改掉5000用詞 教科書全面去中國化

改掉5000用詞 教科書全面去中國化

更新日期:2007/07/21 04:39 記者: 韓國棟/台北報導

中小學教科書全面去中國化!國父、國畫、國字、國劇、古人、水平、中日(甲午)戰爭、兩岸、台灣地區……等詞,都被教育部列為「不適合用詞」,應當的用詞,是孫中山、中國水墨畫、中國文字、中國京劇、中國古人、水準、日治、清日戰爭、兩國、我國(或台灣)……等詞。

「民族英雄」具有爭議性

「台灣僻處我國東南海域」的課文敘述,更不行,因為這種說法是以中國大陸為核心、以台灣為邊陲,明顯貶低台灣地位。「鄭成功從荷蘭人手中收復臺灣,所以後人尊其為民族英雄。」這也不行,因為「收復」和「民族英雄」都是有爭議性的價值判斷用詞,必須修改或刪除。

教部半年前委託「台灣歷史學會」進行一項「教科書不當用詞檢核」計畫,檢核對象含括國小、國中及高中各版本教科書。這項檢核計畫日前完成,教部隨即函轉各教科書出版社「參考」。

教部強調無關意識形態

教育部國教司長潘文忠表示,中小學教科書開放民編後,用詞混淆,對中小學生造成困擾,部長杜正勝發現這項問題後,才指示委託學者專家進行檢核。幾經琢磨,教育部決定委託「台灣歷史學會」進行這項研究,因為較混淆的用詞,幾乎都是歷史造成的。他強調此舉是專業的研究,和意識形態無關,也無強制修改之意。

這份厚約三百頁的檢核報告,是教育部廢除「統編本」實施「審定本」教材以來,首度發函各教科書出版社,統一規範攸關國家認同的相關用詞。現行的中小學各版本教科書,被檢核出來的不當用詞,總計不下五千詞。

這份報告檢核檢核標準不外乎以下幾項:

第一、不客觀的歷史價值判斷,刻意褒揚或貶抑的非中性詞彙。例如「國父孫中山先生說……」,應改為「孫中山先生……」。

「全省各地」用法不標準

第二、自我矮化為地區或主體意識不清。例如,「台灣地區」、「全省各地」、「兩岸」等,都是不適合用詞。

第三、對中國的稱呼未反應歷史事實與政治現況。例如,應稱「中國」卻稱「我國」,如:「王羲之是我國著名的書法家」這段課文中的「我國」應改成「中國」。

第四、臺灣與中國大陸分屬不同政權時期的敘述,對中國的地名、歷史朝代、特定人物等,未加註國名。例如,「余光中,福建省永春縣人……」,應當改為,「余光中,原籍中國福建省永春縣……」。

第五、敘述日治時期臺灣的人、事、物,卻用大清帝國、中華民國紀年;如應把日治時代的民國廿三年,改為西元一九三五年。

「中外」遊客應說國內外

第六、對於特定詞彙的使用不夠精確。例如,指稱中國特有的文物、書畫等,卻使用「國字」、「國畫」、「國劇」、「京劇」、「古典詩詞」等詞彙。

第七、敘述時間或對象泛指中國古代或是古代之人,卻用「歷史上」、「古時候」、「古代」、「上古時代」、「老祖宗」、「古人」等詞彙,應都改為「中國古人」。

檢核報告指出,在近現代「中華民族」一詞未出現前,應用「華夏民族」;「外省人」也應改成「中國各省隨中華民國政府遷臺人士或新住民」;「國曆」應改為「陽曆」;「中外遊客」應改成「國內外遊客」。

報告檢核出來的不適合用詞中,以中國地名前未加註「我國」用詞最多,逾二千個。

In Taiwan Province, the Ministry of Education has issued 380-page compendium of 5,000 inappropriate terms to book publishers for ‘reference purposes.’ Here are some examples:

中法戰爭 Sino-Franco war -> the war between the Qing dynasty and France

日本佔據台灣 Japan occupied Taiwan -> 日本管治台灣 Japan administered Taiwan

Calendar references during Japanese rule used to be in terms of Qing Dynasty or Republic of China calendar, but they will now have to changed to either Showa (Japan) or western calendar (for example, the 20th year of the Republic of China must now be either the 5th year of Showa (Japan) or 1932).

中外遊客 tourists from inside and outside China -> 國內外遊客 tourists from inside and outside the country
國畫 national painting -> 中國山水畫 Chinese landscape painting
京劇 Beijing opera -> 中國京劇 Chinese Beijing opera
國字 national writing character -> 中國文字 Chinese writing characters
國曆 national calendar -> 陽曆 solar calendar
歷史上 in history -> 中國歷史上 in Chinese history
古人 ancient people -> 中國古人 Chinese ancient people
古代 ancient times -> 中國古代 Chinese ancient times

Those like Ma Ying-jeou who were not born in Taiwan will be hereafter referred to as 新住民 “new residents” or 中國各省隨中華民國政府遷台人士 “those people from various Chinese provinces who moved to Taiwan along with the Republic of China government.”

國父孫中山先生 nation’s founder Mr. Sun Yat-sen -> 孫中山先生 Mr. Sun Yat-sen
台灣地區 Taiwan area-> 台灣 Taiwan
海峽兩岸 the sides of the strait -> 兩國 the two countries
我國 our country -> 中國 China; if for example the reference is to Chinese history, culture or language (e.g. 王羲之是我國著名的書法家 Wang Xizhi is a famous calligrapher of our country -> 王羲之是中國著名的書法家 Wang Xizhi is a famous calligrapher of China)
中國 China -> 我國 our country; if, for example, the reference is to Taiwan history, culture or language
鄭成功從荷蘭人手中收復台灣,所以後人尊其為民族英雄 Kuxinga recovered Taiwan from the Dutch and therefore people honored him as a national hero afterwards -> 收復recovered and 民族英雄 national hero are controversial value judgments.

Yesterday, Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng denied at the press conference that this was about de-Sinofication of the school textbooks. He said that the list was used only as ‘reference’ by the book publishers.

However, some book publishers said that while it would appear that they have some leeway, their books were eventually have to be approved by the Ministry of Education.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “改掉5000用詞 教科書全面去中國化

  1. thanks to all these people working hard so Chinese can understand that Taiwan never belonged to China.
    Not by the past, not now, and we will fight to avoid it to be attacked in the future. And here is a message from native people and Hokklo and hakka Taiwanese: “this is our land, if your are Chinese your country is China. Taiwan, love it or leave it. Our mainland is Taiwan, Chinese get lost…”

  2. ludahai

    posted on 4-12-2005 @ 08:42 AM
    on
    http://politics.abovetopsecret.com/thread185471/pg1
    Truth behind Taiwan’s legal status

    Taiwan is NOT a part of China

    A. History

    The notion that Taiwan is a part of China is taken as a matter of faith among China’s government and most of its citizens. It is also similarly taken as a matter of faith among the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which formerly ruled the islad and still retains a strong presence in local Taiwanese politics. However, rarely is an actual examination taken of the legitimacy and legal veracity of these claims.

    The indigenous population of the island is proto-Austronesian peoples who are believed to be the progenitors of the Malayo-Polynesian peoples who have spread through Southeast Asia and as far west as Madagascar and as far east as Hawaii, Easter Island, and perhaps even mainland South America. They had lived in Taiwan in relative isolation, with only limited and infrequent Chinese contacts, as late as the 16th century.

    As the 17th century dawned, Taiwan was still out of the realm of China. China had never established governmental authority east of the Pescadores Island chain in the Taiwan Strait. Even that authority was short-lived. In 1624, the Dutch established a trade outpost in the Pescadores. This elicited the opposition of the Ming Chinese government, who ousted the Dutch. The Ming, however, offered no objection to the Dutch using southern Taiwan as an outpost because they conceded that it was outside their jurisdiction.

    A half-Japanese pirate, and Ming loyalist, by the name of Koxinga (Jheng Chenggong) led a naval raid on the Dutch settlement at Anping (present-day Tainan) and ousted the Dutch in 1660. However, the Ming Dynasty had fallen nearly two decades earlier and he had no authority from the Ming remnants fighting a losing battle in southwestern China at the time. Thus, it cannot be said that Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan was assumed at that time. Shortly thereafter, the Manchus from a region northeast of China took complete control of the country. In 1683, they added Taiwan to their list of conquests and made it a part of their empire. This is the first time in history that Taiwan and China were a part of the same political entity, and the reality is that both were conquered and occupied by an outside power, the Manchus.

    Now, we fast forward to the 1880s. The Manchus still controlled both China and Taiwan and attempted to make Taiwan more integrated with their empire. The fact is that most of Taiwan still lay outside of their control as late as the 1870s as the east coast and the mountain areas were outside their jurisdiction. Taiwan was made a province of the Qing Dynasty in 1886 and they made a short-lived effort to modernize the island. However, the corrupt empress dowager, Cixi, put a stop to it. Regardless, it did not matter as the fate of Taiwan would be decided far from its shores. China managed to get itself into a war with Japan, a war that Japan was itching for, but a war that China provoked and was completely ill-prepared for. The cause was intervention in Korea. The resulting Treaty of Shimonoseki transferred sovereignty of Taiwan to Japan in perpetuity, meaning forever.

    Taiwan became a part of the Japanese empire. Japan tried to turn Taiwan into an integral part of the country. Taiwan’s economy and educational system were developed to an extent not seen in other territories occupied by Japan. Sure, there were Japanese atrocities in Taiwan, especially against the aboriginal population who resisted Japanese rule. However, on balance, Japanese rule over Taiwan was relatively benign, even to the extent that a limited degree of self-rule was introduced in the 1930s.

    Japan invaded China in 1937, beginning the Asian phase of what became World War II. A variety of documents emerged from this war what will be addressed later in this essay. However, virtually all of China’s claims that Taiwan belongs to it stem from this eight-year conflict. Japan was defeated by the Allied powers (which included China) in 1945. KMT forces from China came to Taiwan to accept Japan’s surrender on behalf of the Allied powers. The San Francisco Peace Treaty was signed in 1951 (taking effect the following year) which formally ended the war in the Pacific.

    B. China’s claim

    As mentioned in the above section, China’s claims to Taiwan mostly stem from World War II and the agreements and treaties that were signed as a result of the conflict. The notion that Taiwan is a part of China rests on four agreements and a basic theory of international law known as “state succession.”

    American President Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Churchill and Republic of China Generalissimo Chiang Kaishek (Jiang Jhongjheng) met in Cairo, Egypt in November, 1943. The Cairo Declaration was a joint declaration that the territories “stolen” by Japan are to be returned to China following the end of the war. Taiwan was one of the territories referenced.

    Less than two years later, after the war in Europe was concluded, there was a meeting near Berlin including the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union. They reaffirmed the content of the Cairo Declaration in that meeting and demanded Japan’s unconditional surrender.

    Japanese representatives signed an Instrument of Surrender on September 2, 1945 in which they stated an acceptance to accept the provisions of the Potsdam Proclamation. Japanese and American military commanders were the only signatories.

    Finally, a bilateral treaty was signed between the Republic of China government (by then in exile in Taiwan) and Japan in 1952. In it, Japan signified that it had “returned” Taiwan to the Republic of China. This document is used by the KMT to bolster its claim that Taiwan is a part of China.

    This document is NOT used by the PRC, however. In fact, they do not even recognize its legitimacy. They use another rationale to support their claim. They claim that Taiwan was “returned” to China on either September 2, 1945 (with the signing of the Instrument of Surrender) or on October 25, 1945 when KMT troops accepted Japan’s surrender in Taiwan. Theoretically, as Taiwan was a part of China when the Communist Party won the civil war in 1949, and under the successor state theory, all agreements signed by the previous government (including boundaries) are binding on the successor government.

    C. Examination of International Law on State-to-State Transfer of Territory

    However, when these claims are illuminated under the light of international law, their argument is shown to be built on shifting sands.

    According to international law, there is only one mechanism by which territory can be transferred from one state to another: a legally ratified and binding peace treaty. This is confirmed by state practice, the leading source of international law in the pre-World War II era.

    The Treaty of Shimonoseki, the very treaty in which Taiwan was transferred to Japanese control in the first place, includes a specific mention of that transfer. Article two of that treaty provided for the transfer of Taiwan to Japan. The transfer is specifically referenced as is the beneficiary power.

    The Versailles Treaty ended World War I and was signed in Paris in 1919. In this treaty, territory transfers and new boundaries were specifically spelled out. All territorial transfers were specifically referenced with both the surrendering power and beneficiary being specifically referenced at all points in the document.

    Japan completely defeated Russia in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Japan already occupied territory that it was granted by the Treaty of Portsmouth (N.H.) in 1905. However, all of the territories to be transferred as well as the beneficiary (Japan) are specifically mentioned in the document, although common sense would inform someone that it was not necessary.

    The 1848 Treaty of Guadelupe-Hidalgo was signed by the United States and Mexico when the former had already occupied a significant amount of territory of the later in a war that was begun when Mexican troops crossed into U.S. territory. Regardless, Mexican territory that was transferred to the United States was specifically spelled out in the treaty.

    The 1898 Treaty of Paris concluded the Spanish-American War. At the conclusion of the war, the U.S. physically occupied Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Cuba, all Spanish colonies at the onset of the war. This treaty is very useful in pointing out the power of the mechanism to transfer territory from one state to another. On the one hand, the transfer of the Philippines and Puerto Rico to American sovereignty is specifically mentioned in the treaty. However, there is no such mention of Cuba being designated as being U.S. territory. Consequently, shortly thereafter, Cuba was granted independence rather than being incorporated as a U.S. territory as were Puerto Rico and the Philippines.

    There are countless more examples where these came from, but the point has been sufficiently made that territory can only be transferred from one state to another through the peace treaty.

    D. Implications for China’s Claim on Taiwan

    The provisions of Cairo and Potsdam are properly regarded as unfulfilled wartime commitments. Three allies announced their plans to give Taiwan to China following the war, but those promises were never formalized in a peace treaty. Remember, there were dozens of countries in the anti-Japan alliance. Three, no matter their size and importance, have no legal legitimacy in making decisions of this nature for the entire alliance.

    The Instrument of Surrender is a little closer because it is the first document that is accepted by Japan, the legal sovereign of Taiwan since 1895. However, it was only signed by military commanders of two countries, and had no provisions for ratification because it was technically no more than a cease-fire agreement.

    There was a treaty that was signed to end this war. It is a treaty that is all but ignored by China and the Chinese KMT here in Taiwan. In fact, the KMT has prevented it from even being presented in school textbooks here in Taiwan. That is the San Francisco Peace Treaty. This treaty was signed by Japan and about two dozen Allied Powers in 1951. It then went through the ratification process in each and all of the signatory powers before it came into effect in 1952. This treaty has a provision concerning Taiwan. Japan surrendered their sovereign claim over Taiwan as a result of this agreement. However, there is absolutely no provision whatsoever for Taiwan being transferred to China, a clause deemed necessary by public international law to effectuate the transfer of sovereignty. So, simply stated, there is absolutely no legitimacy to the claim by China or the Chinese KMT in Taiwan that Taiwan was handed over to China following World War II.

    There is still one more treaty to discuss, the Treaty of Taipei between the ROC and Japan. That treaty was signed AFTER Japan had already given up sovereignty over the island. There is absolutely no legal argument that can be made for Japan designating sovereignty over a territory it had already given up in a bilateral treaty with a government that was not even a party to the treaty that ended the war. The territory had already been disposed of. Japan has no further legal right to have any input as to the future disposition of the territory in question.

    E. Where Does that Leave Taiwan?

    That is the big question. Unlike Korea, the treaty did not declare Taiwan an independent state. The reality is that Taiwan was neither ceded to a state nor was it declared independent. There is only one solution to this state of affairs. In accordance with the United Nations Charter, Taiwan should have been permitted to exercise its rights in self-determination. The only way to accurately gauge the will of the Taiwanese people would have been through a plebiscite shortly after the ratification of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. The KMT’s denial of that right to the Taiwanese people rendered it an outlaw regime. In fact, the KMT engaged in four decades of repression and murder to prevent Taiwanese people from telling their story to the world.

    Today, the rest of the world needs to wake up to the reality of the situation. Many states declare a “one-China” policy without any regard for the legality of their political statements. Essentially, Taiwan is being sacrificed on the alter of “one-China.” This is nothing in international law that supports this position nor is there anything in morality. China is a despotic regime while Taiwan is a peaceful state that has become one of the greatest economic and democratic success stories in Asia. It is time for the world to step up and recognize the rights of Taiwan’s people as they did for the people of East Timor in 1999. Taiwanese have the legal right to a plebiscite on the future status of the island without undue coercion from China.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s