Knowledge Is A Polyglot

Foreword

We would like to share our cherished ideas about publishing Knowledge Is A Polyglot – its gist, relevance and purpose:

1. The time is right for China

It is true that China has risen economically, politically and militarily; yet, it is also true that China has left little impact on the world culturally. In fact, the Chinese tradition is being marginalized by Western cultural dominance, largely because most theories are owned by Western thinkers and overwhelmingly expressed in Western philosophical vocabularies, Judeo-Christian categories and Greco-Roman taxonomies. By comparison, Chinese thinkers and their vocabularies, categories and taxonomies play no greater part in the formation and continuity of world history.

China has to realize that it cannot teach the Chinese language to the majority of foreigners, and that the Chinese language is far too complex and difficult to be mastered in part-time, let alone without residing in China. But what she can do, and what is explicitly addressed in this philosophy, is the promotion of Chinese key terminologies into foreign languages.

2. The time is right for Chinese terminologies

Many Europeans and Americans want to know what the West can learn from China. They clearly sense the uniqueness and singularity of the Chinese tradition, yet they cannot quite put it into words. That’s because Western languages don’t have the words for it: Only China possesses and owns the correct Chinese names for its inventions and ideas.

In the past, Westerners used convenient European translations to describe everything Chinese.

In contrast, when Westerners “discovered” cultural India, they often adopted Hindu concepts and Sanskrit words. The result is that today every child in the West learns about karma, dharma, yoga and avatar – these key Hindu concepts; but virtually no Westerner has ever heard about wenming (civilization), datong (Great Harmony), shengren (sage), junzi (virtuous men), or tianren heyi (Unity of Man and Heaven) – these key Chinese concepts.

China thus missed an opportunity in the past; it must not do so again. Now is the time that we address the issue and discuss Chinese words on a global scale with academics, policy makers, public intellectuals, artists, journalists and even religious leaders. Needless to say, a future global language without the contribution from China seems unthinkable to us.

3. The time is ripe for Chinese thought as a global quest for cultural pluralism

In the past, due to the most able European conquest of most parts of the world, the global community has come to embrace a Judeo-Christian and Greco-Hellenic view on all things – whether it’s on culture, politics, philosophy, economics, or the sciences. The English language reflects this phenomenon neatly because it utilizes all those Roman, Greek and other European ideas. This reduction of all the world’s languages to a single set of European terminologies has marginalized (to more or less extend) all other civilizations like the Hindu, Islamic, Chinese and Japanese ones, because their own vocabularies, to this day, are disproportional underrepresented in the international discourse.

However, since the beginnings of the digital age and the use of infinite memory capacities of our machines and the world wide web, humanists and historians alike are now

able to discover, discern and disseminate all cultures, and they are able to demonstrate with impeccable accuracy that there exist measurable differences between, say, a (Western) philosopher, a (Biblical) saint, a (Muslim) imam, a (Hindu) rishi, a (Buddhist) bodhisattva, and a (Confucian) shengren. Those concepts should not be reduced to a single European substitute, the “sage”.

For that shift of paradigm in “Cultural Studies” to happen, we will introduce some new, thought-provoking ideas about language imperialism, the end of translation, the global language, and the competition for terminologies.

In the past, all intellectual investigations of Chinese ideas started from European predicaments. We want to change such outdated practice – as the starting point of all intellectual investigation – by rehabilitating to world history the original and correct Chinese terms.

Language Imperialism: Why we shun Asian words?

I am Master of this College;

and what I know not, is not knowledge.”

—A . N. Whitehead

THE Roman Empire is narrated with pride and pomp, and Latin, its lingua franca – having superseded the Hebrew and Greek lexicons – perpetuates all European languages to this day. However, the Mongols had their empire too, and so did the Han and the Manchu, the Turks and Persians, the Arabs and the Hindu. Their civilizations towered large and different, and their languages – just as rich and original to humankind. Yet, why are we so reluctant, even in this age of globalization, to adopt Asian key terminologies?

One obvious reason seems to be that of power and dominance – those who own the language control all that knowledge. The Jewish world order ended when Saint Jerome translated the Hebrew (and Greek) bible into Latin; and Martin Luther, the protestant reformer, translated the Latin bible into German – hence the march of the German empire. This “translation rationale” has served European expansionists well for over a thousand years; but is it ethical, scientific or even legal in the 21st Century to translate Asia’s socio-cultural originality into convenient European words? Why is it that, say, US brand names like Coca-Cola and Google enjoy greater legal protection than the entire intellectual output of India and China over the past 3,000 years?

One way to protect words is to limit translation: Islam’s ayatollahs and imams are not “philosophers”, Christian philosophers are not “Buddhas” or “bodhisattvas”, Buddhas are neither Confucian “shengren” nor Indian “rishis”. Western categories are often unsuitable for non-Western creations: Calling a Buddhist heshang, Jewish rabbi, Islamic ulama, or Chinese junzi “priest” seems unnecessary in the face of enlightenment and progresses in the study of social diversity and cultural pluralism, where we can easily dig up the original designations – if we wanted to, that is.

A great example is the shengren of the Confucian tradition. The shengren is the most important key concept in East-Asia, only, perhaps, comparable to the role of the philosophers in the West; yet, needless to say, the shengren are no “philosophers”, nor are they (biblical) “saints”, “prophets”, (folkloric) “sages” or (Lutheran) “appointees”: The shengren are just shengren .

Few Chinese terms have survived the translational onslaught during the age of European imperialism. Some commentators tried to arbitrate my case. They argue that the English language has already adopted enough Asian loanwords such as Japanese samurai, ninja and sumo, or Sanskrit guru and pundit, and so on. Yet, compared to what the Asian hemisphere still holds on offer, the number of foreign loanwords remains suspiciously low and, in the case of Chinese words, almost insignificant.

Cultural Studies is now at a crossroad. World history, or better: The writings of thereof, is still administered by the West; however, if Asia truly wanted to escape the suzerainty of European words over her thoughts and originality there is a sure-fire way to do this: Revive Asian words and promote important key concepts.

Long into the West's dragon business

HAD Siegfried or Beowulf not slain a European dragon but a Chinese long, those heroes would have committed an extraordinary crime. That’s because the Chinese long is essentially a force of the good.

The long of China has a history (and etymology) of several thousand years and there are, according to linguist Michael Carr, more than 100 classical ones. Linguistically, it’s a tragedy that many Chinese people, I mean the well-educated, English-speaking ones, are so readily prepared to call the long “dragons” – that’s like voluntarily abandoning one’s culture.

It is predicted that China will overtake the mighty United States in terms of the economy in a decade. Yet an ordinary Westerner has never heard about Lu Xun, doesn’t know who Sun Wukong (the Monkey King) is, cannot tell a shengren from a junzi, has no inkling of Xi You Ji (The Journey to the West) or Hong Lou Meng (A Dream of Red Mansions), or any idea about the correct name for that mysterious creature that’s lavishly showcased throughout the international media these days – the Chinese long.

A long is a long, maybe even a tianlong, but please, please do not use “dragon”. That kind of linguistic imperialism happened to your unique Sichuan xiongmao

once, remember? Now it’s a Western “panda”.

It’s not like asking every expatriate to recite all Chinese mythical creatures like fenghuang, pixiu and qilin. Long is good enough already.

For too long, Western caricaturists depicted China as the European-style dragon: huge and red (of course), clumsy and pear-bodied, fierce, with tiny wings and a small flame. That clueless beast virtually sits there on the cover of some magazine waiting to be slain.

The truth is, the Chinese long are majestic, divine creatures, snake-bodied (snake is often called a xiaolong (xiao means “little” or small”) and embody majesty, happiness, wisdom and virtue. In the West, on the other hand, it’s a virtue to slay the dragon for a happy ending. If the European “dragon” had been on the Yellow Emperor’s mind, what sort of people the “descendants of long” would have turned out to be?

See it from a Western perspective: the French have the cock, the Germans the eagle, the Americans the bald eagle

... and the Chinese a blinking “celestial dragon”! Of course, every sharp Western pen is trying to pick on the beast, and hurt it.

Cultures have preferences: Most Western kids love dinosaurs, the “terrible reptiles”, because they think they are cute (compared to, perhaps, mythical dragons). In China, “dinosaurs” are called konglong. Or, how about this one: A “drakon” in Greece is a serpent of the seas, while a long in China is a serpent of the skies or the seas.

Some commentators argue that the “dragons” are now becoming cute and sociable in the West, too. About this, I have doubts. I believe that for Western children the empowering aspect of the dragon’s physique and (fire-) power is utilized as a tool against one’s foes; they feel like beast-taming dragon-riders. Look at Hollywood and the game industry.

In short, the European dragons haven’t become friendlier at all, they just have been subjugated. As long as Westerners call the Chinese long a “dragon”, they will project their own cultural ideas on China.

Yet, if they used the correct word, long, it would remind them that they are facing something culturally new. And, finally, they would also be able to say the names of China’s beloved kungfu stars correctly: Bruce Lee (Li Xiaolong) and Jackie Chan (Cheng Long).

You must protect your traditions. This is true for all people. English as a global language is fine but, ideally, only if it accommodates all concepts and all cultures ever produced.

Embrace the differences and varieties of cultures and value those concepts that matter the most. Protect them. The long is precious.

BACK TO MAIN