(LI SHIGONG)

The General Administration of Press and Publication of China (GAPP), the governing body of China's press and publishing industry, has issued a document, which demands further standardization of language usage. The document bans newspapers, publishers and website-owners from sloppily using foreign abbreviations and acronyms, as well as the mix of English and Chinese. It forbids excessive use of slang and buzzwords, and non-standard spellings and grammatical order of foreign terms.

Some people think it's deplorable if a civilization does not know how to protect its culture and language. From this perspective, the GAPP's standardization order is reasonable. But opponents say language is by no means unchanging. Does the ban on foreign languages in Chinese publications really mean protection for Chinese—especially when the protection comes from a compulsory order from an administrative power?

It's time to purify the language

Wu Jie (www.sznews.com): Objectively speaking, against the background of globalization, it's already unavoidable that people absorb and use foreign words. If foreign languages are frequently used on various occasions, the space for Chinese will undoubtedly be compressed and the habit of Chinese language use will be affected.

In reality, many Chinese tend to use both Chinese and English in their names. In order to show off their "internationalization" and personality, companies choose English for branding their commodities. All kinds of bizarre and nondescript usage has begun to appear in daily communication.

Worse still, some Chinese media is so irresponsible nowadays that they can't even deliver the news in proper Chinese. Standards in publication have dropped pretty badly. Given these facts, foreign languages (particularly English), are casting a strong influence on Chinese.

In this sense, the GAPP's ban on the use of foreign abbreviations and acronyms, the overuse of slang and buzzwords, as well as the use of non-standard spellings and grammatical order of foreign terms might help to preserve the "purity" of the Chinese language.

Wang Di (Global Times): In recent years more and more English and newly invented "non-Chinese and non-foreign" words have penetrated the Chinese language system and are constituting the word bank of this language and even replacing Chinese words. In order to preserve the purity and standardization of Chinese, it's reasonable for the authority to forbid careless use of foreign words.

The invasion of English words is telling: China's economic development has yet to build up a cultural system strong and powerful enough to resist the influx of Western languages. This phenomenon is even widely seen among Chinese white-collar workers. They have begun to forget how to write Chinese characters properly because of the overuse of computers.

A nation that becomes used to poor language skills is unlikely to develop profound ideas or produce great ideas and thinking. A declining Chinese language ability, no matter if it results from invasion or other facts, will lead to a huge loss of the Chinese nation's wisdom.

More importantly, the sneaking invasion of English implies a lack of national confidence. As long as Chinese company employees still regard their English names as a glory and as long as the use of English words in their daily talk is still shown off as fashionable, the interweaving between Chinese and English will remain for a long time.

Non-Chinese and non-English words are not the only problems facing us. An even harder task is to improve the accuracy and quality of Chinese in today's publications. The authority as well as education institutions must make great efforts to lift the language level of the whole Chinese nation. Strengthening national confidence in the process of language improvement is a long-term question.

An unreasonable ban

Wen Guopeng (Beijing Morning Post): In an era of increasingly closer international exchanges, language interweaving is becoming very common. Does the ban mean, in order to preserve the so-called "purity and standardization of the Chinese language," we have to give up familiar English acronyms such as CCTV, GDP and CPI? After all, if these words are read in Chinese, we have to say several long words.

There are existing simple usages, but people are forbidden to use them. This ban undoubtedly will trigger people's dissatisfaction. The Constitution of China stipulates Chinese citizens have the right of publishing, and there are no Chinese laws with rigid regulations about the proportion of foreign words allowed to be used in Chinese publications.

Wang Pei (Shanghai Morning Post): On the whole, this is a good document, but it still needs clarification. What does it mean by "non-Chinese and non-foreign words?" What does it mean by "buzzwords?" It is neglecting a basic fact of the development of the Chinese language. Most words in modern Chinese language appeared as "non-Chinese" words at the time they were created.

For example, the word "gei li" (meaning "well done") appeared on the front page of People's Daily on November 10, 2010. This is not a standard Chinese word. But the official newspaper recognizes it because it is loved by netizens as it is able to deliver a meaning existing words are unable to. The ban forbids non-standard spellings and non-standard grammatical order of foreign terms. In my opinion, this means banning the invention of "foreign words" by Chinese netizens, because Web space is now filled with English words "made in China," as it were. Generally speaking, it should be foreign press and publication authorities' duty to standardize non-standard foreign words, instead of issuing bans. The fact is that mainstream foreign media boldly take in new English words created by the Chinese. On November 18, 2010, The New York Times used the word "ungeliable"—created by Chinese netizens based on "gei li"—in one of its reports.

Language keeps changing and developing. The modern Chinese we use today was not born pure, but is a result of hybridization. Since 1949, because of the country's implementation of simplified Chinese and pinyin, Chinese language is much different from what it used to be in old days.

Chen Yizhou (Yangcheng Evening News): It's said that preventing the use of English in Chinese publications means preserving the purity of the Chinese language. "Purity" sounds a bit strange here. It seems several English words will sully the Chinese language. Actually, some words, although they are originally from English, have already become deeply rooted in China and people no longer see them as foreign.

Languages are things of vitality and publications are the carriers of culture. If the vitality of the language is suppressed and publications are unable to reflect the cultural changes of an era, it will be a tragedy. The fact Chinese people have begun to accept more and more English shows the Chinese are more engaged with foreign exchanges than before. A national language willing to get involved with the rest of the world will surely become respected.

Publications need standardization, but what is sullying Chinese are not English words in Chinese publications or newly created words like "geliable," but wrongly written characters, frequently seen in sloppily edited books. It's more urgent the authority standardize Chinese spelling than forbid the use of English words.

Wei Yingjie (www.hinews.cn): Several months ago, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television demanded China Central Television and other media block the use of English abbreviations and turn to using full Chinese characters. Recently, the GAPP announced a similar ban on the casual use of English or other foreign words or abbreviations in Chinese publications.

When the whole world is involved in globalization, languages of all countries and all regions will undoubtedly impose influence on one another, and that's why it's no longer possible for a country's language and characters to preserve its purity as in the ancient times. Maybe language purity has never existed in human history.

It has been determined by scholars at least 70 percent of today's Chinese academic words in the social sciences and humanities are borrowed from abroad. Words such as organization, discipline, economy, commerce and cadre did not exist in today's meanings in ancient Chinese, or even if they did, they had different meanings from today.

How can you depend on administrative means to change a language? The use of foreign words and abbreviations in Chinese publications seem to be sloppiness, but it's not. The mixture of Chinese and foreign words in Chinese publications is the result of international communication. If Chinese culture is to become integrated into the world, accepting more foreign words is unavoidable.

The Chinese language adheres to certain laws and rules in the process of evolution and development. Bans on this or that use of foreign words won't help in raising the Chinese up. Meanwhile, the administrative ban reflects the authority's incompetence in correcting the situation.