當代台灣 teh 建構國家意識當中所造成 ê 影響 kap 伊解決 ê 法度 2. 漢字文化共同體 ê 想像基礎 2.1. 漢字文化圈 ê 歷史背景 Beh 了解漢字文化圈 ê 歷史背景 -sái ùi 2 個方向來看 第一 漢 字文化圈 ê 國家 h m 漢字發源地中國 ê 互動關係 第二 漢字文化圈 國家內部 ê 反封建 反知識壟斷 追求文化發展 ê 訴求 (蔣為文 2005f) 第一 ùi 漢字文化圈 ê 國家 h m 漢字發源地中國 ê 互動關係來 看 越南 韓國 kap 朝鮮 t 古早 lóng bat 乎中國直接統治過 就算後來 脫離中國來獨立 m lóng 一直維持是中國 ê 屬國 ê 附屬地位 公元 3 前 111 年 漢朝 ê 漢武帝出兵佔領越南 將越南納入中國 ê 直接統治 一直到公元 939 年 南越利用唐朝大亂 ê sî-ch n chiah 脫離中國 ê 直接統 治(Hodgkin 1981) 雖然越南人脫離中國來 獨立 -koh 越南必須承 認中國 ê 宗主國 ê 地位 chit-ê 情形一直延續到 19 世紀(SarDesai 1992:19) 公元前 108 年 漢武帝征服古朝鮮 設立 樂浪 真 番 臨屯 kap 玄菟 四郡 公元 4 世紀 tòa t 鴨綠江南北一帶 3 Hit ᅝழ Ꮖ ê ਢ chit-mái ê ত ק ຝΖ

264 262! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н ê 高句麗 人攻佔樂浪郡 結束來自中國 ê 直接統治 朝鮮半島 siosòa 形成 高句麗 Koguryo 百濟 Paekche kap 新羅 Silla 3 個王國 雖然脫離中國統治 大體上 iáu 是漢式制度 公元 668 年 新羅 統一 朝鮮了 積極模仿唐朝制度 sòa--lâi ê 高麗王 朝 koh 確立科舉制度 中國 ê 經書變做 朝鮮人 必 修 ê 課程 漢字 ê 正統 地位 m t chit-ch m 穩固起來(Taylor and Taylor 1995:203, ) 若論到日本 日本 ùi 先秦時代 t 有 h m 中國 接觸 ê 記錄 漢朝武帝 ê sî-ch n koh bat 賜 乎日本 漢委奴國王 金印 雖然日本 -bat 受中國統治 -koh 因為漢朝 h m 唐朝 ê 影響 力 中國 m 變做日本引進文物制度 模仿 ê 對象 像講 日本 t 7 世 紀 ê sî-ch n 所進行 ê 大化革新 就是模仿中國建立中央集權體制 ê 開 始(Seeley 1991:40) 漢字文化圈 ê 國家除了政治頂頭受中國支配之外 另外一個共同 特色就是借用 漢字 引進 儒家思想 kap 科舉制度 T 借用 漢字 ê sî-ch n in lóng tú-tiáh 漢字無法度完全表達 in ka-t ê 語言 ê 問 4 5 題 In t 利用 漢字 做 訓讀 音讀 或者造 新漢字 來 應付 chit-ê 問題 甚至後來根據 漢字 ê 字形慢慢發展出 in ka-t ê 新 6 文字系統 親像講越南 ê 字喃 Chu-Nom 朝鮮 ê Hangul kap 日本 ê 假名 Kana 雖然 in 有發展出 ka-t ê 文字 -koh chitkóa 新文字 -ta t 大中國 ê 政治 文化架構下面真歹生存 甚至 t in ka-t ê 國家內面 m 遭受既得利益 ê 文人統治階級 ê 輕視 kap 打壓 Chit4 5 6 ಝ Κଗ ش ዧ ͽ ڗ რ৸Δ ءش ഏ ߢ Ζ ΚBô-chhap ዧ ڗ ê რ৸Δkan-ta ଗ ش ዧ ڗ ê ዧ Δࠐ ሒ ء ഏ ê ᣊ ۿ Ζ Hangul:ψতឌω ڼ ழጠࡅឌഏ ڗ ψឌ ωê რ৸ΖHangul ਢཛធ ઔߒଫ ೯ ψࡌழᆖωΰchu Si-gyongαt 1913 ڣ Ղ ࠌ ش Ζ ק ឌጠࡅཛធ ڗ Chosoncha ΰཛធ ڗ αࢨ Chongum ΰ إ αζ

265 CH 9. Ùi 263 khoánchiâ-chòê ê 1920 ê chhiâ-ichiah tu-tu-á ( 2005fHannas 1997) Ùi ê ê chit-kúi-ê kap ê hm ê ê -ta chit ê hm ê kng ê t ê ê to be-liáu--á thang Chit l-bóe ê kap -bat ê ê 2.2. T li-té ê -sái (diglossia) kap(digraphia) ê kapchit 2 ê ê -koh (i ) ê Charles Ferguson (1959) diglossia ê ê 2 (two varieties of the same language) bôkng ê (social functions) koh chit 2 (High language) (Low language) khah ê kap t hông khah t kap

266 264 kap Joshua Fishman (1967) Ferguson ê diglossia kan-t -sái t li-té ê 2 i m thm -sái 2 Án-ne(digraphia)Dale (1980:5) ùi Ferguson ê m k () ê DeFrancis (1984:59) m kng-khoán ê (Chiung 2003:9) k Dale kap DeFrancis ê li-té ê bô-kng ê chit-khoán ê Fishman ê kng-khoán t kng ê tih ê( ) li-té ê án-chóa leh li-té bô-kng ê in ka-t ka-t ê -koh in hia ê pin beh ài ê ( ê ) ê hit ê t I hit-kóa in ka-t ê -koh pin ài ê ch t-lh hit-kóa koh in tih ê in ê kap hit-kóa ê li-té ê() kap ê Che m ê kng bô-kng ê ê t

267 CH 9. Ùi 265 kap hông khah seng chit-khoán ê t ê lìn iáu i ê lìnpin in teh tak ê lóng hông koh ê khah Chit t ê m iáu m ê tih m lm kóa kap Tê li-té// m in ê t ê koh án-choá t/ kui án-choá kan-t ùi //Hit-kóa soah m ê án-choá tih chit ê 2.3. ê kap ê ê tih ê kap ê t chia kan-ta -sái kéng ê -sái DeFrancis (1990)Gelb (1952)(2005c 2005e2005g) án-choá hông ê -sái

268 266! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 下面 chit 個例來說明 假使有一個講英語 ê 英國人 John beh 用漢字替英 語設計一套新 ê 漢字式文字系統 伊上代先有可能用(1) ê 漢字來表示(2) ê 英語語句 Chit 種方式就是漢字造字原則 六書 l i-té ê 假借 I 就是借用漢字 ê 讀音(t chia 借用北京音)來表記英語 ê 語音 kap 語意 (1) 哀黑夫土豆戈斯 (2) I have two dogs. (3) 人哀 有黑 有夫 土二 䵜豆 䵜戈 多斯 後來 John 驚人看 tiáh 語句(1) l i-té ê 漢字會受漢字字面 ê 語意誤 解 像講看 tiáh 哀黑夫 會誤解是 悲傷 ê 穿黑衫 ê 農夫 所以 John 就 t 原有 ê 漢字頂頭加 形旁 起去 像(3)所寫 ê án-ne 語句(3) chit 種做法就是所謂 ê 形聲字 後來 有另外一個英國人 Marry 伊感覺 John ê 用字無適合 所以 伊 k (2)寫做(4) ê 方式 (4) 人我 有黑 有孚 吐 䵜鬥 䵜哥 多司 LÞ-bóe koh 有一個英國人 Joe k (2)寫做(5) (5) 我 嘿 口孚 二 䵜斗 䵜各 多思 以上 Marry kap Joe 所寫 ê (4) (5) kám -sái 若就漢字造字原則來看 當然 m -sái 若 án-ne siáng 寫 ê 是標準 無人是絕對 ê 標準 m 無人 是絕對 ê 無標準 這就是 chit-khoán 漢字式新字無法度標準化 普遍化 ê 主因 T 漢字文化圈 lìn hit-kóa 利用漢字發展出來 ê 民族文字大概 -sái 分做 3 類 第一類是 t 漢字 ê 基礎頂頭依照漢字造字方法 特別是形聲 字 來創造新字 Chit-khoán ê 新文字 kap 漢字 k ng-khoán 屬 詞素音 節文字7 Chit-khoán ê 新文字有越南 字喃8 台灣 歌仔冊文字 7 ڶ ᣂ ढਢ ᆏ ڗ Δ ᔹ DeFrancis 1990Ζ

269 CH 9. Ùi ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșпѯᢋ ঐ!ف 中國 壯字 苗字 10 瑤字 (周有光 1997:98-108)等 Chit-kóa 字 ê 外形 kap 漢字真類似 造字原則大多數 kap 漢字 k ngkhoán 並無跳脫漢字 ê 思考模式 kap 造字方法 就文字讀寫 ê 效率來 看 chit-kóa 新文字比漢字 koh khah 複雜 歹學 若 beh 讀有 chit-khoán 字 通常就 ài 有漢字 ê 基礎 因為 bat 漢字 ê 人佔人口比例無高 而且 koh 是所有 bat 漢字 ê 人 lóng 會支持發展 chit-khoán 新字 所以 bat chitkhoán 漢字式新字 ê 人 m 無 ch 換一句話講 hit-kóa chò-sit 脫赤腳 ê 普羅大眾 k ng-khoán 真歹接近 使用 chit-khoán ê 漢字式新字 若 ánne 是啥款 ê 人 chiah 有法度操作 chit-kóa 漢字式新字 主要就是 hit-kóa 落魄 ê 文人 落魄文人 -sái 分作 2 類 一種是 ùi 權力核心 hông 趕出 來 不得志 ê 舊文人 一種是具備民族意識 進步 ê 文人 Chit-kóa 落 魄文人因為有漢字 ê 基礎 所以 chiah 有可能使用漢字式新字 落魄 ê 舊文人因為 ti -ti iáu 存有大中國 ê 封建思想 所以 m ti 反應 t in 用 新字創作 ê 作品 lìn 對照之下 若是 beh 有新思想 民族獨立觀通常 就 ài ùi 進步 ê 落魄文人 ê 作品 lìn 去 chh e 可惜 chit-kóa 進步 ê 落魄文 人用漢字式新字所寫 ê 作品因為通路無大 無法度 t 脫赤腳 ê 普羅大眾 之間普遍流傳 利用漢字發展出來 ê 民族文字 ê 第二類是 音節文字 伊典型 代表是日本 ê 假名 (Kana) 第三類是 音素文字 典型代表是韓 國 ê 諺文 (Hangul) 越南 t 17 世紀以後透過傳教士發展出來 ê 越南 羅馬字 (Chu Quoc Ngu) kap 台灣 t 17 世紀透過傳教士發展出來 ê 新 港文字 kap 19 世紀以後 ê 白話字11 (P h-o -j ) Chit 2 類 ê 文字 lóng 8 ቝᝑΔψ Կω(/ba/) ਢᑇ ڗ Ϙ3ϙê რ৸Ζ ቝᝑΔψ ᄎω(b )Εψߪ९ω(lò)Ζ 10 ቝᝑΔψՖԶω(/pa/) ਢϘഡՖϙê რ৸Ζ 11 ᇡาᓮ ᔹᓏ ʻ ˈ ʼʳΕᇀ ʻ ˇʼΖ 9

270 268 kap ê -sái ê Tng-tong hit-kóa ê chit ê ê -sái k chit-khoán án-ne kap ê soah t ê kap ê kng-khoán ( 2005h)hit-kóa êt m t 1930 bat ê ( 1992:245)L-bóe-chhiú tih t 1950 sak beh tih kap ê (Norman 1988: ; DeFrancis 1950: ; Barnes 1974)In ê soah ùi 3. ùi ê 3.1. peh chi 1492 Kholanpos (Christopher Columbus) 1 pái ê Gama (Vasco da Gama) t 1498 (The Cape of Good Hope) phah ê 15 ê tú ê Ttòe táu ê ê kap l-bóe ê t 1579 ê sòa--lâi

271 CH 9. Ùi 269 tu-tu-á ê t 17 beh thang hm ê ê kap L-bóe hm ài ê beh ê b ( 1980:58)T chit ê t 1624 t tú tih ê T chìn-chêng ê hit ê ê tiáu ê (Campbell 1903:vii)In ê koh t 1636 ê (Campbell 1903:147; Heylen 2001; 2003:20) pái ê chit ê koh hit hm ê ( 2005h) Anderson (1991:37-46)kap ê ê chit hit t 1661 ê kap lú lú ê ê ê 3.2. kap pài ê ê ê t 1661 ê

272 270! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 字文化圈 sak ê 頭一人(蔣為文 2005a 2005d) T 鄭氏王朝(公元 ) 統治台灣時期 in 推行漢字 儒學 設立科舉制度(林玉体 2003:37) 台灣就 án-ne hông giú--j p-khì 漢字文化圈 一直到 1895 年清國割讓台灣 乎日本 T 鄭氏王朝 kap sòa--láh ê 清國統治期間 官方一律使用漢字文言 文 雖罔官方用文言文 -koh 民間 m 有出現類似越南 字喃 ê 文 12 字 he t chia 咱 k 統稱做 歌仔冊文字 Chit-khoán 歌仔冊文字雖 罔講是用來寫白話台語 -koh hit-khoán ê 白話 kap 現代所講 ê 白話 bôk ng si ng-ke kan-t n -sái 講是 半白話 這是因為歌仔冊文字本身 ê 文字缺陷所造成 ê 漢字文化圈就是利用漢字文言文做為共同 ê 想像凝聚体 民間發 展出來 ê 字喃 或者 歌仔冊 雖然分別對越南 台灣 ê 個別民族意 識(national consciousness)有幫贊 -koh 因為官方 ê 打壓 kap 本身 ê 文字 缺陷(歹學 歹讀) soah 無法度發揮類似羅馬字 t 歐洲帶動近代西歐國家 國民文學 國民意識 ê 形成 ê 貢獻 總講一句 漢字文化圈 l i-té 有 2 款力量 一款是透過漢字文言文建構起來 ê 以中國皇帝為中心 ê 中國 吸引力 另外一款是透過 字喃 或者 歌仔冊 chit khoán ê 以在地 為中心 ê 本土化力量 漢字文化圈 l i-té ê 成員是 是有法度脫離中國形 成近代 ê 民族國家就 ài 看 chit 2 股力量 siáng khah 強 越南近代因為有外力 ê 介入 幫贊 in 切斷透過漢字文言文連起來 ê hit 條越南 h m 中國之間 ê 線 Koh 因為法國推行羅馬字 soah 乎越南 青瞑雞啄 tiáh 米 得 tiáh 改善越南語書寫效率 ê 工具 thang 提升本土 化力量 所以越南有法度 t 20 世紀解構漢字共同體 行向民族國家 ê 12 ڂ chit-khoán ڗ Օ ڍ ᑇ ش t ዚ םג Ζ ڶ ᣂዚ םג ê ୶Δ -sái ᔹԭᏕੴ (2005)Ζ

273 CH 9. Ùi ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșпѯᢋ ঐ!ف 271 建構(蔣為文 2005a) 3.3. 日本帝國 kap 漢字文化 台灣雖然 t 19 世紀尾 m 有外力介入 -koh 因為佔領台灣 ê 日 本 本身 m 是漢字文化圈 ê 國家 所以對台灣 beh 跳脫漢字共同體 ê 幫贊並無大 若準 1884 年 hit 當時清國 h m 法國之間為 tiáh 越南宗主權 歸屬問題所發生 ê 清法戰爭 (中法戰爭)延續落去而且法國同時佔領 台灣 kap 越南 án-ne 台灣 ê 近代史就 ài 改寫 而且台灣有可能用 白 話字 取代漢字 Án-chóa 講日本統治對台灣脫離漢字文化圈無 kài 大 ê 幫贊 雖然 日本自 1868 年 明治維新 以後就非常注重 脫華入歐 而且真重視 語文改革 h m 國民教育 ê 重要性(Seeley 1991: ) -koh 日本 ê 語 文改革 kan-ta 明顯提升 Kana ê 使用比例 並無完全廢除漢字 為啥物 日本無完全廢除漢字 neh 因為自 1931 年日本發動 滿州事件 開始全 力入侵中國東北以後 日本軍國主義者氣勢當 chhia -i In 為 tiáh 紀 錄所佔 ê 中國地名 kap 人名 ê 實質需要 soah 反對廢除漢字(Gottlieb 1995:75-88; Seeley 1991: ). 日本佔領台灣期間雖然一開始就有按算推行日本話 -koh in 對 漢字 iáu 是真敵視 日本總督甚至 ti 舉辦漢詩聯吟大會 招台籍文 人來官聽吟詩作對 thang giú 近台灣人 h m 日本人 ê 距離(施懿琳 2000: ) 日本人就是利用漢字文化圈 l i-té 漢字 ê 剩餘價值 來 做為軟化台灣人反抗 ê 工具 Che kap 法國人將漢字當作破壞法國 越 南關係 ê 第三者有完全 bô-k ng ê 觀點 13 因為日本政府對漢字無排斥 koh 加上 hit 當時 ê 台灣知識份子對 13 ԫऴ 1937 ڣ ᅮ chiah ᆃ ࠌ ش ዧ (ᆺ ف ᛑ 1993:59)Ζ

274 272! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 用羅馬字來做台灣話文 ê 書寫工具 m 無真看重 致使台灣失去用羅馬 字取代漢字 thang 切斷 h m 漢字文化圈 ê 關係 ê 機會 像講 日據時期 推行羅馬字上有力 ê 蔡培火 t 1924 年同化會 tng teh 鬧熱滾滾 ê 時建議推 行羅馬字 soah 無得 tiáh 重視 t 1931 年對日本官員 伊澤多喜男 遊說 使用羅馬字 m 得 tiáh 反對 ê 回應(張漢裕 2000:19-20) 4. 中華民國 kap 台灣共和國想像 ê 建構 公元 1945 年日本投降了 蔣介石代表聯軍接收台灣 kap 越南北部 14 為啥物 hit 當時 ê 台灣人會出現所謂 ê 歡迎祖國 ê 現象 若 beh 講 he 是歡迎祖國 中國 khah 輸講 he 是一種對漢字文化共同體 ê ¹g 望 咱 chìn-chêng 有講過 台灣雖然經過日本統治 -koh 台灣並無完 全脫離漢字文化共同體 雖然台灣 iáu 有漢字文化共同體 ê 特色 koh he koh h m 蔣介石所想像 ê 中華民族或者中國共同體無完全 k ngkhoán 蔣介石 k chit 個 bô-k ng 怪罪對台灣人受日本 ê 奴化 soah 無認 清 漢字文化共同體 kap 中國共同體 本 chiâ 就是 2 個無完全 k ng ê 層次 因為文化 ê 差異 加上經濟 ê 剝削 kap 政治 ê 壟斷 soah 引起 台灣 1947 年 ê 228 起義 因為 228 起義 ê 教訓 台灣人 chiah 覺醒講台灣 h m 中國是 bô-k ng ê 2 個個體 蔣介石 m 自 án-ne chiah 體會到 ài 徹底對台灣人實行中國 化政策 chiah -tàng 穩定中華民國 t 台灣 ê 生存空間 蔣介石就一方面 利用台灣原有 ê 漢字文化共同體特色 像講使用漢字 崇拜儒學 過 舊曆年 中秋 清明等 k 轉換做中國共同體 ê 想像基礎 另外一方 面就盡力斬斷台灣本土化 ê 根 像講推 sak 華語 禁止講台灣語言 禁 止使用羅馬字 透過出版品 媒體宣傳 kap 大中國 ê 教育系統 台灣 14 ڶ ᣂᓏտ ف ૨ၷ Ꮖ ত ê ז Δ -sái ᔹᓏ 2005aΖ

275 CH 9. Ùi 273 kín ê Chit t 1980 ê -koh ta ê iáu be t 2000 ta 7 -koh kap iáu 5 5 iáu koh hoah án-chóa ê iáu Che kúi iáu bat ka-t ê ê bat ê ê sòa--lâi ê ê m t ê ê ê lóng ài chit-khoán ê kh chit khoán ê ê ê Chit teh ê put-lí-á ch ê ch pái ê Chit ê -n ê khah m hit-chn ê iáu-be ethnic groups ê ê kap hit-chn ê kui-ê -bat hit tng teh ê ê lóng tg -tàng 1721 ê Tng-tong t phah ê sî-chn -koh tng hm phah ê ê m ê k-t m

276 274 kap khah sî-chn -koh soah ka-t tih chit hit-khoán ê ( 2005a) Koh koh tih ê soah lóng chù-táu m ( 2004) tchit-kóa ( ) ê tú-hó kap () ê ê Hitkóa li-té ê kap g tú-hó t beh tàn ê m ê Án-choá chit ê iáu ê ch ê ê -koh iáu in ka-t Chit ê ê kap chìn-chêng ê ê kng-khoán b chit-khoán ê t lìn m bat t 15 ê ( 2005f) 5. hit-kóa ê t ê án-ne Chit-ê beh án-choá khah leh

277 CH 9. Ùi 275 án-ne b iáu teh ê beh io gâu ài () kap ê ê kap kng-khoán ê ê b-sái ê niâ m in t sái b-sáit beh che ê ê iáu k ê teh ê koh hit-pêng m teh án-ne sak m ài chai-iá ài án-ne t ê ê mài hm I ài hit-kóa ê hitkóa -tàng ê án-ne chiah ê ê ch t-chm-á beh chiâ-chò ê ká-ná beh ê kng-khoánm ê kng-khoán hàm-ka-ka ánchoá chiah t chia t 2000 bat ê -koh t leh tih--ê In hia ê ê () 95% lóng chit-kóa ê

278 276 kap Chit-ê chiâ-chò ê I -t ê koh t

279 CH 9. Ùi 277 Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. (Originally published in 1983). New York: Verso. Barnes, Dayle Language planning in Mainland China: standardization. In Advances in Language Planning, Fishman, J.A.(ed.), Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, DeFrancis, John Nationalism and Language Reform in China. Princeton University Press. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. (Taiwan edition) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Ferguson, Charles Diglossia. Word 15, Fishman, Joshua Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 32(2), Gelb, I. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Gottlieb, Nanette Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in

280 278 kap Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Hodgkin, Thomas Vietnam: The Revolutionary Path. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd Johnson, Allan G The Blackwell Dictionary of Society. Oxford: Blackwell. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SarDesai D. R Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Taylor, Insup; and Taylor, Martin M Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins () San Jose: p

281 CH 9. Ùi a ê hm ê b hm ê p c teh ê p d p e p f ê p g ê ê p h ê p

282 280 kap

283 ê hm ê

284 282! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 越南 h m 台灣 k ng-khoán lóng bat 乎中國統治過 越南 bat 受中國 1000 外年 ê 直接統治(公元前 111-公元 939) 了後雖 然脫離中國 ê 統治來獨立 -koh iáu h m 中國維持一定 ê 宗藩關係 Chit-ê 宗藩關係一直維持到 19 世紀後半期法國 ê 介入了 chiah 開始有變 化 T 法國統治 beh kah 100 冬了 越南民族主義領導者胡志明 t 1945 年宣佈越南獨立 建立 越南民主共和國 換 t g 來看越南東北 pêng ê Formosa Ùi 中國來 ê 鄭氏政權 t 1662 年 正式佔領 統治台灣 Sòa--lâi ùi 1683 到 1895 年台灣由中國清朝統治 Koh lâi 1945 年到 ta (2007)台灣 koh 一擺乎中國來 ê 政權 中華民國 統治 若 ùi Benedict Anderson (1991) ê 想像 ê 共同體 (imagined communities) 切入 t 漢字文化圈1l i-té 19 世紀以前 lóng 有一種以中國做中心 透過 漢 字 所 形 成 ê 漢 字 文 化 想 像 共 同 體 (an imagined Hanji cultural community) Chit 種 漢字文化想像共同體 加減 lóng 有影響 tiáh chit 個文化圈 l i-té ê 成員 in 後來 ê 近代 民族國家 (nation-state) ê 國族想像 建構 T 中國 in 利用 漢字文化想像共同體 chiâ 做 in 近代 中華民 族 或者 中國國族 ê 想像基礎 Hit kóa 跳脫 漢字共同體 ê 舊成 員 像講越南 韓國2 朝鮮3 kap 日本 lóng 重新建構以 in ka-t 為主體 ê 民族國家 想像 若講到台灣 伊 iáu t 漢字共同體 ê 邊緣 kiâ ࢬᘯ ê ዧ ڗ എਢਐ bat ࢨش iáu teh ࠌ ش ψዧ ڗ ω ᐊߓอ ê ഏ୮ࢨ چ ΖᘣቝΔ Ε তΕཛធΕ ء ΕխഏΕଉ Εkap ᄅ (ࡕף ᓏ 2005)Ζ ਐࢬᘯ ê তឌΖ ਐࢬᘯ ê ק ឌΖ

285 CH. 10 ᅖԆНϾ ӔӤᡞ ê ᄻșșѯᢋ h m ࠓ ê Щၷ! 283 s h4 che 當然就反應 t 政治上 ê 獨 統紛爭 管台灣 h m 越南是自願 i 被迫 lóng 經過 中國國族想像 ê 時 段 對越南來講 現此時 in 已經徹底解構 中國國族想像 脫離 中國想像共同體 成功重建 越南想像共同體 -koh 對台灣 來講 國內各族群5對中國 iáu 有 bô-k ng 程度 ê 想像 kap ¹g-b ng 雖然 台灣運命共同體 ê 意識 tùi tiáh 1980 年代以來 ê 政治運動 ê 發展 m 有 chhiâ-i 浮頭 ê 趨勢 -koh 若 beh 講 台灣國族共同體 已經完成 想像 恐驚 á ài koh 等一段時間 一個新 ê 共同體 tang-sî chiah 會建構完成 t ài 看伊解構 舊共同 體 ê 速度 Chit 篇論文 ê 目的就是 beh 探討台灣 h m 越南之間 t 解構 漢字 共同體 中國國族想像 ê 過程當中有啥物 k ng-khoán 或者 bôk ng chiah 會造成現此時 chit 種 bô-k ng ê 政治局勢 下面咱就針對越南 h m 台灣 hông 納入 中國共同體 漢字共 同體 ê 歷史背景做紹介 kap 分析 台灣讀者對台灣 ê 歷史背景有 khah 了解 所以咱紹介台灣 ê 部分會 khah 簡省 thang k ke 出來 ê 篇幅用來 紹介越南 2. 越南 2.1. 越南 ê 中國共同體時期 越南傳說中第一個國家名號號做 文郎 (Văng Lan) he 是屬越 南 ê 鴻龐時代 (Hô ng Bàng) 大概是公元前 2879-前 258 年 sòa--lâi ê 4 5 ဎ ࢬᝑ êψ ωζ T chia ਐ ۰ ا Εড়୮ΕH -ló kap ࢬᘯ ઊԳ ê ᄅ۰ ا Ζᑉழ ץ chit 10 g a ࠐמ তࠅΕխഏࢨ چה ê ᄅᄅฝ ا Ζ

286 284! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 公元前 257-前 207 年是由 安陽王 建立 甌貉 國(Âu Lҥc)(Tran 1921:15) 秦始皇 t 公元前 221 年吞食六國 統一中原了 伊 koh 繼續出兵征 討 嶺南6 而且 t 公元前 214 年吞併嶺南地區 秦帝國 t 公元前 207 年崩盤了 伊 chìn-chêng ê 將領 趙佗 (越南話號做 TriӋu Ĉà)趁機會佔 領嶺南 t 公元前 204 年 7建立 南越國 用 番禺8 做首都(張榮 芳 黃淼章 1995:56-68 陳國強等 1988: ) 公元前 111 年中國漢朝 ê 漢武帝出兵消滅 南越國 koh t 當地設 交趾部 分做 9 郡 其中 3 郡 交趾 九真 kap 日南 相當 chit-mái 越南 ê 北部 kap 中北 部地區(Tran 1921:47) Ùi hit-ch m 開始越南第一 pái 乎中國納入版圖 che t 現 此 時 越 南 主 流 史 觀 lìn k 號 做 第 一 pái 北 屬 時 期 (Tran 2002:47) 9 趙佗 到底 beh 算是中國人 i 是越南人 Che t 越南 m bat 爭論 10 過 在我來看 趙佗 t 越南歷史 lìn 所扮演 ê 角色 kap 地位 t 親像 鄭成功 對台灣 k ng-khoán lóng 是 k 台灣/越南 h m 中國 liâm 做伙 ê 頭一人 若 是 beh 消滅 趙佗 ê 南越國 漢武帝可能 b hiah 緊 t k 越南納入中國版圖 若 是 beh 消滅 反清復明 ê 鄭成 功 清朝 m b hiah 緊 t 將台灣當作拓展版圖 ê 目標 自公元前 111 年中國漢武帝將越南納入中國版圖了 一直到 kah 公 元後 939 年 chit 1000 thóng 冬當中 除了少數短暫時間(公元 )起義抗暴成功之外 chhun--ê lóng 是越南乎中國直接統治 ê 時期 6 Օᄗઌᅝ ڼ ழխഏ ê ᐖ Εᐖ Ε௧ত kap ত ק ຝ Ζ ॲ৬ م ψত ഏωê ڶזڣ bô-k ng ê ᝑऄΚ তᖂ ຫ ८(Tran 1921:39) ΕDo Duc Hung (2001:13)ΕπՕ ಖ٤ ρ(1697 ठ) ê ಖሉਢֆցছ 207 ڣ Ζ 8 ઌᅝ ڼ ழխഏᐖ ઊᐖ ڠ Ζ 9 ڂ խഏ ۯ t ত ê ק pêngδࢬ א তԳ m ti ش ψ ק ωࠐ ق խഏζ 10 h m তዧ ઔߒ ٠દઔߒ ê ଡԳ ᓫΖ 7

287 CH. 10 ê hm ê 285 Chit hông ê ê sî-chn Chit ê êlìn hit ê Che hm 20 ê nation-state ê kng-khoán THit ê t kap ê Hit ê (S Nhip) in beh ê chiah (qun Thng Ngô) ê(qung Tín) hit Ùi sóa hit (S Vng)(Tran 1921:53) T hit 200 khah bat khah gâu m ( ) ê chiah (Lý Tin) hông kap ê(lý Cm) lóng sak -sái ê kap kng-khoán -sái t ùi in 2 (Tran 1921:52) T ê m ê ê (Trng Trc)(Trng Nh) áin 2 ê tih ( 40-43)m ê ê (Triu u)t 248 hit ê (Lý Bôn) t 542 koh t ( ) kap ( ) L-bóe koh ê

288 286 kap (Phùng Hng) ê m (B Cái i Vng) ùi in (B) (Cái)ê chit ê (Ch Nôm) puh í ê sî-chn 2.2. ê ê chit 939 (Ngô Quyên) chiah ê -koh iáu ài k ê Chit kah 19 chiah chiâ(sardesai 1992:19) T ê hit 1000 thóng in ka-t ê kap ( ) kap ( ) ùi kapthang ê koh iáu ê (SarDesai 1992:21) ê (Tran Trong Kim ) lóng teh kan-ta m t kiâ...(tran 1921:8) kap ê ê t ê hông kap che t ê t liáuin ê

289 CH. 10 ᅖԆНϾ ӔӤᡞ ê ᄻșșѯᢋ h m ࠓ ê Щၷ! 287 語 所以民間慢慢仔發展出具有越南特色 ê 字喃 所謂 ê 字喃 是指南方(相對中國來講)ê 文字 ê 意思 因為欠標準化 字字喃 m sái 寫作 字宁喃 字字 字南 早期 ê 字喃主要是做漢字 ê 輔助工具 用來紀錄地名 人名 kap 地方特產等(Nguyen 1999:2) T 累積 kúi 百年 使用 ê 經驗 liáu t 13 世紀 chiah 有字喃 ê 文學作品 ê 出現 11 ah t 16 至 18 世紀之間達到高潮 12 字喃 ê 使用者主要是 th¹g 赤腳 ê 平民 落魄文 人 僧侶 kap 少數有強烈民族意識 ê 精英 一般來講 字喃主要用 t 紀錄民間口傳文學 創作純越南話文學 翻譯佛經 kap 替漢字作注 音 註解(Nguyen 1999) 雖然 t 布蓋大王 時期 t 出現 字喃 而且 ùi 10 世紀以後 lú 來 lú ch 字喃 出現 -koh 字喃 -t 無得 tiáh 當權 ê 越南朝 廷 ê 支持 甚至遭受來自國內 kap 國外(中國) ê 打壓 為啥物會有 chit khoán 反本土 現象 neh -sái 分析做下面 chit kúi 點因素 第一 受中國漢字文化價值觀 ê 影響 因為漢字 t 中國是唯一 ê 文 字正統 ah 越南 koh 奉中國做宗主國 致使越南各朝廷 敢侵犯漢字 ê 正統地位 換一個角度來看 越南各朝廷用接受越南 hông 納入 漢字 文化共同體 做為交換 in 政治上獨立 ê 條件 用現此時台灣 ê 用語來 講就是 政治越南 文化中國 Chit 種現象 t 現此時 ê 台灣政治界 文化界 m 是非常普遍 就是所謂 ê 政治台灣 文化中國 真 ch 台灣派 ê 政客 文化人雖然平時會講台語 -koh 真正到正式場合 制 定文化政策 ê 時 soah lóng 認為台語無法度 登大雅之堂 k 台語 當作 àu 鹹菜 tàn t 邊仔 第二 乎科舉制度束縛 ê 關係 因為越南各朝代 lóng k 漢字當做 ᖕ ژ ê ᖂ ࢬזڣ ᓵឰΖ H m Nguyen Thanh Xuan ê ଡԳ ᓫΖ

290 288! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 正統 m k 列 t 科舉考試 l i-té 所以 hit koá 想 beh 做官 通過考試 ê 人就 b -sái 無學 Tng-tong 即 koá 人考試入取 功成名就 liáu in 為 tiáh 維護 ka-t ê 既得利益 當然就繼續擁護漢字 ê 正統地位 Che 就 kap 現 此時台灣人 tú tiáh ê 情形 k ng-khoán hit kóa 經過中華民國 ê 中國語文 教育出來 ê 上層精英 政治人物 作家 老師 lóng 是 中文 ê 既得利 益者 除了少數 ê 例外 beh 叫 hit kóa 中文既得利益者支持使用台文 恐驚是真 oh 第三 字喃先天 ê 文字結構缺陷 字喃主要是按形聲 ê 方式 結 合 2 個漢字(1 個表音 1 個表意) chiân 做 1 個新 ê 字喃字 字喃除了繼承 漢字本身 ê 缺點 m 生 thoàn 出 koh khah ch ê 問題 像講 台語 ê t 越南話 lìn ê 壋 (漢越音/le/)用來 暗示 的發音 字 t 字喃 lìn 寫做 字字 少年 寫做 發音/tre/ 小 用來表示 少年 ê 意思 Ùi chia -tàng 看出字喃其實是比漢字 khah 複雜 歹學 ê 一般來講 beh 讀有字喃 就 ài 先 bat 漢字 chiah 有 châi-ti u 讀 因為字喃複雜 kap 無標準化 所以造成伊 ê 推展 ê 困難 m 乎 hit kóa 擁護漢字者有藉口 推行字喃 咱 -sái 講 越南 ùi 10 到 19 世紀當中 雖然 t 政治上脫離中國統 治 不過 t 文化上 iáu 是 hông 納入 漢字文化共同體 l i-té 2.3. 越南 ê 越南想像 越南人有法度跳脫 漢字文化共同體 che kap 法國 t 19 世紀後 半期以後介入越南--中國有關係 公元 1858 年 法國利用傳教士受迫害做藉口聯合西班牙軍艦向越 南中部 ê 峴港( à NçѺng)出兵(Tran 1921: ) 越南末代朝廷 阮朝 phah b 過法軍 為 tiáh 求和只好 t 1862 年簽訂 第一次西貢條約 割 讓南部 嘉定 邊和 kap 定祥 三省乎法國(Tran 1921:523)

291 CH. 10 ᅖԆНϾ ӔӤᡞ ê ᄻșșѯᢋ h m ࠓ ê Щၷ! 289 當然法國並無 án-ne 就滿足 in koh 繼續侵佔其他各省 越南 b kham-chit 法國 ê 軍事壓力 sòa 尾 t 1883 年 kap1884 年分別簽訂 第一次順化 條約 (HiӋp ѭӟc Harmand) kap 第二次順化條約 (HiӋp ѭӟc Patenôtre) 承認法國是越南 ê 宗主國 越南遭受法國襲擊 ê 時 m bat 向中國求 援 -koh hit 當時 ê 中國已經自身難保 無法度有效阻擋法軍 ê 侵略 (龍章 1996) LÞ-bóe 中法雙方 t 1885 年簽定協議停戰 ê 天津條約 T 條約 l i-té 中國正式放棄對越南 ê 宗主國地位 koh 承認越南改由法國 保護(Tran 1921:577) 法國殖民者統治越南 ê 時 in 認為中國是法國 kap 越南之間 ê 第三 者 對法國統治越南有潛在 ê 威脅 若 beh 將越南 kap 中國永久割開 就 ài 將連接 in 2 國之間 ê 線切斷 因為越南長期以來 lóng k 中國奉做 宗主國 m 透過漢字學習中國文化 kap 價值觀 假使乎越南人繼續使 用漢字就等於是乎越南保持 h m 中國 ê 親密關係 所以法國認定連接 越南 中國之間 ê hit 條線就是 漢字 為 tiáh 乎越南斷絕 h m 中國 ê 關係 thang 親近法國 無將漢字提掉 b -sái (DeFrancis 1977:77) 13法國 人想出來 ê 策略是用 羅馬字 取代漢字 In 認為越南人若 -tàng 接 受羅馬字 án-ne 未來 beh koh 進一步接受 法文 ê 可能性就 lú 高 法 國人所推行 ê 羅馬字就是 t 17 世紀經由傳教士傳入越南 t 越南教會界 使用 200 外冬 ê 羅馬字(蔣為文 2005a, 2005b) 雖然法國殖民者推 sak 羅馬字 ê 最後目的是推廣法文 -koh 伊無 形中 soah 提供越南羅馬字初期成長 ê 奶水 像講 法國殖民者 k 羅馬 13 ቝᝑ 1866 ڣ Δ1 ଡऄഏ چا ਙ Paulin Vial t 1 ޅ lìn ದᝑ From the first days it was recognized that the Chinese language was a barrier between us and the natives ; it is the only one which can bring close to us the Annamites of the colony by inculcating in them the principles of European civilization and isolating them from the hostile influence of our neighbors (quoted in DeFrancis 1977:77)Ζ

292 290 kap soà--lâi t 1865 ê Gia Dinh Bao() m ùi hit chm Ch Quôc Ng() (Vien Van Hoc 1961:22) hm 1885 ê Tâi-oân-hú-siâ n Kàu-ho-pò() kng-khoán chha ê ê t 1882 ê ài ê (Vien Van Hoc 1961:22-23) tih ê in t 1915 kap 1919 kap ê (Nguyen 1998:48) t ê sak t 19 khah -koh ê iáu (DeFrancis 1977:69) ê ài 20 t ê ê chiah ê (DeFrancis 1977:159) t ê pin ê hông ê -koh t tih ê liáuin ê k chiâ n ê Ti 1900 chìn-chêng ê iáu kiò-s t -koh iáu hm ê ê tih ê kap ê in hit kóa ê m chia ê 3 hm kui-khì (SarDesai 1992:14) ui 20 chhia-i òngkóng ê ê ê

293 CH. 10 ᅖԆНϾ ӔӤᡞ ê ᄻșșѯᢋ h m ࠓ ê Щၷ! 291 提供 ê 是一種跛腳 ê 殖民教育 -koh 乎越南人透過 chit 個新式教育 tàng 比傳統教育 khah ch 機會來接觸 民族主義 民族國家 民主 kap 科學 等 ê 新觀念 第二 20 世紀初民族主義潮流 ê 影 響 超過 10 萬 ê 越南人法國兵 t 第一次世界大戰( )替法國做軍 伕 ê sî-ch n 對 hit 當時 ê 民族主義熱潮有真深 ê 印象 加上 hit ch n 美國 總統 Hui-o-son (W. Wilson)發表民族自決 ê 聲明 m 乎各地 ê 民族運動 真大 ê 鼓舞 20 世紀初鼓吹羅馬字 ê 民族主義運動 ê 頭一個代表性團體算是 東京義塾 14 東京義塾 t 越南所扮演 ê 角色就 ká-ná 20 年代 ê 台 灣文化協會 兩者 ê 差別是 文化協會 並無注重羅馬字 kan-tan 倡 導漢字白話文 即個差別 tú-hó 注定羅馬字 t 台灣 h m 越南有無 k ng ê 發展命運 東京義塾 ê 成員主要是一寡留學日本 ê 越南知識份子 In t 1907 年 t 河內15(Ha Noi)設立 東京義塾 學校 thang 傳授西方思想 kap 科學新知等 In 認定若 beh 達成啟發民智 ê 目的 無教羅馬字 b -sái 所以 東京義塾 ê 第一要務就是 beh 普及羅馬字 in beh 透過羅馬字 來教育民眾 乎大眾有知識 thang 對抗法國殖民統治 東京義塾 雖然成立無到 1 冬就乎法國殖民者強迫關門 -koh in ê 主張 soah t 知 識份子之中普遍得 tiáh 認同 h m 支持 T in ê 影響之下 推廣羅馬 字 soah chiân 做越南民族主義者 ê 普遍主張 kap 推動要點 m 引起一 ch n 興學 辦羅馬字報紙 ê 風潮(Vuong & Vu 1980:20-32) 根據估計 到 kah 1930 年為止 全越南量約仔有 75 種 ê 羅馬字報紙(Hannas 1997:86) 雖然羅馬字 t 越南民族主義者 ê 推 sak 之下有真大 ê 成就 -koh 14 H m Nguyen Quang Hong ê ଡԳ ᓫΖ ڶ ᣂψ ࠇᆠቻωΔm -sái ᔹ Marr (1971: )Ζ 15 փਢ ত ؾ ছ ê ଈຟΖ

294 292 kap t hit chn Ti 1945 chìn-chêng ham kap iáu hông ê kap koh khah in ê Ho Duy Kien ti 1931 ê kap t ê Gascogne BrittanyNormandy Provence ê kng-khoán k-l ê beh ê ài liáu 500 ê (DeFrancis 1977) ê t 1945 liáu chiah ê t liáu t 9 8 sûi ê 1945 bat ê 20%t liáu % (DeFrancis 1977:240) -tàng ùi ê ch ê kap t kap àn-sg chiâ n ê thang ê T 40 tih soah àn-sg thh ê thang ê ê-koh hit iáu ê koh k koh thh tg-khì ê lìn ê án-choá n ê thang tih ê m soah ê ( 1971:107) ê ( 1971: )T pn-sè chiâ n ê

295 CH. 10 ᅖԆНϾ ӔӤᡞ ê ᄻșșѯᢋ h m ࠓ ê Щၷ! 293 好選擇 T 1945 年日本投降了 蔣介石軍隊代表聯軍接收台灣 kap 越南北 部(北緯 16 以上) k ng sî-ch n 越南南部是由英國代表接收(Le 2001:10; Bo 2003:69;楊碧川 1998:103) Hit 當時蔣介石派 盧漢軍 20 萬兵進入 越南河內 蔣介石 ê 軍隊一進入河內 kap hit kóa 來台灣 ê 軍隊 k ngkhoán 軍紀真 bái 像講食物件 坐車 付錢 而且 koh 將傳染病 chah 入來越南16 蔣介石佔領越南北部 ê 時要求越南 ài 負擔所有軍糧 ê 開 銷 koh 同時扶持 越南國民黨 (Viêҕt Nam quô c dân aѵng) kap 越南革 命同盟會 (Viêҕt Nam cách maҕng ô ng minh hôҕi) beh 介入越南 ê 政治(Le 2001:10; Bo 2003:76-77) 胡志明 bat t 中國 tòa--kòe m bat 坐過中國國民 黨 ê 監 13 個月 所以伊對中國人 ê 野心真了解 伊 bat 講過 若 beh 一世人食中國人 ê 屎 khah 輸暫時鼻法國人 ê 臭屁 (楊碧川 1998:105) 胡志明看 是勢 驚蔣介石 ê 越南 ê 力量 lú 來 lú 大 所以伊用計乎蔣 介石離開越南 伊 t 1946 年 3 月初 6 h m 法國代表 Sainteny 簽訂 六三 協定 (Hiêҕp iҕnh sѫ bôҕ 6-3) 內容包含 承認越南民主共和國是 France 聯合 (Liên hiӌp Phát) ê 一部份 享有獨立 ê 政府 國會 軍隊 kap 財 政 越南政府同意法國 1 萬 5 千名軍隊進入北部 thang 換掉中國國民黨 ê 軍隊 而且 chit 1 萬 5 千名法國兵 ài t 5 冬內撤退(Bo 2003:78) 胡志明 就是利用法國 kap 國際局勢逼蔣介石退出越南 當蔣介石退出越南 ê 時 胡志明同時 koh 準備 kap 法國 ê 游擊戰 Che 是 hit 當時真有名 ê 故 事 t 越南 ê 高中歷史教科書 lóng 有記載(Bo 2003) Hit 當時 ê 台灣知識 份子就是無 chit khoán ê 對中國 ê 戒心 chiah 會乎蔣介石 乞食趕廟公 佔領台灣 還 內在因素是指反封建 反知識壟斷 ê 廣大需求 就親像胡志明所 16 H m ত Ε ټ ୮ψ႓ ω(hoàng Tiê n) ê ଡԳ ᓫΖ

296 294! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 講 ê án-choán 乎 hiah ch 無受教育 ê 群眾有新知識 thang 乎國家富強是 足要緊 ê 代誌(Ho 1994:64-65) T 19 世紀以前 ê 越南封建社會 lìn in 唯一 外來 ê 主要威脅是中國 t hit 種情形之下 採用漢字雖然會造成多數 ê 勞苦階級 chiân 做青暝牛 -koh án-ne 做 -sái 消除中國 ê 侵略慾 koh tàng 滿足越南封建朝廷 ê 既得利益 -koh 到 kah 20 世紀 liáu 越南 ài 應付 ê -t n 中國 niâ ài koh 應付 sio-soà 來 ê 西歐 kap 日本帝國主義 字 喃雖然有越南民族特色 -koh soah seng 複雜 kap 歹學 對照之下 簡 單 好學 ê 羅馬字就 chiân 做啟發民智 對抗外來統治 ê 上好選擇 雖 然胡志明 t 1945 年就宣佈越南獨立 -koh 一開始並無任何國家承認 而且引起法國 捲土重來 ê 攻擊 lþ-bóe koh 美國介入南北越內戰 -sái 講自 1945 到 1975 年之間越南 lóng 是屬於戰亂 ê 時期 戰亂時期哪 有啥物 li ng-si ng ê 資源 thang 好做 bat 字 ê 教育 T 資源有限 ê 狀況之 下 羅馬字當然是上好 ê 選擇 越南 ê 民族主義領導者 t 覺悟 tiáh 時代 ê 變遷 liáu chhân-chhân 決定採用羅馬字 T 掌握 tiáh 多數民眾是青 暝牛 kan-tan 少數既得利益者 bat 漢字17 ê 情形之下 用全國 ê 力量來 推 sak 羅馬字 當然真 kín 就收 tiáh 效果 3. 台灣 台灣 ê 共同體 歷史經驗 tú-hó kap 越南 tò-péng 台灣 ùi 世界 ê 一部份 t 17 世紀後半期 hông 納入漢字文化圈 l i-té 雖然日本 t chit 段期間介入統治台灣 -koh 伊對台灣脫離漢字文化共同體 ê 幫贊真有限 致使蔣介石軍隊 t 1945 年代表聯軍接收台灣 ê 時有法度 用漢字文化圈 ê 特色製造中國共同體 ê 假象 17 ԫ ࠐᝑΔϘ ޣ բᆖ -hiáu ਬጟ ڗ ê Գᖂᄅ ê ߓڗ อϙ Ϙ bat ڗ ê ψॹዅ ω װ ᄅ ߓڗ อϙkhah ᣄΖቝᝑΔStubbs (1980:72) ਐ נ ᅝ ભ ഏ ê פګ ޏڗ ê ᣂ ਢ ا ฒ beh ៱ ޏ ክ Ζ

297 CH. 10 ê hm ê Ùi ê 1492 Kholanpos (Christopher Columbus) 1 pái ê Gama (Vasco da Gama) t 1498 (The Cape of Good Hope) phah ê 15 ê tú ê Ttòe táu ê ê kap l-bóe ê t 1579 ê sòa--lâi tu-tu-á ê t 17 beh thang hm ê ê kap L-bóe hm ài ê beh ê b ( 1980:58)T chit ê t 1624 t tú tih ê T chìn-chêng ê hit ê ê tiáu ê (Campbell 1903:vii)In ê koh t 1636 ê (Campbell 1903:147; Heylen 2001; 2003:20) pái ê chit ê koh hit hm ê ( 2005d) Anderson (1991:37-46)kap ê ê chit hit t 1662 ê kap lú lú ê

298 296! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 共通語 扮演以平埔族為主體 ê 台灣民族意識 ê 催化劑 可惜台灣平埔族透過新港語想像運命共同體 ê 時間無夠長 就因 為中國明朝遺將 鄭成功 t 1661 年領軍進攻台灣來中斷 鄭成功就類似越南歷史中 ê 趙佗 是透過軍事 政治將台灣往漢 字文化圈 sak ê 頭一人 T 鄭氏王朝(公元 )統治台灣時期 in 推 行漢字 儒學 設立科舉制度(林玉体 2003:37) 台灣就 án-ne hông giú-j p-khì 漢字文化圈 一直到 1895 年清朝割讓台灣乎日本 T 漢字文化圈 l i-té 有一個共同 ê 特色 就是官方 t 文教 行政 正式場合一定是用漢字文言文書寫 -koh t 民間 in 有可能修改漢 字 或者造新文字 thang 配合 in ê 口語(蔣為文 2005c) Che 無形中就形 18 成一種 高低文字 (digraphia ) ê 現象 Chit 種現象 t 早期 ê 越南就是 漢字(高階文字)vs.字喃(低階文字) 若論到台灣 早期民間 m 有出現 類似字喃 ê 文字 he t chia 咱 k 統稱做 歌仔冊文字 漢字文化圈就是利用漢字文言文做為共同 ê 想像凝聚体 民間發 展出來 ê 字喃 或者 歌仔冊 雖然分別對越南 台灣 ê 個別民族意 識(national consciousness)有幫贊 -koh 因為官方 ê 打壓 kap 本身 ê 文字 缺陷(歹學 歹讀) soah 無法度發揮類似羅馬字 t 歐洲帶動近代西歐國家 國民文學 國民意識 ê 形成 ê 貢獻 總講一句 漢字文化圈 l i-té 有 2 款力量 一款是透過漢字文言文建構起來 ê 以中國皇帝為中心 ê 中國 吸引力 另外一款是透過 字喃 或者 歌仔冊 chit khoán ê 以在地 為中心 ê 本土化力量 漢字文化圈 l i-té ê 成員是 是有法度脫離中國形 成近代 ê 民族國家就 ài 看 chit 2 股力量 siáng khah 強 18 Dale (1980: 5)ല digraphia ᆠ the use of two (or more) writing systems for representing a single language. DeFrancis (1984: 59) ᆠ the use of two or more different systems of writing the same language. Chiung (2003:9) k in ê ᆠଥ ޏ the use of more than one writing varieties to serve different communicational tasks within a society.

299 CH. 10 ᅖԆНϾ ӔӤᡞ ê ᄻșșѯᢋ h m ࠓ ê Щၷ! 297 越南近代因為有外力 ê 介入 幫贊 in 切斷透過漢字文言文連起來 ê hit 條越南 h m 中國之間 ê 線 Koh 因為法國推行羅馬字 soah 乎越南 青瞑雞啄 tiáh 米 得 tiáh 改善越南語書寫效率 ê 工具 thang 提升本土 化力量 所以越南有法度 t 20 世紀解構漢字共同體 行向民族國家 ê 建構 台灣雖然 t 19 世紀尾 m 有外力介入 -koh 因為佔領台灣 ê 日 本 本身 m 是漢字文化圈 ê 國家 所以對台灣 beh 跳脫漢字共同體 ê 幫贊並無大 若準 1884 年 hit 當時清國 h m 法國之間為 tiáh 越南宗主權 歸屬問題所發生 ê 清法戰爭 (中法戰爭)延續落去而且法國同時佔領 台灣 kap 越南 án-ne 台灣 ê 近代史就 ài 改寫 而且台灣有可能用 白 19 話字 (P h-o -j ; 台語羅馬字 )取代漢字 Án-chóa 講日本統治對台灣脫離漢字文化圈無 kài 大 ê 幫贊 雖然 日本自 1868 年 明治維新 以後就非常注重 脫華入歐 而且真重視 語文改革 h m 國民教育 ê 重要性(Seeley 1991: ) -koh 日本 ê 語 文改革 kan-ta 明顯提升 Kana ê 使用比例 並無完全廢除漢字 為啥物 日本無完全廢除漢字 neh 因為自 1931 年日本發動 滿州事件 開始全 力入侵中國東北以後 日本軍國主義者氣勢當 chhia -i In 為 tiáh 紀 錄所佔 ê 中國地名 kap 人名 ê 實質需要 soah 反對廢除漢字(Gottlieb 1995:75-88; Seeley 1991: ). 日本佔領台灣期間雖然一開始就有按算推行日本話 -koh in 對 漢字 iáu 是真敵視 台灣總督甚至 ti 舉辦漢詩聯吟大會 招台籍文 人來官廳吟詩作對 thang giú 近台灣人 h m 日本人 ê 距離(施懿琳 2000: ) 日本人就是利用漢字文化圈 l i-té 漢字 ê 剩餘價值 來 做為軟化台灣人反抗 ê 工具 Che kap 法國人將漢字當作破壞法國 越 19 ᇡาᓮ ᔹᓏ (2005a) Εᇀ (2004)Ζ

300 298! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 南關係 ê 第三者有完全 bô-k ng ê 觀點 20 因為日本政府對漢字無排斥 koh 加上 hit 當時 ê 台灣知識份子 對用羅馬字來做台灣話文 ê 書寫工具 m 無真看重 致使台灣失去用羅 馬字取代漢字 thang 切斷 h m 漢字文化圈 ê 關係 ê 機會 像講 日據時 期推行羅馬字上有力 ê 蔡培火 t 1924 年同化會 tng teh 鬧熱滾滾 ê 時建議 推行羅馬字 soah 無得 tiáh 重視 t 1931 年對日本官員 伊澤多喜男 遊 說使用羅馬字 m 得 tiáh 反對 ê 回應(張漢裕 2000:19-20) 3.2. 台灣 ê 中國共同體 公元 1945 年日本投降了 蔣介石代表聯軍接收台灣 kap 越南北 部 為啥物 hit 當時 ê 台灣人會出現所謂 ê 歡迎祖國 ê 現象 若 beh 講 he 是歡迎祖國 中國 khah 輸講 he 是一種對漢字文化共同體 ê ¹g 望 咱 chìn-chêng 有講過 台灣雖然經過日本統治 -koh 台灣並無完 全脫離漢字文化共同體 雖然台灣 iáu 有漢字文化共同體 ê 特色 koh he koh h m 蔣介石所想像 ê 中華民族或者中國共同體無完全 k ngkhoán 蔣介石 k chit 個 bô-k ng 怪罪對台灣人受日本 ê 奴化 soah 無認 清 漢字文化共同體 kap 中國共同體 本 chiâ 就是 2 個無完全 k ng ê 層次 因為文化 ê 差異 加上經濟 ê 剝削 kap 政治 ê 壟斷 soah 引起 台灣 1947 年 ê 228 起義 因為 228 起義 ê 教訓 台灣人 chiah 覺醒講台灣 h m 中國是 bô-k ng ê 2 個個體 蔣介石 m 自 án-ne chiah 體會到 ài 徹底對台灣人實行中國 化政策 chiah -tàng 穩定中華民國 t 台灣 ê 生存空間 蔣介石就一方面 利用台灣原有 ê 漢字文化共同體特色 像講使用漢字 崇拜儒學 過 20 ԫऴ 1937 ڣ ᅮ chiah ᆃ ࠌ ش ዧ (ᆺ ف ᛑ 1993:59)Ζ

301 CH. 10 ê hm ê 299 k ê ê kap ê kín ê Chit t 1980 ê -koh ta ê iáu be t 2000 ta koh kap iáu 5 5 iáu koh hoah án-chóa ê iáu Che kúi iáu bat ka-t ê ê bat ê ê sòa--lâi ê ê m t ê ê ê lóng ài chit khoán ê kh chit khoán ê ê ê m ê k-t m khah sî-chn -koh soah ka-t tih chit hit khoán ê Koh koh tih ê soah lóng chù-táu m ( 2004) tchit kóa ê tú-hó kap () ê ê Hit kóa li-té ê kap g tú-hó t

302 300 kap beh tàn ê Án-choá chit ê iáu ê ch ê ê -koh iáu in ka-t Chit ê ê kap chìn-chêng ê ê kng-khoán b kap ê chiah ê 4. hm pê pê lóng bat ùi kah ê hm l-bóe soah hông chha j p ê Chit teh ê put-lí-á ch ê ch pái ê Chit ê -n ê khah m hit-chn ê iáu-be ethnic groups ê ê kap hit-chn ê kui-ê -bat hit tng teh ê ê lóng tg -tàng e Tng tong t phah ê sî-chn -koh tng hm phah ê ê

303 CH. 10 ê hm ê 301 beh chiâ ê ê ài ê kap ê m ài ê soah t

304 302! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 參考冊目 Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. (Originally published in 1983). New York: Verso. Bôҕ Giáo Duҕc và ào Taҕo Li ch S 12 Tâ p hai [ խᖵ ԿรԲ ]ם. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Giáo Duҕc. Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, DeFrancis, John Colonialism and Language Policy in Vietnam. The Hague. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), ôѻ, ѭ c Hùng Biên Niên S Viê t Nam [ তᒳ ] ڣ. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Thanh Niên. Gottlieb, Nanette Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Ho Chi Minh Ho Chi Minh: Selected Writings Hanoi: The Gioi. Lê, Mâҕu HaѺn & Trâ n Bá êҕ & NguyêѺn Vçn Thѭ a i C ng Li ch S Viê t Nam [ তᖵ Օጼ]. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Giáo Duҕc. Marr, David G Vietnamese Anticolonialism: California: Univ. of California Press. NguyêѺn, Q. Thç ng Khoa C và Giáo Du c Viê t Nam [ তઝᜰ kap ඒߛ]. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Vçn Hoá.

305 CH. 10 ê hm ê 303 Nguyên, Quang Hông Ch Hán và ch Nôm vi vn hiên cô iên Viêt Nam [ hm ]. Ngôn Ng & i Sóng 6(5), 2-7. SarDesai D. R Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Trân, Trong Kim Viêt Nam S Lc []. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá Thông Tin. (2002 ) Viên Vn Hoc Vân ê Cai Tiên Ch Quôc Ng [ ê ]. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá. Vng, Kiêm Toàn & V Lân Hi Truyn Bá Quc Ng [ ]. Hà Ni: NXB Giáo Dc. 1980() San Jose: p a hm ê p

306 304 kap 2005b p c ê p d ê p

307

308 306! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 台灣自 1987 年解嚴以來 包含台灣母語在內的各種本土化運動就 瞬間蓬勃發展起來 例如 1988 年由客家社團發起解嚴以來第一件有關 母語的 還我母語運動 上街頭抗議活動 1989 年由洪惟仁 林錦 賢 楊錦鋒等人組成 台語社 並發行 台語文摘 服務性刊物 1又 1990 年台灣同鄉鄭良光 李豐明等人於美國洛杉磯創立 台文習作 會 後來在 1991 年 7 月創辦至今尚在發行的 台文通訊 這份刊 物同時於台灣 美國 加拿大發行 台文通訊 早期在台的催生者 主要有陳豐惠 陳明仁 廖瑞銘等 台文通訊 採用漢字 白話字 合寫的台灣話文書寫方式 對於 漢羅 書寫的推廣以及將白話字帶 出教會讓更多的社會大眾認識有很大的貢獻 除了社會團體推廣之外 那時各大學校園內部亦成立台語相關社 團 這是台灣話文進入教育體制的先鋒 包含成大台語社(1988) 台灣 大學台灣語文社(1990) 交通大學台研社(1990) 淡江大學台灣語言文化 研習社(1991) 清華大學台語社(1992)等 除了台語社團之外 其後還有 客家社 及以原住民為主的 原社 等社團陸續成立 而後一些校 園台語社團又串聯成立 學生台灣語文促進會 (1992) (楊允言等 1995) 相 較 於 客 家 與 原 住 民 而 言 台 語 人 ( 或 者 所 謂 的 H -lólâng 鶴佬人 福佬人 閩南人) 在 1990 年代所進行的母語運動比較 起來更有深度更為廣闊 所得到的回應相對比較大 此時期台語人的 母語運動主要有二大方面 第一是要求實施母語教育與進行母語書寫 的標準化 第二是主張台灣文學需建立在台灣母語的基礎上 2其中有 1 π ኴρ ٵ ո ೭ࢤ ע ढऱփ୲ਢല ᠧ ᅝխ ڶ ᣂ ऱಘᓵ گ ᐙ ٱ Ι ழ ץ 1989 ڣ ڣ 7 Ζ 2 ڶ ᣂ 1980 ࡉזڣ 1990 זڣ ኙ ئ ፖ ᖂऱಘᓵ אױ ᔹ ᔕ(1983)Ε

309 CH. 11. ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ םޠ Ԛᇅ ڐ Ҕ ܓ ϟ! 307 關母語文學的訴求引起正 反雙方很大的爭論 爭論可以分為 語言 名稱 與 台灣文學代表性 二部份來討論 就語言名稱而言 雖然 台語 台灣話 這 2 個用詞在台灣社會已經長久被普遍使用 不過卻遭受其他族群甚至部分台語族群成員的質疑 他們質疑並且認 為台語人使用 台語 台灣話 的用詞是心胸狹窄 福佬沙文 主義 的表現 就台灣文學代表性而論 有三大不同的主張 例如林 宗源 林央敏主張 台語文學 代表台灣文學 亦有完全否定台語文 學存在的必要性者 例如廖咸浩 陳若曦 另有像李喬 彭瑞金者不 但消極面對母語文學 反倒支持華語成為台灣文學主要文學語言的維 持現狀派 3 對主張使用 台語 台灣話 用詞的人而言 這樣做是要凸 顯自己是 台灣 人 而非中國 閩南 人 是強調台灣認同與台灣意 識的表現 對反對的人而言 他們認為客語 原住民語 甚至華語也 是新的台語 所以 H -ló 人講 H -ló 話是台語 是在否定其他族群語言 成為本土語言的排他性作法 台語 台灣話 用詞有嚴重到成為排他性的沙文主義 當 原住民有權利使用 原住民 取代 番仔 的稱呼時 難道說台語人 就有接受歧視意涵的 閩南人 或者接受語義不清的 H -ló 人 的義 務嗎 本論文的研究目的欲由語言學的角度分析 台語 台灣話 的語意內涵 另由共時與歷時的視野來探討 台語 台灣話 用 詞的正當性 3 ܨ ᘋ (1999)Ζ ڶ ᣂຍࠄԳढऱ ז ࢤᓵ૪ Δᓮ ᔹ ܨ ᘋ (1999)Ζ

310 308 kap (componential analysis) Mickey mouse Mickey mouse,

311 CH ( ) 3 (Taiwanese languages)( )

312 310! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 國民有在使用的語言(languages used by the Taiwanese citizens) 4 我們分別 用圖表 2 kap 圖表 3 來解釋 台灣語言 與 國民的語言 的語意成 份 შߓ 2. ȶѯᢋᇮ ȷ ޠ ᇮཏԚӌȄ შߓ 3. ȶ Җ ޠ ᇮ ȷ ޠ ᇮཏԚӌȄ 4 ᇡาऱಘᓵ אױ ە ᓏ 2004Ζ

313 CH (Taiwanese) (Lingua franca1) 2 : (Francais) 90% BretonDutchGasconLimousinAvergnat Languedocien 24 (Grimes 1996: ) 2.2. (indigenization)(immigrant society) (native society)

314 312 kap ) 2) H-ló H-ló (1994:92) ( ) 23 ( 2006)

315 CH hamburgercoca cola 100 Australia New Zealand 2.3. (language) (dialect) () Crystal (1992:101) (variety)

316 314 kap (mutual intelligible)(crystal 1997:25) ê Scandinavian (Swedish)(Crystal 1997:286) (diglossia) ( 1996: 58)

317 CH. 11. ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ םޠ Ԛᇅ ڐ Ҕ ܓ ϟ! 漢語語系的分類與分佈 台灣話 這個用詞是否妥當呢 本節我們用共時的 (synchronic) 較寬廣的視野看漢語語系的語言成員是如何被分類與命 名 漢語語系(Han language family)分支下的語言成員大概可以分為下面 七大類 1) 官話 2)吳語 3)湘語 4)贛語 5)粵語 6)客語 7)閩語 5 這七大語言 實際上是無法互相溝通的 語言 不過中國學者常因為政治上的考 慮 一律將其稱做 漢語方言 這七大語言每一個語言底下其實還有 不少的次語群 有的是方言 有的是語言的差別 以下我們以官話 粵語 客語與閩語做簡介 官話 是漢語語系當中擁有最多使用人口的語言 海內外在 1990 年大約有 10 億人口 佔漢語系人口的七成 (Grimes 1996:544)中國 此時全國通行的 普通話 就是以官話為基礎所推行出來的 官話可 以分成四大語區 1)華北語區 包含河北 河南 東北三省 內蒙古 的一部份等 2) 西北語區 包含山西 陜西 甘肅 青海 寧夏等的 漢族居住地 3) 西南語區 包含四川 雲南 貴州三省全部與湖北大 部分地區 河南西南部 湖南西北部 廣西北部 4) 江淮語區 包含 江蘇 安徽二省長江以北 淮河以南地區與江蘇省江南鎮西邊 九江 東邊沿江一帶 (詹伯慧 1991:93-99) 粵語 俗稱 廣東話 粵語在中國境內主要分佈於 廣東 西邊 廣西 東南邊與香港 澳門特區(參閱圖表 4) 粵語分佈地區 包含廣西 為何不使用廣西的簡稱 桂 來命名 反而使用廣東的簡 稱 粵 主要是因為粵語人口半數以上都集中在廣東 而且全廣東 人口一半以上都講粵語 根據詹伯慧等人的報導 2001 年中國境內的 5 ᇡาᓮ ᔹ Norman (1988); Ramsey (1987); ᇯ ᐝ(1991); ঀ壄ԫ(2002)Ζ

318 316 kap 6,000 6,500 4,000 1,500 4,000 37%( 2002:174) 4. (based on Ramsey 1987) ,400 (Grimes 1996:544)

319 CH. 11. ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ םޠ Ԛᇅ ڐ Ҕ ܓ ϟ! 317 部 客語在不同的地區有不同的名稱 例如 ngai 話 ma-kai 話 客家話 新民話 客籍話 土廣東話 等 (侯 精一 2002: )使用客語的客人在各地區都算少數人口 所以鮮少使 用地名來稱呼他們的語言 反而使用歷史上 後來者為客 的 客 為 族群與語言名稱 諸多名稱當中 土廣東話 算是少數以地名為稱呼 的名號 這個名號是四川地區講西南官話的在地居民對那些二 三百 年前由廣東遷徙去四川的客人在使用的語言稱呼 (侯精一 2002:154)使 用此名稱的原因可能是四川在地居民誤以為那些由廣東移民到四川的 人講的就是廣東話 閩語 是漢語語系當中語言分歧最大的語系(詹伯慧 1991:181) 閩 語主要分佈地區是中國福建 廣東 海南島與我們的國家台灣 閩語 人口在 1991 年全世界大約有 6,000 萬人 (Grimes 1996:545)其中大約 1800 萬人分佈於福建省內 佔全省 4 分之 3 大約 1500 萬人分佈於廣東 佔全廣東省人口 5 分之 1 (侯精一 2002:207)福建地區的 閩語 可以 分為 5 大 方言 區(事實上是語言) 閩南 閩東 6 閩 北 閩中 莆仙 (季羨林 1992:293) 閩南語 主要是福建 南部一帶包含 泉州 漳州 廈門 等縣市的人在使用的語 言 其中廈門是閩南語的代表腔調 閩南語除了在閩南地區使用之 外 還分佈於廣東東部與東南亞像講新加坡 菲律賓 印尼等國家 因為在閩語 5 大分支語言當中閩南語的分佈與影響力最大 所以閩南 語也被稱做 福建話 中國清朝統治台灣( 年) 時 閩南一帶泉州 漳州等地的福 建人漸漸的移民到台灣 7 在 1887 年之前台灣是隸屬福建省管轄 台灣 6 7 壂 ڠ ᇩਢᎸ ऱ ז Ζ ឈ ڇ ᥞழཚፖᔤ ཛழཚ ڶ ၦዧԳฝ ا Δ ዧԳՕၦฝ ࠐا ਢխഏ堚ཛอएழཚΖ

320 318! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 在政治 經濟 文化各方面仍略遜福建一籌 所以稱呼當時的閩南移 民所使用的語言叫做 福建話 不算過份 不過台灣進入 20 世紀以 後 一方面是土著化的關係 另一方面是因為日本統治期間促成的近 代化 資本主義化導致 台灣社會和台灣人意識 的形成(史明 1992:220) 因為泉州話 漳州話來到台灣已經土著化 形成不漳不泉 的新腔調(王育德 1993:95) 又摻入台灣平埔族 日本語的成份 所以一 種新的語言形式 台灣話 已經客觀上成立了 除了語言的客觀條件 之外 台灣在政治 經濟 文化8等各方面皆比福建顯的更重要且更具 優勢 加上台灣人意識的抬頭 台灣人主觀上認同他們所講的是 台 灣話 不是 福建話 所以 台灣話 (簡稱做台語) 這個用詞就 成立了 3. 由閩南語到台語 台灣的語言除了南島語系的原住民語之外 其餘皆為 17 世紀後才 跟隨著移民遷徙傳入台灣 雖然客語與台語的源頭是中國的廣東與福 建 但是這 2 種語言來台灣已經有數百年的時間而且已經土著化 所 以也成為台灣本土的語言 台灣的語言在不同的時期有不盡相同的稱 呼 此現象一方面反映語言土着化的進程 一方面反映統治者的殖民 心態 本節我們就依歷時的(diachronic)角度來看台語在不同時期稱呼的 演變 近來不少人誤認為 台語 台灣話 是民進黨組黨這 10 幾年 來才新造 帶有 福佬沙文主義 意涵的用語 事實上真的是如此 8 ࠏ ڕ Δ 2001 ڣ མ װ 壂৬ლ ض ມᓳ Ζᅝழ ڶ װ ᅝ چ ऱ ᨠΔ ᅝ چ ऱϘᎸত ϙ ዚՕપ 95% א Ղ ط Ց װ ऱᆺඔ ض Ε ۂ ᘏΕຫ Գऱ ዚΖ چڇߪء ऱ ዚॺ Δ ڶ ऱᇩঞ ਢԫࠄ อዚ Ζ

321 CH ( ) (1895) 1902 ( 1993:209) ( )

322 320 kap H-ló 3 H-ló H-ló

323 CH. 11. ȶѯᢋ ȷཏᜌ םޠ Ԛᇅ ڐ Ҕ ܓ ϟ! 321 參考冊目 Crystal, David An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Crystal, David The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. (2nd ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grimes, Barbara F Ethnologue. (13th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ramsey, S. Robert The Language of China. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. խ ܓ 2003π1930 זڣ Ւ ᖂᓵᖏρ Κਞᄇ נ ठषΖ ߛ ᐚ 1993π Κ ༠ऱᖵ ρ ק Κ م ඡ षΖ 1992π ا ග ګݮ ፖ ا ගρ ܨ ᘋ ᒳ 1999π ᖂሎ೯ᓵ ρ ק ΚছᓡΖ ࡌ ᦊΕ ڿ 1990π ߢፖխഏ ρ ק Κত Ζ ᆡ ᒳ 1992πխഏՕ ۍ ઝ٤ Κ ߢ ڗ ρ ࠇק ΚխഏՕ ۍ ઝ٤ נ ठषΖ ᔕᒳ 1983π ߢ ᠲಘᓵ ρ ק Κ ᢌᠧ षΖ ঀ壄ԫ ᒳ 2002π ז ዧ ߢᄗᓵρՂ௧ΚՂ௧ඒߛ נ ठषΖ ਜ إ ᔴ ᒳ 1996π ߢਙएፖਙ ρ ק Κছᓡ נ ठषΖ ൫ո 1996π ؾ ᇞᠲΚ ߢᣊρ ק Κխ ቹ 塢 塢Ζ ຫ ত 1994π ऱ อխഏषᄎρ(ร 2 ठ) ק Κւඣ נ ठषΖ ຫ ୲ 2004π ᇩ ᓵञ 塒 ρ তΚ ত م ቹ 塢Ζ ᄘւߢ 1993τ ڗ ê መ װ kap ڇ υπ றઔߒρรԫཚΔp.57-75Ζ ᄘւߢ 1995τ ѽ ࠐאזڣ Ⴜ ሎ೯ᄗउυรԮ ᄅ זس ᓵ ઔಘ ᄎᓵ Δ ઔߒഗ८ᄎΖ ᆺ ف ᛑ 1993π ᖂ ጼρ Κ ᖂ ᠧ Ζ ᇯ ᐝ 1991π ז ዧ ߢρ ק Κᄅᖂᢝ ඒ נ ठխ Ζ ᓏ 2004τ گ ᒳࢨ گ ᒳΛΫΫᅝছ ࢬߓ ኙ ئ ᖂ ߢԳᦞኪ৫հ υδ ߢԳᦞፖ ߢ ᖂ ઔಘᄎΔ Δ Օᖂ ᓏ 2006τ ዧ ڗ എ ߢ ڗ ፖഏ୮ᎁ ٵ հᣂএυδഏ୮ᎁ ٵ հ ᓵ ૪ᖂ ઔಘᄎΔ Δ ק Κ ഏᎾઔߒᖂᄎΖ

324 נ ठ ڣ 1837 ټם Dictionary of the Hok-keen Dialect of the Chinese Languages, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms (壂৬ ߢ ) ڗ A vocabulary of the Hok-keen Dialect as spoken in the cönty of Tsheang-tshew (ዜ ڠ ნ) Anglo-Chinese Manual with Romanized Colloquial in the Amoy Dialect ( ဎლ ნ) A Vocabulary of the Hokien Dialect, as Spoken at Amoy and Singapore Chinese-English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy (ლ Օ ) Carstairs DÖglas ( ޙ ቯᐚ) J.A. Win Elihu Doty (ᢅ໓) S. Dyer ᒳထ W. H. Medhurst (ຽຟ৸) ߢ ټ ጠ 壂৬ᇩ 壂৬ዜ ڠ ᇩ ლ ᇩ 壂৬ᇩ ლ ᇩ փ ࠌ ش ê ߢ Ꮈত Ε ዜ ڠ ᇩΕ ლ ᇩΕ Ꮈত Ε ლ ᇩΕ 附錄一 歷年來台語相關字 詞典與其所使用的語言名稱 ཉ ᄅ ࡕף ᐖ ڠ Malacca ڇࢬ ٱ ᖾ Missionary of the Presbyterian Church in England S. Wells Williams AngloChinese College Press נ ठ Honorable East India Company ( ഏ ٱ ৫ֆ ) 322! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н

325 CH A Syllabic Dictionary of the Chinese Language with the Pronunciations of Peking, Conton, Amoy, Shanghai () 1882 Chineesch-Hollandsh Voordenbook van het Emoi Dialect () Nederlandsch-Chineesch Woorden Book Met de Transcriptie der Chineesche Karaters in het Tsiang-tsiu Dialect () 1883 English and Chinese Dictionary of the Amoy Dialect () 1874 Chinese Romanized 1891 Dictionary of the Formosan Vernacular () mg-im ê j-tián ( ê ) S.W. Williams () J.J.C Franken & C.F.M. de Grijs Bata-via Landsdrukkerij Gustave.Schlegel Leiden John Macgowan George L. Makay () John Talmange () 1898 E.J.Brill Fruber & Co Formosan

326 324 kap 1900 Diccinario Tonico Sino-Espanol, Del Dialecto de Emoy, Chiang-chiu, Choan-chiu Formosa R.P.Fr. Ramon Colomer For-mo-sa (A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken Thrghout the Prefectures of Chin-chiu Chiang-chiu and Formosa (Taiwan)) 1923 Supplement to Dictionary of the Vernecular or Spoken Language of Amoy ( ) William Campbell () Thomas Barclay () Formosa ()() 1932

327 CH () A Dictionary of Sthern Bernard L.M. Min Embree 1976 The Maryknoll The Maryknoll (Amoy-English Dictionary) Language Service Language Service Center Center 1979 (English-Amoy The Maryknoll The Maryknoll Dictionary) Language Service Language Service Center Center etc

328 326 kap *Chit-ê (1996) kap ka-t ê ê

329

330 328! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 隨著台灣大眾之間 統獨 意見衝突對立逐漸升高 有關台灣民 眾之國家認同議題在近十幾年也逐漸受到學界之重視 影響台灣民眾 之國家認同的主 客觀因素很多 究竟那些是關鍵因素又其扮演何種 的重要角色則因不同學者而有不同的意見 若就語言文字來看 它對 台灣人的國家認同是否有影響呢 推行台灣本土語言(包含原住民語 客語及台語)及羅馬字對促進台灣民眾的台灣國家認同是否有幫助 贊 成的人或許會舉韓國與越南為例 認為使用和中國不一樣的語言文 字 可以確保自己民族文化的獨立 反對的人總會舉美國及愛爾蘭為 例 認為即使他們使用和英國一樣的英語 仍可獨立建國 究竟語 言 文字對國家認同是否有加分的效果呢 Anderson (1991:37-46)表示 出版 宗教改革 和 當地母語的 出頭 是近代西歐民族國家(nation-state)意識形成的重要源頭 Davies (1997:482)也指出 歐洲文藝復興時期用民族母語來創作的風氣終於促 進發展出國民文學(national literatures) 而這是形成國家認同(national identity)的關鍵之一 若從 Benedict Anderson (1991) 想像的共同體 (imagined communities) 觀點切入 在漢字文化圈1裡 19 世紀以前均有一種以中國為中心 透 過漢字所形成的 漢字文化想像共同體 (an imagined Hanji cultural commu ity) 這種 漢字文化想像共同體 (簡稱做 漢字共同體 )多 多少少均影響到漢字文化圈舊成員於近代 民族國家 (nation-state)的 國族想像建構 1 ࢬᘯऱψዧ ڗ എωਢਐམᆖࢨᝫ شࠌڇ ዧ ڗ ऱ چ ࢨ ഏ୮Δ ץ তΕ ឌഏ(ࢬᘯऱতឌ)Εཛធ(ࢬᘯऱ ק ឌ)Ε ء Εᄅ ࡕף Ε ፖխഏ Ζ

331 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 329 在中國 他們利用 漢字共同體 做為近代 中華民族 或者 中國國族 的想像基礎 那些無法度跳脫漢字共同體的 壯族 苗族 瑤族 等 當然僅被當作中國境內少數民族而沒有形成 自己的民族國家 而那些跳脫 漢字共同體 發展出獨特語言文字 的舊成員 譬如越南 韓國 朝鮮和日本 均重新建構以自我為主體 的 民族國家 想像 若論到台灣 雖然於 17 世紀初因為荷蘭統治的 關係而將台灣從原始部落社會帶上國際舞台 然而隨後而來的鄭成功 及清國統治卻將台灣帶入漢字文化圈 台灣的漢字文化特色竟於二次 戰後成為中國國民黨用來建構台灣人的中華民族想像的基礎 語言 文字雖然和國家認同沒有絕對的關係 卻有相對的關係 此關係依不同情境(context)而有所不同之依互程度 本研究試圖從漢字 文化圈的歷史文化情境中探討語言 文字對台灣人民的國家認同與獨 立建國運動所可能造成的影響 本文指出語言文字在漢字文化圈中扮 演極重要的連結角色 欲促使台灣擺脫漢字共同體舊成員而成為新的 民族國家就應該將此連結切斷並建立台灣民族的語言文字才能收到事 半功倍的效果 2 2. 基本定義 概念與理論架構 2.1. 語言與方言 台灣人長期以來受國語政策之影響以至於對 語言 (language)與 方言 (dialect)有著刻板印象的誤解 總以為國語(華語)以外的台灣本 土語言均為方言 究竟語言和方言有何差別 根據 Crystal (1992:101ʼ 方言是指 因文法或詞彙的差異而顯現出地區或社會背景不同的某種 2 ء ፖ ئس ฆ ऱ Գᄮ Δᑉழ א խ ᐊΖ

332 330! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 語言變體ʻ ʼ 如何判定某二個人所說的話語是語言或方言的差 別呢 在語言學上 一般是以他們兩者溝通交談時是否能互相理解 (mutual intelligible)對方的話語為判斷的基本標準 (Crystal 1997:25)如果二 者互相無法理解則雙方分別使用不同的語言 若即使有些詞彙或文法 的差異 但仍理解對方的話語則雙方使用的是同一種語言底下的二種 方言 儘管語言學上有其標準以區分語言及方言 然而現實上 特別是 有政治力介入時 未必以語言學的標準來區分 有些情況是明顯為語 言的差異 卻被刻意當作方言看待 譬如國民黨時期將台灣本土語言 貶低為方言 另一情形則實際上為方言的差異 但為了突顯政治上的 主權獨立而將該方言提升為語言的層次 譬如北歐的 瑞典 挪 威 丹麥 三國內所使用的 Scandinavian 語言實為某種程度可互相 理解的方言差異 但是他們為凸顯國家的認同而堅持他們所說的話語 是語言的差別 分別稱呼他們的語言為 瑞典語 (Swedish) 挪威 語 (Norwegian) 及 丹麥語 (Danish)(Crystal 1997:286) 何以國民黨時期要刻意將台灣本土語言貶低為方言 因為語言與 方言常扮演不同的社會功能 且方言容易成為 高低語言現象 (diglossia)中的低語言 低語言常給人粗俗 沒水準的印象 因較不受 重視所以不在正式場合使用 也因此容易讓人覺得即使消失了也無所 謂 國民黨將 華語 訂為國語 將其他被支配族群的語言貶為 方 言 其實就是要進行政治鬥爭 利用語言來強化支配者的文化優勢 甚至用來打擊被支配族群的自尊心並進一步消滅其自我認同 (施正鋒 1996: 58) 2.2. 高低語文現象 高低語文 是 高低語言 (diglossia) 和 高低文字 (digraphia)

333 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 331 概念的合稱 什麼是 高低語言 和 高低文字 呢 基本上 這是 二個概念類似的用詞 高低語言 主要是指 口語 而 高低文 字 則是指 書面語 (也就是 文字 ) 若論到 高低語言 的概念 Charles Ferguson (1959)算是第一個有 系統性地論說 diglossia 概念的社會語言學家 他將 高低語言 定義 做一個語言的二個 語言變體3 (two varieties of the same language)分別 擔任不同的社會功能(social functions)的語言現象 他又論述道 這二個 語言變體 當中 其中一個扮演 高語言 (High language) 另外一 個扮演 低語言 (Low language) 高語言 通常有較高的名聲和文 學傳統 享用較多體制內的資源 而且會用於正式場合 相形之下 低語言 通常會被看不起 用於非正式及私人場合 後來 Joshua Fishman (1967)針對 Ferguson 的 diglossia 概念提出修 改 他認為 高低語言 不一定僅發生在一個語言裡面的二個語言變 體 也就是說 高低語言 不一定是 語言變體 也有可能發生在 語言 和 語言 之間 而且語言數目不限定在二個 那麼 什麼是 高低文字 (digraphia)呢 Dale (1980:5)將 Ferguson 的 高低語言 概念延伸到 文字 上 將它定義為 一個語言使用 二種(或者以上) 的文字書寫系統 漢學家 DeFrancis (1984:59)也針對 高低文字 提出類似的定義 後來蔣為文(Chiung 2003:9)將 Dale 及 DeFrancis 的定義修改為 一個社會裡頭有一個以上的文字系統分別擔 任不同的溝通功能 蔣為文的定義就如同 Fishman 對 高低語言 的定義一樣 不限定在一種語言的變體 若引用 高低語言 及 高低文字 的概念來看 漢字文化圈裡 面有什麼樣的語言現象呢 先就口語來說 漢字文化圈裡自古以來各 3 ψ ߢ ω ܛ ԫ ࢬᘯऱψ ߢωᄗ Ζ

334 332! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 地方就有不同的語言 譬如說有廣東話 閩南話 客話 壯話 苗 話 瑤話等 因為皇帝使用的語言是當時的標準語 用於教育 行政 等正式場合 雖然各地有自己的語言 然而各地的讀書人若想參加科 舉考試 就得學皇帝所在首都的語言(或者所謂的口音) 也就是說 那些讀書人平時生活當中雖然是用他們在地的語言 然而每當吟詩作 對 研讀四書五經時就需要模仿首都地方的語音 時間一久 那些讀 書人又將他們模仿的首都語音傳給在地的鄉親及後代子孫 因此形成 那些讀書人的在地語言裡頭有所謂 讀書音 (文言音)和 白話音 同時存在的現象 這也是台語裡面有所謂文言音 白話音的由來 若 用高低語言來分析 就同一個語言來講 文言音就是 高語言 白 話音就是 低語言 若就不同語言之間來看 皇帝所用的語言就是 高語言 各地一般百姓所用的在地語言就是 低語言 高語 言 因為長期以來用於正式場合和科舉制度 所以讓人感覺較有水 準 有學問 低語言 因為過於平凡 所以感覺較粗俗 像這樣的 社會心理其實在目前台灣的社會中還是很普遍 譬如說布袋戲或是歌 仔戲的戲劇裡 每當有大俠 文人出現 就會用文言音講話 而若是 丑角則用白話 若就 書面語 來看 漢字文言文就是 高文字 白話文及其 他發展出來的民族文字 例如越南的 字喃 Chu-Nom 及越南羅 馬 字 (Chu quoc ngu) 韓 國 及 朝 鮮 的 諺 文 4 日 本 的 假 名 Kana 及台灣的 歌仔冊文字 與 白話字 (P h-o -j )等均算是 4 ψᘦ ω(onmun)ԫ ڇ ࠀ ऱრ৸Δ ڇ ឌ ᇙ Onmun ڶ ऱΕษঋऱ ڗ ऱრ৸Ζ(Taylor and Taylor 1995:212) ڼڂ լᓵ ڇ ឌഏࢨཛធΔ լ ࠌ ش Onmun ڼ Ζ ؾ ছ ڇ ឌഏ ش Hangul ( ݙ ભऱ ڗ ऱრ৸)Δ ڇ ཛធঞࠌ ش ཛធ (ڗ Chosoncha) ࢨ إ ΰChongumαࠐጠࡅᘦ ΖHangul ਢཛធ ઔߒ ଫ ೯ ψࡌழᆖωΰchu Si-gyongα 1910 ڣ ࠌ ش Ζ(Kim-Renaud 1997: 1-2)

335 CH // // ( 2006) 2.3. (first language) (second language) (fluent language) (personal mother tongue) (ethnic language national language)

336 334 kap (language shift)

337 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 335 ଡԳ ئ ගᆢ ئ (1)ᠨ ౨Ժ + + (2) ౨Ժ + - შߓ 1. ᚗᇮІ ᇮ ޠ ҕᇮ Ͼ ם 單語的母語異化通常會有二個後果 第一是個人仍會在精神上 情感上承認族群母語的存在 然而在實際日常生活中卻僅用個人母 語 譬如歐洲的 愛爾蘭共和國 (Irish Republic)原本是講 愛爾蘭 語 (Irish) 然而經過英國統治後卻變成很多愛爾蘭人僅使用英語而不 會說愛爾蘭語 5雖然愛爾蘭人於政治上獨立後仍繼續使用英語 然而 在 民 族 情 感 精 神 層 次 上 還 是 將 愛 爾 蘭 語 當 做 民 族 母 語 (Fasold 1984:278) 譬如 愛爾蘭共和國憲法(1937 年版ʼ規定 愛爾蘭語為民族 母語(national language)也是第一官方語言 英語則為第二官方語言 (施正鋒 2002:407; Crowley 2000:5)第二個後果是在精神上 情感上放棄 原有的族群母語 將個人母語當做新的族群母語 換一句話來講 族 群母語已經產生語言轉換 從 A 語言變成 B 語言的 母語轉換現象 (vernacular shift) 發生母語轉換的 A 族群成員剛開始或許還知道自己是 A 族群成員後代 然而隨者時間的消逝 卻可能逐漸認同自己是 B 族 群的成員 譬如台灣的平埔族因語言文化的逐漸消失 而逐漸認為自 己是較強勢的漢人語言文化的後代 2.5. 語言與認同 語言和族群認同(ethnic identity)或者國族 國家認同(national identity) 5 ᖕ Ethnologue (Grimes 1996:489)ऱᇷறΔ1983 ࢬ ऱ ߢཏ ق 13%ऱ ფዿᥞԳ ᎁ աऱფዿᥞ ᝫৰ ܓ Ζ

338 336 kap (Liebkind 1999:144; 1998:52) (social context)(fishman 1999:154; Ross 1979:4) 2 ( 1998:55; Edwards 1985:48; Lu 1988:99) (Hak-ka-ngin)(Hak-fa) (ethnic consciousness)( 1992:4; 1998:52)

339 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 337 史記憶等 當族群母語消失時 如果其他的客觀因素 譬如血緣 膚 色還存在 當然就有可能繼續維持族群意識 但是 如果語言是現存 唯一的客觀因素 族群意識恐怕早晚會隨著族群母語的流失而消逝 譬如台灣目前有不少鶴佬客(H -ló-khehʼ 因沒有留下其他顯而易見的 可做為區別族群身分的客觀因素 因此隨著客語的消失而失去原來客 家意識與認同 蔣為文(Chiung 2005:369)針對 244 個大學生所做的調查 顯示 受訪者即使不會講台語或客語但仍會認同自己是 H -ló 或客家 族群的主要因素在於家族中(祖父母或父母輩)仍有成員使用該族群母 語 相形之下 如果受訪者本身不會講 家族成員又沒有人使用 則 認同自己是 H -ló 或客家族群的比例相當低 由此可見 強化語言功 能 對族群認同扮演著正面加分效果 2.6. 土著化與代表性 土著化 (indigenization)是指從移民社會(immigrant society)變成 土著社會 (native society)的轉變過程 早期漢人從唐山移民來台灣 時 剛開始每逢過年過節便會想要回去故鄉唐山和親人團䨟 甚至過 世後也想落葉歸根將屍體送回唐山埋葬 這就是移民社會現象 也就 是移民者仍存有過客心態 認為唐山才是故鄉 台灣不過是暫時歇腳 的地方 但是經過一定的時間和社會文化的發展 那些漢人移民逐漸 於過年 過節時不再回去唐山 死後也直接埋在台灣 最後漢人移民 就認為自己是在地的台灣人 台灣是他們的新故鄉 這就是土著化的 過程 台灣於 1945 年以前的舊住民包含有 1) 南島語系的 原住民 和 2)平埔族與漢人移民混血的 客家 H -ló 族群 南島語系的原 住民在台灣已經數千冬 早就土著化了 至於客家及 H -ló 族群呢 陳 其南(1994:92)指出在 1683 到 1895 年 的 200 多年當中 台灣的漢人移民社 會逐漸變成土著社會 換言之 在日本及中國國民黨政權來到台灣之

340 338! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 前台灣就已經形成土著化社會 這個土著化社會基礎是 台灣語 言 台灣文學 台灣民族 意識形成的重要因素 就土著化的角度來看 使用 華語 的新住民(或者所謂的 外省 人 ) 有多少比例認同自己是台灣人 這些 1945 年以後移民台灣的新住 民本來有可能在二 三代內就融入台灣社會變成台灣人 然而因為那 些在台中國人的政治操作和動員的關係 導致他們無法度揮別中國認 同 阻礙了他們在台灣土著化的發展 這也連帶地影響到華語在台土 著化的進程 換一句話講 華語若要在台灣生根發展 成為台灣語言6 的一種 除非他的使用者有認同自己是台灣人 要成為台灣語言 除了須經過 土著化 過程之外 尚須有 代 表性 代表性是指在台灣的歷史 文化發展當中有適當的主 客觀 條件促使該語言具有台灣的主體性 對外可以表現台灣的特色 而且 外界也這麼認為 若就定義來看可能很難理解什麼是 代表性 或許可以用具體 的例子來說明 譬如當我們講到日本料理 大家一定會想到壽司 沙 西米(sasimih) 清酒 若談到台灣料理就會想到米粉炒 滷肉飯 珍珠 奶茶 若想到美國料理就是 hamburger coca cola 難道台灣人不吃壽 6 ء ψ ߢω(Taiwanese languages) ψ ഏ ا ऱ ߢω(languages used by Taiwan s citizens)բ ऱრ Ζဎ Ε ࡉ ত ה ᄅฝ ا ऱ ߢԫ ᑌΔ אױ ਢ ऱഏ شࠌڇا ऱ ߢհԫΔ ຟլਢ ڶ อᖵ ז ࢤऱψ ߢωΖང ᇩᎅΔ ਢ ٽ ऄᖑ ڶ ഏᤄऱԳΔ ה ଚ شࠌڇ ऱ ߢຟਢψഏ ا ऱ ߢωΙ ࠀ լਢࢬ ڶ ऱψഏ ا ऱ ߢωຟ אױ ጠ ψ ߢωΖ(ᓏ 2005d) ء ᓵ հࢬ א ψ ഏ ا ऱ ߢωࡉψ ߢωΔ ৸ ە រ ټڶٵڕإ ऱਙए ᖂ୮ Will Kymlicka (2001)ലᄅฝ ا ऱψගᇔ ᦞ ܓ ω(polyethnic rights)ࡉ៱ ا ऱψ ᑇᦞ ܓ ω(rights of ethnocultural minorities) ԫᑌΖࢬ ڶ ऱᄅฝ ا Δլᓵਢ נ ᣋ(ᤝ ڕ Δ ᣋฝ ا ભഏऱ )ࢨ ਢ ڂ ᖏ႖ ฝ ڕᤝ(ا ᙟᓏտ ࠐف ऱ૨ )ا Δ ה ଚຟਢ ڇ ฝ چ բ ګݮ ԫ อ षᄎ ߓ৵թ ף Եऱᄅ ګ Ζຍࠄᄅ ګ ڶࠆڇ ψගᇔᦞ ܓ ωհ Δᅝ ڶ ጐψԵቼᙟঋωΕ ៱ ا ऱᆠ೭Ζ

341 CH (Hodgkin 1981) 19 (SarDesai 1992:19) KoguryoPaekche Silla (Taylor and Taylor 1995:203, ) 7

342 340! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 大化革新 就是模仿中國建立中央集權體制的開始(Seeley 1991:40) 漢字文化圈的成員除了政治上受中國支配之外 另外一個共同特 色就是借用 漢字 引進 儒家思想 及 科舉制度 在借用漢 字的時候 他們均碰到漢字無法完全表達他們在地語言的問題 於是 他們利用 漢字 做 訓讀 音讀 或者造 新漢字 來應付 這些問題 甚至後來根據 漢字 的造字原理慢慢發展出自己的新文 字系統 譬如越南的 字喃 及 越南羅馬字 韓國及朝鮮的 諺 文 及日本的 假名 Kana 雖然他們發展出自己的文字 然 而這些新文字不僅在大中國的政治 文化架構下面很難生存 甚至在 自己國家裡面也遭受既得利益的文人統治階級的輕視與打壓 譬如韓 國 李世宗 於 15 世紀中期召集學者研究發明韓國文字 諺文 的時 候就有封建文人 崔萬里 等以 一尊華制 為理由上疏反對推行諺 文( ʳ ˀ ʳ ˌˈˊʼ 這種 新文字 附屬於 漢字 底下的情 形 延續到 世紀 反殖民 反帝國的民族主義蓬勃發展起來 後 才逐漸開始轉變(蔣為文 2005b 2005c 2005e Hannas 199ˊ 趙潤 濟 ˌˌˋ) 當韓國 朝鮮 越南 日本進步的知識份子提倡用這種簡單 易學的新文字時 一般國民很快就將新文字學起來 當然 民族國家 意識也因為讀寫能力及國民教育的建立而形成起來 這就如同西歐國 家在近代於宗教改革以後因為民眾讀寫能力的建立連帶帶動國民文學 和民族國家意識的形成一樣的道理(蔣為文 2005f) 就語言文字和政治關係來看 當代的越南 韓國 朝鮮與日本除 了均有獨立的語言文字之外 政治上也是獨立的民族國家 不論是先 有獨立的語言文字還是先有獨立的政治 從這幾個國家可看出語言文 字和政治密切的共生關係 相形之下 台灣於政治上仍存有統獨的爭 議 在語言的使用上也有華語和台灣本土語言的爭論 在文字的選用 也有漢字和羅馬字的角逐 台灣人的國家認同混亂現象似乎表現在對

343 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 341 語言文字選用的捉摸不定 而對語言文字的難以取捨也反映出政治上 對中國情感的難分難捨 至於中國 自秦始皇統一漢字 書同文 以來 雖歷史上曾歷 經分分合合 但整體上來說還維持漢字文化共同體 中國境內各民族 7 諸如壯族 苗族 瑤族等雖曾以漢字為基礎發展出 漢字式文字 可惜這些文字難學 難懂 難以推廣成大眾的讀寫能力 以致於難以 透過語言文字形成國民文學建立民族國家意識 這些沒有國家的民族 終究僅能成為中國境內的少數民族 關於漢語的文字改革 中國雖於 1930 年代曾試驗用簡單易學的羅馬字來書寫漢語 進行所謂的 拉丁 化 運動(季羨林 1992:245) 但當中國共產黨得到政權後 卻隨即於 1950 年代停止拉丁化運動 改推動漢字簡體化 何以中國要放棄漢語 拉丁化 主要就是顧慮到中國政治及文化上的 一統性 (Norman 1988: ; DeFrancis 1950: ; Barnes 1974) 中國當政者擔心若中國 各地用當地語言來書寫 會造成廣東 福建 上海等各地的地方意識 發展做近代民族國家意識而進一步從中國獨立出去 中國當政者為了 掩人耳目只好以漢字簡體化為下台階並轉移漢語拉丁化的焦點 總之 壯族 苗族 瑤族 因無法跳脫漢字的迷思導 致無法發展出簡單易學的文字系統以進一步發展國民文學 (蔣為文 2006)相形之下 越南 韓國 朝鮮與日本則因擺脫漢字的羈絆 才得 以迅速解構漢字共同體並建構現代的民族國家想像 那麼台灣呢 下 節將進一步探討台灣的情形 7 ڶ ᣂዧ ڗ ڤڗ Δ ױ ڶࡌە ٠(1997:98-146)Ζ

344 342 kap ( ) (Campbell 1903:147; Heylen 2001; 2003:20) 1661 () 1885 ( 2005b2005cDeFrancis 1977:77)

345 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 343 漢字與科舉制度 無形中讓越南羅馬字有發展的空間並協助越南跳脫 漢字共同體 為後來的越南民族國家建立重要的想像基礎 大清帝國雖然於 1895 年放棄對台的主權 不過因為佔領台灣的 日本 本身也是漢字文化圈的舊成員 所以對台灣欲跳脫漢字共同 體的幫助並不大 若 1884 年當時清國與法國之間為了越南宗主權歸屬 問題所發生的 清法戰爭 延續下去 且法國同時佔領台灣與越南 如此一來台灣的近代史就要改寫 而且台灣有可能用 白話字 (P h8 o -j ; 台語羅馬字 )取代漢字 何以說日本統治對台灣脫離漢字文化圈並沒有多大的幫助 雖然 日本自 1868 年 明治維新 以後就非常注重 脫華入歐 而且很重視 語文改革和國民教育的重要性(Seeley 1991: ) 不過 日本的語文改 革只明顯提升假名的使用比例 並沒有完全廢除漢字 為何日本沒有 完全廢除漢字呢 因為自 1931 年日本發動 滿州事件 開始全力入侵 中國東北以後 日本軍國主義者氣勢如虹 他們為了紀錄所佔領的中 國地名與人名上的實質需要 而反對廢除漢字(Gottlieb 1995:75-88; Seeley 1991: ) 日本佔領台灣期間雖然一開始就有打算推行日本話 但他們對漢 字的態度仍稱不上是敵視 日本總督甚至經常舉辦漢詩聯吟大會 招 攬台籍文人來官聽吟詩作對以利拉攏台灣人與日本人間的距離(施懿琳 2000: ) 日本人就是利用漢字文化圈中漢字的 剩餘價值 來做 為軟化台灣人反抗的工具 這與法國人將漢字當作破壞法國 越南關 係的第三者有完全相異的觀點 因為日本總督一開始對漢字並不排斥 再加上當時的台灣知識份 子對於使用羅馬字來做台灣話文的書寫工具亦不重視 以至於台灣失 8 ᇡาᓮ ᔹᓏ (2005a) Εᇀ (2004)Ζ

346 344 kap ( 2000:19-20) 1937 ( 1993:59)

347 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 345 以台灣為主的想像共同體仍尚未完成 雖然本土政黨 民主進步黨 於 2000 年執政至今已經 6 年 不過台灣派與中國派選舉對決仍是各持 一半 甚至還有人跑到對岸 中華人民共和國 反對台獨以示效忠中 國之意 造成這種現象的原因一方面是在台中國人不認同台灣 一方 面也是在地台灣人仍充斥著漢字共同體迷思所引起 許多政治台獨的人士雖然支持台灣建立主權獨立的國家 但在文 化上仍認為自己是華人 屬於漢字文化共同體的一部分 這種的 政 治台灣 文化中國 的獨立方式其實是 二個中國 或者 藩屬 國 的獨立模式 與日本接收台灣以前所成立的短命 台灣民主國 一樣不會長久 何以說是 文化中國 呢 我們可以近來民進黨政府 極力對外推廣華語為例來做分析 隨著中國經濟的崛起 世界各國學習華語的人數也逐漸增加 民 進黨政府認為台灣可以搶攻華語教學的市場並成為世界性的對外華語 教學中心因而於 2003 年成立跨部會的 國家對外華語文教學政策委員 會9 隔年並於教育部底下設立 國家對外華語文教學政策委員會工 作小組 (簡稱 對外華語小組 ʼ 根據 國家對外華語文教學政策 委員會設置要點 該委員會有十大任務 1)規劃及推動對外華語文 教學政策 2)規劃及編輯對外華語文教材事項 3)規劃及推動對外華語 文檢測 教學評鑑事項 4)規劃及推動對外華語文師資培訓 輸出事 項 5)規劃及推動對外華語文網路學習之建置及整合事項 6)規劃及推 動華語文資料庫查詢系統事項 7)規劃及推動相關學術文化交流事 項 8)結合相關學術機構及民間團體資源 辦理對外華語文教育工 作 9)規劃及推動福臺語(閩南語) 客家語 原住民族語之對外教學及 ˌ ʳʳʳ ټ ʳ ʳ ʳ ʳ ʳ ʳ Ζઌᣂᇷறᓮ ᔹψኙ ဎ ωጻ ˏ ˍ ˁ ˁ ˡ ˠ ˁ ˑΖʳ

348 346! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 文化相關事項 10)其他有關華語文教育事項 就此十大任務來看 其實就是在對外推動華語教學 至於台灣的 本土語言不過被用來做樣板陪襯罷了 此外 將台灣本土語言刻意放 在華語這一框架底下也突顯出其將台灣語言文化放在中華語言文化底 下 的 思 考 模 式 奇 怪 的 是 該 委 員 會 的 英 文 譯 名 竟 為 Committee on International Education of Taiwan Languagesϙ 使用ϘTaiwan Languages 一 詞究竟是要表示華語已經土著化變成台灣語言的一種 還是說該委員 會主要是推動台語 客語與原住民語 而華語只不過是拿來當晃子 如果就對外華語小組實際的作為來看 應該第一種說法較可能吧 若 果真如此 本土政黨民進黨的漢字文化共同體想像不僅沒有隨著政治 解嚴逐漸夢醒 反而更向文化中國傾斜 如果說 政治中國 是過去 一慣主張中華民國是全中國唯一合法代表政府的中國國民黨的大頭 症 那麼 文化中華 恐怕也是自認可以成為華語教學中心的民進黨 的妄想症 ʳ 我們不禁質疑 華語已經土著化了嗎 華語有台灣的代表性嗎 推動華語究竟對台灣是利多還是弊多 就土著化來說 儘管華語在台灣正式使用已有六十餘年的歷史 並逐漸發展出在地化的 台灣國語 但他已經完全土著化了嗎 如 果華語已土著化 算是台灣語言的一種 那麼曾經也是國語的日語算 不算台灣語言呢 即使台灣人一箱情願將華語當成台灣語言 中國人 諸如胡錦濤等會認同嗎 就代表性來談 當世界各國正當興起一鼓Ϙ華語熱ϙ的時候 他 們會先將華語與中國還是台灣做連結呢 目前雖尚未有這類調查的具 體數字報告 但依據筆者的觀察及間接的數據顯示 華語恐怕會被優

349 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 347 先與中國聯想在一起 譬如 根據中國 留學基金管理委員會 10 所 統計 2002 年到中國留學的學生共計 85,829 人 其中 21,055 人攻讀學 位 64,774 人為非學位生(譬如語言學習者) 然而 根據台灣教育部電 子報11第五十一期的報導 91 學年度(2002 年 8 月-2003 年 7 月)來台留學 的學生共僅 7,331 人 其中 1,283 人攻讀學位 6,048 人為非學位生 不 論攻讀學位與否 到中國留學的學生比到台灣的學生多出十餘倍 可 見外國人要學華語時會優先選中國 這情形就如同台灣學生要到英語 國家留學時會優先遴選美國 英國一樣 而不會想到英語也是官方語 言之一的印度 菲律賓 這說明華語與中國是被高度連結在一起的 華語具中國的代表性 而中國才是華語文化的代表者 台灣欲與中國 爭華語文化的代表權 無疑是重蹈過去 中華民國是全中國唯一合法 政府 一樣的愚蠢與無知 就利弊來分析 華語越普及對台灣人越有利嗎 不少人認為隨者 全球華語市場的擴大 台灣人因會講華語因此將從中獲得不少利基 譬如到海外當華語老師或海外旅遊時可以講華語 免除溝通不良的問 題 難道沒有任何弊害嗎 當然有 從商業角度來看 當全球華語市 場擴大且台灣被納入該市場後 意味著台灣也要將本身的市場開放給 來自中國的競爭者 台灣有可能打贏與中國的華語爭霸戰嗎 舉些例 來說 台灣近幾年來外文翻譯書幾乎均由中國的譯者包辦 究竟是台 灣人不夠努力還是因為不敵中國的廉價勞力 又 台灣的電視公司為 了節省成本而逐漸向中國購買連續劇節目 如此一來 台灣演藝人員 究竟是增加還是減少了工作機會呢 臺灣人自認為會講 台灣國語 就可以到海外當華語老師 試問當地教學機構會聘請以中國為標準的 ጻ ˏڇ ሽ ጻ <

350 348! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 標準華語老師還是一口台灣國語的台籍老師 如果就語言文化與國家 認同來看 臺灣人如果將華語內化為新的母語將促使台灣人的漢字共 同體想像更往中國靠攏 如此一來對台灣的民族國家建構有益嗎 總 之 台灣如果要和中國爭奪華語的代表權 不僅 無穩賺 反而可能 因此而再度成為中華文化的邊陲 5. 結論 台灣要建立獨立的文化 避免淪為中華文化的邊陲 就要進行脫 漢運動 並推廣已經土著化且具台灣代表性的原住民語 客家台語 及 H -ló 台語才能收到事半功倍之效果 本文所謂的 脫漢 是指脫離漢字文化共同體的想像以建立政治 及文化獨立的台灣民族國家 脫漢的基本原則是跳脫漢字的迷思以建 立在地語言文化的主體性 譬如 對於台灣母語的書寫方式 要揚棄 漢字本字 的迷思才可能替台灣母語文學開創出一條寬闊的大道(蔣 為文 2006ʼ 脫漢並不是排斥所有的中國文化 而是拒絕以中國為主體 的文化思考模式 中國文化和日本文化 歐美文化一樣 可以是台灣 文化的一部分 但絕不是她的主體 推廣原住民語 客家台語 及 H -ló 台語就是建立台灣文化主體性的最佳方法之一 或許有人會質疑 中國那邊也有人在用閩南語 客語 因而論定 推廣台語 客語並無台灣特色 台語 客語有無台灣特色並不是決定 在中國有沒有人使用 而是決定在誰具有其文化代表權 台灣因為有 主導台語 客語文化發展的實力所以台語 客語有台灣特色 我們可 以閩南語在當今中國發展的情形為例來做說明 筆者於 2000 年底曾去 中國 廈門 做田野調查 照理說廈門曾經是閩南語文化的中心12 應 12 ڰ ཚ ඒՓ 壂৬ࢨࠐ ඒழ א ლ Ꮈত ऱᑑᄷ Ζᤝ ڕ รԫ ڇء

351 CH 12. ᅖԆНϾ ᇮ НԆᇅ ঢ়ᇰӤϟᜱ! 349 該可以預期很多人在講閩南語 可是那時筆者所到之處 諸如大街小 巷 公共場所幾乎難得聽到廈門人講閩南語 反而聽到的大多數是中 國普通話 廈門的唱片行所賣歌曲(北京話不算)大約 95%以上都是台灣 歌手諸如葉啟田 江蕙等人的台語歌 以台語發音的豬哥亮餐廳秀節 目在廈門的唱片行也相當普見 這個現象說明台灣已經取代廈門成為 所謂 閩南 文化的中心 由於中國官方以華語為國家語言文化的發 展主軸 而讓台灣有機可乘 取得閩南語與客語的代表權 台灣在取 得閩南文化的代表權後更進一步將 閩南 正名為 台灣ϙ 如此不僅 可建立台灣文化的主體性更可將她發揚光大傳播到中國閩南及東南亞 去 總之 台灣應避免與中國爭奪華語代表權 台灣人為了爭奪華語 的代表權而試圖將華語內化為台灣語言實為不智之舉 當華語內化為 台灣語言後 華語勢必排擠其他本土語言 導致台灣缺乏建立語言文 化主體性的主導權 其後果是台灣將成中華文化的邊陲 或許華語和 英語一樣可以成為台灣人的第二語言(second languageʼ 但絕對要避免 華語內化成台灣人的民族母語 ȪҐ Н Н ߓ 2006 ঢ়ᇰӤϟНϾ ख़Ᏹ ଇ Ȃѯᢋ ር ف Ᏹ Ȃ6 У СȂѯіȄȫ ٱ ऱᢅ ڗڗ πლ ᄅ ڗ ρʻ ˌ ˆʼս א ლ ᑑᄷΖ

352 350 kap Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. New York: Verso. Barnes, Dayle Language planning in Mainland China: standardization. In, Fishman, J.A.(ed.). Advances in Language Planning, Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. Chiung, Wi-vun T Impact of monolingual policy on language and ethnic identity: a case study of Taiwan. In Wi-vun Chiung. Languge, Identity and Decolonization, Tailam: National Cheng Kung University. Crowley, Tony The Politics of Language in Ireland : A Sourcebook. NY: Routledge. Crystal, David An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Crystal, David The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. (2 nd ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, DeFrancis, John Nationalism and Language Reform in China. Princeton University Press. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), Edwards, John Language, society, and identity. NY: Basil Blackwell. Fasold, Ralph The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Blackwell Ferguson, Charles Diglossia. Word 15, Fishman, Joshua. (ed.) Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

353 CH Fishman, Joshua Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 32(2), Gottlieb, Nanette Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Grimes, Barbara F Ethnologue. (13 th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Hodgkin, Thomas Vietnam: The Revolutionary Path. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd Kim-Renaud, Young-key The Korean Alphabet. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Kymlicka, Will Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship. Oxford University Press. Lee Sang-Baek, L. D Hangul: The Origin of Korean Alphabet. Seoul: Tong-Mun Kwan. Liebkind, Karmela Social psychology. In Joshua Fishman (ed.). Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lu, Li-Jung A study of language attitudes, language use and ethnic identity in Taiwan. M.A. Thesis: Fu-jen Catholic University. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ross, Jeffrey A Language and the mobilization of ethnic identity. In Howard Giles & Saint-Jacques Bernard (eds.) Language and Ethnic Relations. NY: Pergamon Press.

354 352 kap SarDesai D. R Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Taylor, Insup; and Taylor, Martin M Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins : ( 2 ) p a hm ê p b ê hm ê

355 CH c p d e ê p f ê p ê kap ê

356

357 CH

358 356 kap ( ) Holo ( 1991 ) ( ) 6

359 CH () () () 3 () () 8/60 4/68 4/52 (6/16)(4/22) 3.

360 358 kap ( 1965:17-21) (languages of citizens) (Taiwanese languages)

361 CH (American language) Will Kymlicka (2001) (polyethnic rights)(rights of ethnocultural minorities) ( )() (indigenization) ( 1994: 92) 1945

362 360 kap

363 CH

364 362 kap Pickering ()( )

365 CH Holo (insider) (outsider) ( 1965:55-56)

366 364 kap 3.2.

367 CH Fishman (1968)(nationism)(nationalism) Fishman (nation-state)

368 366 kap (official language) (national language) India CongoParaguayPalau NamibiaMonacoZambia () Zambia Namibia 2001 ()

369 CH () 1996 Barcelona (Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights) 5.

370 368 kap

371 CH 13. Ԟጢ ܗ ೞԞጢȉșș ࠊѯН ܛق ᄈҕᇮНᏱІᇮ ᄙ ϟߒ 369 參考文獻 Kymlicka, Will Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship. Oxford University Press. ຫ ত 1994π ऱ อխഏषᄎρ ק ΚւඣΖ ஃ 1965πնԼ ࠐڣ խഏഏ ሎ೯ ρ ק Κഏ षΖ ਜ إ ᔴᒳ 2002π ߢᦞ ܓ ऄ ρ ק ΚছᓡΖ ʳ

372 370! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 附錄 各大學台文系現況一覽表 (пίၦਠ С 11/2004) შߓ 1. өτᏱѯн (ق τᏱഌ)౫ ݸ س זڣ ᖂ ټ ጠ ߓ ࢬ ټ ጠ ฅ ᄐ ᖂ 128 റ ᄐ ଥ ᖂ 60 ଥ ᖂ 8 ޣ ร Բ ڶ 4 ޣ ร ԫ ڶ 2 ޣ ร Բ 1997 ట Օ ᖂ ᖂ ߓ 2002 ګ פ Օ ᖂ ᖂ ߓ ڶ 8 ڶ 4 Եᖂ ە ᇢ ઝ ؾ ፖ റ ஃ ᇷ ߢᖂஃ ᇷ ە ᇢ : ഏ 2 2 ᑇᖂ 1 ᖵ 1 چ 1 ጉᇢ: ഏ षᄎ 1 1 ە ᇢ : ഏ ᑑ ഏ ᖵ 1 چ 1 ጉᇢ: ഏ ᑑ ഏ 1.5 ᑑ 1.5 षᄎছᑑ षᄎ 1 ᐉ ᇷற 40% Ցᇢ 40% ຫର ܨ ۂ ဘ ޙ ᐝ ଫ ຫ ቯ ܨ ᘋ গ ᚨᏕ೩ ຫഛ ᓏ ᄘፇ ਜᦜ ᓏ

373 CH : : ( ) 20% 30% : : % 20% 128 ( ) ( ) : : 1 1 1

374 372 kap ( ) 128 ( ) % 30% :

375 CH () : a. b. c. d. ( ) : 40% 60% () a. b. c. d.( ) ()

376 374 kap : a. ()( ) b. ()( ) (2005 ) c. d. e. : 40% 40% 20%( ) : a. b. c. d. e. : 30% a. b. 30% 40% 32 8 : a.

377 CH : : a. 50% b. 50% (70%) c. d. 30% : a. b. c. d. e. : a. b. c. d. e : a. b. c. d. () e.

378 376 kap % 40% %: a. b. c. d. 15% 15%

379 CH () %: a. 40% 40% %( ) 50% a. b. c. ( ) 30%( )

380

381 CH 14. ᅖԆଝ І ڐ ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ޠ ኈ! 前言 1492 年 哥倫布 Christopher Columbus 代表歐洲人第一次航行 到 美 洲 大 陸 幾 年 之 後 葡 萄 牙 的 航 海 士 達 伽 碼 Vasco da Gama 在 1498 年透過 好望角 The Cape of Good Hope 打開了歐洲 到印度的新航線 接著葡萄牙統治者 A-bu-khe-khe (Don Affonse de Albuquerque)在 1510 以及 1511 年 分別佔領能夠控制印度西海岸的 Goa 與能夠控制東南亞麻六甲海峽的 麻六甲 (Malacca) 從此 歐洲人開啟了從海上來到東方的新航路(Hall 1981: 264; 湯錦台 2001:35)Ζ 回過頭來看 15 世紀的結束正好是新航線 大航海時代的開始 台灣也在這樣的時代潮流之下被推上國際舞台 在此之前 台灣原本 是由南島語系的原住民所構成的原始部落社會 到了 17 世紀 荷蘭在 葡萄牙 日本 大明帝國 西班牙等國際勢力當中有出眾的表現 因 此捷足先登 在 1624 年佔領台灣 建立台灣第一個外來的政權 雖然荷蘭人佔領台灣主要在於經貿上的考量 但是以基督教義為 主的文教活動也是他們重要的任務之ㄧ (Campbell 1903: vii; 曹永和 1979: 33-38) 像是 荷蘭人為了讓當時的台灣人 也就是平埔族人能夠使用 自己的母語和上帝溝通 所以運用羅馬字來替平埔族設計文字 又在 1636 年設立台灣有史以來的學校(Heylen 2001* 台灣就在這樣半自願與 半強迫的情形之下 由口傳原始社會進入了書面語的時代 並且在荷 蘭的影響之下與西歐的文字讀寫傳統建立了關係 雖然台灣從原始社會被帶進國際舞台 一開始就受到西歐基督教 文化的影響 不過 自從 1662 年荷蘭人投降 鄭成功取代他們並在台 灣建立漢人政權 透過體制的力量來推動漢字文化以後 台灣人所呈 顯出來的漢字文化特質就越來越來鮮明了 台灣人對漢字的迷思一開始表現在對漢字的錯誤認知 認為漢字

382 380 kap Gelb ABC semi er McDonald ABC Tzeng 1992: 128 Flores d Arcais (1992)Cheng (1992)Su and Anderson (1999)Li (2000)

383 CH 14. ᅖԆଝ І ڐ ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ޠ ኈ! 381 有鑒於傳統表音 表意的文字分類法存在著很大的疏漏 Gelb 1952 與 Smalley 1963 就提出新的文字分類觀念 他們指出 世界 上的文字應該就其 表示語音的單位的大小 來做為分類的基準 才 能夠有系統的將世界文字進行分類 進而了解文字的演變趨勢 所謂 的 語音單位 就是指語言學上所提到的 音素 phoneme 音 節 syllable 詞素 morpheme 與 語詞 word 等 由 小到大 不同大小的 話語 成分 在這個分類的標準之下 漢字可以說是 語詞-音節 wordsyllabic 或者 詞素-音節 morphosyllabic 的文字 1 日本的 假 名 是 音節 文字的典型代表 越南羅馬字 英文字 台灣 白話 字 與韓國 諺文 可以算是 音素 文字 因為在這個系統裡 每 一個字母所表示的語音單位是 音素 雖然越南羅馬字 英文字 白話字與諺文都屬於音素文字 其中還是有些許的差異存在 差異的 地方就在於 語音與符號的對應關係 以及 符號排列方式 的不 同 就 語音與符號的對應關係 來看 越南羅馬字和台灣白話字基 本上是一個符號對應一個音素 而英文則是多元的對應關係 就音素 符號的排列方式來看 越南羅馬字 台灣白話字與英文字都是一維的 線性排列 而韓國諺文與漢字都是二維的排列結構 當今世界上多數 的文字系統 像是英文 德文 法文 西班牙文 越南文與台灣白話 字 都是一維的音素文字 可見 一維的音素文字可以說是世界上普 遍的書寫系統 2.2. 文字演變是由大的單位進到小的單位 Gelb 1952 進一步提出 從語音單位的大小來看 世界上的文字 1 Gelb شٻ Ϙword-syllabicϙΔDeFrancis شٻ ϘmorphosyllabicϙΖ

384 382 kap vowels consonants Smalley1963:7 26 2,600 3,000 Hannas1997 7,000 7,000 47,035

385 CH Siraya ( 1) () 1 5 Siraya 1 2

386 384 kap (phonetization) (Gelb 1952: )

387 CH rebus writing 3 4U 4 U rebus writing for you() 4 U 4 U for you 3. 4U rebus 4 7 chhit-thô chhit-thô Rebus writing

388 386! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 七桃Æ 7 粒桃仔Æ chhit-thô, s g (to play) შߓ 4. пѯᇮȶν ȷ rebus پޠ φ 什麼是 部分音化 呢 就是借用現有文字圖案的時候 僅僅取 用它其中部分的音素 在漢字裡面 舊有的 反切 方法就是這種部 分音化的例子 像是圖表 5 裡面分別取 都 ([t]) 與 宗 ([ong])來表 記 冬 的發音[tong] 在西方 古埃及文裡面的 ޟ 聲符 文字也是這 種部分音化的文字 都 [tto] + 宗 Æ [choong] 冬 [tong] შߓ 5. ᅖԆЇϹ ഌӌॲϾ پޠ φ 2.4. 文字發展過程裡解決 同音異義詞 的方法 文字的發展過程裡只有 定形 拼字 與 音化 的過程並 不足夠 因為 音化 的過程雖然可以克服文字圖案有限的問題 不 過它會衍生出同音不同意思的 同音異義詞 為了解決這個問題 一個成熟的文字系統就必須找出解決的方案 而這個問題通常是透過 變更拼字法或者增加區別符號來解決 在音素文字裡 多數是以變更拼字法來解決同音異義詞 以英文 為例 相同發音的 to too two 分別拼寫做不同的字 see 與 sea 也是 不同的拼字 ʳ除了變更拼字法之外 也有採用增加區別符號的例 2 ᅝ ࠄڶ ნࠀॺԫ რ ᇞ ٵ ฆᆠ ڗ լ ٵ Δ ᆖመᖵ ዝ ৵Δᅝվ ڶ լ ნ ԫᑌথ ڗ լ ٵ ऱຍጟ ݮ խ אױ ᇞ ٵ ฆᆠ ऱ ᠲΖ

389 CH ( )%z kau%kauz /kang/ 2.5. (syllable) (Kana) ( )(Habein 1984: 12) (Seeley 1991: 59)/a/ (/ri/)(/no/) (morpheme) (Ledyard 1966; Taylor and Taylor 1995) (phoneme) (Hangul) (Shin et al. 1990)

390 388! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н ය ර ච 拼湊而成的 又因為受到漢字二維排列方式 的影響 所以諺文也是二維的排列方式 ය [h] + ර [a] + ච Æ 䞲G [n] [han] შߓ 6. пȶ䞲ȷ ޠپ ᗻ ᒕННԆ๗ᄻȄ 3. 漢字的文字結構 3.1. 漢字 六書 的原理與本質 經過上一節文字發展過程的分析之後 我們就能夠更清楚的看出 漢字的文字結構 平心而論 漢字不過是由語詞文字演化到音節文字 過程中的 中輟生 因為半途而廢 進化不完全 所以漢字算是一 種過渡期的 詞素音節 文字 如果就文字的成熟度來說 漢字的源頭一般是從商朝後期 西元 前 14-前 11 世紀 的 甲骨文 算起 甲骨文 經過周朝 春秋 戰 國時期的發展 到了秦始皇時代併吞六國 規定 小篆 作為標準的 文字之後 漢字的 字形 與 結構 才穩定下來 3 古人分析漢字的文字結構 歸納出 六書 的漢字造字原則 不 同的學者對 六書 的見解略有出入 但若依照東漢時代許慎的著作 說文解字 的說法 一曰指事 指事者 視而可察 察而見意 上 下 是也 二曰象形 象形者 畫成其物 隨體詰詘 3 ឈ ዧ ڗ ຍଡழଢ ڶ ለࡐ ऱ ݮڗ Δլመ ݺ ଚՈլ౨ ݱ ಖΔ ڇ ᖵ ዝ ऱመ խམᆖᖵመψជ ωεψ౻ ωεψᄒ ωεψ ω լ ݮڗٵ ऱ Ζ

391 CH % (concrete) (abstract) 1 % forest () 7 3 wood

392 390 kap 7. forest ( forest ) 8 8. ( 2005a) OK back 2 school 2 to I have two

393 CH 14. ᅖԆଝ І ڐ ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ޠ ኈ! 391 dogs 的假借字 當然 也有可能有人會運用下面(2)的假借字來書寫 到底要用甚麼字才好 當然 依個人的喜好與意願 這就是漢字所 存在的嚴重問題 (1) 哀黑夫土豆割撕 = I have two dogs (2) 埃黑膚兔鬥戈斯= I have two dogs 雖然說假借字能夠用來表記所有的口語語詞 不過它會造成新舊 文字字義的混亂 像是英語的 哀黑夫土豆割撕 可能會受字面的影 響而被誤解成 悲哀的穿黑衫的農夫在那邊割土豆 因為假借字會造成新 舊字義的混亂 所以就出現了形聲字 像 是 可能有人會將上面(1)(2) 的例子利用形聲的原理改寫成下面的 (3) (3) 人哀 有黑 有夫 土二 䵜豆 䵜戈 多斯 雖然(3)符合形聲字的原理 不過不一定所有的人都認同這樣的 字 可能有人會改寫做下面(4) (5)的用字 (4) 人我 有黑 有孚 吐 䵜鬥 䵜哥 (5) 我 口孚 二 䵜斗 䵜各 多思 嘿 多司 以上(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)的例子同時都表記 I have two dogs 也都符合六 書的造字原則 到底誰的用字才正確 沒有人錯 也沒有人是正確 的 這是漢字的嚴重問題 也是造成台語漢字標準化相當困難的文字 因素之一 六書 裡面的 ޟ 轉注 ޠ 是指整個漢字被當做同一個字來使 用 轉注 其實就是 異形同義字 或者是 漢字的變異體 以 前的研究者就是不清楚為甚麼這幾個字能夠互通 就直接說明是可以 互轉的轉注字 其實 所謂的轉注字是在不同時空 不同使用者的情 形之下必然的變異體產物 所以轉注其實不算是造字原則 難怪近年 來六書的研究者已經漸漸將轉注排除在漢字造字方法之外(裘錫圭 1995:125)

394 392! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 3.2. 漢字是進化無完全的詞素音節文字 若是按照 六書 的原則 將漢字做分類 每一類所佔的百分比 有多少呢 按照李孝定 根據 甲骨文 六書爻列 六書略 三種分別代表不同時期的漢字所做的統計整理 能夠從 下面圖表 9 圖表 10 這 2 張表看出每一類所佔的百分比 也可以看出 漢字的文字結構在歷史發展中的演變過程 ז זڣ ք ฃ 12th A.D. ք ٨ 2nd A.D. ظ ڗ 14th-11th B.C. ݮ ਐࠃ ᄎრ ଗ ݮ ᜢ լᇡ ૠ ڗ ᑇ ۍ ൎ 1.63 ൎ இ ൎ இ ൎ 100 ڗ ᑇ ۍ 3.84 ൎ 1.32 இ ൎ 1.21 ൎ ڗ ᑇ ۍ 2.50 ൎ 0.44 ൎ 3.05 ൎ 2.47 இ இ 0.07 ൎ இ 1.53 ൎ შߓ 9. ᅖԆϳਫആԆЩ پ ᅌᡑȄ

395 CH 14. ᅖԆଝ І ڐ ᄈѯᢋНᏱȃНϾ ޠ ኈ! 393 შߓ 10. ᅖԆϳਫആԆЩ پ ᅌᡑȄ 由圖表 9 圖表 10 能夠看出 六書 裡面的 形聲字 比例越來 越高 其他的類別相對的越來越低 我們若根據六書(不包含 轉注 ) 的 ޟ 語音單位 與 演進階段 來看 可以分析成圖表 11 的情形 因 為形聲字的比例越來越高 因此 在這個圖裡面能夠看出 漢字是由 語詞文字往詞素音節文字發展 ዝ ၸ ۯ Word ቹ ᆏ Logosyllable ᆏ Morphosyllable ቹ ڗ ݮ Pictographic step ڗݮ რฤ ڗ ʳ Ideographic step ਐࠃ ڗ ᜢฤ ڗ ʻ ʼʳ Phonographic step ᄎრ ڗ ଗ ڗ შߓ 11. ᅖԆᅌ ޠ ᇅ ߓܛڐ ұ ޠ ᇮॲ Ȅ ݮ ᜢ ڗ

396 394! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 為甚麼漢字沒有繼續往純 音節 文字或者 音素 文字 這種 所謂的 拼音 文字來發展呢 主要是因為漢字發展成形聲字以後 沒有繼續將 聲旁 與 形旁 進一步標準化與簡化 所以無法形成 純音節文字 像是 形聲字 愲 牯 瞽 鵠 等在華 語裡都讀做[ku ] (ㄍㄨˇ) 但是卻分別用骨 [ku ] 古 [ku ] 鼓 [ku ] 告 [kaug]等不同的聲旁來表示 而且 同樣一個聲旁 古 字 有時表記 發音[ku ] 有時表記[kuk] (eg. 估 姑) 有時表記[kug] (故 固) 有時 更表記成[hug](怙 岵ʼ 形成一個聲音由幾個聲旁來表記 一個聲旁表 記幾個不同聲音等非標準化的現象 如果古人將它標準化 像是[ku ] 音就由 古 來表記 古 字就只表記[ku ] 不再表記[hug] 接著 再將 古 字筆劃簡化 像是 如此就產生了音節字母 形聲字要如何的標準化與簡化可以再以當代的 ㄅㄆㄇ注音符 號 來舉例 像是 愲 牯 瞽 鵠 可以用ㄅㄆㄇ來 做聲旁 如圖表 12 შߓ 12. ң Ͱͱ ᖑਡȂпȶ ȷȃȶ ȷȃȶᙀȷȃȶᚸȷ پ Ȅ 形聲字不只 聲旁 有問題 形旁 更是問題重重 一個形旁 可能有幾個不同的語意 而一個語意也可能由幾個不同的形旁來表 示 像是 螞蟻 的形旁 虫 是蟲的意思 不過 彩虹 裡面的 虫 與蟲並無關聯 滑倒 的形旁 ޠ ޟ 與 水 有關係 不過 滯銷 滾蛋 滾筒 裡面的 與水並無關聯 又像 是 同樣代表 心 的意涵 卻有 恩 恨 恭 等 3 不同

397 CH ( 2005c) wordsyllable cha-b female cha-b chhit-thô to play (I have two dogs) I

398 396! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 字 而另外一個人 比如說阿花在別本古書裡讀到 人哀 有黑 有夫 土二 犭 豆 䵜戈 多斯ωΔ那麼阿花就認為 人哀 才是 I 的本字 台灣的文人因為受漢字化的影響卻沉迷在找尋台語本字的工作當 中 反而不太注重台語文學作品的創作 比如說 1930 年代的台灣話文 論戰與 1990 年代的台語文運動都將焦點放在漢字用字的爭議上(參閱呂 興昌 1999 中島利郎 2003) 因為過於注重 本字 無形中卻影響了 台語文學作品的數量無法大量增加 4.2. 漢字對語詞認知 語意表達的影響 漢字對語詞認知與語意表達的影響有下面幾個面向 第一 欠缺單純表音功能 誤導語詞的意涵 因為漢字是 詞素 音節 文字 每一個字可以說都是一個 詞素 morpheme 當讀 者讀到一個語詞時 容易受其中詞素的影響 若是詞素的個別意義與 語詞的整體意義相同 那麼就不會出現問題 但是 假使它們不同就 會產生意義上的混淆 例如 三貂角 /sam-tiau-kak/ 語源來自西班 牙文 San Diego 原本與 貂 並無關聯 不過使用漢字書寫之後 可 能會誤導讀者與 三隻貂 產生聯想 又例如 台南縣的地名 麻 豆 原本是平埔族 Siraya 族族語 mata 也就是台語 目周 (eyes) 的意思 不過用漢字之後可能會被誤認與五穀的芝麻 豆類有關聯 第二 欠缺多音節語詞 polysyllable 的觀念 束縛語言的發展 漢字文化圈的書寫系統在長期的 語音 與 語意 單位脫離的歷史 發展之下 一個 語詞 通常都由一個 音節 的漢字來表示 所產 生的影響可以就二個方面來談 首先 就新造語詞的過程來說 因為 單音節 能夠創造出來的發音組合十分有限 但是人類需要的語詞 卻是每天都在增加 因此為了利用有限的發音組合來描寫無限的語 詞 只好勉為其難的 透過輔助的辦法 像是增加 聲調 增加

399 CH (6) (7) (8) (6) (sad) (difficult to cross)(7) (safely trade) (sex trade in safety) nan-kuo ()nan kuo () (8)

400 398! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 有很多種的解釋 像是下面(8a)到(8d) 到底哪一種解釋才正確 都正 確 也都不正確 這就要看誰掌握了 解釋權 如果你是科舉考試 的主考官 你認為哪一種解釋是正確的 那一個答案就能躍升為標準 答案 (8a) 尊敬(孝敬?)別人的長輩就像尊敬我們的長輩 (8b) 尊敬我們的長輩以及別人的長輩 (8c) 老 我確實很老了 但是還有很多人像我這麼老 (8d) 我雖然老 但是還有人比我老 老實說 文言文是一種進化不完全的書寫方式 文言文會造成語 意模糊的現象照理說是它的致命傷 不過長期以來卻讓一些漢字既得 利益者拿來當做宣傳的藉口 製造出漢字 文言文 高深莫測 的假 象 4.3. 漢字束縛台灣文學 文化的發展 台灣人因為對漢字有迷思 卻在無形中對台灣文學與文化的發展 產生影響 我們舉例說明如下 第一 限制了台灣話文的大眾性與普遍性 因為要能讀懂漢字式 的台灣話文就必須先讀懂漢字 導致懂得台灣話文漢字書寫的人數比 一般 漢文 的人口還少 俗話說 漢字若 beh 讀會 bat 嘴鬚就 phah 死結 就是在諷刺漢字難學的問題 4 在 1920 年代的台灣認識漢字 的人並不多 如果台語的書寫必須依靠懂漢字的人口 自然越會被邊 緣化 而普遍的國民文學自然就比較難產生 第二 限制了台灣話文的標準化 近代國民文學的形成與民族語 言標準化是互相扶持與共生的 漢字式台灣話文因為使用漢字書寫 4 ڶ ᣂዧ ڗ ऱᖂ ய Δ ױ ᔹᓏ (2005d)ΕChiung (2003)Ζ

401 CH ( 1990:194) ( 2005a:90) (loanwords) 19 (Kana) Bush croissant croissant bagel ( 2005b)

402 400 kap () ( 2005e) ( 2005b) 5. Gelb (1952)

403 CH (nation-state) ( 2005e)

404 402! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 參考冊目 Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. ΰreprinted in 1992α Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chen, Hsuan-Chinh; and Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) Language Processing in Chinese. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Cheng, Chao-Ming Lexical access in Chinese: evidence from automatic activation of phonological information. In Hsuan-Chih Chen & Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) pp Chiung, Wi-vun T Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization. PhD dissertation: University of Texas at Arlington. DeFrancis, John The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy. ΰ Taiwan editionα Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. DeFrancis, John How efficient is the Chinese writing system? Visible Language. Vol.30, No.1, p Flores d Arcais, Giovanni B Graphemic, phonological, and semantic activation processes during the recognition of Chinese characters. In Hsuan-Chih Chen & Ovid J.L. Tzeng. (eds.) pp Gelb, I. J A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Habein, Yaeko Sato The History of The Japanese Written Language. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Hall, Daniel George E A History of South-East Asia. (4th ed.) London: The Macmillan Press. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ΰ α. In Ku Wei-ying ΰed.α. Missionary Approaches and Linguistics

405 CH in Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Ledyard, Gari Keit The Korean Language Reform of 1446: the Origin, Background, and Early History of the Korean Alphabet. Ph.D. Dissertation: University of California, Berkeley. Li, Ledong The Role of Phonology in Rading Chinese Single Characters and Two-characters Words with High, Medium and Low phonological Regularities by Chinese Grades 2 and Grade 5 Students. Ph.D. dissertation: Oakland University. Norman, Jerry Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Shih, Sang-Soon; Don-ju Lee; and Hwan-Mook Lee. (eds.) Understanding Hunmin-jong um. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company. Shu, Hua; and Richard C. Anderson Learning to read Chinese: the development of metalinguistic awareness. In Jian Wang; Albrecht W. Inhoff; and Hsuan-Chih Chen pp Smalley, William. et al Orthography Studies. London: United Bible Societies. Taylor, Insup; and Taylor, Martin M Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins. Tzeng, Ovid. et al Auto activation of linguistic information in Chinese character recognition. Advances in Psychology. Vol.94, p Wang, Jian; Albrecht W. Inhoff; and Hsuan-Chih Chen Reading Chinese Script. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2 )

406 404 kap 2005a hm ê p b ê hm ê c ê ê p d p e ê p

407

408 406! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 1. 前言 越南與台灣一樣 均曾被中國統治過 越南曾受中國一千多年的直接統治(公元前 111-公元 939) 其後雖然 脫離中國的統治而獨立 卻仍與中國維持一定的藩屬關係 這種藩屬 關係一直維持到 19 世紀後半期法國的介入後才開始有變化 法國統治 了約一百年後 越南民族主義領導者胡志明於 1945 年宣佈越南獨立 建立 越南民主共和國 至於越南東北邊的台灣呢 從中國來的鄭氏政權 於 1662 年正式 佔領 統治台灣 接著 1683 到 1895 年台灣由中國清朝統治 之後 1945 年到目前(2007) 台灣再次被中國來的政權 中華民國 統治 若 由 Benedict Anderson (1991) 的 想 像 的 共 同 體 (imagined communities)切入 在漢字文化圈裡 19 世紀以前皆有一種以中國為中 心 透過漢字所形成的 漢字文化想像共同體 (an imagined Hanji cultural community) 1 此種 漢字文化想像共同體 或多或少都影響到 這個文化圈成員後來對於近代 民族國家 (nation-state) 的國族想像建 構 在中國 他們利用 漢字文化想像共同體 作為他們近代 中華 民族 或 中國國族 的想像基礎 那些跳脫 漢字共同體 的舊成 員 例如 越南 韓國 2 朝鮮 3 和日本 皆重新建構以自我為主體的 民族國家 想像 若談到台灣 它仍處在 漢字共同體 的邊緣徘 徊 這現象當然就反應在政治上的獨 統紛爭 ࢬᘯऱዧ ڗ എਢਐམ ࢨش ս شࠌڇ ψዧ ڗ ω ᐊߓอऱഏ୮ࢨ چ Ζࠏ ڕ Κ Ε তΕཛធΕ ء ΕխഏΕଉ Εࡉᄅ (ࡕף ᓏ 2005)Ζ ਐࢬᘯऱতឌΖ ਐࢬᘯऱ ק ឌΖ

409 CH 15. ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșѯᢋ ࠓ ڸ ϟщၷ!ف 407 無論台灣與越南是自願或是被迫 他們皆經過 中國國族想像 的時期 對越南而言 此時他們早已徹底解構 中國國族想像 脫 離 中國想像共同體 成功地重建 越南想像共同體 但是對台 灣而言 國內各族群對中國仍有程度不一的想像與寄望 4 雖然台灣 命運共同體的意識隨著 1980 年代以來的政治運動的發展而有日漸抬頭 的趨勢 但若要說 台灣國族共同體 已經完成 想像 恐怕還要 等上一段時間 一個新的共同體何時才會建構完成需看它解構 舊共同體 的速 度 本論文的目的在探討台灣與越南之間 對於解構 漢字共同體 與 中國國族想像 的過程當中有何異同之處才造成現在這種不同的 政治局勢 以下筆者將針對越南與台灣被納入 中國共同體 漢字共同 體 的歷史背景做介紹與分析 台灣讀者對台灣的歷史背景比較了 解 所以介紹台灣的部分會較簡要 以便多出篇幅來介紹越南 2. 越南 2.1. 越南的中國共同體時期 越南傳說中第一個國家名號稱為 文郎 (Văng Lan) 屬於越南 的 鴻龐時代 (Hô ng Bàng) 大約是公元前 2879-前 258 年 接下來公 元 前 257- 前 207 年 是 由 安 陽 王 建 立 甌 貉 國 (Âu Lҥc)(Tran 1921:15) 4 ڼڇ ਐ ۰ ا Εড়୮Ε壂ࠍࡉࢬᘯϘ ઊԳϘ ऱᄅ۰ ا Ζᑉழլ ץ ਔ२Լ ڣڍ ࠐΔࠐ তࠅΕխഏࢨ چה ऱᄅᄅฝ ا Ζ

410 408! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 秦始皇 在公元前 221 年併吞六國 統一中原後 又繼續出兵 征討 嶺南 並在公元前 214 年併吞嶺南地區 5 秦帝國在公元前 207 年分崩離析後 曾為秦效命的將領 趙佗 (越南話稱做 TriӋu Ĉà) 趁機會佔領嶺南 在公元前 204 年6建立 南越國 並以 番禺7 為首 都(張榮芳 黃淼章 ˌˌˈˍˈˉˀˉˋ 陳國強等 ˌˋˋˍ ˊˀ ˆˌ) 公元前 111 年 中國漢朝 漢武帝 出兵殲滅 南越國 並於當地設 交趾部 分 為九郡 其中三郡 交趾 九真 與 日南 相當於現今越南的 北部和中北部地區(Tran 1921:47) 從那時開始越南第一次被中國納入版 圖 這段歷史在當今越南主流史觀中稱為第一次 北屬時期 (Tran 2002:47) 8 趙佗 到底算是中國人或是越南人 這個問題在越南也曾爭論 9 過 在我看來 趙佗在越南歷史中所扮演的角色與地位就如同 鄭成 功 之於台灣 都是將台灣/越南與中國連結在一起的第一人 若不是 要殲滅 趙佗 的南越國 漢武帝可能不會那麼快就將越南納入中國 版圖 若非要殲滅 反清復明 的 鄭成功 清朝也不會那麼快就 將台灣當作拓展版圖的目標 自公元前 111 年中國漢武帝將越南納入中國版圖後 直到公元後 939 年這一千多年當中 除了少數短暫時間(公元 及 )起義 抗暴成功之外 其餘皆為越南被中國直接統治的時期 此時期是越南 被軍事 政治的力量納入中國共同體的階段 這個時期所講的 中國 共同體 其實是 五服制 中那種以中國皇帝為中心的收編系統 這 5 ψᚢতωօᄗઌᅝ ڼ ழխഏऱᐖ Εᐖ Ε௧ত ࡉ ত ק ຝ Ζ ॲ৬ م ψত ഏωऱ ڶזڣ լ ٵ ऱᎅऄΚ তᖂ ຫ ८(Tran 1921:39) ΕDo Duc Hung (2001:13)ΕπՕ ಖ٤ ρ(1697 ठ) ऱಖሉਢֆցছ 207 ڣ Ζ 7 ઌᅝ ڼ ழխഏᐖ ઊᐖ ڠ Ζ 8 ڂ խഏ ۯ তऱ ק ᢰΔࢬ א তԳՈ ش ψ ק ωࠐ ق խഏζ 9 ፖ তዧ ઔߒ ٠દઔߒ ऱଡԳ ᓫΖ 6

411 CH nation-state (S Nhip) (qun Thng Ngô) (Qung Tín) (S Vng)(Tran 1921:53) ( ) (Lý Tin) (Lý Cm) (Tran 1921:52) (Trng Trc)(Trng Nh) ( 40-43) (Triu u) 248 (Lý Bôn) ( ) ( ) (Phùng Hng) (B Cái i Vng) (B) (Cái)(Ch Nôm)

412 410 kap (Ngô Quyn) 19 (SarDesai 1992:19) ( )( ) (SarDesai 1992:21) (Tran Trong Kim )...(Tran 1921:8) ( ) (Nguyen 1999:2)

413 CH 15. ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșѯᢋ ࠓ ڸ ϟщၷ!ف 411 驗後 於 13 世紀才有字喃的文學作品出現 10並於 16 至 18 世紀之間達 到高峰 11 字喃的使用者主要是打赤腳的平民 落魄文人 僧侶 與 少數有強烈民族意識的精英 一般而言 字喃主要使用於紀錄民間口 傳文學 創作純越南話文學 翻譯佛經 替漢字作注音 註解(Nguyen 1999) 雖然在 布蓋大王 時期就出現 字喃 且自 10 世紀以後 有 越來越多 字喃 出現 但是 字喃 不但沒有受到當權的越南朝廷 支持 甚至遭受來自國內與國外(中國) 的打壓 為何會有此 反本 土 現象呢 可以做以下幾點因素來分析 第一 受中國漢字文化價值觀的影響 因為漢字在中國是唯一的 文字正統 而越南又奉中國做宗主國 以致越南各朝廷不敢侵犯漢字 的正統地位 換個角度來看 越南各朝廷用 接受越南被納入漢字文 化共同體 做為交換他們政治上獨立的條件 以此時台灣的用語來說 就是 政治越南 文化中國 這種現象在此時台灣的政治界 文化 界也是非常普遍 就是所謂的 政治台灣 文化中國 許多台灣派 的政客 文化人雖然平時會使用台灣母語 不過真正到了正式場合 制定文化政策時 卻認為台灣語文無法 登大雅之堂 將母語棄之 如敝屣 第二 受科舉制度束縛之故 因為越南各朝代都把漢字當做正 統 也將其列在科舉考試中 所以那些想通過考試以當官的人就不得 不學 當這些人考試入取 功成名就後 他們為了維護自己的既得利 益 當然就繼續擁護漢字的正統地位 這就和此時台灣人所遭遇的情 形相同 那些經由中華民國的中國語文教育出來的上層精英 政治人 ᖕ ژ ऱ ᖂ ࢬזڣ ᓵឰΖ ፖ Häm Nguyen Thanh Xuan ऱଡԳ ᓫΖ

414 412! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 物 作家 老師都是 中文 的既得利益者 除了少數例外 要叫那 些中文既得利益者支持使用台文 恐怕遙遙無期 第三 字喃先天的文字結構缺陷 字喃主要是按形聲的方式 結 合 2 個漢字(1 個表音 1 個表意) 成為 1 個新的字喃字 字喃除了繼承漢 字本身的缺點 又衍生出層出不窮的問題 例如 台語的 字 在字 在越南話發音/tre/ 中的 壋 (漢越音/le/)用來 暗示 的發音 小 用來 喃中寫做 字字 年輕 寫做 表示 年輕 的意思 由此可知字喃其實遠比漢字複雜 不好學 一 般而言 要讀懂字喃 就要先懂漢字 因為字喃複雜 且無標準化 所以造成它推展上的困難 也讓那些擁護漢字者有藉口不推行字喃 我們可以說 越南從 10 到 19 世紀當中 雖然在政治上脫離中國統 治 不過文化上依然被納入 漢字文化共同體 之中 2.3. 越南的越南想像 越南人之所以可以跳脫 漢字文化共同體 這與法國在 19 世紀 後半期之後介入越南--中國有關係 公元 1858 年 法國利用傳教士受迫害做藉口聯合西班牙軍艦向越 南中部的䫎港(Ĉà Nҹng)出兵(Tran 1921: ) 越南末代朝廷 阮朝 敵不過法軍 為了求和只好於 1862 年簽訂 第一次西貢條約 割讓南 部 嘉定 邊和 和 定祥 三省給法國(Tran 1921:523) 當然 法國並沒有因此滿足 又繼續侵佔其他各省 最後於 1885 年完全征服 越南 越南遭受法國襲擊時也曾向中國求援 不過當時的中國已經自 身難保 無法有效阻擋法軍的侵略(龍章 1996) 最後中法雙方於 1885 年 簽定 天津條約 協議停戰 條約當中 中國正式放棄對越南的宗主 國地位且承認越南改由法國保護(Tran 1921:577) 法國殖民者統治越南時 認為中國是法國與越南之間的第三者

415 CH 15. ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșѯᢋ ࠓ ڸ ϟщၷ!ف 413 對法國統治越南有潛在的威脅 若要將越南和中國永久劃分 就要將 銜接兩國文化的臍帶切斷 因為越南長期以來都將中國奉為宗主國也 透過漢字學習中國文化與價值觀 假使讓越南人繼續使用漢字就等於 是讓越南保持與中國的親密關係 所以法國認定連接越南 中國之間 的那條臍帶就是 漢字 為了讓越南斷絕與中國的關係以便親近法 國 非將漢字除掉不可 (DeFrancis 1977:77) 12 法國人想出來的策略是用 羅馬字 取代漢字 他們認為若越南人可以接受羅馬字 這樣一來 要再進一步讓越南人接受 法文 的可能性就愈高 法國人所推行的 羅馬字就是在 17 世紀經由傳教士傳入越南 在越南教會界使用兩百多 年的羅馬字(蔣為文 2005a 2005b) 雖然法國殖民者推行羅馬字的最後目的是推廣法文 不過在無形 中卻提供越南羅馬字初期成長的養分 例如 法國殖民者將羅馬字列 入學校課程 接下來於 1865 年由官方發行第一份的羅馬字報紙 Gia Dinh Bao (嘉定報) 越南羅馬字也由此時開始稱作 Chӳ Quӕc Ngӳ (國語字) (Vien Van Hoc 1961:22) 嘉定報 與台灣 1885 年出版的第一份 羅馬字報紙 Tâi-oân-hú-siân Kàu-ho -pò (台灣府城教會報)一樣 具有 帶頭普及羅馬字的貢獻 另外一個推廣羅馬字的例子是 南部總督在 1882 年簽定一份規定所有越南話的公文要使用羅馬字寫的議定(Vien Van Hoc 1961:22-23) 此外 法國人為了打破 科舉制度 對漢字的保 護 於 1915 年與 1919 年分別廢除越南北部和中部的科舉考試(Nguyen 1998:48) 12 ᤝ ڕ 1866 ڣ Δ1 ଡऄഏ چا ਙ Paulin Vial ڇ ԣ ॾխ From the first days it was recognized that the Chinese language was a barrier between us and the natives ; it is the only one which can bring close to us the Annamites of the colony by inculcating in them the principles of European civilization and isolating them from the hostile influence of our neighbors (quoted in DeFrancis 1977:77)Ζ

416 414! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 雖然在法國殖民者的推行之下 越南羅馬字在 19 世紀後半期比以 前 更 為 普 遍 不 過 就 整 體 而 言 推 行 效 果 仍 舊 很 有 限 (DeFrancis 1977:69) 羅馬字的推行要從 20 世紀初後在越南本土民族主義者的鼓吹 之下才有明顯的進展(DeFrancis 1977:159) 這原因是在反對法國殖民主義 的氛圍之下 凡是用外來的羅馬字就會被當做是倚附外來政權的行 為 不過在越南民族主義者感受到羅馬字簡單好用 是教育民眾的好 工具後 他們就化解對羅馬字的反感 將羅馬字本土化 做為對抗外 來統治的利器 在 1900 年以前 越南的文人 官員以為即使越南在政治上受法國 控制 仍然可以維持文化與精神上的獨立 但是新一輩的改革派注意 到殖民統治所造成的教育與文化衝擊之危險性 他們對於那些巴結法 國人的官員 貴族感到心灰意冷 也擔心成為 亡國奴 所以這些 越南官員大概分作三類 第一是與法國統治者合作 第二是乾脆隱居 起來 作消極抵抗 第三是積極反抗法國殖民統治(SarDesai 1992:14) 基本上 越南的民族主義運動於 20 世紀初開始蓬勃發展起來 主 要的原因是 第一 法國西式教育的影響 雖然殖民者提供的是一種 不完全的殖民教育 不過讓越南人透過這個新式教育可以比傳統教育 有更多的機會來接觸 民族主義 民族國家 民主 與 科 學 等新觀念 第二 20 世紀初民族主義潮流的影響 超過 10 萬的越 南人法國兵在第一次世界大戰( )替法國做軍伕時 對當時的民 族主義熱潮有很深的印象 加上當時美國總統威爾遜(W. Wilson)發表民 族自決的聲明 也成為各地民族運動很大的鼓舞動力 20 世紀初鼓吹羅馬字民族主義運動的頭一個代表性團體算是 東 京義塾 13 東京義塾 在越南所扮演的角色就如同 1920 年代的 13 ፖ H m Nguyen Quang Hong ऱଡԳ ᓫΖ ڶ ᣂψ ࠇᆠቻωΔ ױ ᔹ Marr

417 CH 15. ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșѯᢋ ࠓ ڸ ϟщၷ!ف 415 台灣文化協會 兩者的差別是台灣文化協會並不注重羅馬字 單 只倡導漢字白話文 這個差異剛好造成羅馬字在台灣和越南有不同的 發展命運 東京義塾 的成員主要是一些留學日本的越南知識份子 他們 於 1907 年在首都 河內 (Hà Nӝi)設立 東京義塾 學校 藉以傳授西 方思想與科學新知等 他們認定若要達成啟發民智的目的 非透過羅 馬字不行 所以 東京義塾 的第一要務就是要普及羅馬字 他們欲 透過羅馬字來教育民眾 讓大眾有知識可以對抗法國殖民統治 東 京義塾 雖然成立不到一年就被法國殖民者強迫關閉 不過他們的主 張卻在知識份子之中普遍獲得認同與支持 在他們的影響之下 推 廣羅馬字 成為越南民族主義者的普遍主張與推動要點 也引起一陣 興學 辦羅馬字報紙的風潮(Vuong & Vu 1980:20-32) 根據估計 到 1930 年為止 全越南約有 75 種羅馬字報紙(Hannas 1997:86) 雖然羅馬字在越南民族主義者的推行之下有很大的成就 但這並 不代表羅馬字在當時已經完全取代漢字 在 1945 年以前 越南話 和 越南羅馬字 相對法文與漢文而言仍然被看輕 尤其是被保守派 的知識份子和官員更加瞧不起 舉例來說 有一個越南的政治人物名 叫 Ho Duy Kien 於 1931 年 交趾支那殖民地會議 討論基本教育時指 出 越南話與在法國的 Gascogne Brittany Normandy 或者 Provence 所 發現的 土話 一樣是沒有水準 礙眼的語言 若是要將越南話提昇到 像法國話或者中國話的水準 要花 500 年的時間(DeFrancis 1977) 羅馬字的地位在 1945 年胡志明宣布越南獨立後才進一步提升為國 家唯一的正式書寫文字 胡志明於 1945 年 9 月 2 日宣布成立 越南民 主共和國 後 新政府在 9 月 8 日又立即宣佈全面推行羅馬字的教育 (1971: )Ζ

418 416! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 政策 根據估計 1945 年全國識字的人口大約有 20% 在全面推行羅 馬字後 於 1953 年已經提升到 70% (DeFrancis 1977:240) 總而言之 越南可以從漢字 字喃成功轉換為羅馬字的原因不勝 枚舉 其中最重要的關鍵是 外在 與 內在 因素 外在因素是指越南在長期受中國與法國殖民統治之下 打算利用 越南羅馬字做為文化獨立的基礎 以便進一步保障民族政治的獨立 在 40 年代 日本軍為了侵略中國而出兵到越南 打算將越南做為攻擊 中國西南地區的根據地 對中國來講 派軍隊進入越南以便掃除日軍 的根據地是有必要的 不過對當時仍然佔領越南的法國而言 他們擔 心中國軍隊若又舉兵進入越南會鳩佔鵲巢 甚至會將越南又奪回中國 的手中 對越南的領導人來講 如何利用各國的矛盾好讓越南得以獨 立是首要之事 胡志明對中國相當了解 他也擔心中國利用掃除日軍 做藉口進而佔領越南 所以他的策略是一方面阻擋中國軍隊進入越南 (蔣永敬 1971:107) 一方面策動反中國的運動(蔣永敬 1971: ) 在此 情勢之下 羅馬字無庸置疑的成為確保政治 文化獨立上的最佳選 擇 1945 年日本投降 蔣介石代表聯軍接收台灣和越南北部(北緯 16 以 上) 同時間越南南部是由英國代表接收(Le 2001:10; Bo 2003:69;楊碧川 1998:103) 當時蔣介石派 盧漢 的軍隊 20 萬兵進入越南河內 蔣介 石的軍隊一進入河內 與那些來台灣的軍隊同一個樣 軍紀極差 例 如吃霸王餐 坐霸王車 而且還將傳染病帶入越南 14 蔣介石佔領越 南北部時要求越南必須負擔所有軍糧的開銷 同時還扶持 越南國民 黨 (ViӋt Nam quӕc dân ÿҧng) 與 越南革命同盟會 (ViӋt Nam cách mҥng ÿӗng minh hӝi)欲干預越南的政治(le 2001:10; Bo 2003:76-77) 胡志 14 ፖ ত Ε ټ ୮ψ႓ ω(hoàng TiӃn) ऱଡԳ ᓫΖ

419 CH ( 1998:105) Sainteny (Hip nh s b 6-3)France (Bo 2003:78) (Bo 2003) (Ho 1994:64-65)

420 418! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 的教育 在資源有限的狀況之下 羅馬字當然是最好的選擇 越南的 民族主義領導者在覺悟到時代的變遷後 當機立斷決定採用羅馬字 在掌握到 多數民眾是文盲 只有少數既得利益者看懂漢字 的情形 之下 用全國的力量來推行羅馬字 當然就立見效果 台灣 台灣的 共同體 歷史經驗剛好與越南相反 在 17 世紀後半期台 灣從世界的一部份被納入漢字文化圈之中 雖然日本於 這段 期間介入統治台灣 不過它對台灣脫離漢字文化共同體的幫助很有 限 導致蔣介石軍隊在 1945 年代表聯軍接收台灣時容易用漢字文化圈 的特色製造中國共同體的假象 3.1. 從世界的一部份到漢字文化共同體 1492 年 哥倫布 (Christopher Columbus)代表歐洲人第一次航行到 美洲大陸 幾年後 葡萄牙的航海人 達伽碼 (Vasco da Gama) 於 1498 年經由 好望角 (The Cape of Good Hope) 開啟歐洲到印度的新航 線 15 世紀的結束剛好是新航線 大航海時代的開始 在亞洲 隨著 新航線時代腳步而來的是西歐的傳教活動 國際貿易和殖民主義 荷蘭人於 1579 年脫離西班牙的統治 建立荷蘭共和國 之後與英 國逐漸形成當時新的海上霸權 荷蘭人於 17 世紀初原本要佔領澎湖以 作為和中國買賣的據點 因為中國明朝強烈的反對和抵抗 宣告失 敗 後來中國和荷蘭達成停戰協議 荷蘭要退出明朝統治之下的澎 湖 荷蘭若是要佔領不屬明朝的台灣 明朝並不會干涉(史明 1980:58) 15 ԫ ߢΔϘ ޣ բᆖᄎਬጟ ڗ ऱԳᖂ ᄅऱ ߓڗ อϙ Ϙ լᢝ ڗ ऱ ψ ळω װ ᄅ ߓڗ อϙ ޓ ᣄΖࠏ ڕ ΔStubbs (1980:72) ਐ נ ᅝ ભഏ ऱ פګڶ ޏڗ ऱ ᣂ ਢ ا ฒլ ៱ ޏ ክΖ

421 CH (Campbell 1903:vii) 1636 (Campbell 1903:147; Heylen 2001; 2003:20) ( 2005d) Anderson (1991:37-46) ( ) ( 2003:37) 1895 ( 2005c)

422 420! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 16 形成一種 高低文字 (digraphia ) 的現象 這種現象在早期的越南就 是漢字(高階文字)vs.字喃(低階文字) 若談到台灣 早期民間亦有出現 類似字喃的文字 在此我們將它統稱為 歌仔冊文字 漢字文化圈就是利用漢字文言文做為共同的想像凝聚體 民間發 展出來的 字喃 或者 歌仔冊 雖然分別對越南 台灣的個別民族 意識(national consciousness)有幫助 不過因為官方的打壓及本身的文字 缺陷(難學 難讀)卻無法發揮類似羅馬字在歐洲帶動近代西歐國家國 民文學 國民意識形成的貢獻 總而言之 漢字文化圈中有兩種力 量 其一是透過漢字文言文建構起來以中國皇帝為中心的中國吸引 力 另外一種是透過 字喃 或者 歌仔冊 諸如此類以在地為中心 的本土化力量 漢字文化圈當中的成員是否有辦法脫離中國以形成近 代的民族國家就要視這兩股力量如何角逐 越南近代因為有外力的介入 協助他們切斷透過漢字文言文連起 來的那條越南與中國之間的臍帶 又因為法國推行羅馬字讓越南 誤 打誤撞 得到改善越南語書寫效率的工具來提升本土化力量 所以越 南有辦法於 20 世紀解構漢字共同體 走向民族國家的建構 台灣雖然於 19 世紀末也有外力介入 不過因為佔領台灣的 日 本 本身也是漢字文化圈的國家 所以對台灣欲跳脫漢字共同體的幫 助並不大 若 1884 年當時清國與法國之間為了越南宗主權歸屬問題所 發生的 清法戰爭 (中法戰爭)延續下去 且法國同時佔領台灣與越 南 如此一來台灣的近代史就要改寫 而且台灣有可能用 白話字 16 Dale (1980: 5)ല digraphia ᆠ the use of two (or more) writing systems for representing a single language. DeFrancis (1984: 59) ᆠ the use of two or more different systems of writing the same language. Chiung (2003:9) ല ה ଚऱ ᆠ ଥ ޏ the use of more than one writing varieties to serve different communicational tasks within a society.

423 CH 15. ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșѯᢋ ࠓ ڸ ϟщၷ!ف (P h-o -j ; 台語羅馬字 )取代漢字 何以說日本統治對台灣脫離漢字文化圈並沒有多大的幫助 雖然 日本自 1868 年 明治維新 以後就非常注重 脫華入歐 而且很重視 語文改革和國民教育的重要性(Seeley 1991: ) 不過 日本的語文改 革只明顯提升假名的使用比例 並沒有完全廢除漢字 為何日本沒有 完全廢除漢字呢 因為自 1931 年日本發動 滿州事件 開始全力入侵 中國東北以後 日本軍國主義者氣勢如虹 他們為了紀錄所佔領的中 國地名與人名上的實質需要 而反對廢除漢字(Gottlieb 1995:75-88; Seeley 1991: ) 日本佔領台灣期間雖然一開始就有打算推行日本話 但他們對漢 字的態度仍稱不上是敵視 台灣總督甚至經常舉辦漢詩聯吟大會 招 攬台籍文人來官廳吟詩作對以利拉攏台灣人與日本人間的距離(施懿琳 2000: ) 日本人就是利用漢字文化圈中漢字的 剩餘價值 來做 為軟化台灣人反抗的工具 這與法國人將漢字當作破壞法國 越南關 係的第三者有完全相異的觀點 18 因為日本政府對漢字並不排斥 再加上當時的台灣知識份子對 於使用羅馬字來做台灣話文的書寫工具亦不重視 以至於台灣失去用 羅馬字取代漢字來切斷與漢字文化圈關係的機會 譬如說 日本時期 最積極推行羅馬字的蔡培火 於 1924 年同化會正如火如荼進行時建議 推行羅馬字卻不受重視 蔡於 1931 年對日本官員 伊澤多喜男 遊說 使用羅馬字也得不到支持的回應(張漢裕 2000:19-20) ᇡาᓮ ᔹᓏ (2005a) Εᇀ (2004)Ζ ԫऴ 1937 ڣ ᅮթᆃ ࠌ ش ዧ (ᆺ ف ᛑ 1993:59)Ζ

424 422 kap

425 CH ( 2004) () 4.

426 424! Ȯᇮ ȃнᏱ kap ѯᢋ ঢ়ӕདྷ ȯጾ Н 在描寫清朝統治台灣期間 台灣人起義造反的次數不勝枚舉 雖然台 灣人起義造反的次數很多 為何沒有起義成功甚至進一步建立獨立的 王朝 這個原因不只因為清朝軍隊比起義的民兵更有組織 也因為當 時的人尚未形成整合各族群(ethnic groups)的現代 台灣人意識 以共 同對抗清朝或者其他外來統治者 此外 儒家思想與中國式士大夫教 育是那時的社會主流 整個台灣或者中國社會不曾接觸當時西歐社會 正在流行的民族國家概念 難怪起義的領導者都停留在封建觀念以寄 望有一天可以登基作皇帝 譬如 1721 年有名的朱一貴起義 當時朱 一貴在初期打贏清朝軍隊時 短時間內就自封 中興王 不過當他 和一起打天下的客家籍領導人 杜君英 發生衝突時 沒有多久他就 被清朝鎮壓下來 總之 台灣若要成為現代的主權獨立國家就要加強化本土化的教 育與創造適合本土文化生存的體制 比如推行台灣母語 廢除漢字 改用台灣羅馬字等 同時亦要注意族群關係的發展 避免因為族群衝 突而有少數族群聯合中國來制衡台灣 ȪҐ Н ߓ 2006 Ԓѯᢋ ٴࠓݎޠ ف Ԓ ଇ Ȃ4 У СȂԚѓτᏱȇҐ Н ѯн ޏ ȂϜН ޏ Ҧ ၒዬᙛណȫʳ

427 CH 15. ᅖԆНϾӔӤᡞ ژ Җఋ ঢ়șșѯᢋ ࠓ ڸ ϟщၷ!ف 425 參考書目 Anderson, Benedict Imagined Communities. (Originally published in 1983). New York: Verso. Bôҕ Giáo Duҕc và ào Taҕo Li ch S 12 Tâ p hai [ խᖵ ԿรԲ ]ם. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Giáo Duҕc. Campbell, William Formosa Under the Dutch. (reprinted in 1992) Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Dale, Ian R.H Digraphia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 26, DeFrancis, John Colonialism and Language Policy in Vietnam. The Hague. DeFrancis, John Digraphia. Word 35 (1), ôѻ, ѭ c Hùng Biên Niên S Viê t Nam [ তᒳ ] ڣ. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Thanh Niên. Gottlieb, Nanette Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Hannas, William Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Heylen, Ann Dutch language policy and early Formosan literacy ( ). In Ku Wei-ying (ed.). Missionary Approaches and Linguistics in Mainland China and Taiwan, Leuven: F. Verbiest Foundation and Leuven University Press. Ho Chi Minh Ho Chi Minh: Selected Writings Hanoi: The Gioi. Lê, Mâҕu HaѺn & Trâ n Bá êҕ & NguyêѺn Vçn Thѭ a i C ng Li ch S Viê t Nam [ তᖵ Օጼ]. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Giáo Duҕc. Marr, David G Vietnamese Anticolonialism: California: Univ. of California Press. NguyêѺn, Q. Thç ng Khoa C và Giáo Du c Viê t Nam [ তઝᜰ kap ඒߛ]. Hà Nôҕi: NXB Vçn Hoá.

428 426 kap Nguyên, Quang Hông Ch Hán và ch Nôm vi vn hiên cô iên Viêt Nam [ hm ]. Ngôn Ng & i Sóng 6(5), 2-7. SarDesai D. R Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Seeley, Christopher A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Trân, Trong Kim Viêt Nam S Lc []. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá Thông Tin. (2002 ) Viên Vn Hoc Vân ê Cai Tiên Ch Quôc Ng [ ê ]. Hà Nôi: NXB Vn Hoá. Vng, Kiêm Toàn & V Lân Hi Truyn Bá Quc Ng [ ]. Hà Ni: NXB Giáo Dc. 1980() San Jose: p a hm ê p

429 CH b p c ê p d ê p

430

431 CH khioh

432 430 kap Columbus Vasco da Gama

433 CH () 2001

434 432 kap 2003 ( 40% 60%)

435 CH ( 2004) ( ) () () () 3 () () 8/60 4/68 4/52 (6/16)(4/22) Chinese restaurant

436 434 kap Taiwanese restaurant Chinese Vietnamese restaurant chiâ n leh

437 CH )

438 436 kap

439 CH ()

440 438 kap 5. ( Taiwanese School)

441 CH 16. ӓ౩ͼίѯᢋᇮ НϾϟ ርո! 439 養當地管理幹部 並可透過其政府智庫的角色逐步影響當地 政府的對台政策 c) 積極招收國際學生到台灣留學 並鼓勵國際學術合作 而這 些招生與合作的對象不應集中在歐 美 日國家 更應主動 出訪那些所謂較落後的國家 6. 結論 台灣作為一個新興的海洋國家 如何運用現有的資源應對全球化 的潮流並將台灣語言文化帶上國際舞台已成一重要課題 而這也是台 灣要告別被殖民陰影 建立文化自信與主體性的具體正面做法 台灣一方面應當強化台灣語文的教育 一方面及時運用新移民帶 來的語言文化資產 並將之化為有利於台灣語言文化輸出的利器 同 時在世界各地設立台灣語言文化中心作為台灣文化佈局國際的平台 如此才能茁壯主體性台灣文化的根 增加台灣在國際舞台上的能見度 並展現海洋台灣的實力 ȪҐ Н ߓ 2005 Ԓӓ౩ϾίѯᢋНϾґ ٿ ᇅ Ӫ ଇ Ȃ1 У 12 СȂ ݾ τᏱȫ ʳ 參考文獻 ᓏ 2004τ گ ᒳࢨ گ ᒳΛΫΫᅝছ ࢬߓ ኙ ئ ᖂ ߢԳᦞኪ৫հ υ ψ ߢԳᦞፖ ߢ ᖂ ઔಘᄎωΔ ՕᖂΔ12 18 Ζ

442 Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere

443 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere Introduction The Han character sphere, including Vietnam, Korea, Japan, Taiwan and China, adopted Hanji (Han characters) and classical Han writing as the official written language before the 20 th century. However, the advent of the 20th century brought along great changes. In Vietnam, Han characters and their domestic derivative characters, Chu Nom, which had been adopted as writing systems for more than a thousand years, were officially replaced by the romanized Chu Quoc Ngu in 1945, the year of the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam. Han characters in Korea were finally replaced by phonemic system Hangul after World War II. In Japan, the syllabary Kana system was gradually developed after Japan s adoption of Han characters; the number of Han characters used by Japanese decreased from thousands to 1,945 frequently used characters by 1981 (Hannas 1997). In Taiwan, although romanized systems such as Sinkang Bunsu and Peh-oe-ji were developed centuries ago, Han characters remain the dominant orthography today. In China, simplification of Han characters seems the only harvest after China s efforts at reforming characters for over a century. This paper examines the orthographic transition within the Han sphere in terms of linguistics and sociolinguistics. It centers on two issues: 1) the development and trend of linguistic structure of the later devised scripts, and 2) the factors which contributed to the transition. From the perspective of linguistics, the orthographic structure in evolution tends to represent smaller sound units, that

444 442 kap is, from morphosyllabic, syllabic, to phonemic writing; and from two dimensions to single dimension. Both internal and external factors have contributed to the different outcomes of orthographic reform in these countries. Internal factors include the general public s demand for literacy and anti-feudal hierarchy; external factors include the political relationships between these countries and the origin of Han characters (i.e. China). 2. Historical background within the Han sphere The Chinese attitude towards their neighbors and foreigners can be exactly expressed by an old Chinese philosophy, the Five Clothes System (Wufuzhi; Ngou-hok-che). The Chinese empire set up a world outlook: the capital is great, civilized, and the central point of the world. Further, the empire used the capital as the center of a circle, to draw five circles per 500 kilometers of radius. The farther barbarians are from the central capital, the more barbaric they are. Chinese people call the barbarians from the east as Dong-yi, barbarians from the south as Nan-man, barbarians from west as Xi-rong, and barbarians from the north as Bei-di. All the words are different animal names. Following the thought of the Five Clothes System, the Chinese empire always tried to conquer the barbarians and brought them under the domination of China in order to civilize them. As a consequence, the barbarians were either under China s direct domination or were demanded to pay tributes every certain number of years to recognize the empire s suzerainty (i.e., become a vassal state under China). In this pattern, Vietnam, Korea and Taiwan had been directly

445 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 443 occupied by China for long periods. Although later on they were no longer under direct domination, they became China s vassal states until modern times. For example, Vietnam was brought under China s direct domination in 111 BC by Han Wu Di, the Chinese emperor of Han dynasty. Vietnam could not liberate itself from China until AD 939, during the fall of the powerful Chinese Tang dynasty (Hodgkin 1981). Thereafter, although the Vietnamese established their own independent monarchy, they had to recognize the suzerainty of imperial China in exchange for a millennium of freedom until the late 19th century (SarDesai 1992: 19). Although Japan was not under China s direct domination, due to China s powerful regimes during the times of Han and Tang dynasties, China was the model of imitation for Japan until the 19th century. For example, Japan s Taika Reform in the seventh century marked the first step in the direction of the formation of a Chinese-style centralized state (Seeley 1991: 40). In general, China s main influences on these sinitic countries include: 1) The adoption of Han characters and classical Han writing (bun-gian; wenyan) to write Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese, and Taiwanese, and 2) The importation of Buddhism, Confucianism, the civil service examination and the government official system. According to the civil service examination system, the books of Confucius and Mencius, which were written in classical Han Chinese, were accorded the status of classics among scholars and mandarins who assisted the emperor or king in governing his people (Taylor and Taylor 1995: ). Everyone who desired to become a scholar or mandarin had to learn to use Hanji and

446 444 kap read these classics and pass the imperial examination, unless he had a close relationship with the emperor. Consequently, as Coulmas (2000: 52) has pointed out that such literacy skills functioned as a crucial means of social control, and the Mandarin scholar-bureaucrat embodied this tradition, which perpetuated itself above all through the civil service examination system. Han characters and their classical Han writing thus became the orthodoxy of written language in the Han sphere for over a thousand years. The influence of Han characters on these counties is reflected in the fact that the first historical annals compiled by their governments to record their early history were all written in classical Han. They are Kojiki (AD 712) and Nihon shoki (AD 720) in Japan, Samguk sagi (AD 1145) in Korea, and Dai Viet Su Ky (AD 1253) in Vietnam. From the perspective of literacy, the classics were not only difficult to read (i.e., Hanji), but also hard to understand (i.e., the texts), because the texts were written in classical literary style instead of colloquial style (peh-oe; baihua). 1 In other words, because most of the people were farmers who spent their days laboring in the fields, they had little interest in learning Hanji and classical writing. As a consequence, a literate noble class and an illiterate peasant class were formed and this class division reinforced the feudal system. The complication of Hanji could be well expressed with the old Taiwanese saying, Hanji na thak e- bat, chhui-chhiu to phah si-kat. It means that you cannot understand all the Han characters even if you studied until you could tie your beard into a knot. Or another saying, Si-su Ngou- 1 For more details about classical Han writing, see Norman (1988: ).

447 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 445 keng thak thau-thau, m-bat ku pih chau, which means you still can not distinguish the characters of tortoise, turtle, and cooking stove (because they look so similar in shape) even if you have studied all of the classics. In short, as Chen (1994: 367) has pointed out, since high illiteracy and low efficiency caused by the use of Han characters became impediments to national modernization, the demand for widespread literacy was one of the advising factors pushing orthographic reform in the Han sphere. 3. Orthographic tradition and transition After Han characters were introduced to Vietnam, Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, the local people found that it was extremely difficult to write their vernacular in classical Han writing. They gradually developed various domestic writing schemes, such as Chu Nom in Vietnam, Hangul in Korea, Kana in Japan, and Koaa-chheh in Taiwan. Nevertheless, none of those newly devised schemes ever successfully replaced the orthodoxy status of the Han characters until the 20 th century Vietnam In Vietnam, Han characters were employed since 207 BC during the Nam Viet (South Viet) period (Nguyen 1999: 2). Thereafter, Han characters retained their orthodoxy status during the millennium of Chinese occupation. Not until the tenth century when Vietnam achieved liberation could the domestic scripts Chu Nom have been prominently developed (DeFrancis 1977: 21). Chu Nom, or Nom scripts, means southern writing or southern orthography in contrast to Chu Han, Han writing or Han

448 446 kap characters. Chu Nom in the early period was used as an auxiliary tool of classical Han to record personal or geographical names and local specialties (Nguyen 1999: 2). After a few centuries, the 13 th century was marked by the date of the first literary writing in Chu Nom (DeFrancis 1977: 23). Literary works in Chu Nom achieved popularity from the 16 th to the 18 th century, and reached their peak at the end of the 18 th century (DeFrancis 1977: 44). For example, Truyen Kieu, a novel in Chu Nom considered the masterpiece of Vietnamese literature, was published at the end of the 18 th century. Generally speaking, ordinary people, monks, relegated mandarins, and very limited ultra-anti-chinese nationalist elites were in favor of Chu Nom. In contrast to official domains dominated by Han characters, such as governmental administration, education, academia, and classic literary works, Nom scripts were mainly used for the purposes of recording folktales, composing literary works in pure Vietnamese, translating the Buddhist Scripture, and being used as an auxiliary tool to read classics in Han characters (Nguyen 1999). The orthographic structure of Nom scripts consists of two main categories (DeFrancis 1977: 24-26). The first one may be called simple borrowings, which is in accordance with the existing Han characters in shape, but different in sound or semantic meaning. In other words, Han characters were borrowed for their phonetic or semantic value to represent Vietnamese words. For example, in the case of phonetic borrowings,, which originally meant insect in Chinese and had a Sino-Vietnamese pronunciation /kon/, was borrowed to represent the Vietnamese word con (pronounced as /kon/ and means child or offspring). In such a case, the original Chinese meaning of Han characters was

449 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 447 ignored and only their Sino-Vietnamese sound was preserved to indicate the pronunciation of the corresponding Vietnamese words. On the other hand, the pronunciation of characters was ignored and only their semantic meaning was preserved in the case of semantic borrowings. The second category may be called composite creations, which were developed relatively later than the first one (personal communication with Nguyen Quang Hong). In this category, Nom scripts were made by combining two Han characters, usually where one was taken over for its meaning and the other for its pronunciation (DeFrancis 1977: 25). For example, the Vietnamese word con was also written as at a later time. It comprises two Han characters (with Chinese meaning child or offspring and Sino-Vietnamese pronunciation /tu/) and. In this case, refers to its meaning and indicates its pronunciation. Although Nom scripts were being developed for at least a thousand years, they are still far away from standardization (The Anh 1999: 5; DeFrancis 1977: 24-30). Because of inconsistency, a Vietnamese word may be written in different Nom scripts, such as,, and, which are all referring to the same word Chu Nom. The major causes of inconsistency are 1) the lack of institutional support since the mandarin and scholar class as a whole looked with disdain on the Nom literature, 2) the fact that Nom scripts were not devised under systematic linguistic planning as Hangul was in Korea; instead, Nom scripts were created by individual authorship in different time and places, and 3) the inheriting of inconsistencies from Han characters. Although the domestic Nom scripts have been around since the 10 th century, they neither reached the same prestige as Han

450 448 kap characters, nor replaced the classical Han writing. In contrast, Chu Nom was generally regarded as a vulgar writing, which indicates the low language in digraphia. Moreover, Nom scripts were eventually forced to yield themselves to the Chu Quoc Ngu, a romanized writing system originally devised in the early 17 th century, which finally became the only official orthography of Vietnam in The factors that contributed to the fate of Chu Nom are as follows: First, the Vietnamese were deeply influenced by Chinese values with regard to Han characters. Since Hanji was regarded highly as the only official orthography in China, which was the suzerain of Vietnam, the Vietnamese people had no choice but to follow this traditional value assignment. As a consequence, the Vietnamese rulers in all dynasties, except a few short-lived strongly anti-chinese rulers, such as Ho Quy Ly ( ) and Quang Trung ( ), had to recognize Han characters as the institutional writing criteria. Second, writing in Nom scripts was restricted by the civil service examination. Because the examination system was based exclusively on the contents of Chinese classics written in Hanji, all the literati that wished to pass the exam had to study the classics. Once they passed the exam and became bureaucrats, they had to maintain the examination system to ensure their monopoly of power and knowledge in the Chinese-style feudal hierarchy (DeFrancis 1977: 47). Third, the development of Nom scripts was highly restricted by the nature of their orthographic structure. Because Chu Nom comprises one or two Han characters to form a new Nom character, it inherited all the defects of Han characters (DeFrancis

451 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere : 25). The much more complicated structure caused Nom scripts even more problems in areas of efficiency, accuracy, and consistency. Normally, one has to learn Han characters first before s/he could fully master Nom scripts (personal communication with Nguyen Quang Hong). Consequently, learning to read and write in Nom scripts is more laborious than in Han characters. In the late 16 th and early 17 th century, European missionaries from countries including Portugal, Italy, and France gradually came to preach in Vietnam. To get their ideas across to the local people, the missionaries recognized that knowledge of spoken Vietnamese was essential. The romanized writing system was thus devised to assist missionaries to acquire the Vietnamese language (Do 1972). It is apparent that the Vietnamese romanization resulted from collective efforts, with the influences of diverse backgrounds of missionaries (Thompson 1987: 54-55; Ly 1996: 5). Among the variants of Vietnamese romanization, Alexandre de Rhodes is usually referred to as the person who provided the first systematic work of Vietnamese romanization (DeFrancis 1977: 54). In 1651, Alexandre de Rhodes published the first romanized dictionary, Dictionarium Annamiticum, Lusitanum et Latinum (Vietnamese-Portuguese-Latin), and a Vietnamese catechism Cathechismus. De Rhodes romanized system, with some later changes, became the present Chu Quoc Ngu (literally, national scripts). The development of romanized writing in Vietnam can be divided into four periods: 1) Church period, from the early 17 th century to the first half of the 19 th century. During this time, Roman scripts were mainly used in church and among religious followers. 2) French promotion period during the second half of

452 450 kap the 19 th century after the French invaded Vietnam in 1858 (Vien Van Hoc 1961: 21-23). In this period, romanized Vietnamese were intentionally promoted by the French aiming to replace the classical Chinese with French ultimately (DeFrancis 1977: ). 3) Nationalist promotion period during the first half of the 20 th century. In this period, Vietnamese romanization was promoted by anti-colonialism organizations, such as the Dong Kinh Nghia Thuc 2 and Hoi Truyen Ba Quoc Ngu 3 (Vien Van Hoc 1961: 24). Because roman scripts were no longer associated with the French colonialists, but were considered as an efficient literacy tool, romanization thus received much more recognition by the Vietnamese people than in the period of French promotion (DeFrancis 1977: 159). 4) National status period after 1945, when Ho Chi Minh declared the exclusive use of Chu Quoc Ngu (Ho Chi Minh 1994: 64-65). How was Vietnam able to successfully replace Han characters and Chu Nom with romanized Chu Quoc Ngu? I would attribute this success to two crucial factors: 1) internal factors of social demand for literacy and anti-feudal hierarchy, and 2) external factors of political interaction between Vietnam and China in the international sphere during the first half of the 20th century. These two crucial points also apply to other cases of language and orthographic reform in the Han sphere. Internal factors of social demand for literacy and anti-feudal hierarchy are understandable. Recall that China was the only major threat to the traditional feudal society of Vietnam prior to 2 Dong Kinh Free School. 3 Association for Promoting Chu Quoc Ngu.

453 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 451 the 19 th century. Under such conditions, although the adoption of Han characters could cause the majority of Vietnamese to be illiterate, it could, on the other hand, minimize the potential invasion from China, and more importantly, preserve the vested interests of the Vietnamese bureaucrats in the Chinese-style feudal hierarchy. However, with the advent of the 20 th century, Vietnam faced a train of international colonialism. Since Ho Chi Minh claimed that 95 percent of Vietnam s total population was illiterate, it was important to equip the people with primary education, which was considered essential to modernization in order to fight against imperialisms (Ho Chi Minh 1994: 64-65). Although the domestic-made Nom scripts, to some extent, represented the Vietnamese spirit, their fatal weakness in literacy had withdrawn themselves from the candidates of being a national writing system in the modern time. Thus, the efficient and easily learned romanization was the best choice for literacy in contrast to the complexity of Han characters and Nom scripts. Since the majority of Vietnamese were illiterates, and only a few elites were skilled in Han writing or French during the promotion of Quoc Ngu, it was clear that romanized Vietnamese would be favored by the majority, and thus win the literacy campaign. External factors involve the complexity of the international situation in the 1940s. As Hodgkin (1981: 288) stated, the Vietnamese were faced with a varying combination of partly competing, partly collaborating imperialisms, French, Japanese, British and American, with Kuomintang China. At that time, Vietnam was considered an important base from which to attack

454 452 kap southern China 4 when Japan s invasion of China became more apparent and aggressive since the 1930s (Hodgkin 1981: 288). The Japanese military eventually entered Vietnam and shared with the French the control of Vietnam in the early 1940s. From the perspective of China, suppression against Japan s military activities in Vietnam was desired. However, the French were afraid that China would take over Vietnam again if Chinese troops entered Vietnam under the excuse of suppression of the Japanese forces (Jiang 1971: 181). For the Vietnamese people, maintaining their national identity and achieving national independence from the imperialisms were considered priority by their leaders such as Ho Chi Minh. Ho s Chinese strategy was to keep Chinese forces away from Vietnam, and minimize the possibility of a Chinese comeback in Indochina. Politically speaking, Ho opposed Chinese army entering Vietnam (Jiang 1971: 107) as well as instigated anti-chinese movement (Jiang 1971: ); Culturally, romanized Vietnamese was considered a distinctive feature of the cultural boundary between Vietnam and China. These considerations impelled Ho in favor of romanization rather than Han characters which are used in China Korea Han characters were probably introduced to Korea by Chinese immigrants escaping China s civil wars during the Warring States period (BC ) (Ledyard 1966: 22-23). Han 4 In the view point of Japan, domination of Vietnam and its northern trade-route was essential for effective control of southern China since the Tonkin Railway from Haiphong to Yunnan was a vital source of supplies for Kuomintang China (Hodgkin: 288).

455 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 453 characters became institutionalized after Han Wu Di brought northern Korea under direct Chinese domination in 108 BC (Ledyard 1966: 23). China s control of northern Korea lasted until the fourth century. Meanwhile, the deposed Korean people migrated south and spilt into three kingdoms: Silla (BC AD), Paekche (BC AD), and Koguryo (BC AD), which were all unified by Silla in 668AD. In addition to the territory of Chinese domination, Han characters were also used among the elites in the three kingdoms (Taylor and Taylor 1995: 203). In 958AD, the Chinese-style civil service examination system was established by the Koryo kingdom, which had replaced the Unified Silla in 935AD. The state examination system lasted in Korea for a thousand years until 1894 (Taylor and Taylor 1995: ). Once the Koreans adopted Han characters, they encountered difficulties in understanding the classical Han writing. They gradually developed their own remedial measures to make the writing in Han characters more accessible to the Korean-speaking people. Beginning in the late sixth and early seventh centuries, two major remedies were developed, later known as Hyangch al and Idu. Hyangch al was mainly applied in transcribing vernacular poetry. Idu served as a bureaucratic tool for the clarification of administrative documents written in literary Chinese, and it lasted until the end of the 19 th century (Ledyard 1966: 34). Texts in Hyangch al and Idu were both written in Han characters. The arrangement of word order in Hyangch al was in accordance with the Korean language. However, the text of Idu wavers between Chinese and Korean syntax and is marked by the insertion of Korean grammatical forms intended to aid Korean

456 454 kap readers (Ledyard 1966: 33). In both types, either sound borrowings or semantic borrowings were adopted while choosing Han characters to represent Korean language (Taylor and Taylor 1995: ). Although the Korean elites had developed Hyangch al and Idu, the demand for a more accessible writing system grew stronger as the 15 th century progressed (Ledyard 1966: 70). In the 15 th century, the Korean King Sejong and his scholars undertook a project of new scripts for writing the Korean vernacular. The project was carried out in 1443, and was officially proclaimed in the title of Hun Min Jong Um 5 in 1446 (Ledyard 1966: 91-99). The scripts of the Hun Min Jong Um were known in the 20 th century as Hangul, the Korean alphabets, consisting of 28 letters to write Korean in a phonemic way (Shin et al. 1990). Although the new system of Hangul was very efficient, thus possible as a tool for widespread literacy, it soon faced opposition from the privileged bureaucrat and literate classes. The bestknown anti-sejong faction was led by Malli Choi, the highest purely academic rank in the College of Assembled Worthies (Ledyard 1966: ). In 1444, Choi presented Sejong with a petition against the new orthographic invention, as follows: In the first place it is a violation of the principle of maintaining friendly relations with China, to invent and use letters, which do not exist in China Those who seek position in the government will not seek to learn Chinese characters with patience, and consequently, 5 Literary, Correct Sounds to Instruct People.

457 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 455 Chinese literature, which is our only study and sole literature, will flourish no longer. The Vulgar Script [i.e., Hangul], which is a mere novelty will cause hindrance to study, disadvantage and inefficiency to administration (Lee 1957: 30-31). The opposition to the new scripts lasted decades even after the death of Sejong. Moreover, writing in Hangul was banned by the regent Yonsan gun after the literati purge of 1504 (Ledyard 1966: 322). Consequently, Hangul was used in very limited circles and domains. For centuries after its creation, Hangul was variously called onmun (vulgar script), women s letters, monks letters, or children s letters (Taylor and Taylor 1995: 212). For most of its history, Hangul was regarded as a poor person s substitute for real writing, which was either classical Chinese written in characters or stilted Korean written in Chinese characters (Hannas 1997: 51). The inferior development of Hangul reached a turning point at the beginning of the 20 th century. During Japanese occupation of Korea ( ), Japan s harsh policy to restrict the use of the Korean language had enhanced the Korean identity of Hangul (Coulmas 2000: 56). Moreover, the user-friendly characteristic of Hangul made it favorable to the Korean nationalists in the consideration of literacy. In other words, Hangul, similarly to Chu Quoc Ngu in Vietnam, was chosen as the tool to eliminate illiteracy in order to fight against the Japanese imperialism. As Hangul gained more recognition and had become more widespread than ever before, it was further promoted to the status

458 456 kap of the official national script when the Korean people began to build their modern nation-state(s) after the World War II. After the war, Han characters in North Korea were officially abolished in favor of the exclusive use of Hangul. In South Korea, although the policy of abolition of Han characters was not consistently executed, the use of Han characters has dramatically declined over the past decades (Taylor & Taylor 1995: ). In short, Han characters have shifted from a dominant status to a supplementary tool to the Hangul Japan It is estimated that around the fifth century, Han characters were brought over to Japan by Korean scholars (Seeley 1991: 6). Thereafter, due to an increasing cultural dependence on China, exemplified for instance by the Taika Reform ( ), Han characters and the classics written in them became more prominent and prestigious in the Japanese society by the seventh century (Seeley 1991: 40). Once the Japanese embraced the classical Han writing, they encountered similar difficulties in reading the Chinese classics as were seen in the cases of Vietnam and Korea. Again, the Japanese utilized sound borrowings and semantic borrowings to overcome the problems. Those remedies were both well adopted in the famous Man yoshu (Collection of a Myriad Leaves), a collection of Japanese poems compiled around 759. In the method of sound borrowings of the Man yoshu, the original meaning of Han characters was disregarded, while their Chinese pronunciation or Japanese kun pronunciation in accordance with the characters was borrowed. The sub-methods based on

459 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 457 characters sounds were called shakuon and shakukun respectively. Because shakuon and shakukun are the prominent features in the writing of Man yoshu, they are generally called man yogana, a combination of man yo, from the title of Man yoshu, and kana, the syllabary (Habein 1984: 12). Because of their complexity and inconsistency, starting in the ninth century, the man yogana-like systems were moving toward a process of simplification to Han characters used as phonograms (Seeley 1991: 59). Among the various simplified syllabaries, Katakana and Hiragana, currently in use after modern standardization, were well developed and widely used at least by the 10 th century (Habein 1984: 22-35; Seeley 1991: 69-75). Katakana referred to as imperfect kana, was developed by priests. Hiragana was called onnade (woman s handwriting) or onnamoji (woman s letters). Because women were excluded from the study of literary Chinese, they were most likely to use hiragana (Habein 1984: 25). The Heian period ( ) was the time of introduction of reading and writing to the noble class. In later centuries, literacy was brought to broader public, leading to diversification and complication of writing styles, which include literary Chinese, Kana, and a hybrid of Han characters with Kana (Habein 1984: 4). The issue of script reform was raised again as the public became highly concerned with the opening of Japan to the West from the later part of the 19 th century onwards. After the imperial regime was restored in 1868, Emperor Meiji opened his door to foreign countries, which resulted in enormous changes in daily life. Among the changes was the increase of new words coined for the overwhelming number of unfamiliar concepts and objects

460 458 kap from the West. In this situation, the intellectuals raised the issues of language reform in the consideration of better literacy and education. There were three major proposals in this reform: 1) to replace the current chaotic systems with a Kana-only system, 2) to replace the existing systems with romanization, and 3) to limit the number of Han characters in use (Seeley 1991: ). After the successful political reform of Emperor Meiji, which was manifested in two victorious wars, i.e. the Sino-Japanese war of and the Russo-Japanese war of , the Japanese stimulated by the victories embarked on the idea that the nation could be mobilized through more effective education, to which script reform was considered important (Gottlieb 1995: 25). This belief eventually brought language reform into practical trials in the early part of the 20 th century. Because using Kana-only or romanization was considered too radical, the orthographic reform was thus, in fact, centered on restricting the number of commonly used Han characters and the standardization of the Kana usage (Seeley 1991: 142). Such efforts were reflected in the following developments: new regulations aimed at simplifying the teaching of written Japanese at the primary schools were issued by the Education Ministry in 1900; Kanji seirian Proposed Modifications to Han Characters was published in 1919 by Hoshina et al.; Kanazukai no Kaitei An Proposal for the Revision of Kana Usage was released by the Interim Committee on the National Language in 1924; Toyo kanjihyo List of Characters for general Use was proposed by the Interim Committee in 1923, revised in 1931 as Toyo kanjihyo, which consists of 1856 characters. As time went on, Japan s language policy was driven by

461 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 459 imperatives from modernization to imperialism in the first half of the 20 th century (Gottlieb 1995: 21). The influence of the military and the ultranationalists became more and more powerful when Japan became more aggressive in preparation for conquering China. The influence was substantial especially after the Manchuria Incident of 1931, in which three northeast provinces of China were under Japan s occupation. From the perspective of the military and ultranationalists, Han characters and historical Kana usage were kotodama, the spirit of the Japanese language, which constitutes the essence of the Japanese national spirit. Therefore, reform proposals, such as abolition of Han characters, romanization, or new Kana usage, were considered to be attempts at tampering Japan s spirit, culture, and history. For example, the Interim Committee s proposals of 1931 to restrict characters and to introduce a new Kana usage were dismissed because of fierce oppositions from the conservatives. In another case in 1939, a number of romanization advocates were arrested on the charge of anti-nationalist sympathies (Gottlieb 1995: 75-88; Seeley 1991: ). Although many efforts were brought to the script reform, wider adoption of reform proposals could not become reality until the end of World War II, when the Japanese army surrendered to the Allied Forces (Seeley 1991: 151; Hannas 1997: 43). After the defeat of 1945, the military and ultranationalist voices were suppressed. As Eastman (1983: 23) has pointed out, without any social, cultural, or political changes, orthography reform is not likely to succeed. Japan s dramatic changes after the war thus created the atmosphere and conditions necessary to carry out script reform. In 1946, under the supervision of the Supreme

462 460 kap Command for the Allied Powers (SCAP), Japan s cabinet promulgated Toyo kanjihyo, the list of 1850 characters for daily use, and Gendai kanazukai, the new modern Kana usage, as the first step of script reform after the war (Unger 1996: 58; Seeley 1991: 152). At present, Han characters and Kana syllabary all serve as the official scripts in the hybrid Japanese writing system. This fact makes Japan the only case, among examples analyzed in this paper, where Han characters were not officially abolished after domestic scripts were promoted to national status. Why were Han characters not abolished in Japan? Both internal and external factors have contributed to the outcome. From the perspective of literacy and anti-feudal hierarchy, by the early 20 th century, Japan had reached a much higher degree of literacy and modernization in comparison with other Asian countries. 6 This achievement gave the conservatives the impression that Han characters need not be abolished as long as Kana syllabary was in actual use. Furthermore, although Han characters were originally imported from China, they were converted from a pure foreign invention to an indigenized writing system over more than a thousand years of adoption use. In other words, Hanji was regarded by the Japanese as part of their language, which was totally different from the case of the Vietnamese, who considered Han characters as Chinese script and Chu Nom as their own. Why did Japan and Vietnam 6 For example, Koji Taira estimated that male and female literacy rates rose from about 35 and 8 percent, respectively, to about 75 and 68 percent between the beginning and end of the Meiji period ( ) (quoted in Unger 1996: 35). Aso and Amano reported that 86.9 percent of Japanese children attended four-year compulsory schooling in 1905 (quoted in Okano and Tsuchiya 1999: 19).

463 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 461 have reverse perceptions of Han characters? Recall that historically, Japan was never under the direct control of China. On the contrary, Japan s imperialism and militarism became a fateful threat to China in the modern period. However, battles against China frequently occurred in the history of Vietnam. That is to say, the Japanese did not associate the use of Han characters with the potential invader (i.e., China). As a matter of fact, the use of Han characters was even considered necessary once Japan launched invasion of China. For example, the Interim Committee s proposal, Toyo kanjihyo of 1931, was strongly opposed by the military because of the practical need to write a large number of Chinese personal and place names of the newly occupied Chinese territories (Seeley 1991: 147) Taiwan Although Taiwan is currently a Hanji-dominated society, romanization was once the first and the only writing system used in Taiwan (Chiung 2001c). The first system of romanization was introduced by the Dutch missionaries in the first half of the 17 th century. Thereafter, Han characters were imposed in Taiwan by the sinitic Koxinga regime in the second half of the 17th century. As the number of Han immigrants from China dramatically increased, Han characters gradually became the dominant writing system in Taiwan. At present, only Han characters and modern standard Chinese (Mandarin) are taught in Taiwan s national education system. In contrast, romanization is excluded from school education. 7 7 Starting Fall semester 2001, a one-hour mother tongue elective course is added to the

464 462 kap Taiwan is a multilingual and multiethnic island country. There are currently more than twenty languages in Taiwan, including indigenous languages, Hakka, Holo Taiwanese, and Mandarin Chinese (Grimes 1996). Generally speaking, Taiwan s population can be divided into four primary ethnic groups: indigenous (1.7%), Hakka (12%), Holo (73.3%), and Mainlanders (13%) (Huang 1993: 21). Hakka and Holo are the so-called Han people. In fact, many of them are descendants of intermarriage between sinitic immigrants and local Taiwanese aboriginals during the Koxinga and Qing periods. Mainlanders, who came to Taiwan with the Chiang Kai-shek s KMT regime in the late 1940s, are the latest immigrants from China. Although Hakka, Holo, and Mainlanders are all immigrants originally from China, they have different national identities. For example, most of the Holo and Hakka people identify themselves as Taiwanese, However, according to Ong s investigation, 54% of the surveyed Mainlanders still identify themselves as Chinese. Only 7.3% identify themselves as Taiwanese, and the rest are neutral (Ong 1993: 87). Their divergent identity of Taiwan is also a factor influencing the promotion of Taiwanese language(s). In addition to being a multiethnic society, Taiwan has been colonized by several foreign regimes since the seventeenth century. Prior to foreign occupation, Taiwan was a collection of many different indigenous tribes, which did not belong to any countries, such as China or Japan. In 1624, the Dutch occupied Taiwan and established the first alien regime in Taiwan. Roman curriculum of elementary schools. Teachers may choose to teach romanization or other scripts for written Taiwanese.

465 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 463 scripts were then introduced to Taiwan by the Dutch. The first romanization was used to write the indigenous Siraya language, which has since become extinct. In 1661, Koxinga, a remnant force of the former Chinese Ming Dynasty, failed to restore the Ming Dynasty against the new Qing Dynasty and subsequently retreated to Taiwan. Koxinga expelled the Dutch and established a sinitic regime in Taiwan as a base for retaking the Mainland. Confucianism and civil service examination were thus imposed in Taiwan during Koxinga s regime and maintained under the Qing Dynasty. The Koxinga regime was later annexed by the Chinese Qing Dynasty in During the late Qing period (in the second half of the 19 th century), Peh-oe-ji (Scripts of Vernacular Speech), the second romanization in Taiwan, was introduced by western (Tiu n 2001; Chiung 2001b). Peh-oe-ji is mainly used for Holo Taiwanese, who constitut the majority of Taiwan s current population. Two centuries after the Qing s occupation, the sovereignty of Taiwan was transferred from China to Japan as a consequence of the Sino-Japanese war in At the end of World War II, Japanese forces surrendered to the Allied Forces. Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT 8 or Kuomintang), took over Taiwan on behalf of the Allied Powers under General Order No.1 of September 2, 1945 (Peng and Ng 1995: 60-61). Simultaneously, Chiang Kai-shek was fighting against the Chinese Communist Party in Mainland China. In 1949, Chiang s troops were completely defeated and then pursued by the Chinese Communists. At that time, Taiwan s 8 KMT was the ruling party in Taiwan since 1945 until 2000, in which year Chen Shuibian, the presidential candidate of opposition party Democratic Progressive Party, was elected the new president.

466 464 kap national status was supposed to be dealt with by a peace treaty among the fighting nations. However, because of his defeat in China, Chiang decided to occupy Taiwan as a base from which he would fight to recover the Mainland (Kerr 1992; Peng and Ng 1995; Su 1980; Ong 1993). Consequently, Chiang s political regime called the Republic of China (R.O.C) was renewed in Taiwan and has remained there since National Language Policy or monolingual policy was adopted both during the Japanese and KMT occupations of Taiwan (Huang 1993; Tsao 1999; Png 1965; Tiu n 1974). In the case of KMT s monolingual policy, the Taiwanese people were not allowed to speak their vernaculars in public. Moreover, they were forced to learn Mandarin Chinese and to identify themselves as Chinese through the national education system (Cheng 1996; Tiu n 1996). As Hsiau (1997: 307) has pointed out, the usage of Mandarin as a national language becomes a testimony of the Chineseness of the KMT state, in other words, the Chinese KMT regime tried to convert the Taiwanese into becoming Chinese through Mandarin monolingualism. Research by scholars such as Chan (1994) and Young (1988) has revealed that a language shift toward Mandarin is in progress. Huang (1993: 160) goes so far as to suggest that the indigenous languages of Taiwan are all endangered. 9 Republic of China was formerly the official name of the Chinese government ( ) in China, but was replaced by the People s Republic of China (P.R.C) in Once the R.O.C was renewed in Taiwan, the ruling party KMT claimed that R.O.C has sovereignty over Mainland China and is the only legal government, which represents all of China. This extravagant claim was not changed until 2000, when the opposition party DPP won the presidential election.

467 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 465 In response to KMT s National Language Policy, the promoters of Taiwanese have protested against the monolingual policy and have demanded bilingual education in schools. This is the so-called Taigibun Untong Taiwanese language movement that has substantially grown since the second half of the 1980s (Hsiau 1997; Erbaugh 1995; Huang 1993; Li 1999; Lim 1996). There are two core issues for the Taiwanese language movement. First, the movement wishes to promote spoken Taiwanese 10 in order to maintain people s vernacular speech. Second, the movement aims to promote and standardize written Taiwanese in order to develop Taiwanese (vernacular) literature. 11 Because written Taiwanese is not well standardized and not taught through the national education system, Taiwanese speakers have to write in Modern Written Chinese (MWC) instead of Written Taiwanese (WT). In other words, people speak in Taiwanese, but write in MWC. Although more than a hundred orthographies have been proposed by different persons enthusiastic for the standardization of written Taiwanese, most of the designs have most likely been accepted and used only by their own designers. Moreover, many of the designs were never applied to practical writing after they were devised. Because of the wide use of the personal computer and electronic networks in Taiwan since the 1990s, most 10 The broad definition of Taiwanese includes all the indigenous languages, Hakka, and Holooe. Occasionally, Taiwanese refers to Holooe only, which is the language spoken by the Holo people. Holooe is also called Holo Taiwanese, Taigi, Tai-yu, Holooe, Southern Min, or Min-nan. 11 Although the issues of written Taiwanese include Hakka and indigenous languages, most literary works are written in the Holo language. This fact makes the Holo language the focus of the written Taiwanese. Therefore, the term written Taiwanese in this paper refers only to the written form of the Holo language, if not specified.

468 466 kap orthographic designs, which require extra technical support other than regular Mandarin software, are unable to survive. Therefore, the majority of recent Taiwanese writing systems are either in Han characters, Roman alphabet or a mixed system combing Roman and Han, as Cheng (1990) and Tiu n (1998) have documented. The orthographic situation in Taiwan is as complicated as Taiwan s political status and people s national identity. Linguistically, people in Taiwan have to face the issue of whether to use MWC or WT as their written language. Furthermore, people who choose WT have to decide which scripts will be adopted while they are writing in Taiwanese. Politically, Taiwan is currently in an ambiguous political status, i.e., neither nominally an independent Republic of Taiwan nor substantially a province of the People s Republic of China (Peng and Ng 1995). This political ambiguity mirrors people s divergent national identity, which is usually categorized as 1) Taiwanese-only, 2) 12 Chinese-only, and 3) both Taiwanese and Chinese. Consequently, the diversity of the public s national identity has led to different political claims, i.e., independence, unification with China, or maintaining the status quo. 13 The contemporary Taiwanese language movement since the 1980s reflects Taiwan s socio-political complexity and its colonial 12 Taiwanese-only means that people identify themselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese. Both Taiwanese and Chinese refers to people who identify themselves as both Taiwanese and Chinese. For more information about the identity issue, readers may refer to Chang (1993), Si (1994, 1996, 1997, 1998), Huang (2000), and Tse (2000). 13 Their proportion of supporters may vary slightly from poll to poll, but in general, less than 20% of Taiwan s populations in recent years are in favor of unification with China (Huang 2000; Tse 2000).

469 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 467 background. In terms of Fishman s (1968) nationalism 14 and nationism, 15 it reveals the controversial relationship among Chinese nationalism-nationism, 16 Taiwanese nationalism and Taiwanese nationism as illustrated in figure 1.Figure 1. Chinese Nationalism & Nationism Taiwanese Nationalism Taiwanese Nationism Figure 1. Relationship among Chinese nationalism-nationism, Taiwanese nationalism, and Taiwanese nationism. 14 Fishman (1968:41) defines nationalism as the process of transformation from fragmentary and tradition-bound ethnicity to unifying and ideologized nationality. The role of language in nationalism is that it serves as a link to the glorious past and with authenticity. A language is not only a vehicle for the history of a nationality, but also a part of history itself (Fasold 1984: 3). 15 Fishman (1968: 42) describes nationism as wherever politico-geographic momentum and consideration are in advance of sociocultural momentum and consideration. The role of language in nationism is that whatever language does the job best is the best choice (Fasold 1984: 3). In other words, language in nationism plays a more instrumental role. For example, considering government administration and education, a language or languages which do the job best must be chosen. 16 At the beginning of Chinese KMT s occupation of Taiwan, Chinese nationists may have held different opinions from Chinese nationalists. However, later on when the use of Mandarin by people in Taiwan dramatically increased, the objects of Chinese nationalism and Chinese nationism became the same. That is, to keep using Mandarin since it has dominated educational and governmental functions in Taiwan. Therefore, I do not distinguish Chinese nationalism from Chinese nationism here.

470 468 kap In the dimension of nationalism and nationism, the chart reveals the political tensions between Chinese and Taiwanese. Chinese nationalism can be inherited internally from Chinese KMT and as well as externally from the People s Republic of China. The strong conflicts between KMT s Chinese nationalism and Taiwanese nationalism were overt in the anti-kmt movement 17 during the second half of the 1980s and the entire 1990s. The conflicts between PRC Chinese nationalism and Taiwanese nationalism started in the late 1980s 18 and reached the climax in 1999 when the former president Teng-hui Lee claimed that Taiwan and China hold special state to state relationship. In the dimension of Taiwanese, the chart shows the expanding tension between Taiwanese nationalism and Taiwanese nationism. Some Taiwanese politicians and intellectuals who lead socio-political movement, such as Hong-Beng Tan, Sui-kim Phenn and Chhun-Beng Ng, do not view the Taiwanese language movement as a necessary step even though they identify themselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese. In their ideology, they disapprove of the KMT s strict national language policy; however, they have come to the stage to accept the results of the national language policy. In other words, they recognize the legitimate status of the colonial language, i.e., Mandarin Chinese as the official language since it has been widespread in Taiwan 17 In this paper, I consider 1986, when the first native opposition party Democratic Progressive Party was born, the beginning of anti-kmt movement though its origin can be traced back to the 1970s. KMT lost its ruling status in the 2000 presidential election; therefore, 2000 was considered the end of the anti-kmt movement. 18 For example, Iu-choan Chhoa, Cho-tek Khou, and Lam-iong Tenn claimed the independence of Taiwan to the public in 1987.

471 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 469 after more than fifty years of promotion. However, they are criticized by Taiwanese nationalists who claim that they have ignored the threat of Chinese nationalism from China. From the perspective of Taiwanese nationalism, Taiwanese language is not only a medium for communication, but also a part of history and spirit of Taiwan. Moreover, it is considered a national defense against Chinese nationalism of the PRC and the ROC (Lim 1996, 1997, 1998; Li 1999; Chiu n 1996). The complexity of the socio-political background has prevented Taiwan s domestic scripts from being promoted to a national status. Therefore, in contrast to Vietnam, Korea, and Japan, Taiwan is the unique case where the vernacular writing is still under development. Both internal and external factors, as I proposed, have contributed to the inferior development of Taiwanese orthography. In terms of internal demands for literacy and anti-feudal hierarchy, written Taiwanese was not effectively promoted at the right time when the public met their literacy demands in the early 20 th century during the Japanese occupation. 19 Nowadays, Taiwan has shifted from a traditional feudal society to a modern one, in which the requirement of a minimum of 9 years of compulsory education has been in place since It is claimed that Taiwan s current population has reached a literacy rate of 94%. 20 That is, the majority of people in Taiwan have acquired some 19 The causes are complicated. On one hand, it was because of the opposition from the Japanese colonialist; on the other hand, the elites preference for Han characters was caused by their internalized socialization and misunderstanding of the nature and function of Han characters (Chiung 2001a). 20 Based on the statistical data of Taiwan s Minister of Interior.

472 470 kap literacy skills in Han characters and Modern Written Chinese. This fact has reduced the need to promote a new orthography on the bases of public s literacy. From the perspective of external factors, because of the complexity and ambiguity of the political relationship between Taiwan and China, Han characters are not substantially regarded as a foreign script by the people in Taiwan. In contrast, roman scripts are generally considered as a foreign invention, even though romanized writing has existed in Taiwan for hundreds years (Chiung 2001). As Gelb (Gelb 1952: 196) has pointed out, in all cases it was the foreigners who were not afraid to break away from sacred traditions and were thus able to introduce reforms which led to new and revolutionary developments. The weak distinction between Taiwanese people and Chinese people in terms national identity has thus undermined the promotion of roman scripts and written Taiwanese. 4. Orthography, literacy, and socio-political identity Regarding issues of orthography, Gelb (1952) and Smalley (1963) have developed a remarkable classification of the world s writing systems. They classify orthographic systems based on the sound units they represent. According to this norm, orthographies can be grouped into four linguistic levels, i.e. morphemic, syllabic, phonemic, and phonetic writing systems, corresponding to the sound units of morphemes (or words), syllables, phonemes, and phonetic features. Han characters are the best example of morphemic 21 writing, because almost every Han character 21 In terms of DeFrancis (1990), the Han writing system is a form of morphosyllabic

473 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 471 symbolizes a morpheme or a word and can be combined with other characters to form new words. Japanese Kana is an example of syllabic writing (syllabary). Examples of phonemic 22 systems are Taiwanese Peh-oe-ji, Vietnamese Chu Quoc Ngu, Korean Hangul, English, and many other languages using Latin scripts. In phonemic writing, the symbols represent corresponding phonemes. 23 The various types of phonemic systems can be further categorized based on their arrangement of sound symbols. For example, Korean Hangul has a two-dimension orthographic structure. Peh-oe-ji and Chu Quoc Ngu both have a singledimension linear structure. However, Chu Quoc Ngu has three horizontal layers, which represent phonemes, acoustic features, and tones. In contrast, Peh-oe-ji has only two layers consisting of phonemes and tones. As for phonetic writing, all the detailed features of sound differences are reflected in the transcription. This kind of script is usually the tool of a phonetician who wishes to transcribe spoken language data into written form for linguistic analysis. Generally speaking, phonemic writing is the most efficient system because it requires the learning of the fewest number of symbols to represent the full range of speech. In contrast, the least writing. 22 Phonemic writing should be distinguished from phonetic writing. Many people confuse phonemic with phonetic writing, and treat phonemic writing as phonetic writing. In fact, in most cases, what people call phonetic writing is actually a phonemic writing system (Smalley 1963: 6). 23 Whether or not symbols and phonemes have a one-to-one relationship, varies depending on each language. In Peh-oe-ji, the Taiwanese romanization, each symbol represents only one phoneme in general. In contrast, English has more than one corresponding relationships.

474 472 kap efficient is morphemic writing, since in it every morpheme has to be individually learned (Smalley 1963: 7). For example, all English lexical items can be expressed by the 26 letters of the alphabet. In contrast, the number of Hanji learned by elementary students in Taiwan is about 2669 (Chiung 2001a: 505). Norman (1988: 72-73) has pointed out that an ordinary literate Chinese person knows and uses somewhere between 3,000 and 4,000 Han characters. In other words, literacy learners have to learn at least 3,000 characters to be able to achieve certain levels of literacy in Chinese. Compared to the limited number of letters in English, the Chinese writing system has a greater number of characters to be individually learned. Even if one does not count the number of characters, but only the number of components (or radicals) that form the characters, there are still approximately a thousand radical and phonetic components that are required of a fluent speaker. With regard to the orthographic transition in the Han sphere, the evolution of orthographic structure tends to represent smaller sound units; that is, from morphosyllabic (i.e. Hanji) to syllabic (i.e. Kana), to phonemic writing (i.e. Hangul, Chu Quoc Ngu, and Peh-oe-ji). It also goes from two dimensions (i.e. Hanji and Hangul) to a single dimension (i.e. Kana, Chu Quoc Ngu, and Peh-oe-ji). In short, these changes represent a move towards a simpler and more efficient writing system in terms of literacy. In addition to linguistic factors, nationalism is another driving force in East Asia s orthographic transition. Although nationalism may or may not consist of a linguistic component as Edwards (1985: 37) noted, it is definitely the case in the Han sphere that language and scripts play a substantial role in nation-

475 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 473 building. For more than a millennium, Han characters and classical Han writing have served as the hallmark and tie between China and the sinitic countries in the Han sphere. From the nationalistic viewpoint, abolition of Han characters was thus considered an important step to the construction of a newly independent nation-state. On the contrary, nationalism has prevented China from success in orthographic reform. For example, Latinization, known as latinhua in China, was finally aborted in the consideration of China s cultural and political unity (Norman 1988: ; DeFrancis 1950: ; Barnes 1974). 5. Conclusion This paper has examined the orthographic transition within the Han sphere in terms of literacy and nationalism. The survey reveals that both internal and external factors have contributed to the different outcomes of orthographic reform in the sinitic countries. Internal factors include the general public s demand for literacy and anti-feudal hierarchy. External factors include the political relationships between these countries and China. In the case of Taiwan, it is apparent that external factors remain variable and will play a crucial role in the current development of the Taiwanese language movement. Chiung s survey of 244 college students reveals that Taiwanese identity and assertion of Taiwanese independence are two significant factors that effect students attitudes towards written Taiwanese (Chiung 2001a). Although writing in Taiwanese is still far removed from the main-stream Taiwanese society, it is not surprising that as conflicts between Taiwan and China increase, people s enthusiasm about written Taiwanese will be mobilized. For

476 474 kap example, the Association of Taiwanese Romanization (ATR), established in 2001, is the first non-religious organization aiming to promote writing in romanized Taiwanese. The establishment of ATR can be considered Taiwan s reflection of the increased military threat from China in recent years.

477 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 475 References Barnes, D. (1974) Language planning in Mainland China: standardization. In J.A. Fishman (ed.) Advances in Language Planning (pp ). The Hague. Brown, M.J. (2004) Is Taiwan Chinese? The Impact of Culture, Power, and Migration on Changing Identities. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chen, P. (1994) Four projected functions of new writing systems for Chinese. Anthropological Linguistics 36(3), Cheng, R.L. (1990) Ianpian-tiong e Taioan Siahoe Gibun [Essays on Taiwan s Sociolinguistic Problems]. Taipei: Chu-lip. Cheng, R.L. (1996) Bin-chu-hoa cheng-ti bok-phiau kap gi-gian cheng-chhek [Democracy and language policy]. In C.H. Si (pp ). Chiu n, U.B. (1996) Hui Han-ji chiah u chai-tiau tok-lip [We could not achieve independence unless we abolish Han characters]. In U. Chiu n (ed.) Haiang (pp ). Taipei: Tai-leh. Chiung, W.T. (2001a) Language attitudes towards written Taiwanese. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development 22(6), Chiung, W.T. (2001b) Peh-oe-ji, gin-a-lang the iong e bun-ji? Tai-oan kau-hoe Peh-oe-ji e sia-hoe gi-gian-hak hun-sek [Missionary scripts: a case study of Taiwanese Peh-oe-ji]. The Taiwan Folkway 51(4), Chiung, W.T. (2001c) Romanisation and language planning in Taiwan. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal 9(1), Corcuff, S. (2004) Fong He Rih Ruan: Taiwan Wayshenren yu Guojia Rentong de Jhuanbian [Changing Identities of the Mainlanders in Taiwan]. Taipei: Unsin. Coulmas, F. (2000) The nationalization of writing. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences. 30(1), DeFrancis, J. (1950) Nationalism and Language Reform in China. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DeFrancis, J. (1977) Colonialism and Language Policy in Viet Nam. The Hague.

478 476 kap Do, Q.C. (1972) Lich Su Chu Quoc Ngu: [History of the Quoc Ngu Script: ]. Saigon: Ra Khoi. Eastman, C.M. (1983) Language Planning. San Francisco: Chandler & Sharp Publishers, Inc. Edwards, J. (1985) Language, Society, and Identity. New York: Basil Blackwell. Erbaugh, M. (1995) Southern Chinese dialects as a medium for reconciliation within Greater China. Language in Society 24, Fishman, J.A. (1968) Nationality-nationalism and nation-nationism. In J. Fishman, et al. (eds) Language Problems of Developing Nations (pp ). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Gelb, I. J. (1952) A Study of Writing. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Gottlieb, N. (1995) Kanji Politics: Language Policy and Japanese Script. London: Kegan Paul International. Habein, Y.S. (1984) The History of The Japanese Written Language. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Hannas, W. C. (1997) Asia s Orthographic Dilemma. Hawaii: University of Hawaii. Heylen, A. (2005) The legacy of literacy practices in colonial Taiwan. Japanese- Taiwanese-Chinese: language interaction and identity formation. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development 26(6), Ho, C.M. (1994) Ho Chi Minh: Selected Writings Hanoi: The Gioi. Hodgkin, T. (1981) Vietnam: The Revolutionary Path. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd. Hsiau, A.C. (1997) Language ideology in Taiwan: the KMT s language policy, the Tai-yu language movement, and ethnic politics. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 18 (4), Huang, S.F. (1993) Gi-gian Sia-hoe kap Chok-kun I-sek [Language, Society, and Ethnic Identity]. Taipei: Crane. Huang, S.F. (2000) Language, identity, and conflict: a Taiwanese study. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 143, Jiang, Y.J. (1971) Ho Chi Minh ti Tiong-kok [Ho Chi Minh in China]. Taipei.

479 CH 17. Language, Literacy, and Nationalism in Han Sphere 477 Kerr, G.H. (1992) Hong Chhut-be e Tai-oan [Formosa Betrayed]. Taipei: Chian-ui Press. Ledyard, G.K. (1966) The Korean Language Reform of 1446: the Origin, Background, and Early History of the Korean Alphabet. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley. Lee, S.L.D. (1957) The Origin of Korean Alphabet Hangul: According to New Historical Evidence. Seoul: Tong-Mun Kwan. Li, H.C. (ed.) (1999) Tai-gi Bun-hak Un-tong Lun-bun-chip [Collection of Essays on Taigi Literature Movement]. Taipei: Chian-ui. Lim, I.B. (1996) Tai-gi Bun-hak Un-tong-su-lun [Essays on the Tai-gi Literature Movement] Taipei: Chian-ui. Lim, I.B. (1997) Tai-gi Bun-hoa Teng-kin-su [Essays on Taiwanese Language and Culture]. Taipei: Chian-ui. Lim, I.B. (1998) Gi-gian Bun-hoa kap Bin-chok Kok-ka [Language, Culture, and Nation-States] Taipei: Chian-ui. Nguyen Q.H. (1999) Chu Han va chu Nom voi van hien co dien Viet Nam [Han characters, Nom characters, and Vietnam s historical references], Ngon Ngu & Doi Song, 6(5), 2-7. Norman, J. (1988) Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Okano, K.; and Tsuchiya M. (1999). Education in Contemporary Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ong, H.C. (1993) Seng-chek iong-hap e pun-chit [The nature of assimilation between Taiwanese and Mainlanders]. In M.K. Chang (ed.) Chok-kun koan-he kap kok-ka gin-tong [Ethnic Relations and National Identity] (pp ). Taipei: Iap-kiong. Ong, I.T. (1993) Tai-oan: Khou-bun e Lek-su [Taiwan: A Depressed History]. Taipei: Independence Press. Peng, M.M. and Ng, Y.C. (1995) Tai-oan ti Kok-che-hoat-siong e Te-ui [The Legal Status of Taiwan]. Taipei: Taiwan Interminds Publishing Inc.

480 478 kap Png, S.T. (1965) Gou Chap Ni Lai Tiong-kok Kok-gi Un-tong-su [History of the National Language Movement in China in the Past 50 years]. Taipei: Mandarin Daily News Press. SarDesai, D.R. (1992). Vietnam: The Struggle for National Identity. (2 nd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press. Seeley, C. (1991) A History of Writing in Japan. Netherlands: E. J. Brill. Si, C.H. (ed.) (1996) Gi-gian Cheng-ti kap Cheng-chhek [Linguistic Politics and Policy]. Taipei: Chian-ui. Su, B. (1980). Tai-oan-lang Si Pah Ni Su [Taiwan s 400 Year History]. San Jose: Paradise Culture Associates. Taylor, I. and Taylor, M.M. (1995) Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. PA: John Benjamins. Tiu n, J.H. (1996) Tai-oan hian-heng gi-gian cheng-chhek tong-ki e hun-sek [An analysis on the Taiwan s current language policy]. In C.H. Si (pp ). Tiu n, H.K. (1998) Writing in two scripts: a case study of digraphia in Taiwanese. Written Language and Literacy 1 (2), Tiu n, J.H. (2001) Peh-oe-ji Ki-pun-lun [Principles of POJ or the Taiwanese Orthography: An Introduction to Its Sound-Symbol Correspondences and Related Issues]. Taipei: Crane. Tiu n, P.U. (1974) Tai-oan Te-khu Kok-gi Un-tong Su-liau [Historical Materials for the Promotion of Mandarin in Taiwan]. Taipei: Taiwan Business. Tsao, F.F. (1999) The language planning situation in Taiwan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 20 (4&5), Tse, K.P.J. (2000) Language and a rising new identity in Taiwan. International Journal of the Society of Language 143, Unger, M.J. (1996) Literacy and Script Reform in Occupation Japan. NY: Oxford University Press. Vien Van Hoc. (1961) Van De Cai Tien Chu Quoc Ngu [Aspects of Reforming Chu Quoc Ngu]. Hanoi : Nha Xuat Ban Van Hoa.

481 The author Wi-vun Taiffalo Chiung obtained his Ph.D degree in linguistics from the University of Texas at Arlington. He is currently an assistant professor in the Department of Taiwanese Literature at the National Cheng-Kung University in Taiwan. His major research languages include Taiwanese and Vietnamese. His research fields are sociolinguistics and applied linguistics. Currently, he is interested in the relevant studies of language and orthography reforms in Hanji cultural areas, including Taiwan, Vietnam, Korea, Japan, and China. Tác gi Wi-vun Taiffalo Chiung là tin s ngôn ng hc ti Trng i Hc Texas-Arlington M và hin nay là Phó Giáo s ca Khoa Vn hc ài Loan, Trng i hc Thành Công, ài Loan. Ông chuyên nghiên cu, so sánh i chiu gia ting ài Loan và ting Vit Nam.

482 Arlington ê m ùi bat LINGUA ê kap kap Chit kúi ê khg t kap ê ê ê hm ê

483 蔣為文著 語言 文學 kap 台灣國家再想像 第一版訂正表 P36, 188, 316 圖表 1. 漢語語系 tī 南方 ê 分佈圖 (based on Ramsey 1987) P245 代表年代 象形 指事 會意 假借 形聲 轉注 不詳總計 14 th -11 th 甲骨 字數 B.C. 文字百分比 強 1.63 強 弱 強 弱 強 nd A.D. 六書 字數 爻列百分比 3.84 強 1.32 弱 強 1.21 強 弱 0.07 強 th A.D. 六書 字數 略 百分比 2.50 強 0.44 強 3.05 強 2.47 弱 弱 1.53 強 0 100