Taipei Times editing standards


I hope they could look at the numbers aswell. I'm not sure if they have the same problem in the Chinese language newspapers but it seems to me they always screw up the way they analyse their figures and numbers. They will often quote numbers that directly contradict each other within a paragraph of each other. What's the difference in a decimal point or two eh?


From a recent article in the Taipei Times:

"the Taipei Dome Complex, or the Taipei Culture and Sports District, will occupy about 18 hectares in bustling Xinyi District (信義) and will include an indoor stadium that will seat 400,000."

Wow! An indoor stadium that will seat 400,000 people!!! :astonished:

That's going to be quite a large stadium. ... 2003421288


I think this is a honest, typical Chinese->English translation error.
The word "萬" means 10000 but sometimes they add or miss some 0's when translating.
It gives me the creeps too. :slight_smile:
七百萬 (qi1 bai3 wan4 = 700 10000's) = seven million.
In the western world, we have the problem with "billion":
- 1,000,000,000 , one thousand million, 10^9, for all short scale countries
- 1,000,000,000,000 , one million million, 10^12, for all long scale countries

The chinese system is actually easier.


Engrish?...eng-lish?....some unknown tongue?


or my favorite..


Engrish?...eng-lish?....some unknown tongue?

Speak EngLish!



It is English, just not as you know it, Jim.



Any China Post editors here? What happened to the front page today? Today is Thursday, not Tuesday! Is there anything you guys haven't bungled?


That's fucking hilarious.


Yes but I guess you would know that a 400,000 seater stadium is 3 times bigger than the biggest one in the world! The screw-ups in numbers point to either that they don't care or don't know how to think logically.

Don't tell me they wrote the wrong day on their FRONT PAGE :slight_smile:


From a front-page TT story today:

Made me giggle.


You will have to blame the AFP wire service for that one.


Oh yes, dear reason we should cast a quick eye over what we publish (and charge readers money for) if it comes from a wire service...


Resurrection of TT Typos:

“Bill will not affect exisiting mines: Li”


In today’s paper, on page 4, is a “Quick Take” entitled “Fulong to mark 22nd year.” The first sentence reads:

Fulong Beach, a seaside resort in the northeast tip [of Taiwan], is inviting former life-guards, staff and lunch-box sellers who worked there in 1957 to attend its 60th anniversary.





Yes, they’ve been in touch with me and I will be in attendance. The Fulong Bento is of course the top ranked bento on the island.


From today’s Taipei Times, on page 4, there’s an AFP article with the following headline: “In first for S Korea, Seoul picks woman as foreign minister.” The first paragraph reads:

South Korean President Moon Jae-in yesterday appointed a UN veteran as the country’s first female minister of national defence, tasked with easing tensions over North Korea’s nuclear ambitions.

The article makes no mention of any foreign minister, noting only that the new minister of national defence, Kang Kyung-hwa, “served at the South’s foreign ministry for years before joining the UN.”




Most random anniversary ever.


And in today’s paper, most random minister too.



I also read local papers purely for content.

And when I do, i acknowledge that I am in a country with very few English speakers, meaning low distribution, meaning a small budget, meaning they can’t pay competitive salaries for all the fancy editors and writers (that some posters have been whining about)

That’s just the way it is. I read local papers knowing those realities and auto-factor them in and never think about it again. Is that wrong?

I am all for direct action but short of single-handedly forcing vast numbers of English speakers to live in Taiwan to improve circulation, what am I gonna do?

The other point for pedants to consider is that English is an international tool of communication that is evolving over time. As a language, it developed from other languages and has developed through history and my guess is it’s gonna continue to develop

Take American English for example - a simplified version of English - and that doesn’t bother me in the slightest either - but no doubt there were people running around loudly railing against it at the time

Chinglish is just another evolutionary branch. So what?

Language is a dynamic, living thing. It’s a bunch of noises that express thoughts and build ideas - it’s not owned by anyone