語言文化的批評
批評，因著批判精神之盛而大行，喜歡凡事批評成為不少Blogger的習慣。其實看了不少Blog，老是覺得要進入他們的世界很難，當中有不少人自以為憤世疾俗，與眾不同，其實正是眾口喧嘩，胡言亂語。
最近在Blog-You看到有人在Blogger Choice推薦的文章－香港的語言文化。文章說香港人愛中英混用不成體統，祟日崇英，置自己母語和文化之不顧，甚至斷言「說什麼語言也好，說中就中，說英就英，說日就日。不中不英又不日，就是狗屁不通的外星話。」
老實說，我自己亦曾討厭別人不中不英，中英夾雜，但究其底蘊，所令人厭惡的不是真的是他們夾雜了幾個英文字，而不過是一些人造作的行為。我那裡留了言，只是說了實情－－中英混用是一種語言習慣，根本無可指責，豈料留言竟被删除了，百思不得其解。
Posted April 22nd, 2006 in 瑣言.
//不過是一些人造作的行為。
唉，我曾做過些負責招聘的職務。真的，我發覺刻意夾幾個英文，然而炸炸帝帝說，「即係中文既…」跟著停幾秒扮諗唔到，d 受者係會buy 你好多。
April 22nd, 2006 at 5:59 pm:sosad: 笑死
April 22nd, 2006 at 5:59 pm小弟中英文都唔係幾得, 唯有咩law….:frown:
April 22nd, 2006 at 8:08 pm這個,很多時都在多元文化下的地方發生
April 23rd, 2006 at 3:28 am看看星加坡,馬來西亞
[...] 昨午讀黑雪寫的“語言文化的批評”，說他在《活在桃花島 》的“香港的語言文化”一文的留言被刪了，仍不以為然。 晚上再看 blog-you.com的“一言孤島”，才知道《活在桃花島》的 blog 主東邪黃藥師，在刪留言之餘，還發表了一個留言，內容如下： 敬希注意 [...]
April 23rd, 2006 at 6:23 am香港的留言文化？…
昨午讀黑雪寫的“語言文化的批評”，說他在《活在桃花島 》的&ldquo…
April 23rd, 2006 at 6:27 am和你一樣，我對中英夾雜沒有何feeling（ha ha）。我反而對刪除別人的留言有點意見。島主的確有權刪除佢唔likey的留言，因為那地盤是他的（至於話會有法律問題就似乎誇左D）。但他這樣做卻不甚大方。若他不想別人打擾，大可像馬家輝先生（http://makafai.blogspot.com/）或PK（http://pkblog.org/）一樣關掉了 comment 功能。似乎島主不是不想別人打擾，而是想將留言區的功能由「交流」變為「歌頌」。當然，另一個角度來看，我們一向也有權刪除留言中的 spam 。就當那些反對意見是 spam 吧！？
April 23rd, 2006 at 8:01 am以前也都討厭中英夾雜, 說話都是全中的, 很少夾有英文字詞。
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:53 pm可是, 上了大學之後, 習慣就改變了。有些時候, 夾一點英文詞語的確比較貼近本意, 又或是聽起來比較順耳。
問題其實不在於有多少中, 有多少英, 如果覺得用一個英文字可以更恰當清晰地表達自己的意思, 那就用吧。
然而, 若只是覺得加一兩個英文字會比較「型」的話, 那就很白痴了。:no:
嘉:
April 23rd, 2006 at 2:57 pm我和你看法有點相似，我在那裡留言是說，以前我也討厭別人中英夾雜，但年紀漸大，中英能力提升了，就覺得中英混用是無可厚非，正如我是讀工程的，要我講工程不用英文根本不可能。說起來，我的留言實在沒有挑釁性，他的反應實在難以理解。
my observations.
if only 東邪黃藥師’s original post had carried sufficient clarity.
after reading his supplementary comments, i think 中英夾雜 is not what he meant to criticise though he did suggest “說話時，又中又英，代表你的語文水平是劣等”.
his theme is “be proud of one’s own langauge and be respectfully of other ppl’s langauges”.
in particular, he seems to be criticising those pretentious locals who look down on their first langauge, ie. chinese/cantonese, and remain to speak a second langauge, ie. english, in their communication with other locals. worse, in speaking these 2nd langauge, these pretentious ppl more often than no do not speak the language well. 東邪黃藥師 also critcised those eng-speaking gwei who do not respect the first langauges of others as if everyone in the world had to speak eng.
unfortunately, 東邪黃藥師 concludes his post with “說什麼語言也好，說中就中，說英就英，說日就日。不中不英又不日，就是狗屁不通的外星話。” which i believe just leads ppl to the preception that the target of his criticism is 中英夾雜.
actually he seems to have found that readers began to misunderstand his post, as he said:
“唉…..等我補充番兩句先。真係…
平日說話，夾了一兩個外語，無可厚非，無須被猛烈指責，亦不是本文的精髓中心思想。
文中的中心思緒是什麼，看得懂的，就會懂。”
but apparently he did not care to explain or clairify it, literally putting the burden of comprehension on readers, so much so that, i guess, to avoid “quarrels” he refued posts that might extent the misunderstanding on the front of 中英夾雜.
be it misunderstanding or “misexpression”, it highlights once again the imporatnce of communications, not only the quality of communications but also the will for it, and hence empathy.
東邪黃藥師 has every right to express his opinions the ways he desires, but apparently there r more ppl misunderstanding his post (if my interpretation is “correct”) than those who did not. he also has every right to refuse comments, though that does not really accord with the norm we reasonably expect. nevertheless, after all, readers can always choose to/not to read his blog, or to read it and citiicise it.
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:31 pmthere ARE a lot of mistakes in the above post. dont kick me :frown:
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:32 pm> his theme is “be proud of one’s own langauge and be respectfully of
> other ppl’s langauges”.
may i amend “his theme, as i comprehend after repeated reading of the post and the comments, is…..”
> in particular, he seems to be criticising those pretentious..
should read “he seemED to be…..”
> in speaking these 2nd langauge, these pretentious ppl more often
> than no do not speak the language well
should read “in speaking THE 2nd langauge, these pretentious ppl more often than NOT do not speak IT well”.
> unfortunately, 東邪黃藥師 concludes his post with
should read “concludED”.
> which i believe just leads ppl to the preception that the target of his > criticism
should read “…..just ADDS TO PPL’s perception that…..”
> he refued posts that might extent the misunderstanding
“EXTEND” not extent
:049:
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:45 pmdill, one more
> his theme is “be proud of one’s own langauge and be respectfully of
> other ppl’s langauges”.
should read “be proud of one’s own langauge and RESPECT other ppl’s langauges”
:049:
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:54 pmThere is a
“NOTICE” saying that ……
This may mislead others in believing that Blacksnow has siad something ” 搞事及牽起任何筆戰’.
What exactly did 東邪黃藥師 disliked or refuted ? Blacksnow, would you mind posting your message (in 東邪黃藥師’s blog) here ?
As PK_ , 五師兄 and the others have commented, 東邪黃藥師 might have misunderstood your message.
P.S. Sorry for my writing in english :flowerface: . There is no ‘chinese input’ in the computer and the chinese characters are c&p only.
:censored:
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:12 pmpk:
其實我看他的文章由一開始開宗明義說”現在社會風氣崇日，文字要用上兩句日語，才顯得型，才顯得勁。”到結尾結論”說什麼語言也好，說中就中，說英就英，說日就日。不中不英又不日，就是狗屁不通的外星話。”明顯中英夾雜是他”文中的中心思緒”的唯一理由，所以對他來說中英混用和崇洋媚外根本分不開，而我卻認為兩者無必然關係。
在他留言說我所說的不是他所講的文中的中心思緒後，我亦有說，我所不認同者，不是他的”文中的中心思緒”，而是我不認為中英混用有甚麼不妥的地方，因為中英混用，是語言習慣，根本不一定就是因為崇洋媚外。當然，他的中心是中英混用又好，崇洋媚外也好，根本不重要，哪裡我不認同，我就批評那裡，就是如此。
nana:
我沒有留下我第一個留言，但留下了之後的：
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:19 pmP.S. The sentence should read ” What exactly did 東邪黃藥師 dislike or refute ? “
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:20 pmblacksnow, i always appreciate the specificity of ur words. just tried to understand him. :049:
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:23 pm網主有權刪留言，問題是刪留言不少人會看為一項十分嚴重的動作。嚴重的動作應該有嚴謹的理由支持。
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:31 pmJust read your response to PK.
I agree with you, to a certain extent, that “是語言習慣，根本不一定就是因為崇洋媚外”. There are different reasons why people use mixed-code language in Hong Kong.
“不一定’ is important here because you don’t mean 東邪黃藥師 is wrong. He misunderstood and deleted your messages —> That’s not your problem !
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:34 pmpk, nana:
多謝大家理解。:agree:
亞占：
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:46 pm你說得對，我有留言權，網主也刪留言權，而我又有批評他的權，所討論的已經不是他能不能這樣做的問題，而是他應不應這樣做的問題。:040:
:offtopic:
Suggestion :
I picked on 映雪 in his post “唉，還是白木一大堆”.
He has a sense of humor and responded by playing with words. This is one of the ways to untie the knot between you and 東邪黃藥師.^^
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:52 pm[...] 延伸閱讀： [...]
April 24th, 2006 at 1:49 amnana, 又關我事？
想起，現代三大小說，尤利西斯，開英國新詩風格的荒原，都是五六種語言混雜。
行文淺白如海明威，在a clean delight place，也來了一大段西班牙文nada pue nada，個時背死我。
April 24th, 2006 at 2:35 am:offtopic:
Blacksnow,可以借用點地方在這兒罵人嗎？沒有做部落主啊！
如果映雪刪我的回應文，我會借用 (有欠無還) 東邪黃藥師的屎給他嘗嘗。但是也被他畫了個大花面 (即其所言「公仔面」) 給諷刺呢！
映雪：「個時背死我。 」自討苦吃，抵死。嘿嘿！
April 24th, 2006 at 11:48 amTo prevent other bloggers and readers from being trapped :
// 島主一向不喜有人在此搞事及牽起任何筆戰。如有違者，或涉及任何民事侵權行為，包括任何誹謗言論，一律以本港法例為依歸，保留任何法律追究權利。
另，特此告之，本網誌設有「IP address」記錄，以方便島主日後與任何搞事者作友誼聯絡。//
Possible remedial measures are :
(1) (3) To untie the knot (pending further discussion and suggestions).
(2) As Sidekick has suggested, 島主 should consider posting the above NOTICE in the sidebar or anywhere in his blog which is eye-catching (e.g. popu-ups).
(3) To delete 島主’s blog in the feed.
(4) To kill both Blacksnow & 島主 and ban their blogs. Peace on Earth ! Amen.
(5) A fight between the 2 (literally —> you die you matter).
(6) Others e.g. …… @@
April 24th, 2006 at 11:52 amnana：
公仔面不是說你啦。那個只是給你裝靚靚;公仔面，我是用於那些舖粉舖得象抆灰的女生。
哇，苦口良藥耶。沒有那個以前背兩萬多字古詩書之類的野(說來羞家，才兩萬字，人家紅樓夢一本一本的背出來)，也大概沒有今天的我吧。
April 24th, 2006 at 7:44 pm我選(5)，不過，不是要動武，要來就來個正面對質，又不過，隻揪不如群毆，我知道有幾個人對我好像有點意見，我很想與他們來個交流。:040:
April 24th, 2006 at 11:27 pm咁,係人地群毆你ja喎
April 25th, 2006 at 1:40 am:hehe::hehe:
April 25th, 2006 at 8:21 amfox, nana:
April 25th, 2006 at 8:45 am最好佢地幾個一齊上啦,唔好晒時間喇。:c38:
在 Sidekick 那裡貼了點想法，在這兒 C&P給你 :
Blog 中已引發出不同意見和討論。很好啊。
有些意見認為Blog主是有控制任何言論的權利，不喜歡的話，大可加以無視甚或刪除。
但問題是刪除後卻貼上如此文字：
“主一向不喜有人在此搞事及牽起任何筆戰。如有違者，或涉及任何民事侵權行為，包括任何誹謗言論，一律以本港法例為依歸，保留任何法律追究權利。 另，特此告之，本網誌設有「IP address」記錄，以方便島主日後與任何搞事者作友誼聯絡。”
以上所言實很容易引致誤會或誤導，使讀者以為 blacksnow或其他人 搞事、或誹謗或 ……，亦對沒有 “犯” 留言 “問題” 的人不公平。個人認為這 (誤導) 是令人難以接受或理解的的。
刪 feed 而避免再有不知情或一番好意的無辜者「死得不明不白」兼被人誤會是誹謗或搞事，也是其中一個可以考慮的方法。至於是不是最好的方法，可另作討論。
若 blacksnow 要求某人拿出證據，指出 blacksnow 如何搞事或誹謗或 ….，不知對方又有何回應？
April 25th, 2006 at 10:17 am漏 c&P。補 :
若有誤導之嫌，又是否可以一句「我沒有指名道姓，是你們對號入座而已」便能合理地解釋自己的行為和言論呢？
April 25th, 2006 at 10:19 am看過些不同部落格的舊貼文，你和映雪兩人對毆後，又可以繼續討論或聊天，很好啊！你們這才像樣嘛:hoho:
April 25th, 2006 at 10:24 am這個當然，我由認識映雪第一日開始已經是一場罵戰，各不相讓，直至今時今日，仍然是我不同意他，他也不同意我，但君子和而不同，但世上又有幾多人可 以如此，跟我對戰過的多數變了仇人，唉，胸襟最窄的那幾個人仍然在今次事件中將我講成因一己私怨而行，說甚麼公器私用等等，唉。
:sosad::sosad::sosad:
April 25th, 2006 at 7:58 pmBlacksnow,
I apologize for having messed up the ‘communication’ between you and Lightnesssnow
Nana Says:
April 25th, 2006 at 10:24 am
看過些不同部落格的舊貼文，你 (Blacksnow) 和映雪兩人對毆後，又可以繼續討論或聊天，很好啊！你們這才像樣嘛 (http://blacksnow.hkbloggers.org/2006/04/22/399/#comments)
Blacksnow , “‘映雪跟我以往罵戰連連，我們之間甚麼難聽的說話都講過，我都讓他的Blog host在hkbloggers.org，如果說我會為了一個素未交惡，只是delete了我的留言，而會做出公報私仇的行為，我想根本難以令人信服。”
Lightnesssnow, “先說這個吧，黑雪說「映雪跟我以往罵戰連連，我們之間甚麼難聽的說話都講過」是一廂情願的，在印象中我還沒有罵過他象牙塔。”
April 26th, 2006 at 11:23 amLightnesssnow講既係一個事實問題，根本無話一唔一相情願架喎。:mvk8za:
April 26th, 2006 at 1:17 pm相熟我就不改名字那欄了，手動trackback：
http://blogclues.mysinablog.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=163038
又，如何理解事實就可以一廂情願了。
May 13th, 2006 at 7:04 pm映雪的「雪」應是白色的吧。黑雪和白雪，沒有了對方，怎麼渡過那無聊的日子？:kill2:
May 23rd, 2006 at 10:45 am