IMJ, the loss of culture from MJ
Jesse
and completely deromantasizes playing mahjong (if one plays by their
system) through the incorporation of such a ridiculous naming scheme.
What has drawn so many non-Chinese players to MJ is the exotisism of
the game, creating hands of dragons and great winds, shouting pung,
sei, chow. If I were to shout "bobby bango" in Chinatown I would
surely be killed.
In America, outside major cities, cultral diffusion is very weak.
Using the Chinese terms (or Japanese or Korean for that matter) is
just another step towards cultural intergration. Several friends in a
white suburb of New York can now read 1-9 and the four directions in
kanji.
But what originally sparked the interest to play a game seen by many
as "a game played by old jewish ladies"? The Chinese romantasism (via
Chinese terms and translations), otherwise why not play "bridge" (the
game also played by grandma and her friends). Combine romantasism with
Chinese pop culture movies (esspecially "Fat Choi Spirit") and you
have a greater acceptance and anticipation.
But does romantasisim really sell a culture? I have taught MJ in the
above New York suburb and during the Superbowl, then when I moved to
Japan I managed to get more people to play HKOS over Japanese-style
and everyone enjoyed saying "ba long" over "haku" and definitely over
"bobby". (Also most people enjoyed saying "nam, dong" over " minnami,
higashi" and "south, east").
Talk to anyone from Hong Kong and you will get a unified answer on
what hands and pieces are called. The IMJ mistakenly believes that the
foreign aspect of MJ is what frightens people when in actuality it is
that exotisism that draws them. With their ludicris renaming scheme
they might as well call "mahjong" the "IMJ Super Tile Game" because
the cultural aspect is already lost.
Tom Sloper
>
>What has drawn so many non-Chinese players to MJ is the exotisism of
>the game, creating hands of dragons and great winds, shouting pung,
>sei, chow.
Absolutely.
>If I were to shout "bobby bango" in Chinatown I would
>surely be killed.
Heh. (^_^)
>when I moved to
>Japan I managed to get more people to play HKOS over Japanese-style
>and everyone enjoyed saying "ba long" over "haku" and definitely over
>"bobby". (Also most people enjoyed saying "nam, dong" over " minnami,
>higashi" and "south, east").
The Japanese don't say the names of the winds in Japanese. They say them in
Chinese. "Ton, Nan, Sha, Pei." Kanji often have multiple pronunciations:
some of them derived from the Chinese (which of course is the origin of
kanji).
Tom
John Hwang
>The IMJ despite written good intentions, is a cultural bane to China
>and completely deromantasizes playing mahjong (if one plays by their
>system) through the incorporation of such a ridiculous naming scheme.
Totally agreed. But that's only the tip of the iceberg. It's also saddled
with a non-sensical payment table and other poor "features" that emphasize luck
over play.
>What has drawn so many non-Chinese players to MJ is the exotisism of
>the game, creating hands of dragons and great winds, shouting pung,
>sei, chow. If I were to shout "bobby bango" in Chinatown I would
>surely be killed.
Heh.
>when I moved to Japan I managed to get more people to play
>HKOS over Japanese-style
I'm not surprised. HKOS is much easier to teach and learn than Japanese style.
Not necessarily better balanced, or fairer, but almost certainly a lot more
fun.
>The IMJ mistakenly believes that the foreign aspect of MJ is what
>frightens people when in actuality it is that exotisism that draws them.
IMJ has a lot of other mistaken beliefs at its core. Mostly because of the
developer's truly limited "abilities" WRT game design.
>With their ludicris renaming scheme they might as well call "mahjong" the
>"IMJ Super Tile Game"
If they did, I'd be much more charitablly inclined towards it.
--
--- John Hwang "JohnHw...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
Cofa Tsui
news:fa7d1a9e.03052...@posting.google.com...
> The IMJ despite written good intentions, is a cultural bane to China
> and completely deromantasizes playing mahjong (if one plays by their
> system) through the incorporation of such a ridiculous naming scheme.
Thanks Jesse for your thoughtful comments on my product International
Mahjong ("IMJ"). Comments on IMJ products and concepts will all be well
taken, although I only have the IMJ Rules available at this point and any
IMJ online games are still yet to come (see also additional note at bottom).
In response to your comments, I certainly do not agree to your statement
("IMJ is a cultural bane to China")! It has been my initial idea to promote
the Chinese game of mahjong to the world level. How it is being carried out
or being presented may be of another issue, but the intention of promoting
this Chinese culture to the world is of no doubt!
Since your statement doesn't come with any proof, other than the terminology
issue, I can only response generally as above. If you could provide more
details about the alleged *bane*, I will certainly response to it, as I do
for your "terminology issue" in the following paragraphs.
> What has drawn so many non-Chinese players to MJ is the exotisism of
> the game, creating hands of dragons and great winds, shouting pung,
> sei, chow. If I were to shout "bobby bango" in Chinatown I would
> surely be killed.
As far as the terminology used in the IMJ Rules is concerned, I am in line
with Nick Wedd's viewpoint - It shouldn't be an issue (from other post).
While what you (and other experienced mahjong players) say about the IMJ
terminology will be well taken, I must also say that in this issue I concern
the response of those brand new players more. Unfortunately, the latter
cannot be tested until those brand new players are widely met. It is also
unfortunate to see that a standardized set of mahjong terminology (English)
is also outstanding; otherwise I would have no doubt had incorporated it
into IMJ.
The feeling of and response to new terms of an experienced player and that
of a brand new player could always be very different. Many years ago almost
all Chinese out of the influence of the mainland government criticized the
Pinyin program - saying it a bane to Chinese culture. However, it has in
fact long been proved that those brand new Chinese language learners
(non-Chinese foreigners) find it helpful for them to learn and research
Chinese culture...AND helpful for those experienced Chinese language users
to communicate with them as well!
Back to the mahjong games: It is not surprised to learn of another "risk" in
playing the gambling game of mahjong - being killed in addition to the loss
of money! But to any Chinese who doesn't know "white dragon" or "ba long",
and who knows only "Bak Baan", you or any brand new mahjong player will be
absolutely safe by saying Bobby, white dragon, ba long, or whatever term you
(he or she) are familiar with.
Expecting a Chinese who doesn't know the "widely accepted English terms",
and expecting a brand new mahjong player who doesn't know the "widely
accepted English terms", to recognize those "widely accepted English terms"
as their old friends, is really the same as I am expecting you and other
experienced mahjong players to recognize the IMJ terms... If one considers
all these issues from a third party's point, they all seem like the same
(and interchangeable).
As long as a standardized set of "widely accepted English terms" is
outstanding, I can hardly see the terminology issue an absolute harm to any
set of mahjong terms; not to mention if a new game not applying any "widely
accepted English terms" can be defined as harm to the mahjong culture.
Cheers!
Cofa Tsui
(For those who are interested, IMJ is now collecting bids for the
construction of its online game. More info at http://www.imahjong.com/g3mbs)
Tom Sloper
>[snip] a standardized set of mahjong terminology (English)
>is ... outstanding [snip]
I disagree. A casual reading of FAQ 6 will reveal that most of the essential
terms (of which there are actually only a few) are well established. Here's
the list.
TILE - It's almost universally accepted to call a tile a "tile."
SUITS - The three suits are almost universally called "Characters" (else
"Craks"), "Bamboo" (else "Bams"), and "Circles" (else "Dots").
DRAGONS - Just about everyone calls these tiles "dragons," and the three
different tiles are always called "Red," "Green," and "White."
WINDS - Practically every author calls these tiles "winds," and of course
they are called "East," "South," "West," "North."
WINDS & DRAGONS COLLECTIVELY are practically universally called "Honors."
(The term is sometimes used to include terminals.)
TERMINALS and SIMPLES - Every English author who uses these terms means
"ones and nines" when using the former, and "twos through eights" when using
the latter.
FLOWERS - Some authors distinguish between "flowers" and "seasons." Some
don't (some call them all flowers and some call them all seasons). Big deal.
We manage.
FAN / DOUBLE - It depends on which kind of mah-jongg is being discussed. For
Chinese Classical, Western, and American mah-jongg, the term is "double."
PUNG - Hardly anybody uses any other term for this.
KONG - Although Wei-Hwa Huang's website uses the term "quad," I've never
heard anyone say that except in one computer game (^_^). Everybody uses a
"kong" or a variant spelling.
CHOW - Although some use the term "chi" (mainly when discussing the Japanese
game), the normal English term is "chow."
PAIR - The vast majority of English writers use this term over any other.
DEALER - The overwhelming majority of English writers say either "Dealer" or
"East."
WINNING - Yes, there are a number of terms for this. If someone says "Going
Out," it's easily understood as meaning the same as "Going Ma-Jong" or
"Declaring A Win."
THE NAME OF THE GAME - This one is the worst term in the bunch. It
frequently happens with words imported into English from other languages
that there isn't one standardized spelling system. We're seeing that today
in regards to place names and peoples' names in Iraq (Saddam Hussein, Sadam
Husayn, etc.). So too with mah-jongg. I only have one dictionary in my
bookshelf, and that one uses the spelling given the game by J.P. Babcock in
1920: with the hyphen and double G. It may well be that other dictionaries
use other spellings. I just looked at the Merriam Webster dictionary,
online, and they use both (with hyphen and double G - and without hyphen or
double G). Spellings without the hyphen, and/or without the double G, aren't
"incorrect." But yes, it'd be nice if we could get all the dictionaries to
agree.
OTHER TERMS - I don't know what other terms are as important to
"standardize" as the ones above. It's less than thirty terms (depending on
which of the above you count, or how you choose to count them).
This, then, is my argument that there ARE standardized terms, used by the
overwhelming majority of English players and authors.
Just take a look at FAQ 6. Add up the authors that use a particular term and
see for yourself.
A few exceptions are noted. But all in all, I don't see any "terminology
problem."
Tom
Cofa Tsui
news:ydTza.451303$Si4.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> Cofa wrote:
>
>
>
> >[snip] a standardized set of mahjong terminology (English)
> >is ... outstanding [snip]
>
>
>
> I disagree. A casual reading of FAQ 6 will reveal that most of the
essential
> terms (of which there are actually only a few) are well established.
Here's
> the list.
>
>
>
Thanks Tom, for the detailed list of, I believe to be, widely accepted
mahjong terms in English.
> This, then, is my argument that there ARE standardized terms, used by the
> overwhelming majority of English players and authors.
>
> Just take a look at FAQ 6. Add up the authors that use a particular term
and
> see for yourself.
However, there should be fundamental differences between the widely accepted
terms and a standardized set of terms. Besides, I believe there is also lack
of standards just how these widely accepted terms were established.
> A few exceptions are noted. But all in all, I don't see any "terminology
> problem."
Anyway, without the connection to a standardized mahjong rules, I also don't
see any "terminology problem" with various terms and phrases being used.
Cheers!
Cofa
John Hwang
>Cofa wrote:
>>[snip] a standardized set of mahjong terminology (English)
>>is ... outstanding [snip]
>
>I disagree. A casual reading of FAQ 6 will reveal that most of the essential
>terms (of which there are actually only a few) are well established.
Totally agreed. There's no need for a new set of terminology. Nor any
benefit. Rather, a new set is a *detriment*. All a new set of terminology
does is generate confusion.
And when as ridiculous and laughable as so-called "IMJ", it's an utter waste of
time.
>Here's the list.
[SNIP list]
All agreed. Minor Romanization aside (i.e. Pong/Pung, Mahjong/Mah-Jongg) the
concepts and terminology is very well-established.
>This, then, is my argument that there ARE standardized terms, used by the
>overwhelming majority of English players and authors.
Yes.
>Just take a look at FAQ 6. Add up the authors that use a particular term and
>see for yourself.
>
>A few exceptions are noted. But all in all, I don't see any "terminology
>problem."
Yup.
Jesse
diffusion. Mahjong, being a game unique to Asia, is currently finding
a trend in the international community and cannot be overlooked as a
mechanism to trasport even minimal cultural infuluence.
"Cofa Tsui" <cofa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<_UNza.67346
::In reference to the statement IMJ is a bane to Chinese culture::
> Since your statement doesn't come with any proof, other than the terminology
> issue, I can only response generally as above. If you could provide more
> details about the alleged *bane*, I will certainly response to it, as I do
> for your "terminology issue" in the following paragraphs.
Every player using the *IMJ super tile game* ruleset is one less
player playing HKOS, Chinese Classical, Japanese, Korean, Fuzhaonese
etc. in otherwords it is one less player being culturally infuluenced.
> > What has drawn so many non-Chinese players to MJ is the exotisism of
> > the game, creating hands of dragons and great winds, shouting pung,
> > sei, chow. If I were to shout "bobby bango" in Chinatown I would
> > surely be killed.
>
> As far as the terminology used in the IMJ Rules is concerned, I am in line
> with Nick Wedd's viewpoint - It shouldn't be an issue (from other post).
The terminology is unimportant in two responses, the business aspect
and the playability aspect. If someone bought your game it doesnt
matter what they call anything, its sold and you made money. In
playability three tiles will be taken despite the yell of *pung* or
*bango*. But again the point I am trying to make is on the cultural
aspect of the game.
> all Chinese out of the influence of the mainland government criticized the
> Pinyin program - saying it a bane to Chinese culture.
Pinyin (like romanji for japanese students) is used in only the most
rudimentry text books and is simply a tool for learning and writing
before you mastered X000 chinese characters. Too much effort was put
into IMJ to consider it a learning tool of MJ.
> But to any Chinese who doesn't know "white dragon" or "ba long",
> and who knows only "Bak Baan", you or any brand new mahjong player will be
> absolutely safe by saying Bobby, white dragon, ba long, or whatever term you
> (he or she) are familiar with.
Familiarity again isnt the topic, but cultural diffusion. Of the three
terms above only one doesnt really relate to the others.
> Expecting a Chinese who doesn't know the "widely accepted English terms",
> and expecting a brand new mahjong player who doesn't know the "widely
> accepted English terms", to recognize those "widely accepted English terms"
> as their old friends, is really the same as I am expecting you and other
> experienced mahjong players to recognize the IMJ terms... If one considers
> all these issues from a third party's point, they all seem like the same
> (and interchangeable).
as above
America too has a popular tile game, Dominos (to tell the truth the
country of orgin cannot be discerned from the game alone due to lack
of cultural influence). But what makes a game of matching numbers so
appealing? The romantisizing of inner city culture via pop media. With
every such infulence minorities in America gain yet another foot hold
towards true equality. Does mahjong have the same effect? Look over
past postings and see how many people asked for the meaning of the
dragons and winds, the signifigance of the numbers used for the
characters (a curiosity created due to the romance of the country of
origin). Then look at how many web pages were devoted to that topic
alone. Now how many people follow the links on the web pages
elsewhere.
Tom Sloper
little about that one? It would be great to add another variant to the list
in FAQ 2b.
Tom
--
Tom Sloper - Game Designer, Producer, Consultant, Author, Speaker.
- The Mah-Jongg FAQs. 100+ web pages of information and bulletin boards
about the game of mah-jongg. http://www.sloperama.com/mjfaq.html
Tom Sloper
> Jesse, you mentioned "Fuzhaonese" mah-jongg in your post. Can you tell a
> little about that one? It would be great to add another variant to the
list
> in FAQ 2b.
Looking on my map of China, I see that the province across the Taiwan Strait
from Taiwan is Fujian. So I presume that the game played in Fujian is what
we're talking about. Perhaps it's not too different from the Taiwanese style
of play? Or perhaps it's not too different from Cantonese style (since
Fujian is just to the north of Guangdong)?
Would love to know more about it.
Tom
Cofa Tsui
> diffusion. Mahjong, being a game unique to Asia, is currently finding
> a trend in the international community and cannot be overlooked as a
> mechanism to trasport even minimal cultural infuluence.
Understood.
> "Cofa Tsui" <cofa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<_UNza.67346
> ::In reference to the statement IMJ is a bane to Chinese culture::
>
> > Since your statement doesn't come with any proof, other than the
terminology
> > issue, I can only response generally as above. If you could provide more
> > details about the alleged *bane*, I will certainly response to it, as I
do
> > for your "terminology issue" in the following paragraphs.
From your two statements:
> Every player using the *IMJ super tile game* ruleset is one less
> player playing HKOS, Chinese Classical, Japanese, Korean, Fuzhaonese
> etc. in otherwords it is one less player being culturally infuluenced.
and
(as found below in the original order of the message:)
> Familiarity again isnt the topic, but cultural diffusion. Of the three
> terms above only one doesnt really relate to the others.
I have tried to understand if the following are what you meant to be:
(a) "IMJ carries no Chinese culture or carries no culture of mahjong", and
(b) "IMJ is no more Chinese culture or is no more culture of mahjong".
Please correct me if I understood wrongly. Assuming this understanding is
correct, I still have to disagree with these allegations. It's difficult to
define how and when a "bane" is made to a particular culture when that
particular culture is being introduced to communities of other different
cultures. If you could define this precisely, I would be happy to response
further.
Meanwhile, if you would review the Introductory Section of the International
Mahjong Rules (Click on the link "View IMJ Rules Online" at
http://www.imahjong.com/g1mru.html), you'll see I am also introducing the
Chinese game of mahjong to the world with similar purposes of most other
authors.
However, there might be several differences. Firstly, in addition to merely
introducing, I am also trying to raise the game of mahjong to the world
level in the manner I believe appropriate, rather than just positioning the
game and keeping it as a game of China alone.
Secondly, from the Introductory Section of the IMJ Rules, you'll also see
that I tried to introduce mahjong terms according to a set of standards
including, in brief, "IMJ uses terms and phrases of or closest to the
English language, with the consideration that each term or phrase should:
(a) have a similar pronunciation corresponding to spoken Chinese or (b) have
a closer meaning of the English words used." In other word, trying to keep
the Chinese pronunciation and meaning of a Chinese term to the new English
term were what I tried to accomplish.
Thirdly, I also introduce the game in its fullness, covering all rules in
one rulebook. I claim my rulebook the "World's FIRST comprehensive set of
written rules of mahjong, governing every step of play." Although my
rulebook is written in English, this statement is not specific to any
language. This is not just a commercial slogan, it indicates the standards
and expectations I wanted it to be.
From the above, I can conclude to say that IMJ does carry the Chinese
culture and the culture of mahjong. As to your statement:
> Every player using the *IMJ super tile game* ruleset is one less
> player playing HKOS, Chinese Classical, Japanese, Korean, Fuzhaonese
> etc. in otherwords it is one less player being culturally infuluenced.
Would it also be true, that everyone playing just any non-Chinese mahjong
games is one less player who should have played the ORIGIN of mahjong? OR,
...is one new EXTRA player joining to play a mahjong game developed from the
ORIGIN? I can hardly see any harm done to the original culture of mahjong,
rather than the benefits of it being promoted.
This will give me a chance to further explain why IMJ is in fact carrying
more Chinese culture and original culture of mahjong, than you thought.
Let's still use the "white dragon" as an example; this term doesn't really
carry the true meaning of the Chinese mahjong that I found in all Chinese
literature I know of. Chinese games of mahjong don't have the idea of
"dragon" at all! By transferring a Chinese term "Bak Baan" (Pinyin = Bai2
ban3 "white board/block") to "white dragon", would you call it a "bane" to
the culture of mahjong? Not to mention the activity of transferring the
English term "white dragon" back into Chinese, as "ba long".
On the other hand, IMJ term "Bobby" comes with the "pronunciation
corresponding to spoken Chinese" and since it is obvious to be a name of a
person, it reflects the original Chinese meaning of "one of the three
scholars". Would this feature qualify IMJ to still be something Chinese
culture and culture of mahjong?
The following is another example how IMJ is correctly transferring the
original culture of mahjong: In IMJ I introduced the term Selfmake to
represent "winning upon drawing by oneself" (Art. 5.19). In Chinese games of
mahjong "selfmake" (Pinyin = zi4 mo1 "self touch") is a very popular term,
yet you can hardly find any book in non-Chinese languages that have
transferred its true meaning. The term "self draw", though is a widely
accepted mahjong term in English, truly doesn't carry any cultural aspect of
the Chinese games at all (also Chucker - Art. 5.20 as with other terms
"discarder" and "thrower"). Again, would this feature qualify IMJ to still
be at least something Chinese culture and culture of mahjong?
> America too has a popular tile game, Dominos (to tell the truth the
> country of orgin cannot be discerned from the game alone due to lack
> of cultural influence). But what makes a game of matching numbers so
> appealing? The romantisizing of inner city culture via pop media. With
> every such infulence minorities in America gain yet another foot hold
> towards true equality. Does mahjong have the same effect? Look over
> past postings and see how many people asked for the meaning of the
> dragons and winds, the signifigance of the numbers used for the
> characters (a curiosity created due to the romance of the country of
> origin). Then look at how many web pages were devoted to that topic
> alone. Now how many people follow the links on the web pages
> elsewhere.
Sorry I don't quite understand what you wanted to express here. I shall
response to it if you would give me some hint on this.
Thanks again for the meaningful topic. Cheers!
Cofa Tsui
www.iMahjong.com
Jesse
Fuzhao is the capital of the Fujian province which is where this style
is normally played. The game itself is a unique variant of MJ that I
havent seen anywhere else, its very easy to play and id say its more
of a gambling game then strategy. Ive only played a few times so there
is a slight blur on the rules but here we go.
*First there are no flowers and one honor suit is removed (the exact
one i forgot, beings the rules were explained in chinese which i dont
speak other then several white slangs ;).
*The wall and dice rolling is the same as canton style, but after you
break the wall you go six(?) tiles back and flip it, that tile is the
wild card.
*Every honor tile you get is played like a flower, thus put to the
side and another tile is drawn from the far end of the wall.
*For each honor you put out you get one point, for each kong you get a
point, and if the finishing pair for your hand is two wild cards you
get a point. (i believe there is one or two other ways to get a
point.)
*Everyone pays winner, self touch gives you double points. The object
is to go out as fast as possible after you accumulated several points
(chicken is all to common).
Thats the general jist of play, the people who taught me were gamblers
and played a dollar a point, i won each time i played btw :O If you
are near the New York city area, a lot (maybe a majority of) chinese
there are fuzhao so if you see them playing mj they might be able to
help you more.
Hope i helped, if i get a clearer version of the rules ill no doubt
update.
Tom Sloper
>
>*First there are no flowers and one honor suit is removed
Honor suit? You mean one of the three number suits is removed? I don't know
what an "honor suit" might be, if you aren't referring to the numbered
suits.
>*The wall and dice rolling is the same as canton style, but after you
>break the wall you go six(?) tiles back and flip it, that tile is the
>wild card.
Just like the Japanese "dora" rule. Except the tile is wild, rather than
just worth a double. Interesting.
>*Every honor tile you get is played like a flower, thus put to the
>side and another tile is drawn from the far end of the wall.
Just like in the Filipino game.
Great, thanks, Jesse. Other than that first question above, I'm happy with
this description.
Tom
Tom Sloper
Players hold 13 tiles, go out on 14?
Only the winner is paid?
Thanks
Tom
Jesse
>
> > Every player using the *IMJ super tile game* ... is one less player being
> > culturally infuluenced.
>
> and
>
>
> (a) "IMJ carries no Chinese culture or carries no culture of mahjong", and
> (b) "IMJ is no more Chinese culture or is no more culture of mahjong".
Chinese culture (or foriegn culuture), which I stressed repeatedly.
There is no ideological reason to diffuse a gaming culture.
> It's difficult to
> define how and when a "bane" is made to a particular culture when that
> particular culture is being introduced to communities of other different
> cultures.
When the culture is being introduced in a perverted form of itself, it
can be devistating. An (extreme) example is in japan, japanese
students are learning about japanese history from an american point of
view. This has lead to identity dissonance and cultural rejection.
(actually a discussion of this calibur is beyond the scope of this
message board).
> However, there might be several differences. Firstly, in addition to merely
> introducing, I am also trying to raise the game of mahjong to the world
> level in the manner I believe appropriate, rather than just positioning the
> game and keeping it as a game of China alone.
I never said otherwise.
> that I tried to introduce mahjong terms according to a set of standards
> including, in brief, "IMJ uses terms and phrases of or closest to the
> English language, with the consideration that each term or phrase should:
> (a) have a similar pronunciation corresponding to spoken Chinese or (b) have
> a closer meaning of the English words used."
...Looking more closely at some of your terms, you have a good point
on several (fortua, joh, and maybe 'bang' could work under your
premesises) but there are still just so many ludicrus terms (see
below).
> From the above, I can conclude to say that IMJ does carry the Chinese
> culture and the culture of mahjong. As to your statement:
>
> > Every player using the *IMJ super tile game* ruleset is one less
> > player playing HKOS, Chinese Classical, Japanese, Korean, Fuzhaonese
> > etc. in otherwords it is one less player being culturally infuluenced.
>
> Would it also be true, that everyone playing just any non-Chinese mahjong
> games is one less player who should have played the ORIGIN of mahjong? OR,
> ...is one new EXTRA player joining to play a mahjong game developed from the
> ORIGIN? I can hardly see any harm done to the original culture of mahjong,
> rather than the benefits of it being promoted.
Again this is about cultural diffusion of global cultures not gaming
cultures, thus chi in japanese mj, or chow in chinese mj still helps
further the diffusion.
> > > > What has drawn so many non-Chinese players to MJ is the exotisism of
> > > > the game, creating hands of dragons and great winds, shouting pung,
> > > > sei, chow.
> > > As far as the terminology used in the IMJ Rules is concerned...
> > > It shouldn't be an issue (from other post).
> >
> This will give me a chance to further explain why IMJ is in fact carrying
> more Chinese culture and original culture of mahjong, than you thought.
> Let's still use the "white dragon" as an example; By transferring a Chinese > term "Bak Baan" (Pinyin = Bai2
> ban3 "white board/block") to "white dragon", would you call it a "bane" to
> the culture of mahjong?
> On the other hand, IMJ term "Bobby" comes with the "pronunciation
> corresponding to spoken Chinese" and since it is obvious to be a name of a
> person, it reflects the original Chinese meaning of "one of the three
> scholars". Would this feature qualify IMJ to still be something Chinese
> culture and culture of mahjong?
This brings up two points.
1. You have just implied two names better then 'bobby', Bakban or
Baiban, which would be a better english pronunciation, or if you were
refering to scholars, why not use a scholarly name, aka famous chinese
scholar sun tzu, or aristotle or some other such (3 scholars has
better connotation than 3 youthes and if it is more in line with the
chinese term so be it).
2. A very important point that many people don't take into account,
native speak or otherwise is the concepts of connotation and
annotation. In summary annotation is the meaning of a word, dictionary
style, aka bobby - a person's name.
Connotation is the feeling that a word invokes upon the speaker or
reader, aka bobby - that chubby kid from elementry school.
The mistake isnt only with bobby, but other terms. Pie (written Pai
would have the same pronunciation and a more cultural connotation),
socks, youths, chucker... soft poles. These words already have
meanings associated with them which would take away from the original
romance of the game. Joh is one exception that uses these concepts
correctly, Joe would have failed.
> > America too has a popular tile game, Dominos (to tell the truth the
> > country of orgin cannot be discerned from the game alone due to lack
> > of cultural influence). But what makes a game of matching numbers so
> > appealing? The romantisizing of inner city culture via pop media. With
> > every such infulence minorities in America gain yet another foot hold
> > towards true equality. Does mahjong have the same effect? Look over
> > past postings and see how many people asked for the meaning of the
> > dragons and winds, the signifigance of the numbers used for the
> > characters (a curiosity created due to the romance of the country of
> > origin). Then look at how many web pages were devoted to that topic
> > alone. Now how many people follow the links on the web pages
> > elsewhere.
>
> Sorry I don't quite understand what you wanted to express here. I shall
> response to it if you would give me some hint on this.
I was expressing the importance of cultural romance in bringing out
cultural acceptance. Dominos would be boring if not for cultural
romance. The cultural romance of MJ has created the desire to learn
more about it and in effect more about other cultures.
Again, no sarcasm intended, IMJ is a benevolent cause and i fully
support all forms of cultural diffusion, but what i realized from
reading your posts is that you may take too much of a selfish stance
on the game (a lot of 'I' and 'my' writings). From that stance it
seems you may be prone to reject some good ideas or constructive
critisism in reaction to 'inventors pride'. Before any game hits the
market it is thrown in front of commity after commity to ensure
several things, 1. Entertainment value 2. lack of bugs 3. remaining
strong to its true purpose (if there was a purpose for the game). Ive
seen several good ideas and good critisizms on this board, do you take
them seriously or just humor us with 'thanks' and 'cheers'?
Jesse
> And a couple other quick questions for Jesse.
>
> Players hold 13 tiles, go out on 14?
> Only the winner is paid?
Yes and Yes, I just got in contact with one of my friends who knows
the style well, he'll probobly post the full unmemoryhazed rules soon.
Theres nothing i try to avoid more then spreading false information.
Tom Sloper
>Yes and Yes, I just got in contact with one of my friends who knows
>the style well, he'll probobly post the full unmemoryhazed rules soon.
Excellent. The only remaining point for me, then, is what this "honor suit"
is that's left out. In other words, what's the total number of tiles used on
the table.
It could be 136 minus 36 (one suit) = 100,
or
It could be 136 minus 4 (one honor) = 132.
Korean style uses 104 tiles (suit of Dots, suit of Craks, the 16 Winds, the
12 Dragons, and 4 flowers). So it makes sense to me that we could be talking
here about a 2-suited, 100-tile game.
Cheers,
Tom
Jesse
> is that's left out. In other words, what's the total number of tiles used on
> the table.
sorry i forgot to address that, i meant to say either dragon or wind,
im pretty sure it was the white dragons that were removed, but im not
positive, it was one of the sets of honor tiles (is set a better word
you think)?
Tom Sloper
>i meant to say either dragon or wind,
>im pretty sure it was the white dragons that were removed, but im not
>positive, it was one of the sets of honor tiles (is set a better word
>you think)?
Yes, thanks Jesse!
Tom
Cofa Tsui
> > From your two statements:
> >
> > > Every player using the *IMJ super tile game* ... is one less player being
> > > culturally infuluenced.
> >
> > and
> >
> > > Familiarity again isnt the topic, but cultural diffusion.
> >
> > I have tried to understand if the following are what you meant to be:
> > (a) "IMJ carries no Chinese culture or carries no culture of mahjong", and
> > (b) "IMJ is no more Chinese culture or is no more culture of mahjong".
>
> Chinese culture (or foriegn culuture), which I stressed repeatedly.
> There is no ideological reason to diffuse a gaming culture.
>
> > It's difficult to
> > define how and when a "bane" is made to a particular culture when that
> > particular culture is being introduced to communities of other different
> > cultures.
>
> When the culture is being introduced in a perverted form of itself, it
> can be devistating. An (extreme) example is in japan, japanese
> students are learning about japanese history from an american point of
> view. This has lead to identity dissonance and cultural rejection.
> (actually a discussion of this calibur is beyond the scope of this
> message board).
Your topic is about "loss of culture from MJ" but our discussions seem
have covered both Chinese culture and the culture of MJ itself. IMJ is
derived from the Chinese game of mahjong and is intended to be
introduced as a new game. It might be difficult to view its individual
elements (i.e., one or two specific terms or phrases) and determine if
it carries any Chinese culture or any culture of mahjong, and any at
all. As to your topic, I guess one may find a conclusion suitable for
oneself if IMJ is to be viewed as an entire package...
[...]
> ...Looking more closely at some of your terms, you have a good point
> on several (fortua, joh, and maybe 'bang' could work under your
> premesises) but there are still just so many ludicrus terms (see
> below).
[...]
> This brings up two points.
> 1. You have just implied two names better then 'bobby', Bakban or
> Baiban, which would be a better english pronunciation, or if you were
> refering to scholars, why not use a scholarly name, aka famous chinese
> scholar sun tzu, or aristotle or some other such (3 scholars has
> better connotation than 3 youthes and if it is more in line with the
> chinese term so be it).
When deciding the IMJ system I decided on a set of standards to
translate Chinese terms into English. I never have satisfied with
these naming standards but only recently do I have chances to reply to
comments on this issue publicly... (more below)
> 2. A very important point that many people don't take into account,
> native speak or otherwise is the concepts of connotation and
> annotation. In summary annotation is the meaning of a word, dictionary
> style, aka bobby - a person's name.
> Connotation is the feeling that a word invokes upon the speaker or
> reader, aka bobby - that chubby kid from elementry school.
> The mistake isnt only with bobby, but other terms. Pie (written Pai
> would have the same pronunciation and a more cultural connotation),
> socks, youths, chucker... soft poles. These words already have
> meanings associated with them which would take away from the original
> romance of the game. Joh is one exception that uses these concepts
> correctly, Joe would have failed.
I agree with the "mistake" you mentioned about IMJ as I also see that
it was also a result of my following too tight with the set standards
- This had been kept on record but I am still yet to find a perfect
way that could balance the needs from all viewpoints. An example was
the selection of Pie instead of Pai. Pie seemed to have met the set
standards but I always liked Pai better because of the feeling I had
with it. Applying your standards, I see that both "Pie" and "Tile" are
lousy if "Pai" is to be introduced...
> > Sorry I don't quite understand what you wanted to express here. I shall
> > response to it if you would give me some hint on this.
>
> I was expressing the importance of cultural romance in bringing out
> cultural acceptance. Dominos would be boring if not for cultural
> romance. The cultural romance of MJ has created the desire to learn
> more about it and in effect more about other cultures.
>
> Again, no sarcasm intended, IMJ is a benevolent cause and i fully
> support all forms of cultural diffusion, but what i realized from
> reading your posts is that you may take too much of a selfish stance
> on the game (a lot of 'I' and 'my' writings). From that stance it
> seems you may be prone to reject some good ideas or constructive
> critisism in reaction to 'inventors pride'. Before any game hits the
> market it is thrown in front of commity after commity to ensure
> several things, 1. Entertainment value 2. lack of bugs 3. remaining
> strong to its true purpose (if there was a purpose for the game). Ive
> seen several good ideas and good critisizms on this board, do you take
> them seriously or just humor us with 'thanks' and 'cheers'?
As mentioned many times before points (from you and from anyone else)
about IMJ will be well taken and will be considered when comes the
time when the IMJ system is to be further developed. But before a new
system is actually introduced to the public what else could I show you
other than my thanks and cheers? ;-(
Thanks again!
Cofa Tsui
www.iMahjong.com
Thierry Depaulis
> Fuzhao is the capital of the Fujian province which is where this style
> is normally played.
Maybe it should be better to write the name of the city according to a
recognised standard. In pinyin it is now spelled Fuzhou, while the old
English spelling -- Foochow -- may be more familiar to some of us,
unless they prefer Culin's use of the Cantonese form Fuhchau. (In
French, it was Foutcheou, evidemment.)
Thierry Depaulis