(36) 2026.07.04 美國建國二百五十年有感 — 談「台灣話」命名的原則

[Taitzer Wang]

Bilingual English-Chinese Conversation with Artificial Intelligence

與人工智能英漢雙語對談錄   Twang 7.4.26

The following is a bilingual discussion in Chinese and English. Scroll down to read the English version.

以下論述，漢、英並列，滑下閱讀英文版本。   

(36) 2026.07.04  美國建國二百五十年有感 — 談「台灣話」命名的原則

今天適逢美國建國二百五十週年國慶，我想到 Allen 與 Ted 最近在 BATA 論壇就「台灣話」稱謂所引發的討論（請參閱本文後附 6 月 28–29 日〈Allen「勸閱人工智能」vs. Ted「勸跳台南運河」〉）。藉此機會，我提出自己對「台灣話」命名問題的一點看法。

我認為，語言的命名應建立在族群政治共同體形成之後，而不應由任何單一族群在共同國家尚未建立之前，率先壟斷其命名權。以下所論，即以此原則為出發點。

本文沿用「原台語」「福台語」「客台語」「中台語」等名稱，係根據拙著《母語踏腳行 ─ Taiwanese Language: An Acoustic Journey》（2004 年，前衛出版社出版）所提出的命名方式。其目的並非創造新名詞，而是在尊重歷史事實的前提下，反映先後來台原住民族、閩南族群、客家族群及戰後來台「外省人」族群，共同形塑台灣社會的歷史過程。

Ted 在回應 Allen 時，提到 American English。我在美國生活六十三年，日常生活中從未有人要求我「請講 American English（美式英語）」。一般人只會說：「Please speak English.」所謂 American English，主要是語言學上用來區別英、美在發音、語調及部分詞彙差異的名稱，而非一般社會日常使用的語言稱呼。

然而，美國的經驗仍提供了一項值得深思的原則。美利堅合眾國建立之後，才逐漸形成 American English 這一地域性稱呼；其前提，是一個新的政治共同體已經存在。換言之，語言名稱的形成，是國家形成之後的自然發展，而不是建國之前由任何單一群體預先宣告。

反觀今日台灣，這片土地由原住民族、閩南族群、客家族群以及戰後來台外省族群等共同組成。如果台灣終將建立一個獲得普遍承認的正常國家，那麼未來「官方語言」、「法定語言」及各種語言的正式名稱，都應由這個政治共同體依民主程序與社會共識加以決定，而不宜在國家定位尚未完成之前，便由任何單一族群率先壟斷「台灣話」的命名權。

因此，我主張：現階段採用「原台語」「福台語」「客台語」「中台語」等較具描述性的名稱，不是削弱台灣主體性，也不是向任何外來政權妥協；相反地，它尊重台灣多元族群共同生活的歷史現實，也為未來正常國家建立之後，由全體人民共同決定語言名稱，保留應有的公共空間。

至於福台語、客台語如何藉由漢字與羅馬拼音兼顧保音、保義與文化傳承，拙著《母語踏腳行》已有較完整的討論，此處不再贅述。

國家的建立，是人民共同意志的展現；語言的命名，則是共同意志成熟之後的文化成果。兩者不宜本末倒置，更不宜由任何單一族群預作定論。唯有建立在共同政治共同體與社會共識之上的語言命名，才能真正成為全體人民共同擁有、共同珍惜的文化資產。

(36) 2026.07.04  Reflections on the 250th Anniversary of American Independence: A Principle for Naming the Languages of Taiwan

As the United States celebrates the 250th anniversary of its founding, I am reminded of the recent discussion between Allen and Ted on the BATA Forum concerning the designation of what is commonly called "Taiwanese." (See the attached forum exchanges of June 28–29: Allen: "Read Artificial Intelligence" vs. Ted: "Jump into the Tainan Canal.") Their debate prompts me to offer my own perspective on the principles that should govern the naming of Taiwan's languages.

My central proposition is this: The naming of a language should follow the formation of a shared political community. Before such a community exists, no single ethnic or linguistic group should claim the authority to monopolize the name of a language on behalf of all. The following discussion is based on this principle.

In this article I continue to use the terms Indigenous Taiwanese, Hoklo Taiwanese, Hakka Taiwanese, and Chinese Taiwanese, following the terminology proposed in my book Taiwanese Language: An Acoustic Journey (published in 2005 by Advanguard Publishing). These names were not coined merely to introduce new labels. Rather, they are intended to reflect Taiwan's historical reality: a society successively shaped by Indigenous peoples, Hoklo settlers, Hakka settlers, and postwar immigrants from China.

In his response to Allen, Ted referred to American English. Having lived in the United States for sixty-three years, I have never heard anyone ask me, "Please speak American English." In everyday life people simply say, "Please speak English." The term American English is primarily a linguistic designation distinguishing American usage from British usage in pronunciation, intonation, and certain vocabulary; it is not the ordinary name people use for their language in daily conversation.

Nevertheless, the American experience illustrates an important principle. The designation American English emerged only after the United States had already become an established political community. In other words, the evolution of a language's name followed the establishment of the nation rather than preceding it.

Taiwan presents a fundamentally different situation. Its population consists of Indigenous peoples, Hoklo, Hakka, and postwar Chinese immigrants, all of whom have contributed to the island's history and society. Should Taiwan one day become a fully recognized and normal member of the international community, the designation of its official language(s), legal language(s), and the names of its various languages should be determined through democratic institutions and broad social consensus within that shared political community — not by any single group claiming the authority to define "the Taiwanese language" in advance.

For this reason, I believe that using descriptive names such as Indigenous Taiwanese, Hoklo Taiwanese, Hakka Taiwanese, and Chinese Taiwanese at the present stage neither diminishes Taiwan's identity nor represents a concession to any outside political power. On the contrary, such terminology acknowledges Taiwan's multicultural historical reality while preserving the public space necessary for future citizens of a common state to determine language names together through democratic consensus.

As for the preservation of pronunciation, meaning, and cultural heritage through the combined use of Chinese characters and Romanization in Hoklo Taiwanese and Hakka Taiwanese, I have discussed these issues in greater detail in my book Taiwanese Language: An Acoustic Journey and will not repeat them here.

The founding of a nation is the expression of the collective will of its people. The naming of its languages is a cultural achievement that should follow the maturation of that shared civic will. The two should not be reversed, nor should any one group presume to decide the matter unilaterally. Only language names established upon a genuinely shared political community and broad public consensus can become cultural assets that belong equally to all of its people.

[alle...@timebyte.com]

Taitzer 教授的命名建議雖然很有創意, 可惜基本上不符合事實.

 

據台語文專家張復聚說:

一般福建來台灣的移民後裔僅簡單自稱是 “台灣郎”.

之所以有 “福佬人” 之稱呼, 是客家族群遷台之後, 在客家人之間自己使用的.

一般福建來台灣的移民後裔, 絕不會自稱是 “福佬郎”.

 

因此, Ted 的「福台語」「客台語」之分, 並不具代表性.

應以「台語」, 「客語」區分即可.

 

此外,「中台語」會使人混淆. 廣東話算是「中台語」嗎?

北京話就是北京話, 廣東話就是廣東話, 毋需硬產生什麼「中台語」的名詞.

 

依此類推, 如果客語在台灣跟客語在國際上沒有太大的差別,

則客家話就是客家話, 毋需硬產生什麼「客台語」的名詞.

 

Cheers,

Allen Kuo

--
This is the Bay Area Taiwanese American E-Mail Group. Our main objective is to provide open communication channel for the Taiwanese American community, let the Taiwan Spirit grow and pass down to the future.
---
這是 Google 網路論壇針對「Bay Area Taiwanese American」群組發送的訂閱通知郵件。
如要取消訂閱這個群組並停止接收來自這個群組的郵件，請傳送電子郵件到 bay-area-taiwanese-...@googlegroups.com。
如要查看這個討論，請前往 https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bay-area-taiwanese-american/BA54A21E-2383-4D8D-9E7C-1D518B15DEDD%40gmail.com。

[Taitzer Wang]

BATA Allen 壇長，論事如此這般，除了Ted 建議他跳「台南運河」外，還有張復聚醫師高雄的「愛河」和我老家屏東的「萬年溪」可以跳。

泰澤 7/5

On Jul 4, 2026, at 9:59 AM, <alle...@timebyte.com> <alle...@timebyte.com> wrote:

Taitzer 教授的命名建議雖然很有創意, 可惜基本上不符合事實.

 

據台語文專家張復聚說: 

一般福建來台灣的移民後裔僅簡單自稱是 “台灣郎”.

之所以有 “福佬人” 之稱呼, 是客家族群遷台之後, 在客家人之間自己使用的.

一般福建來台灣的移民後裔, 絕不會自稱是 “福佬郎”.

 

因此, Ted 的「福台語」「客台語」之分, 並不具代表性.

應以「台語」, 「客語」區分即可. 

 

此外,「中台語」會使人混淆. 廣東話算是「中台語」嗎?

北京話就是北京話, 廣東話就是廣東話, 毋需硬產生什麼「中台語」的名詞.

 

依此類推, 如果客語在台灣跟客語在國際上沒有太大的差別, 

則客家話就是客家話, 毋需硬產生什麼「客台語」的名詞.

 

Cheers,

Allen Kuo

 

From: bay-area-taiw...@googlegroups.com <bay-area-taiw...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Taitzer Wang
Sent: Saturday, July 4, 2026 6:13 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: [BATA] (36) 2026.07.04 美國建國二百五十年有感 — 談「台灣話」命名的原則

 

 

Bilingual English-Chinese Conversation with Artificial Intelligence

與人工智能英漢雙語對談錄   Twang 7.4.26

 

The following is a bilingual discussion in Chinese and English. Scroll down to read the English version.

以下論述，漢、英並列，滑下閱讀英文版本。   

 

<image001.png>

(36) 2026.07.04  美國建國二百五十年有感 — 談「台灣話」命名的原則

 

今天適逢美國建國二百五十週年國慶，我想到 Allen 與 Ted 最近在 BATA 論壇就「台灣話」稱謂所引發的討論（請參閱本文後附 6 月 28–29 日〈Allen「勸閱人工智能」vs. Ted「勸跳台南運河」〉）。藉此機會，我提出自己對「台灣話」命名問題的一點看法。

 

我認為，語言的命名應建立在族群政治共同體形成之後，而不應由任何單一族群在共同國家尚未建立之前，率先壟斷其命名權。以下所論，即以此原則為出發點。

 

本文沿用「原台語」「福台語」「客台語」「中台語」等名稱，係根據拙著《母語踏腳行 ─ Taiwanese Language: An Acoustic Journey》（2004 年，前衛出版社出版）所提出的命名方式。其目的並非創造新名詞，而是在尊重歷史事實的前提下，反映先後來台原住民族、閩南族群、客家族群及戰後來台「外省人」族群，共同形塑台灣社會的歷史過程。

 

Ted 在回應 Allen 時，提到 American English。我在美國生活六十三年，日常生活中從未有人要求我「請講American English（美式英語）」。一般人只會說：「Please speak English.」所謂 American English，主要是語言學上用來區別英、美在發音、語調及部分詞彙差異的名稱，而非一般社會日常使用的語言稱呼。

 

然而，美國的經驗仍提供了一項值得深思的原則。美利堅合眾國建立之後，才逐漸形成 American English 這一地域性稱呼；其前提，是一個新的政治共同體已經存在。換言之，語言名稱的形成，是國家形成之後的自然發展，而不是建國之前由任何單一群體預先宣告。

 

反觀今日台灣，這片土地由原住民族、閩南族群、客家族群以及戰後來台外省族群等共同組成。如果台灣終將建立一個獲得普遍承認的正常國家，那麼未來「官方語言」、「法定語言」及各種語言的正式名稱，都應由這個政治共同體依民主程序與社會共識加以決定，而不宜在國家定位尚未完成之前，便由任何單一族群率先壟斷「台灣話」的命名權。

 

因此，我主張：現階段採用「原台語」「福台語」「客台語」「中台語」等較具描述性的名稱，不是削弱台灣主體性，也不是向任何外來政權妥協；相反地，它尊重台灣多元族群共同生活的歷史現實，也為未來正常國家建立之後，由全體人民共同決定語言名稱，保留應有的公共空間。

 

至於福台語、客台語如何藉由漢字與羅馬拼音兼顧保音、保義與文化傳承，拙著《母語踏腳行》已有較完整的討論，此處不再贅述。

 

國家的建立，是人民共同意志的展現；語言的命名，則是共同意志成熟之後的文化成果。兩者不宜本末倒置，更不宜由任何單一族群預作定論。唯有建立在共同政治共同體與社會共識之上的語言命名，才能真正成為全體人民共同擁有、共同珍惜的文化資產。

 

(36) 2026.07.04  Reflections on the 250th Anniversary of American Independence: A Principle for Naming the Languages of Taiwan

 

As the United States celebrates the 250th anniversary of its founding, I am reminded of the recent discussion between Allen and Ted on the BATA Forum concerning the designation of what is commonly called "Taiwanese." (See the attached forum exchanges of June 28–29: Allen: "Read Artificial Intelligence" vs. Ted: "Jump into the Tainan Canal.") Their debate prompts me to offer my own perspective on the principles that should govern the naming of Taiwan's languages.

 

My central proposition is this: The naming of a language should follow the formation of a shared political community. Before such a community exists, no single ethnic or linguistic group should claim the authority to monopolize the name of a language on behalf of all. The following discussion is based on this principle.

 

In this article I continue to use the terms Indigenous Taiwanese, Hoklo Taiwanese, Hakka Taiwanese, and Chinese Taiwanese, following the terminology proposed in my book Taiwanese Language: An Acoustic Journey (published in 2005 by Advanguard Publishing). These names were not coined merely to introduce new labels. Rather, they are intended to reflect Taiwan's historical reality: a society successively shaped by Indigenous peoples, Hoklo settlers, Hakka settlers, and postwar immigrants from China.

 

In his response to Allen, Ted referred to American English. Having lived in the United States for sixty-three years, I have never heard anyone ask me, "Please speak American English." In everyday life people simply say, "Please speak English." The term American English is primarily a linguistic designation distinguishing American usage from British usage in pronunciation, intonation, and certain vocabulary; it is not the ordinary name people use for their language in daily conversation.

 

Nevertheless, the American experience illustrates an important principle. The designation American English emerged only after the United States had already become an established political community. In other words, the evolution of a language's name followed the establishment of the nation rather than preceding it.

 

Taiwan presents a fundamentally different situation. Its population consists of Indigenous peoples, Hoklo, Hakka, and postwar Chinese immigrants, all of whom have contributed to the island's history and society. Should Taiwan one day become a fully recognized and normal member of the international community, the designation of its official language(s), legal language(s), and the names of its various languages should be determined through democratic institutions and broad social consensus within that shared political community — not by any single group claiming the authority to define "the Taiwanese language" in advance.

 

For this reason, I believe that using descriptive names such as Indigenous Taiwanese, Hoklo Taiwanese, Hakka Taiwanese, and Chinese Taiwanese at the present stage neither diminishes Taiwan's identity nor represents a concession to any outside political power. On the contrary, such terminology acknowledges Taiwan's multicultural historical reality while preserving the public space necessary for future citizens of a common state to determine language names together through democratic consensus.

 

As for the preservation of pronunciation, meaning, and cultural heritage through the combined use of Chinese characters and Romanization in Hoklo Taiwanese and Hakka Taiwanese, I have discussed these issues in greater detail in my book Taiwanese Language: An Acoustic Journey and will not repeat them here.

 

The founding of a nation is the expression of the collective will of its people. The naming of its languages is a cultural achievement that should follow the maturation of that shared civic will. The two should not be reversed, nor should any one group presume to decide the matter unilaterally. Only language names established upon a genuinely shared political community and broad public consensus can become cultural assets that belong equally to all of its people.

[alle...@timebyte.com]

台灣地方選舉（又稱九合一選舉）下次選舉為 2026年11月28日，共選出直轄市長、直轄市議員、縣市長、縣市議員、鄉鎮市長、鄉鎮市民代表、村里長等 9 種地方公職人員.

 

請各位名嘴們如 Ted, Taitzer, 以及各位壇友在剩下4個月裡督促台灣各地自己家鄉的政府首長及民代候選人, 承諾把「台南運河」, 「愛河」, 「萬年溪」等各地河川整治妥善, 達到水質可以回收成為民生用水的地步, 列為競選政見. 以及承諾把這些河川能夠妥善防洪等列為競選政見. 並且在當選後能落實這些政見. 則我必將會樂意的一一跳下這些乾淨的河川, 健泳, 兼慶祝美國建國二百五十年.

 

反之, 如果一如既往, 這些候選人只會在競選期間在媒體, 或各名嘴們只會在各論壇上吹牛, 開空投支票, 大噴口水. 但卻是 “射後不理”. 則跳下這些高度污染河川的傳統, 應該是落在這些當選後卻無法像 Trump 一樣兌現承諾的各地政府首長, 民代, 以及只會在論壇上吹牛造勢的名嘴們. 無論藍, 綠, 白.

 

Cheers,

Allen Kuo

[Dr. Michael Yeun]

 Thank you, Taitzer, for this thoughtful reflection on the future of the Taiwanese language.

In my humble opinion, we Taiwanese Americans are often inclined to evaluate Taiwan's affairs through the lens of our American experiences. As a result, our conclusions may not always be the most appropriate or suitable for our homeland, Taiwan.

To me, the issue ultimately goes back to the legal status of the island and the entity known as the "Republic of China (ROC)," whose legitimacy, in my view, is seriously undermined by historical facts and legal documents. From that perspective, the term 「中台語」can be understood as describing a form of "Chinese" that has been adapted into Taiwanese culture and spoken with a Taiwanese accent.

My sincere hope remains unchanged: that Taiwan's present or future governing authority will adopt a national common-language policy that serves as a unifying medium in the nation-building process of a Republic of Taiwan.

From my perspective, 「中台語」would rank at the bottom of the available choices.

Michael Yeun

---------------------------------------------------------------

(Translation of the above writing)

感謝 Taitzer 先生對台語未來的深思熟慮。

依我之見，我們這些台裔美國人常常傾向於用美國的經驗來評斷台灣事務。因此，我們的結論未必總是最恰當或最適合我們故土台灣的。

在我看來，問題的根源在於台灣的法律地位以及「中華民國（ROC）」這個實體的合法性。我認為，歷史事實和法律文件嚴重損害了其合法性。從這個角度來看，「中台詞」一詞可以理解為一種融入台灣文化並帶有台灣口音的漢語形式。

我始終真誠地希望：台灣現在或未來的政府能夠制定一項全國通用語言政策，作為建構台灣共和國的統一媒介。

在我看來，「中台語」在所有選配中排名墊底。

Iu Beng-ho
Michael Yeun 

楊明昊

--