Pattberg accuses @nyt @wsf, others of 'censoring China,' & 'Orwellian rules of writing

To be exact, I also said they are "pseudo-global publications". That's because if The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Economist etc. were truly global, they wouldn't censor Chinese (and so many other foreign) words and concepts, and they wouldn't stick to their outdated, ultra-violent, racist Orwellian rules of writing (or derivatives of thereof). I reckon that, since so many Western journalist are evidently slow in reporting their own limitations, the case of rampant translation of Chinese key terminologies in those publications will only become a well-reported issue in the West in a decade from now or two; or ten -who knows. But, I would be surprised if the West could get away with language imperialism forever. The liberalization of non-Western words and concepts has only just begun.

Pattberg Urges “China Experts” To Use Chinese Terminologies in Their English Reports

THORSTEN PATTBERG, Peking University

Pattberg Urges “China Experts” To Use Chinese Terminologies in Their English Reports

In this op-ed piece to China Daily, cultural critic and activist Thorsten Pattberg warns China against importing history and terminologies from the West; instead, he says, China must contribute its own originality to world history, and Chinese terms to global language. In the long run, both East and West would benefit: China can keep its inventiveness, while the West learns something new. As an example, we are reminded of Japan which has contributed far more loanwords into the English language than China.

Pattberg also criticizes the “China experts” from a CCTV “Special” program about the “Chinese Dream”. The program – telecast nationwide - invited five foreigners or Western-educated Chinese to explain the Chinese Dream and the future of China; they did so in English and without ever using a single Chinese terminology. [The ‘Chinese Dream’ originally reads ‘Zhongguo Meng’]

[In fact, there were six guests on the program: The “foreign” experts were: Daniel A. Bell(Canadian), Zhang Xudong (New York University), M. D. Nalapat (India), Einar Rangen (American), Tu Weiming (American), and Wang Jianfei (PhD Berkeley).]

Pattberg thinks that such an awkward situation could only happen in China: Not only is China importing its own history from the West, that history also comes totally Chinese-free!

“[…] whenever Western readers come across the term "Chinese Dream", they will try to understand it through their concept of the American Dream.”

Ironically, they talked about how China must provide global knowledge and universalism. How is it going to do that, if China can’t even keep its own terminologies?

Dr. Thorsten Pattberg (Peking University) publishes widely on the East-Westdichotomy, Shengren, Language imperialism, Comparative cultural studies, Globallanguage, World history, the Competition for terminologies, the End oftranslation, and the Rise of non-European terminologies.

*****

Read article by star journalist Frank Ching about ‘Who is aChinese?’ in which he explains why the Chinese government seems to think that all ethnic Chinese belong to China even though they are often nationals of a foreign power.

The Confucian Way of Europe

BEIJING/SHANGHAI - Published first in China's flagship media Shanghai Daily on July 25, 2012, and China Daily as Europe's path to a new humanism on Dec 10, 2012, the article has gone viral on the internet. 

Thorsten Pattberg - Europe's Path to a New Humanism;
photo: Dong Guisheng

Here's a link to the uncensored piece entitled The East is a Promotion.

Thorsten Pattberg - The East is a Promotion Series;
photo: Dong Duisheng