Read on Twitter
A couple quick thoughts on Chinese language skills and commentary, research, or journalism about China-related issues, following this great thread.
TL;DR: People need to try to understand the limits of their understanding, and be honest about those limits. 1/ https://twitter.com/ourobororoboruo/status/1336688667679666177
TL;DR: People need to try to understand the limits of their understanding, and be honest about those limits. 1/ https://twitter.com/ourobororoboruo/status/1336688667679666177
. @Kate_OKeeffe also raised a good question in response to a perhaps overstated argument that no Chinese language skills means no right to work on China-related issues. 2/ https://twitter.com/kate_okeeffe/status/1336745328612171778
In my view, anyone working on issues related to China full-time should pursue at least part-time language study. Employers should support it. Many do.
The reason is not so that the person can do Chinese-language work independently; this takes too long for many. 3/
The reason is not so that the person can do Chinese-language work independently; this takes too long for many. 3/
The reason to pursue at least beginning knowledge of Chinese language(s) is that it can seriously power up a person’s BS-detecting capabilities. It helps analytical thinking by fueling better questions and by giving a peak at the magnitude of what the analyst does not grasp. 4/
But analysis is not just language. It is the skill of an experienced and skeptical journalist, of a researcher versed in the methodologies and theoretical concerns of a discipline, or of a policy practitioner who knows what is movable vs stubborn at in other systems. 5/
In fact, some of the very worst China reasoning I’ve seen has come from people with dazzling second-language proficiency in Mandarin.
The confidence of being unusually good there, whether by gift or work or both, can spill over into areas where gifts or work are missing. 6/
The confidence of being unusually good there, whether by gift or work or both, can spill over into areas where gifts or work are missing. 6/
As @ourobororoboruo discusses, many in the field are acutely sensitive about their limits, or they go to extremes to cure perceived language inadequacies.
But many will engage with China without the time to become true specialists. It’s unavoidable and good. 7/
But many will engage with China without the time to become true specialists. It’s unavoidable and good. 7/
The solution is pretty simple. People need to be thoughtful and honest about their limits.
I edit translations for #DigiChina @StanfordCyber. I’m pretty experienced with tech policy language. But our work is possible because many specialists contribute, and we seek advice. 8/
I edit translations for #DigiChina @StanfordCyber. I’m pretty experienced with tech policy language. But our work is possible because many specialists contribute, and we seek advice. 8/
DigiChina emerged because a number of specialists thought the debates in English were lacking real engagement with Chinese sources. Knowing many who have no Chinese language are concerned with Chinese tech policy, we set out to make it more legible. It’s division of labor. 9/
But you wouldn’t want to come to (most of) our contributors for thoughts on Song literature or contemporary Chinese religious practices. We’d send you elsewhere.
The amazing interpreters I’ve ever met would not try to school me on data governance. 10/
The amazing interpreters I’ve ever met would not try to school me on data governance. 10/
Everyone should do their best to know more and know their limits, and hucksters should be marginalized and (if you like) mocked.
But language ability and quality, honest work are not necessarily correlated. Dismissing or credentialing people as if they are is misguided. 11/
But language ability and quality, honest work are not necessarily correlated. Dismissing or credentialing people as if they are is misguided. 11/
Most of all, trying to exclude voices because they lack language will never work.
Too many important things touch China and the world. People concerned will and must engage. (Many will have insight the fluent student doesn’t.) With humility and division of labor, we all win. END
Too many important things touch China and the world. People concerned will and must engage. (Many will have insight the fluent student doesn’t.) With humility and division of labor, we all win. END
