Taichung City
Xitun District
Joint Zhongwei
207.18 meters 42 floors
2 Likes
@Gmu How do they score these points?
When will architects ever learn that round buildings make absolutely no sense, are expensive to build, and just create lots of wasted space? Almost everything that needs to be put in the building is rectangular, think elevator shafts, staircases, partitioning walls, most furniture…
Back in the days, we would have defenestrated any architect that came into our office with a proposal like that.
Is it gonna happen though? That is the big question. Hsinchu would be a great city if it had good public transport.
Will the stations have names in Taiwanese? Shouldnt they be Hakka? Or maybe just standard Pinyin, to make it easier for the people who actually will use the romanizations
Hsinchu city was completely under the control of people of Tsuân-tsiu (泉州) descend (specifically Tông-an (同安) speakers from Amoy) after the ethnic violence in the 1830s to the 1840s. It was the 1840s ethnic violence that forced the Hakka to move from present day Xinzhuang to Taoyuan and Hsinchu area en mass, but in the 1830s ethnic violence, agreements were reached that no Hakka would be inside Hsinchu city.
Prior to that, in the 1787 to 1788’s Lîm Sóng-bûn (林爽文) rebellion, Hsinchu, which was called Tamsui thiann (淡水廳) at the time, was the capital of Northern Taiwan, and was already dominated by people of Tsuân-tsiu (泉州) descend. The people living in Hsinchu city worked with Hakka living outside of the city to defend against Lîm because Lîm was of Tsiang-tsiu (漳州) background. So even before the agreement, Hakkas and Tsuân-tsiu were already segregated in the Hsinchu area by the city.
In addition to the absolute Tsuân-tsiu dominance inside the city walls, the coasts, as well as present day Xinfeng and Zhubei (real Zhubei, not the area surrounding THSR, that’s Liujia not Zhubei) were also Tsuân-tsiu strongholds.
The whole Hsinchu equals Hakka narrative is an oversimplification, and completely false in Hsinchu city.
There is one Hakka station name, 下員山 is romanized as Há-ǐen-sán.
Yeah that seems like a weird way of doing things. Having a mix of mandarin, Taiwanese, Hakka and English names
That’s confusing for locals and you can forget about tourists
That’s why Taiwan should have one unified romanization for all native languages. That way even though you might only speak one or two languages, but as long as you’ve learned the romanization, you can at least pronounce the names of people and places in other languages.
Only romanizing in Mandarin suggests that only Mandarin is the official language.
1 Like
Yeah ok, but before that happens, can’t they just keep romanizations to HYP
Kids in uk have been learning HYP in schools for the last decade. Guess same as the U.S. or wherever teaching mandarin
This goes back to the who the romanization is for debate. I understand why people think it is only for tourists and expats, but Taiwan isn’t Japan, and there are reasons why the romanizations should also be for the locals so that location names can be written and read in their original language, instead of just Mandarin. The need for that to happen is dire because without doing something about it, most native languages in Taiwan would be gone in just 2 more decades.
1 Like
Well can there be both then? HYP and also other languages.
I prefer the future where the location name is pronounced in its original form by all. It certainly sucks there’s no just one language for the entire country, but it will suck even more if there is just one language for the entire country.
1 Like
So basically aboriginal names everywhere
Great, I already try to do that where possible.
1 Like
Getting off-topic here, but I feel like as long as a language is documented for history, there’s no need to try and preserve it in daily use. Once a language has outlived it’s usefulness in modern society, let it die.
1 Like
Tell that to all the Israelis, and Luke Ranieri.
By the way, what’s the credential required to act as an arbiter of said usefulness anyway?
Same credential needed to act as a preservationist.
But you said without intervention that native languages would die in two decades. That there illustrates their usefulness. Let languages live or die naturally, rather than eg teaching kids a language that can’t self-sustain and won’t be useful.
If someone is going to die in 2 minutes from a bully choking him, does that mean the victim has outlived his usefulness? I guess I can see someone taking that position, but I hope I’ll be the one to try and help the victim live.
1 Like
