The word "Chinese"--

Discussion Open Forum
1

I’ve always wondered what other ppl thought when mentioning the word-“Chinese.” Does Chinese mean someone whose ethnically Han Chinese, as someone who is Korean, is ethnically Korean? Or does Chinese have the same connotation as the word American- which refers to everyone in America but with the implicit reference of being caucasian? OR does Chinese refer to everyone who lives in China and are citizens?

Note: AS many ppl know in this forum, there are 56 or more ethnicities in China including Tibetans, Mongolians, Manchu’s, Koreans, Uygurs, etc…with the majority being Han.

Maybe in America, it might be perfectly natural for you to hear a “blonde American” or “brunette American” or African American. Can you imagine a “blonde CHinese” (Uygurs) or a Korean-Chinese? If not, do you just tend to imagine only an ethnically Han-Chinese person?

I personally think humans tend to group a country by the majority who lives there, just as many ppl see America as being a Caucasian country while seeing China as being a Han-Chinese country…

2

Of course people think of a certain looks they attribute to the name “American, Chinese, …” etc. but an American can also be of Hispanic origin - in particular when talking about the nationality of a person it is however of no concern if he is Hispanic, Indian or whatever.
African-American would highlight that the person is an American by nationality but of a different race (not biological race). So Chinese would normally refer to a person from China, but it could also be a person of Chinese descent from Malaysia. Then again a German-American is still caucasian (say a German immigrant who obtained American citizenship).

This would however IMHO depend on the context or circumstances where/when it’s said, i.e. if it’s important to highlight the race/origin or not.

3

I have to say that all of the Tibetans I have met would be truly offended to be referred to as Chinese. I am sure that the same is true of many other of the minority groups in China. Keep in mind that not all of the groups now residing within the currently internationally-recognized borders of China are part of China by choice.

4

“Chinese” has two meanings whereas “American” conotes nationality, “Chinese” can mean nationality and/or ethnicity. To abet clarity, when refering to ethnicity the word “Han” is used to describe what non-Chinese refer to as Chinese: “the influx of Han Chinese into traditionally Uiygher areas as exacerbated age old tensions.”

Tibetians are Chinese in the national sense, but ethnically not Han Chinese. As a minority people, they are exempt from the one child policy prescribed fo the Han Chinese.

5

Chinese has lots of meanings. Depending on who you ask it might mean

  • Han Chinese
  • citizen of China
  • citizen of China or Taiwan
  • Asian person
  • person with certain character traits
  • bad driver, etc.
6

America and other immigrant societies such as Australia, Canada, etc. base national identity upon citizenship. This is quite different from many Old World societies, where ethnicity = nationality. I would never call a Croat possessing Serbian citizenship a Serb, nor would I would ever refer to a Tibetan or Uighur as Chinese. You can move to New Zealand and after enough time has passed and you’ve assimilated, you can genuinely call yourself a Kiwi. Even if I married a nice Chinese girl, learned to speak the language fluently, and tried to assimilate as much as I could for 50 years until I finally croaked, neither I nor my children nor perhaps even my great-great-grandchildren would ever be considered truly Chinese.

Chinese identity, same as Japanese and Swiss and Egyptian identity, is based on blood & soil.

7

So, basically the idea I am getting is that a person can have separate definitions for separate countries…hmmm does that make any sense?

So, if I refer to an American, I’d refer to all the ppl living in America, including the immigrants (Asians, Caucasians, Blacks,etc) and Native Americans… whereas Chinese refers to ppl of Han Chinese origin, oh wait, but also ppl living in China.

Doesn’t that seem a bit illogical? I mean in that respect Americans should be native Americans and everyone else INCLUDING caucasians are not Americans. Also, what if more immigrants start moving into China? So they wouldn’t be Chinese, but would be Chinese? Huh?

You can’t have double standards for a country where in one cause you say,-yes ALL Jamaicans shall be bloodwise 100%. There is way too much inter-mixing among the races in China as well as in the world, so you cannot expect to call someone Chinese and expect them to have black hair and brown eyes. Heck, if you were blond and blue eyed born in China, you ARE Chinese, but ethnically you aren’t Han, maybe swedish~~

8

Yes.

If you are refering to the USA, you would only refer to people born in the USA or born of US citizen parent/s or immigrants who obtained US citizenship as “Americans”.

Not exactly. Not all people living in China are Han Chinese or even Chinese citizens.

Americans (USA) do not refer to “Americans” as caucasions only. There is no American ethnicity. The Chinese government and people are the ones who refer to Chinese in both an ethnic and political sense.

If a caucasian missionary couple has a blond-haired blue-eyed baby in China, that baby is NOT Chinese, in either the political or ethnic sense of the word “Chinese”. If there is a double standard, it is caused by the Chinese giving both a political meaning (Chinese citizenship) and ethnic meaning (Han) to the word “Chinese”.

9

Where exactly do you get the idea that the Chinese gov’t is at fault only? I think the world’s preconceived notions are at fault here.
And yes, if most ppl say America, they mean White. As an American I don’t feel it, but there are plenty of ppl worldwide - in France, S.Korea, and Taiwan who do.

These preconceived notions are brought about by false images and information that we only see through media. Yes, most of the images we have of China consist of Han Chinese, but I’m glad in Taiwan there are shows where they actually Chinese who are NOT ethnically Han in the Xinjiang province, Tibet, etc. Sorry to say, but most of the Taiwanese ppl here still have the image that America is pretty much a White country.

10

I don’t believe I used the word “fault”. And I said the Chinese government and people. Do you deny that the word “Chinese” has the two meanings, i.e., political (Chinese citizen) and ethnic (Han Chinese)? Do you deny that birth in China does not automatically entitle one to Chinese citizenship and that not all people born in China are ethnic Chinese? In any case, I don’t think the reason for any double standard in the use of the word “Chinese” is attributable to Americans.

Its not the Americans who use terms like “Overseas Americans” and give special status to ethnic Americans… because there is no ethnic American.

It doesn’t matter what “most people” mean. The fact is US citizens come in a variety of colors, and being born in the US entitles a person automatically to US citizenship. Do you deny that this is true?

America (US) is pretty much a white country (although this demographic is rapidly changing). But that doesn’t mean that only caucasians can be or are US citizen Americans. The fact is, the term “American” does not equate to a particular ethnicity. The term "Chinese, however, can refer to a particular ethnicity.

11

[quote=“cornelldesi”]Where exactly do you get the idea that the Chinese gov’t is at fault only? I think the world’s preconceived notions are at fault here.
And yes, if most ppl say America, they mean White. As an American I don’t feel it, but there are plenty of ppl worldwide - in France, S.Korea, and Taiwan who do.

These preconceived notions are brought about by false images and information that we only see through media. Yes, most of the images we have of China consist of Han Chinese, but I’m glad in Taiwan there are shows where they actually Chinese who are NOT ethnically Han in the Xinjiang province, Tibet, etc. Sorry to say, but most of the Taiwanese ppl here still have the image that America is pretty much a White country.[/quote]

it isn’t just chinese government, but chinese people who have accepted/accustomed to calling only ethnic chinese chinese. just like japanese will call japanese japanese, but not 3rd or 4th generation koreans/chinese born in japan japanese, and hell they look the same with black hair, brown eyes. and even though there are minorities in china, they are maybe 2%. and chinese don’t call them chinese. they call them minorities or by their ‘tribe name’. even the Hakka are seen as outsiders (they’re kinda treated until recently as gypsies)
the difference with america i think concerns 2 factors at least. one is america is an immigrant society. historically, most of the immigrants to us have been european. china has never been. chinese identity is therefore more easily based on ethnicity, and chinese culture reinforces that. until massive numbers of africans, europeans, middle easternites, etc come flocking to china, that identity problem seen in the new world, and now to some extent in europe, will not surface.
second, as you say, is perception, by people outside america, by americans, by media about what constitutes “american”. in some respects, it is white, because historically, blacks, latinos, asians, and irish (yes, the irish were once treated no better than blacks and asians) have been marginalized. they’ve been the workers, builders, field hands. while the english, mostly, have been the landholders, the wielders of power and wealth of america.
more at eleven.

12

arrrr marty mcfly arrrrr
“don’t call me chicken”

13

logical? who’s “logical”? language is a tool. the slightest nuances turned the right way can have powerful results.

it benefits the ruling elite in china (and taiwan) to perpetuate the idea that all chinese are of the same tribe, despite the biological facts. it ain’t hard to get even taiwanese to talk about the “national destiny” they were taught in school.

in a similar vein, the use of the term “dialect” in speaking of chinese language is equally nuanced. in regards to other languages, “dialect” implies "mutually intelligible. not so in chinese. many of the languages of china are mutually unitelligible. nonetheless, they are all sorted as dialects of chinese. such “lumping” despite the need for “splitting” keeps the splittish and sectarians at bay while solidifying the control of those determining the meaniong of words.

our word “vitamins” (from “vital minerals”?) was accepted in mainstream chinese everyday terms in both china and taiwan as “wei ta min.” such is still widely used in taiwan (and really easy to teach). however, in china there is a ministry of the word (ala france) which prohibited the sinified “wei ta min.” newspapers and television station were given a new term to use in lieu of “wei ta min.” i was in china when the changes were promulgated and it struck me as very odd…even…hate to say it…orwellian.

anybody able to steer me to further links of the chinese ministry of words and subsequent edicts? fascinating stuff. our languages want to grow together but one half of the equation refuses the mutual interchange: we can have tofu but they can’t have western words.

14

Does it?

“Dialect: A variety of a language that is distinguished from other varieties of the same language by features of phonology, grammar, and vocabulary, and by its use by a group of speakers who are set off from others geographically or socially, or a variety of a language that differs from the standard language, or a language considered as one of a group that have a common ancestor.”

-Random House Dictionary of the English Language, 1984 edition.

So where does this implication of “mutually intelligible” come from? I always wondered how people came to the conclusion that dialects should be by definition mutually intelligible.

15

That’s garbage. My dad and my late grandfather spoke both high German and low German, and they are most definitely NOT mutually intelligible.

16

“Chinese” has lots of meanings not due to some sinister PRC plot, but simply because different people use the word to mean different things. There is not one correct definition for each word in a language. Webster and Oxford do not have exclusive rights to determine the definitions of words. The meaning of a word is based on its common usage.

Just as “Jewish” can mean one who practices the jewish religion, one who grew up in a jewish household, one whose ancestors were Jewish, one whose mother was jewish, etc, depending on who you ask, Chinese also has different meanings, except that they seem to fall into just two categories: ethnicity and nationality. How one uses the word in each of those cases will naturally vary depending on ones beliefs.

17

I always thought if someone was Jewish they were practicing the religion. Their ethnicity has NOTHING to do with being Jewish. Just like Christianity. So that argument fails miserably.

I just don’t get how ppl in general can have double standards for something. Do you have to think beforehand to say, oh your American (means, you could be any color in the world, but just an American citizenship) or oh your Chinese (oh so you must be ethnically Han AND have citizenship)… I’m confused…

When I think of Chinese I think the same as I do of an American— someone who has citizenship in the country.

18

That says something about the ignorance of many Taiwanese people. It doesn’t anything about the reality of American life. Sure, great swaths of the Midwest are very white. But the South isn’t, the Southwest isn’t, and no major city is. Comprende, amigo?

19

[quote=“cornelldesi”]I always thought if someone was Jewish they were practicing the religion. Their ethnicity has NOTHING to do with being Jewish. Just like Christianity. So that argument fails miserably.

[/quote]

That excuse didn’t work for Hitler.

20

You’re wrong about judaism. Ethnicity may have everything to do with it. You may define a jew as simply one who practices the religion, but as modlang noted, Hitler’s definition was broader than yours. And many jews define it more narrowly as a person whose mother was/is jewish. Just as being jewish can have several different meanings so can being Chinese.

OK, you think of Chinese as citizenship. That’s one definition. But others use it to refer to ethnicity and that definition is equally correct. It may bother you when Taiwanren refer to themeselves as Chinese, but ethnically they are correct, just the same as a 3d generation Chinese-American who refers to herself as Chinese.