A sample of pe̍h-ōe-jī text
|Type||Latin alphabet (modified)|
|Creator||Walter Henry Medhurst
John Van Nest Talmage
Pe̍h-ōe-jī (pronounced [peʔ˩ ue˩ dzi˨] ( ), abbreviated POJ, literally vernacular writing, also known as Church Romanization) is an orthography used to write variants of Southern Min, a Chinese language or dialect, particularly Taiwanese and Amoy Hokkien. Developed by Western missionaries working among the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia in the 19th century and refined by missionaries working in Xiamen and Tainan, it uses a modified Latin alphabet and some diacritics to represent the spoken language. After initial success in Fujian, POJ became most widespread in Taiwan, and in the mid-20th century there were over 100,000 people literate in POJ. A large amount of printed material, religious and secular, has been produced in the script, including Taiwan's first newspaper, the Taiwan Church News.
The orthography was suppressed during the Japanese era in Taiwan (1895–1945), and faced further countermeasures during the Kuomintang martial law period (1947–1987). In Fujian, use declined after the establishment of the People's Republic of China (1949) and in the early 21st century the system was not in general use there. Use of pe̍h-ōe-jī is now restricted to some Taiwanese Christians, non-native learners of the language, and native-speaker enthusiasts in Taiwan. Full native computer support was developed in 2004, and users can now call on fonts, input methods, and extensive online dictionaries. Rival writing systems have been developed over time, and there is ongoing debate within the Taiwanese mother tongue movement as to which system should be used. Versions of pe̍h-ōe-jī have been devised for other languages, including Hakka and Teochew.
- 1 Name
- 2 History
- 3 Current system
- 4 Texts
- 5 Computing
- 6 Han-Romanization mixed script
- 7 Adaptations for other languages or dialects
- 8 Current status
- 9 References
- 10 External links
|Literal meaning||Vernacular writing|
The name pe̍h-ōe-jī (simplified Chinese: 白话字; traditional Chinese: 白話字) means "vernacular writing", that is, written characters representing everyday spoken language.1 Though the name vernacular writing could be applied to many kinds of writing, romanized and character-based, the term pe̍h-ōe-jī is commonly restricted to the Southern Min romanization system developed by Presbyterian missionaries in the 19th century.2
The missionaries who invented and refined the system didn't use the name pe̍h-ōe-jī, however, instead using various terms such as "Romanized Amoy Vernacular" and "Romanized Amoy Colloquial".1 The origins of the system and its extensive use in the Christian community has led to it being known by some modern-day writers as "Church Romanization" (simplified Chinese: 教会罗马字; traditional Chinese: 教會羅馬字; pinyin: Jiàohuì Luōmǎzì; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Kàu-hōe Lô-má-jī); often abbreviated in POJ itself to "Kàu-lô" (simplified Chinese: 教罗; traditional Chinese: 教羅; pinyin: Jiàoluō).3 There is some debate as to whether "pe̍h-ōe-jī" or "Church Romanization" is the more appropriate name.
Objections raised to "pe̍h-ōe-jī" include that the surface meaning of the word itself is more generic than one specific system, and that both literary and colloquial register Southern Min appear in the system (meaning that describing it as "vernacular" writing might be inaccurate).1 Opposition to the name "Church Romanization" is based on the identification with the church, as the writing is used by a wider community than just Christians, and for secular as well as sacred writing.4 One commentator observes that POJ "today is largely disassociated from its former religious purposes".5 The term "romanization" is also disliked by some, who see it as belittling the status of pe̍h-ōe-jī by identifying it as a supplementary phonetic system, rather than a fully-fledged orthography.4 Sources disagree on which represents the more commonly used name of the two.34
The history of Peh-oe-ji has been heavily influenced by official attitudes towards the Southern Min vernaculars and the Christian organizations that propagated it. Early documents point to the purpose of the creation of POJ as being pedagogical in nature, closely allied to educating Christian converts.6
The first people to use a romanized script to write Southern Min were Spanish missionaries in Manila in the 16th century.2 However, it was used mainly as a teaching aid for Spanish learners of the language, and seems not to have had any influence on the development of pe̍h-ōe-jī.7 In the early 19th century, China was closed to Christian missionaries, who instead proselytized to overseas Chinese communities in South East Asia.8 The earliest origins of the system are found in a small vocabulary first printed in 1820 by Walter Henry Medhurst,910 who went on to publish the Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms in 1832.9
This dictionary represents the first major reference work in POJ, although the romanization within was quite different from the modern system, and has been dubbed Early Church Romanization by one scholar of the subject.3 Medhurst, who was stationed in Malacca, was influenced by Robert Morrison's romanization of Mandarin Chinese, but had to innovate in several areas to reflect major differences between Mandarin and Southern Min.11 Several important developments occurred in Medhurst's work, especially the application of consistent tone markings (influenced by contemporary linguistic studies of Sanskrit, which was becoming of more mainstream interest to Western scholars).12 Medhurst was convinced that accurate representation and reproduction of the tonal structure of Southern Min was vital to comprehension:
Respecting these tones of the Chinese language, some difference of opinion has been obtained, and while some have considered them of first importance, others have paid them little or no intention. The author inclines decidedly to the former opinion; having found, from uniform experience, that without strict attention to tones, it is impossible for a person to make himself understood in Hok-këèn.—W. H. Medhurst13
The system expounded by Medhurst influenced later dictionary compilers with regard to tonal notation and initials, but both his complicated vowel system and his emphasis on the literary register of Southern Min were dropped by later writers.1415 Following on from Medhurst's work, Samuel Wells Williams became the chief proponent of major changes in the orthography devised by Morrison and adapted by Medhurst. Through personal communication and letters and articles printed in The Chinese Repository a consensus was arrived at for the new version of POJ, although Williams' suggestions were largely not followed.16
The first major work to represent this new orthography was Elihu Doty's Anglo-Chinese Manual with Romanized Colloquial in the Amoy Dialect,16 published in 1853. The manual can therefore be regarded as the first presentation of a pre-modern POJ, a significant step onwards from Medhurst's orthography and different from today's system in only a few details.17 From this point on various authors adjusted some of the consonants and vowels, but the system of tone marks from Doty's Manual survives intact in modern POJ.18 John Van Nest Talmage has traditionally been regarded as the founder of POJ among the community which uses the orthography, although it now seems that he was an early promoter of the system, rather than its inventor.1016
In 1842 the Treaty of Nanking was concluded, which included among its provisions the creation of treaty ports in which Christian missionaries would be free to preach.6 Xiamen (then known as Amoy) was one of these treaty ports, and British, Canadian and American missionaries moved in to start preaching to the local inhabitants. These missionaries, housed in the cantonment of Gulangyu, created reference works and religious tracts, including a bible translation.6 Naturally, they based the pronunciation of their romanization on the speech of Xiamen, which became the de facto standard when they eventually moved into other areas of the Hokkien Sprachraum, most notably Taiwan.19 The 1858 Treaty of Tianjin officially opened Taiwan to western missionaries, and missionary societies were quick to send men to work in the field, usually after a sojourn in Xiamen to acquire the rudiments of the language.19
Quanzhou and Zhangzhou are two major varieties of Southern Min, and in Xiamen they combined to form something "not Quan, not Zhang" – i.e. not one or the other, but rather a fusion, which became known as Amoy Dialect or Amoy Chinese.20 In Taiwan, with its mixture of migrants from both Quanzhou and Zhangzhou, the linguistic situation was similar; although the resulting blend in the southern city of Tainan differed from the Xiamen blend, it was close enough that the missionaries could ignore the differences and import their system wholesale.19
The fact that religious tracts, dictionaries, and teaching guides already existed in the Xiamen tongue meant that the missionaries in Taiwan could begin proselytizing immediately, without the intervening time needed to write those materials.21 Missionary opinion was divided on whether POJ was desirable as an end in itself as a full-fledged orthography, or as a means to literacy in Chinese characters. William Campbell described POJ as a step on the road to reading and writing Hanzi, claiming that to promote it as an independent writing system would inflame nationalist passions in China, where Hanzi were considered a sacred part of Chinese culture.22 Taking the other side, Thomas Barclay believed that literacy in POJ should be a goal rather than a waypoint:
Soon after my arrival in Formosa I became firmly convinced of three things, and more than fifty years experience has strengthened my conviction. The first was that if you are to have a healthy, living Church it is necessary that all the members, men and women, read the Scriptures for themselves; second, that this end can never be attained by the use of the Chinese character; third, that it can be attained by the use of the alphabetic script, this Romanised Vernacular.—Thomas Barclay23
A great boon to the promotion of POJ in Taiwan came in 1880 when James Laidlaw Maxwell, a medical missionary based in Tainan, donated a small printing press to the local church,24 which Thomas Barclay learned how to operate in 1881 before founding the Presbyterian Church Press in 1884. Subsequently the Taiwan Prefectural City Church News, which first appeared in 1885 and was produced by Barclay's Presbyterian Church of Taiwan Press,24 became the first printed newspaper in Taiwan.25
As other authors made their own alterations to the conventions laid down by Medhurst and Doty, pe̍h-ōe-jī evolved and eventually settled into its current form. Ernest Tipson's 1934 pocket dictionary was the first reference work to reflect this modern spelling.26 Between Medhurst's dictionary of 1832 and the standardization of POJ in Tipson's time, there were a number of works published, which can be used to chart the change over time of pe̍h-ōe-jī:27
|Year||Author||pe̍h-ōe-jī spellings comparison||Source|
|1894||Van Nest Talmage||ch||ng||ian||iat||ek||eng||o͘||h||32|
|1911||Warnshuis & de Pree||ch||ng||ian||iat||ek||eng||o͘||h||33|
Competition for POJ was introduced during the Japanese era in Taiwan (1895–1945) in the form of Taiwanese kana, a system designed as a teaching aid and pronunciation guide, rather than an independent orthography like POJ.37 From the 1930s onwards, with the increasing militarization of Japan and the Kōminka movement encouraging Taiwanese people to "Japanize", there were a raft of measures taken against native languages, including Taiwanese.38 While these moves resulted in a suppression of POJ, they were "a logical consequence of increasing the amount of education in Japanese, rather than an explicit attempt to ban a particular Taiwanese orthography in favor of Taiwanese kana".39
The Second Sino-Japanese War beginning in 1937 brought stricter measures into force, and along with the outlawing of romanized Taiwanese, various publications were prohibited and Confucian-style shobō (Chinese: 書房; pinyin: shūfáng; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: su-pâng) – private schools which taught Classical Chinese with literary Southern Min pronunciation – were closed down in 1939.40 The Japanese authorities came to perceive POJ as an obstacle to Japanization and also suspected that POJ was being used to hide "concealed codes and secret revolutionary messages".41 In the climate of the ongoing war the government banned the Taiwan Church News in 1942 as it was written in POJ.42
Initially the Kuomintang government in Taiwan had a liberal attitude towards "local dialects" (i.e. non-Mandarin varieties of Chinese). The Mandarin Promotion Council produced booklets outlining versions of Mandarin Phonetic Symbols ("Bopomofo") for writing the Taiwanese tongue, these being intended for newly arrived government officials from outside Taiwan as well as local Taiwanese.43 The first government action against native languages came in 1953, when the use of Taiwanese or Japanese for instruction was forbidden.44 The next move to suppress the movement came in 1955, when the use of POJ for proselytizing was outlawed.42 At that point in time there were 115,000 people literate in POJ in Taiwan, Fujian, and southeast Asia.45
Two years later, missionaries were banned from using romanized bibles, and the use of "native languages" (i.e. Taiwanese, Hakka, and the Aboriginal languages) in church work became illegal.42 The ban on POJ bibles was overturned in 1959, but churches were "encouraged" to use character bibles instead.42 Government activities against POJ intensified in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when several publications were banned or seized in an effort to prevent the spread of the romanization. In 1964 use of Taiwanese in schools or official settings was forbidden,44 and transgression in schools punished with beatings, fines and humiliation.46 The Taiwan Church News (printed in POJ) was banned in 1969, and only allowed to return a year later when the publishers agreed to print it in Chinese characters.4247
In 1974 Bernard L.M. Embree's A Dictionary of Southern Min was banned by the Government Information Office, with a government official saying: "We have no objection to the dictionary being used by foreigners. They could use it in mimeographed form. But we don't want it published as a book and sold publicly because of the Romanization it contains. Chinese should not be learning Chinese through Romanization."48 Also in the 1970s, a POJ New Testament translation known as the "Red Cover Bible" was confiscated and banned by the Nationalist regime.49 Official moves against native languages continued into the 1980s, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of the Interior decided in 1984 to forbid missionaries to use "local dialects" and romanizations in their work.42
With the ending of martial law in 1987, the restrictions on "local languages" were quietly lifted,50 resulting in growing interest in Taiwanese writing during the 1990s.51 For the first time since the 1950s, Taiwanese language and literature was discussed and debated openly in newspapers and journals.52 There was also support from the then opposition party, the Democratic Progressive Party, for writing in the language.44 From a total of 26 documented orthographies for Taiwanese in 1987 (including defunct systems), there were a further 38 invented from 1987 to 1999, including 30 different romanizations, six adaptations of Zhuyin fuhao and two Hangul-like systems.53 Some commentators believe that the Kuomintang, while steering clear of outright banning of the native language movements after the end of martial law, took a "divide and conquer" approach by promoting Taiwanese Language Phonetic Alphabet (TLPA), an alternative to POJ,54 which was at the time the choice of the majority inside the nativization movement.55 Native language education has remained a fiercely debated topic in Taiwan into the 21st century, and is the subject of much political wrangling.5657
The current system of pe̍h-ōe-jī has been stable since the 1930s, with a few minor exceptions (detailed below).58 There is a fair degree of similarity with the Vietnamese orthography Quốc Ngữ, including the 〈b/p/ph〉 distinction and the use of 〈ơ〉 in Quốc Ngữ compared with 〈o͘〉 in POJ.59 POJ uses the following letters and combinations:60
Chinese phonology traditionally divides syllables in Chinese languages into three parts; firstly the initial, a consonant or consonant blend which appears at the beginning of the syllable, secondly the final, consisting of a medial vowel (optional), a nucleus vowel, and an optional ending; and finally the tone, which is applied to the whole syllable.61 In terms of the non-tonal (i.e. phonemic) features, the nucleus vowel is the only required part of a licit consonant in Chinese languages.61 Unlike Mandarin but like other southern varieties of Chinese, Taiwanese has final plosives, which have no audible release, a feature that has been preserved from Middle Chinese.62 There is some debate as to whether these stops are a tonal feature or a phonemic one, with some authorities distinguishing between 〈-h〉 as a tonal feature, and 〈-p〉, 〈-t〉, and 〈-k〉 as phonemic features.63 Southern Min dialects also have an optional nasal property, which is written with a superscript 〈ⁿ〉 and usually identified as being part of the vowel.64
A legitimate syllable in Hokkien takes the form
(initial) + (medial vowel) + nucleus + (stop) + tone, where items in parenthesis indicate optional components.65
The initials are:66
ㄇ 毛(mo͘ )
POJ has a limited amount of legitimate syllables, although sources disagree on some particular instances of these syllables. The following table contains all the licit spellings of POJ syllables, based on a number of sources:
|Number||Diacritic||Chinese tone name||Example
|8||vertical line above||陽入 (yangru)
In standard Amoy or Taiwanese Hokkien there are seven distinct tones, which by convention are numbered 1–8, with number 6 omitted (tone 6 used to be a distinct tone, but has long since merged with tone 2).68 Tones 1 and 4 are both represented without a diacritic, and can be distinguished from each other by the syllable ending, which is a vowel, 〈-n〉, 〈-m〉, or 〈-ng〉 for tone 1, and 〈-h〉, 〈-k〉, 〈-p〉, and 〈-t〉 for tone 4.
Southern Min languages undergo considerable tone sandhi, i.e. changes to the tone depending on the position of the syllable in any given sentence or utterance.65 However, like Hanyu Pinyin for Mandarin Chinese, POJ always marks the citation tone (i.e. the original, pre-sandhi tone) rather than the tone which is actually spoken.69 This means that when reading aloud the reader must adjust the tone markings on the page to account for sandhi. Some textbooks for learners of the language mark both the citation tone and the sandhi tone to assist the learner.70
- If the syllable has one vowel, that vowel should be tone-marked; viz. 〈tī〉, 〈láng〉, 〈chhu̍t〉
- If a diphthong contains 〈i〉 or 〈u〉, the tone mark goes above the other vowel; viz. 〈ia̍h〉, 〈kiò〉, 〈táu〉
- If a diphthong includes both 〈i〉 and 〈u〉, mark the 〈u〉; viz. 〈iû〉, 〈ùi〉
- If the final is made up of three or more letters, mark the second vowel (except when rules 2 and 3 apply); viz. 〈goán〉, 〈oāi〉, 〈khiáu〉
- If 〈o〉 occurs with 〈a〉 or 〈e〉, mark the 〈o〉; viz. 〈òa〉, 〈thóe〉
- If the syllable has no vowel, mark the nasal consonant; viz. 〈m̄〉, 〈ǹg〉, 〈mn̂g〉
A single hyphen is used to indicate a compound. What constitutes a compound is controversial, with some authors equating it to a "word" in English, and others not willing to limit it to the English concept of a word.71 Examples from POJ include 〈sì-cha̍p〉 "forty", 〈bé-hì-thôan〉 "circus", and 〈hôe-ho̍k〉 "recover (from illness)". The rule-based sandhi behaviour of tones in compounds has not yet been clearly defined by linguists.73 A double hyphen 〈--〉 is used when POJ is deployed as a full orthography (rather than as a transcription system) to indicate that the following syllable should be pronounced in the neutral tone.74 It also marks to the reader that the preceding syllable does not undergo tone sandhi, as it would were the following syllable non-neutral. Morphemes following a double hyphen are often (but not always) grammatical function words.75
|Sian-siⁿ kóng, ha̍k-seng tiām-tiām thiaⁿ.||A teacher/master speaks, students quietly listen.||listen (help·info)|
|Kin-á-jit hit-ê cha-bó͘ gín-á lâi góan tau khòaⁿ góa.||Today that girl came to my house to see me.||listen (help·info)|
|Thài-khong pêng-iú, lín-hó. Lín chia̍h-pá--bē? Ū-êng, to̍h lâi gún chia chē--ô͘!||Space friends, how are you? Have you eaten yet? When you have the time, come on over to eat.||Listen (from NASA Voyager Golden Record)|
In addition to the standard syllables detailed above, there are several regional variations of Hokkien speech which can be represented with non-standard or semi-standard spellings. In Zhangzhou and parts of Taiwan which are closely related to the Zhangzhou dialect (particularly the northeastern coast around Yilan), the final 〈ng〉 is replaced with 〈uiⁿ〉, for example in "egg" 〈nuiⁿ〉 and "cooked rice" 〈puiⁿ〉.76
Due to POJ's origins in the church, much of the material in the script is religious in nature, including several Bible translations, books of hymns, and guides to morality. The Tainan Church Press, established in 1884, has been printing POJ materials ever since, with periods of quiet when POJ was suppressed in the early 1940s and from around 1955 to 1987. In the period to 1955, over 2.3 million volumes of POJ books were printed,78 and one study in 2002 catalogued 840 different POJ texts in existence.79 Besides a Southern Min version of Wikipedia in the orthography,80 there are teaching materials, religious texts, and books about linguistics, medicine and geography.
- Lán ê Kiù-chú Iâ-so͘ Ki-tok ê Sin-iok (1873 translation of the New Testament)
- Lāi-goā-kho Khàn-hō͘-ha̍k
- Amoy–English Dictionary
- Lear Ông (translation of King Lear)
POJ was initially not well supported by word-processing applications due to the special diacritics needed to write it. Support has now improved and there are now sufficient resources to both enter and display POJ correctly. Several input methods exist to enter Unicode-compliant POJ, including OpenVanilla (Mac OS X and Windows), the cross-platform Tai-lo Input Method released by the Taiwanese Ministry of Education, and the Firefox add-on Transliterator, which allows in-browser POJ input.81 When POJ was first used in word-processing applications it was not fully supported by the Unicode standard, thus necessitating work-arounds. One employed was encoding the necessary characters in the "Private Use" section of Unicode, but this required both the writer and the reader to have the correct custom font installed.49 Another solution was to replace troublesome characters with near equivalents, for example substituting 〈ä〉 for 〈ā〉 or using a standard 〈o〉 followed by an interpunct to represent 〈o͘〉.49 With the introduction into Unicode 4.1.0 of the combining diacritic
COMBINING DOT ABOVE RIGHT (U+0358) in 2004, all the necessary characters were present to write regular POJ without the need for workarounds.8283 However, even after the addition of these characters, there are still relatively few fonts which are able to properly render the script, including the combining diacritics. Some of those which can are Charis SIL, DejaVu, Doulos SIL, Linux Libertine, and Taigi Unicode.49
One of the most popular modern ways of writing Taiwanese is by using a mixed orthography85 called Hàn-lô86 (simplified Chinese: 汉罗; traditional Chinese: 漢羅; pinyin: Hàn-Luó; literally Chinese-Roman), and sometimes Han-Romanization mixed script.87 In fact, the term Hàn-lô does not describe one specific system, but covers any kind of writing in Southern Min which features both Chinese characters and romanization.85 That romanization is usually POJ, although recently some texts have begun appearing with Tâi-lô spellings too. The problem with using only Chinese characters to write Southern Min is that there are many morphemes (estimated to be around 15 percent of running text)88 which are not definitively associated with a particular character. Various strategies have been developed to deal with the issue, including creating new characters, allocating Chinese characters used in written Mandarin with similar meanings (but dissimilar etymology) to represent the missing characters, or using romanization for the "missing 15%".89 There are two rationales for using mixed orthography writing, with two different aims. The first is to allow native speakers (almost all of whom can already write Chinese characters) to make use of their knowledge of characters, while replacing the missing 15% with romanization.85 The second is to wean character literates off using them gradually, to be replaced eventually by fully romanized text.90 Examples of modern texts in Hàn-lô include religious, pedagogical, scholarly, and literary works, such as:
- Chang Yu-hong. Principles of POJ.
- Babuja A. Sidaia. A-Chhûn.
POJ has been adapted for several other languages and dialects, with varying degrees of success. For Hakka, missionaries and others have produced a Bible translation, hymn book, textbooks, and dictionaries.91 Materials produced in the orthography, called Pha̍k-fa-sṳ, include:
- Hak-ngi Sṳn-kin, Sin-yuk lau Sṳ-phien: Hien-thoi Thoi-van Hak-ngi Yit-pun (Hakka Bible, New Testament and Psalms: Today's Taiwan Hakka Version). Bible Society. 1993.
- Phang Tet-siu (1994). Thai-ka Loi Hok Hak-fa (Everybody Learn Hakka). Taipei: Southern Materials Center. ISBN 957-638-017-0.
- Phang Tet-siu (1996). Hak-ka-fa Fat-yim Sṳ-tien (Hakka Pronunciation Dictionary). Taipei: Southern Materials Center. ISBN 957-638-359-5.
- Hak-ka Sṳn-sṳ (Hakka Hymns). Tainan: PCT Press. 1999. ISBN 957-8349-75-0.
Most native Southern Min speakers in Taiwan are unfamiliar with POJ or any other writing system for the language,93 commonly asserting that "Taiwanese has no writing",94 or, if they are made aware of POJ, considering romanization as the "low" form of writing, in contrast with the "high" form (Chinese characters).95 For those who are introduced to POJ alongside Han-lo and completely Chinese character-based systems, a clear preference has been shown for all-character systems, with all-romanization systems at the bottom of the preference list, likely because of the preexisting familiarity of readers with Chinese characters.96
POJ remains the Taiwanese orthography "with the richest inventory of written work, including dictionaries, textbooks, literature [...] and other publications in many areas".97 A 1999 estimate put the number of literate POJ users at around 100,000,98 and secular organizations have been formed to promote the use of romanization among Taiwanese speakers.99
Outside Taiwan, POJ is rarely used. For example, in Fujian, Xiamen University uses a romanization known as Bbánlám pìngyīm, based on Pinyin. In other areas where Hokkien is spoken, such as Singapore, the Speak Mandarin Campaign is underway to actively discourage people from speaking Hokkien or other Chinese dialects in favour of switching to Mandarin instead.100
In 2006, Taiwan's Ministry of Education chose an official romanization for use in teaching the language in the state school system.101 POJ was one of the candidate systems, along with Daighi tongiong pingim, but a compromise system, the Taiwanese Romanization System or Tâi-Lô, was chosen in the end.102 Tâi-Lô retains most of the orthographic standards of POJ, including the tone marks, while changing the troublesome 〈o͘〉 character for 〈oo〉, swapping 〈ts〉 for 〈ch〉, and replacing 〈o〉 in diphthongs with 〈u〉.103 Supporters of Taiwanese writing are in general deeply suspicious of government involvement, given the history of official suppression of native languages,5 making it unclear whether Tâi-Lô or POJ will become the dominant system in the future.
|Min — Min Nan|
|Min — Min Dong|
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 90.
- Klöter, The History of Peh-oe-ji, p. 1.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 89.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 13.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 248.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 92.
- Klöter, The History of Peh-oe-ji, p. 2.
- Heylen, Romanizing Taiwanese, p. 139.
- Heylen, Romanizing Taiwanese, p. 142.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 14.
- Heylen, Romanizing Taiwanese, p. 144.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 109.
- Medhurst, Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect, p. viii.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 110.
- Heylen, Romanizing Taiwanese, p. 145.
- Heylen, Romanizing Taiwanese, p. 149.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 111.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, pp. 111, 116.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 93.
- Ang, A Journey Through Taiwanese Regional Speech, p. 2.
- Heylen, Romanizing Taiwanese, p. 160.
- Klöter, The History of Peh-oe-ji, p. 13.
- Quoted in Band, Barclay of Formosa, p. 67.
- "Our Story". Taiwan Church News. Archived from the original on 2009-03-01. Retrieved 2009-04-30.
- Copper, Historical Dictionary of Taiwan, p. 240.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 114.
- Adapted from Klöter, Written Taiwanese, pp. 113–6.
- Medhurst. Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms.
- Doty. Anglo Chinese Manual of the Amoy Dialect.
- MacGowan. A Manual of the Amoy Colloquial.
- Douglas. Chinese English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken of Amoy.
- Van Nest Talmage. New Dictionary of the Amoy Dialect.
- Warnshuis; de Pree. Lessons in the Amoy Vernacular.
- Campbell. A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken Throughout the Prefectures of Chin-chiu, Chiang-chiu and Formosa (Taiwan).
- Barclay. Supplement to Douglas' Amoy–English Dictionary.
- Tipson. A Pocket Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular: English-Chinese.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 136.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 153.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 154.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 135.
- Lin, Writing Taiwanese, p. 21
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p.18.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 231.
- Lin, Writing Taiwanese, p. 1.
- Tiuⁿ, Peh-oe-ji and the Modernization of Written Taiwanese, p. 7.
- Sandel, Linguistic Capital in Taiwan, p. 533.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 217.
- "Guide to Dialect Barred in Taiwan: Dictionary Tried to Render Local Chinese Sounds". New York Times. September 15, 1974.
- Iuⁿ, Processing Techniques for Written Taiwanese, p. 24
- Sandel, Linguistic Capital in Taiwan p. 530.
- Wu, The Taigi Literature Debates, p.1.
- Wu, The Taigi Literature Debates, p.9.
- Chiung, Language, Identity and Decolonization, p. 275.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 19.
- Chiung, Language, Identity and Decolonization, p. 273.
- Loa Iok-sin (2009-02-28), Activists demand Hoklo exams, Taipei Times, retrieved 2010-03-31
- Premier's comments over language status draws anger, China Post, retrieved 2010-03-31
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 98.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 15.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 99.
- Chung, Segmental Phonology, p. 78.
- Norman, Chinese, p. 237.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 14.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 15.
- Ramsey, The Languages of China, p. 109.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 30.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 33.
- Maryknoll, Taiwanese: Book 1, pp. 5–7.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 100.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 101.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 102.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, pp. 86–88.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 103.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, pp. 103–104.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 104.
- Chang, Principles of POJ, p. 134.
- Sin Kū Iok ê Sèng-keng, p. 1.
- Tiuⁿ, Peh-oe-ji and the Modernization of Written Taiwanese, p. 6.
- Tiuⁿ, Peh-oe-ji and the Modernization of Written Taiwanese, p. 8.
- Iunn, Processing Techniques, p. 23.
- Iunn, Processing Techniques for Written Taiwanese, p. 29
- Iunn, Processing Techniques for Written Taiwanese, p. 11
- "Combining Diacritical Marks". unicode.org. p. 34. Retrieved 2010-07-29.
- Babuja A. Sidaia A-Chhûn, pp. 264.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 225.
- Ota, An investigation of written Taiwanese, p. 21.
- Iunn, Processing Techniques for Written Taiwanese, p. 10.
- Lin, Writing Taiwanese, p. 7.
- Lin, Writing Taiwanese, p. 9–11.
- Klöter, Written Taiwanese, p. 230.
- Wu and Chen, Books Written in Hakka Romanization.
- "潮州字典-韵母表" (in Chinese). Hailufeng. Retrieved 2010-03-10.
- Ota, An investigation of written Taiwanese, p. 20.
- Baran, Taiwanese don't have written words, p. 35–5.
- Chiung, Language, Identity and Decolonization, p.300.
- Chiung, Language, Identity and Decolonization, p.301.
- Chiung, Language, Identity and Decolonization, p. 272.
- Lin, Writing Taiwanese, p. 17.
- Chiung, Language, Literature, and Reimagined Taiwanese Nation, p. 474.
- Wong-Anan, Noppom (2009-09-16). "Eyeing China, Singapore sees Mandarin as its future". Reuters. Retrieved 2009-10-31.
- Tseng, Practical Manual p. 2.
- 閩南語鄉土教學確定採台灣閩南語羅馬字拼音 (Southern Min native language teaching to use Taiwan Southern Min Romanization) (in Chinese), Central News Agency
- Tseng, Practical Manual, pp. 2–5.
- Ang Ui-jin (1992). Taiwan Fangyan zhi Lü (A Journey Through Taiwanese Regional Speech) (in Chinese). Taipei: Avanguard Publishing. ISBN 957-9512-31-0.
- Band, Edward (1936). Barclay of Formosa. Ginza, Tokyo: Christian Literature Society. OCLC 4386066.
- Baran, Dominika (2004). ""Taiwanese don't have written words": Language ideologies and language practice in a Taipei County high school". Conference Proceedings – 2004 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization 2. OCLC 77082548.
- Campbell, William (2006) . A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular. Tainan: PCT Press. ISBN 957-8959-92-3.
- Chang Yu-hong (2001). Principles of POJ or the Taiwanese Orthography: An Introduction to Its Sound-Symbol Correspondences and Related Issues. Taipei: Crane. ISBN 978-957-2053-07-2.
- Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2003). Learning Efficiencies for Different Orthographies: A Comparative Study of Han Characters and Vietnamese Romanization.' (PhD dissertation). University of Texas at Arlington.
- Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2005). Language, Identity and Decolonization. Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. ISBN 957-8845-85-5.
- Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2007). Language, Literature and Reimagined Taiwanese Nation. Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. ISBN 978-986-00-9746-7.
- Chiung, Wi-vun Taiffalo (2011). Nations, Mother Tongues and Phonemic Writing. Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. ISBN 978-986-02-7359-5.
- Chung Raung-fu (1996). The Segmental Phonology of Southern Min in Taiwan. Taipei: Spoken Language Services. ISBN 957-9463-46-8.
- Copper, John F. (2007). A Historical Dictionary of Taiwan (Republic of China) (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. ISBN 978-0-8108-5600-4.
- Doty, Elihu (1853). Anglo Chinese Manual of the Amoy Dialect. Guangzhou: Samuel Wells Williams. OCLC 20605114.
- Douglas, Carstairs; Barclay, Thomas (1990) . Chinese–English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy. Taipei: Southern Materials Center. ISBN 957-9482-32-2.
- Embree, Bernard L.M. (1973). A Dictionary of Southern Min. OCLC 2491446.
- Heylen, Ann (2001). "Romanizing Taiwanese: Codification and Standardization of Dictionaries in Southern Min (1837–1923)". In Ku Weit Ying; De Ridder, Koen. Authentic Chinese Christianity, Preludes to Its Development: Nineteenth & Twentieth Centuries. Leuven: Leuven University Press. ISBN 978-90-5867-102-8.
- Iûⁿ Ún-giân; Tiuⁿ Ha̍k-khiam (1999). "台灣福佬話非漢字拼音符號的回顧與分析 (Comparison and Analysis of non-Character Transcription Systems for Taiwanese Holo)" (in Chinese). Tainan: National Cheng Kung University. Retrieved 2009-12-17.dead link
- Iûⁿ Ún-giân (2009). Processing Techniques for Written Taiwanese – Tone Sandhi and POS Tagging (Doctoral dissertation). National Taiwan University. OCLC 367595113.
- Kì Bō͘-hô (2008). 台語教會羅馬字講義 (Notes on Taiwanese Church Romanization). Tainan: PCT Press. ISBN 978-986-6947-34-6.
- Klöter, Henning (2002). "The History of Peh-oe-ji". 2002台灣羅馬字教學KAP研究國際學術研討會論文集 (Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization Research). Taipei: Taiwanese Romanization Association.
- Klöter, Henning (2005). Written Taiwanese. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ISBN 3-447-05093-4.
- Lin, Alvin (1999). "Writing Taiwanese: The Development of Modern Written Taiwanese". Sino-Platonic Papers (89). OCLC 41879041.
- Macgowan, John (1869). A Manual of the Amoy Colloquial. Hong Kong: de Souza & Co. OCLC 23927767.
- Maryknoll Fathers (1984). Taiwanese: Book 1. Taichung: Maryknoll. OCLC 44137703.
- Medhurst, Walter Henry (1832). Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms. Macau: East India Press. OCLC 5314739.
- Norman, Jerry (1998). Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-29653-6.
- Ong Iok-tek (2002). Taiwanyu Yanjiu Juan (in Chinese). Taipei: Avanguard Publishing. ISBN 957-801-354-X.
- Ota, Katsuhiro J (2005). An investigation of written Taiwanese (Master's thesis). University of Hawai'i at Manoa. OCLC 435500061.
- Ramsey, S. Robert (1987). The Chinese Language. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-01468-5.
- Sandel, Todd L. (2003). "Linguistic capital in Taiwan: The KMT's Mandarin language policy and its perceived impact on language practices of bilingual Mandarin and Tai-gi speakers". Language in Society (Cambridge University Press) 32 (4). ISSN 0047-4045.
- Sidaia, Babuja A. (1998). A-Chhûn (in Hàn-lô Taiwanese). Taipei: Taili. ISBN 957-98861-6-4.
- Tipson, Ernest (1934). A Pocket Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular: English-Chinese. Singapore: Lithographers. OCLC 504142973.
- Tiuⁿ Ha̍k-khiam (2004). "白話字kap台語文的現代化 (Peh-oe-ji and the Modernization of Written Taiwanese)". Conference Proceedings – 2004 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization (in Han-lo Taiwanese) 1. OCLC 77082548.
- Tseng Rui-cheng (2009). Taiwan Minnanyu Luomazi Pinyin Fang'an Shiyong Shouce (Practical Manual for the Taiwan Southern Min Romanization System) (in Chinese). ROC Ministry of Education. ISBN 978-986-01-6637-8.
- Van Nest Talmage, John (1894). New Dictionary in the Amoy Dialect. OCLC 41548900.
- Warnshuis, A. Livingston; de Pree, H.P. (1911). Lessons in the Amoy Vernacular. Xiamen: Chui-keng-tông Press. OCLC 29903392.
- Wu Chang-neng (2007). The Taigi Literature Debates and Related Developments (1987–1996) (Master's thesis). Taipei: National Chengchi University. OCLC 642745725.
- Wu Guo-sheng; Chen Yi-hsin (2004). "客家語羅馬字文獻的版本研究 (Books Written in Hakka Romanization)". Conference Proceedings – 2004 International Conference on Taiwanese Romanization (in Chinese) 2. OCLC 77082548.
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Pe̍h-ōe-jī.|
- "Tai-gu Bang". – Google group for Taiwanese language enthusiasts – uses POJ and Chinese characters.
- "Pe̍h-ōe-jī Unicode Correspondence Table". Tailingua. 2009. – information on Unicode encodings for POJ text
- "Taiwanese Romanization Association". – group dedicated to the promotion of Taiwanese and Hakka romanization
- Input methods
- "Open Vanilla". – open source input method for both Windows and Mac OS X.
- "Taigi-Hakka IME". – Windows-based input method for both Hokkien and Hakka variants.
- "Tai-lo Input Method" (in Chinese). – cross-platform input method released by Taiwan's Ministry of Education.
- "Transliterator". – extension for the Firefox browser which allows POJ input in-browser.
- POJ-compliant fonts
- "Charis SIL". SIL International. – serif font in regular, bold, italic, and bold italic.
- "DejaVu". – available in serif, sans-serif, and monospace.
- "Doulos SIL". SIL International. – Times New Roman-style serif.
- "Gentium". SIL International. – open source serif.
- "Linux Libertine". – GPL and OPL-licensed serif.
- "Taigi Unicode". – serif font specifically designed for POJ.
- Texts and dictionaries
- "Taiwanese bibliography". – list of books in Taiwanese, including those written in POJ.
- "Memory of Written Taiwanese". – collection of Taiwanese texts in various orthographies, including many in POJ.
- "Tai-Hoa Dictionary". – dictionary which includes POJ, Taiwanese in Chinese characters, and Mandarin characters. Some English definitions also available.
- Exhibits: Taiwanese Romanization Peh-oe-ji – sample images of various older POJ texts.
|Min Nan Chinese edition of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia|