These changes may be just in time. Most scholars agree that Taiwan is the ancestral homeland of the Austronesian peoples and therefore the source of the Austronesian language family, one of the world’s most widespread linguistic groups. In Taiwan, however, over half of the original 27 Austronesian languages have already been lost and several of the remainder are threatened with extinction. Only 35% of Taiwan’s 500,000 indigenous people (~2% of the population) can speak their tribal language, a figure that is expected to decline as younger generations are increasingly drawn to Chinese and English.
Cultural degradation has resulted from centuries of foreign rule and oppressive policies. Although each of the controlling group’s impact has varied, all have repressed indigenous rights and contributed to the linguistic decay.
Dutch East India Company Period (1624-1661): Indigenous language and culture was fairly stable during this period. As a business rather than a government, the Dutch East India Company was preoccupied with the profitability of its ports and therefore did not concern itself with indigenous peoples in the rest of the island. However, the Company’s need for labor to work its sugar plantations began the process of prolific Chinese immigration.
Koxinga Period (1661-1683): Koxinga, a military leader and Ming loyalist, forced the Dutch off of the island and established it as a base from which to launch his attack on the mainland Qing Dynasty. Koxinga and later his son, Cheng Ching, were preoccupied with military events and therefore did not interfere significantly into the lives of indigenous peoples. However, as agriculture and development expanded in this short period, Chinese civilization also spread and began to become a contentious issue in occupied lands.
Qing Dynasty/ Manchu Period (1683-1895): Han Chinese farmers and other long-term settlers continued to immigrate in large numbers to Taiwan, displacing or assimilating the indigenous groups of the western lowlands. Assimilation often came through intermarriage, as Han men were not permitted to bring their wives to the island until the late 1700s. The situation in the highlands was different, as the rugged terrain helped indigenous groups resist Han migrants. The government’s two main strategies for dealing with the highland tribes were development by pacification and defensive segregation. Under the former, indigenous group leaders (tou-mu) were targeted and subordinated and their people were subject to imposition of Chinese customs. In the latter, physical separation was maintained by the by the Ai-Yun Line, a constructed wall with guard posts that administratively, legally and geographically divided the island’s plains and mountains. The impact of this policy is reflected in the distribution of indigenous groups today, as seen in the maps below.
Japanese Colonial Period (1895-1945): During this period, the vast majority of mountain peoples were forcibly relocated to the lowlands and the Ai-Yun line was fortified to confine the remaining indigenous groups to the interior. Rebellions were met with force. The Japanese authority implemented a strict social policy that relegated aboriginals to the bottom of the social hierarchy, subjecting them to forced labor. Indigenous groups were also forced to learn Japanese and adopt new names.
Chinese Nationalist/ KMT Period (1949-1996): Acute cultural degradation continued under the Chinese Nationalist regime. Once again, indigenous groups were forced to learn a new language. Under the 1951 “life-improving proclamation,” Mandarin was promoted and indigenous traditions were prohibited. Policies, however, were generally less harsh than they had been under the Japanese government. As Taiwan gradually democratized in the late 1980s and 1990s, conditions grew favorable for indigenous rights. Grassroots political organization and student-led movements helped lead to the cultural revitalization movement of the 1980s. Public protests spurred government reforms on language, culture and lands rights issues.
Democratic Period (1996-present): The democratic transition brought about favorable legislation for indigenous peoples, including the eight-year Aboriginal Development Program, the Aboriginal Education Bill, the White Paper on Aboriginal Policy, the Law on Aboriginal Identity and the Aboriginal Workers Rights Protection Law. Efforts to revitalize indigenous culture have included certification programs to train teachers in local languages and the creation of the Indigenous Television Channel. Indigenous languages are now being taught in schools, at special centers offering free weekend classes, and at newly formed summer camps.
Taiwan’s efforts to preserve the cultural traditions of its indigenous inhabitants are commendable, but some critics contend that they are too little and too late. In addition to supporting democracy and cultural identity, the government is driven by less-than-altruistic motives, such as attracting tourism and justifying the independence movement. Blundell postulates that the presence of indigenous people can serve as a “tool for socio-political communication and identification of Taiwan with other Austronesian speaking peoples” that populate independent nations such as New Zealand, Palau and the Solomon Islands. Although the democratic period has seen significant change, only time will tell how much can be done to reverse the cultural degradation that Taiwan’s indigenous groups have suffered.
No comments:
Post a Comment