Tuesday, August 26, 2008

辩论评分标准雷达

如果你是辩论评判你会怎么评一场辩论比赛?

你认为下述4大因素之中,那个最能影响你对一场比赛胜负的判决?
请为每一个因素打分(0-10分)。10 分为非常重要,0分为不重要。
但是,4 个因素加起来不得超过25分。

内容
- 其中包括清晰的主线,架构,以及适合的例子。但并不包括反驳的内容,以及呈现内容的方式

反驳技术
- 反驳的内容,语句结构。气势。

语言风度
- 舞台感好,咬字清晰,发音标准。笑容,从容。

幽默/娱乐
- 幽默,风趣,娱乐。未必有实质的内容,但也不至于离题。

这是我的看法,我的评分雷达。。。你呢?你的雷达又是什么样呢?



内容 : 7
反驳技术 : 10
语言风度 : 4
幽默/娱乐 : 4

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Love...

Loving someone,
is not about giving the other what you think love is.
is about giving the other what the other think love is.

Sunday, August 17, 2008

伤。。。

对许多人来说,奥林匹克运动会的观赏仅仅是一种娱乐。大家都为金牌得主欢呼。可是,看到别人拿金牌我们却不会想到拿银牌的那位,或者没缘拿任何奖牌的运动员的心情是如何的可悲。也没有人会为他而掉泪。谁知背后运动员的付出与努力?就算比金牌得主付出更多,但由于裁判,运气或其他天时地利的因素输了一场比赛也没有人会可怜你。竞技项目自古以来就是成王败寇,这是无法改变的残酷事实。

辩论比赛何尝不是如此呢?

圈外人,绝对不会体会到我们现在的感受。

马大以外的人,也不会体会到我们付出的程度与痛楚。

等了9年,准备了2年。一切,化为乌有。

是裁判偏见也罢,是运气差也罢。但我最不能理解也不能原谅的是,为何过了这么多年,我们依然是公敌?

树大招风?我呸!输了4届,还算大树?就算是大树,我依然觉得那些硬是要吹向我们这颗树的“风”,卑鄙无耻。何必,何必因为曾经是一棵大树而瞄准我们?在外围赛之前,就已经有人指责我们操控评判,影响赛会,甚至比别人更早知道辩题。我们有必要吗?没有这个必要,不是因为我们自傲,而是我们正义。如果可以操控,我不会要“经济”这一题;如果可以操控,我不会要打外围赛;如果可以操控,我会把所有自以为是,先入为主的评判搁置一旁。但我们没有这么做,也不曾这么想。

我们受到攻击,遍体鳞伤。不过,对有意到大专参加辩论的同学们,我倒有个建议。要参加,就要参加像马大这种辩论队。有些人参加辩论比赛得了冠军以后,我看到他,还真的不好意思说他是辩论员。但在马大辩论队这种环境下成长,无论是输赢,出来以后不但可以堂堂正正地称自己为辩论员 ,还可以实实在在地学到什么是人生。更重要的是,你可以认识到一群又可爱,又认真,而且真挚的朋友。就好像昨天在唱K时的那首歌一样:“赢了世界,输走好友等于一切全部也飘走,。。。”

伤。。。真的伤得无话可说。。。但,我依然会记得那天我独自到天后宫向观音的祈求。我虽然没有得到胜利,但我没有失去对我而言最珍贵的东西。谢谢。


(写于2008北京奥运会期间;第11届马来西亚全国大专辩论赛,马来亚大学输了复赛后的第二天)

Sunday, August 3, 2008

the functions of languages - a war...

I'm no linguist. But since posting my previous personal post regarding the Chinese and English language, I am itching to write this post on the functions of languages.

Let me begin by describing my sins of the past. I used to loathe "bananas". Yes, by "bananas" I mean those English speaking Chinese who can't speak a word of Chinese (other than the few famous phrases spoken in those HK TV serials aired over RTM and ASTRO). That was more than 10 years ago. Many things happened since, and I've come to let go my prejudice. However, this doesn't mean I'm any less insistent on the education of the Chinese Language for Malaysian Chinese.

This is mainly because I see a Language as more than just a tool of communication. Language also represents a way of life, a way of thought and most importantly a cultural representation. Therefore, by foregoing your right to learn Chinese is like losing a part of you as Chinese. (Note: I'm not being racist or promoting cultural superiority here. That being a proud Chinese doesn't make you any less Malaysian because, I think, we all can agree that there's a vast difference between Malaysian Chinese and China Chinese)

Many of my English-speaking friends disagree with me. Insisting that culture and language are independent of each other. My simple answer to them is this: reading Shakespeare in Mandarin is quite different from the English version. And likewise if you are reading Sun Tzu's art of war in English, the 'feel' is very different. Moreover, terms such as 'gentleman' are difficult to translate to Chinese and likewise 君子 is not possible (or near impossible) to translate to the other.

It is not possible to describe what 君子 means in a word or two. You'll have to understand Chinese literature and history and stories to understand how the concept of 君子 is depicted. And there are many more words like that in both English and Chinese. Language is actually a bridge that connects our thoughts to the real world. But there is always a gap between what we think and what we say or write. Therefore a lot of expressions (words or phrases) in a language are beyond explanation. Only experiences can give you the true meaning of a word or phrase.

I'll give you another example. We all know what love is, in a very general way. But everyone understands love in a very different way because of the love stories we hear, the movies we watch, the way we are brought up, etc. There is nothing that would suffice in explaining what love is until you experience it. A definition of word is not given by the dictionary, but given by one's experience of the world. It is how one perceives the world. And therefore, the teaching of a language will inevitably include the teaching of how one perceives the world.

Given that, it is not surprising why Chinese-educated and English-educated folks think very much differently and view the world quite differently. Not just in the command of language, but also the way they think. And that's why I think there is a minute, but detectable polarisation among those that are Chinese-educated and English-educated. It's because language is closely tied to culture, behaviour and thinking patterns. In Chinese, 'respect' (尊敬) is closely tied to the relationship between the younger ones, and the older ones; between teachers and students. But there isn't any such ties in English version of 'respect'. This is why, in general, Chinese-educated students have a tendency not to challange teachers in the public.

In many parts of the world, there isn't any clear distinction in this function of language. The language used to communicate is the language used predominantly in their respective cultures, e.g. Germans, English, Japan, etc. That is why, I do not expect Chinese nationals (from China) to really understand this situation. In Malaysia, however, it is different. We are a multicultural (or heterogeneous) country, each race with our own preferred choice of language and hence a different set of thoughts.

As a result of this, there are many ongoing arguments in Malaysia on which language we should use for our Math and Science subjects. Some may even argue that Malaysians should use one unified language - English for our education system. There are two issues here. One, should there be only one language? Two, which language should it be if we should only have one unified language for our education system?

But first, let there be no doubt that using one single unified language as the medium of teaching helps the national unity. While learning your own mother tongue is human right, there is no denying that the nation needs to speak or understand one common language for unity to happen. And this so-called common language for unity is not just a language we learn and know per se, but also it becomes the preferred choice of language for communication among ourselves. This is something that even Dong Zong (董总)should realise. And obviously that language will not be Chinese.

Then should it be English? Or Malay?

I noticed that most Asean scholars or Singaporean-educated Malaysians, if given a choice, would prefer to use English as the sole medium of education. I guess, in giving me a choice between Malay and English, I would have chosen English too. As Tony Pua mentioned in his blog, many Chinese-educated students may find it difficult to obtain a good job at the highest level of corporates due to their inept in English language. However, one should not go to the other extreme of our neighbour too.

Decades ago, the then Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew decided to discourage the use of Mandarin in Singapore. He reckons that learning two first languages (English and Chinese) will make Singapore less competitive. Obviously, at that time, when China was just recovering from the cultural revolution and during the pinnacle of cold war, Lee Kuan Yew chose to abandon Mandarin. Just a few years back, however, he changed that. The reason is again obvious - China's back as the superpower of the world. Therefore, I reckon that Singapore is the perfect example in the World that uses the language for nothing, but merely as a communication tool. More precisely, as a business communication tool. And I think that is pathetic.

Given that a language has its cultural value, there is no doubt that I want to learn Mandarin. And I would want my sons and grandsons to learn Mandarin. This language is built up upon more than 3000 years of history. But since, also knowing the fact that Mandarin is impossible to be the 'unifying' language used in Malaysia, I admit I'm in a dilemma in this issue.

But I'm adamant, that one should not pursue a language purely as a tool of communication. It's much more than that.

Saturday, August 2, 2008

English vs Chinese language

I've written quite some posts in mandarin lately. One of my friends wondered, why did I not write them all in one unified language? Is it because I have a specific audience in mind when I write in English and likewise for Chinese?

The answer is no.

Basically, I think in Chinese and English quite independently. Therefore, when I thought of something in English, or if I attended a class or a forum in English, I will write an account of it in English. It will be very difficult for me to translate it to Mandarin or vice versa.

However, there are draw backs to this. One of the most significant ones is that I learn both languages quite separately, i.e. it'll take more time. Also, I'm neither excellent in Mandarin or English. I'm ok at both. So those English-speaking friends find my English ok, but rather unpolished. And my Mandarin-speaking friends will find my Mandarin ok, but with occasional weird sentence structures.

最近的政局乱象,是否是民主的阵痛?

刚刚才出席了一个由马华举办的讲座。我觉得这个讲座很有意思。

可惜,很多观众借题发挥,乘机攻击政府和大谈这不是短痛而是剧痛,而偏离整个讲座的题目。我本身觉得这个课题的重点不在乎这是否是阵痛,长痛还是剧痛。而是到底这“痛”是否是因为民主而引起的呢?这“痛”又是否是我们迈向民主化的过程之一呢?

我认为那个答案是否定的。我们最近的政局乱象都是因为政党内外,政客争夺权力而引起的。虽然这乱象也许会带来新的政府,而这新政府也许会为自由与公平带来曙光。然而,民主化不是一个选举的成果,更不是关于谁是政府,而是关于一个机制的改变。

许多观众谈到这个乱象,似乎对现有的政府大感不满。他们提到了石油涨价、通货膨胀、贪污滥权、交通诸塞等的问题。尤其是一位观众,更把民主说成是“民煮”-人民在大锅里面被政府煮,而获得在场观众的如雷掌声。大家好像说成只要马来西亚有了民主,经济问题就会迎刃而解。这不禁让我想起,最近308的政治海啸根本就不是民主的请愿而是对经济状况的埋怨。悲乎!

是不是只要人没有被,而是吃得饱饱的,那你就会情愿不要真正的民主呢?经济有其周期,它的起起伏伏,谁也无法预测。只为了经济而换政府是短视的,是头痛医头,脚痛医脚,治标不治本的。如果换政府,如果成立两宪制,首先必须做的是先建立好一个能够自己运行,自我纠正的机制。这个机制就是一个相对比较完善的民主制。

我们根本没有办法确定民联是否又是一个“50年的独裁国阵”,只是换汤不换药。正如其中一位主讲者所说的:人民是在赌博,过去50年赌输了,这次就一次过赌在民联的身上,希望它真的会开“大”。但如果输了又要再等一个50年。这不就是“赶走了老狼,却迎来饿虎”吗?然而,若有完善的民主机制,我们就可以确保我们不需要等50年,而是4年。

试想想,我们为何推崇民主?回顾人类历史,我们不难发现许多古文明曾经在出色领袖的领导下创造出辉煌的成绩。不过,好景一般都不长留。这些文明一般都在出色领袖去世以后的几个时代就销声匿迹。 古罗马是这样,古希腊和埃及也是这样。在没有民主的情况下,一个文明只需要一个饿狼就能够把过去所有杰出领袖的功劳功亏一篑。民主不一定选出最好的、最善良的领袖。但,它却能确保破坏性能减至最低点。这就是伟大文明传承与延续的关键。

另外,成立更完善的民主机制还有一个重点。就是言论与思想的自由。大马华社可以大谈要开放固大制(quota system),其实多少也因为华社了解开放了以后对自身族群有利。如果换作你是弱势族群,你会这么着急要开放吗?不是说我不支持开放,其实我对固大制痛恨极了。然而,多少个马来西亚华人真正勇敢地把这个观点与普罗大众的巫裔同胞讨论过呢?在kopitiam就能把这个课题高谈阔论,但在马来朋友面前却步步为营。实际上,除了少数马来精英分子以外,绝大部分的马来人都不认为他们应该放弃固大制或是他们的特权。而我们从小就被灌输这是敏感课题,不宜多谈。merdeka center 曾经做过一个调查显示,大部分马来人认为现有的不公平,主要不是源于不公平的政策。而几乎90%的华人认为是因为不公平的政策。这个认知的落差是不容忽视的。

要走向民主,不是华社说了算。还要马来人了解我们。我们也要了解他们的困境。惟有确立言论自由,建立沟通的桥梁,多鼓励民族间的对话,我们才能真正步向民主。在这个过程中,难免会有一些激烈的争吵。但这是必要的。而这,才是真正的民主阵痛!