425
papers and only uses part of the available space.
There is the matter of romanization itself. Authors of books of this sort in the English language find themselves having to use a mix of Cantonese names, comprising old renderings of both Cantonese and Mandarin, the frequently encountered various misspellings by Western writers, and now with pinyin street and place names into the bargain. Like many more of us, Mrs. Garrett has also had to mix her romanizations here and there. Having myself been hauled over the coals for perpetuating just such a "mish-mash" in one of my books, by my former boss and mentor, the late K.M.A. Barnett (Journal, Vol 24, 1984, pp.329-330), I can greatly sympathize with a dilemma not of her making.
The disadvantages for author and reader alike come out particularly in Chapter 6, devoted to the local temples, where we encounter the confusions inseparable from using different systems of romanization within paragraphs devoted to the same institution - and compounded where a street named after the temple in question is (and has to be) rendered in pinyin (as at pages 64-65 on the Kwong Hau/Guangxiao Buddhist Temple). Mrs. Garrett has done her best to reduce problems of identification with her useful 'English/Pinyin and Cantonese/Pinyin Glossary' at pp.184-6, but this in itself cannot remove all the puzzles inherent in the mix.
In a book which is so full of facts, the attempt to write a review tests the reviewer's knowledge as much as the author's, and in truth often beyond it. However, "history" itself can sometimes be uncertain, as in the case of Macau's origins. It is widely believed that the Portuguese were permitted to settle there because of their help with the suppression of pirates (pp. 10, 73), but this is still not certain. Also, Macau was not "granted" (p.73) to the Portuguese, in the sense of bestowing possession or legal right, their occupation being made subject to various payments, that included customs dues and taxes and (later) payment of an annual ground rent, whilst Chinese were excluded from their jurisdiction, being placed under their own official. (For a useful, fairly recent, compendium, see R.D. Cremer (editor), Macau, City of Commerce and Culture, 2nd Edition: Continuity and Change (Hong Kong, API Press, Ltd., 1991).)
425
papers and only uses part of the available space.
There is the matter of romanization itself. Authors of books of this sort in Like English language find themselves having to use a mix of Cantonese names, comprising old renderings of both Cantonese and Mandarin, the frequently encountered various misspellings by Western writers, and now with pinyin street and place names into the bargain. Like many more of us. Mrs. Garrett has also had to mix her romanizations here and there. Having myself been hauled over the coals for perpetuating just such a "mish-mash" in one of my books, by my former boss and mentor, the late K.M.A. Barnett (Journal, Vol 24, 1984, pp.329-330), I can greatly sympathize with a dilemma not of her making.
The disadvantages for author and reader alike come out particularly in Chapter 6, devoted to the local temples, where we encounter the confusions inseparable from using different systems of romanization within paragraphs devoted to the same institution - and compounded where a street named after the temple in question is (and has to be ) rendered in pinyin (as at pages 64-65 on the Kwong Hau/Guangxiao Buddhist Temple). Mrs. Garrett has done her best to reduce problems of identification with her useful 'English/Pinyin and Cantonese/Pinyin Glossary' at pp.184 - 6, but this in itself cannot remove all the puzzles inherent in the mix.
In a book which is so full of facts, the attempt to write a review tests the reviewer's knowledge as much as the author's, and in truth often beyond it. However, "history” itself can sometimes be uncertain, as in the case of Macau's origins. It is widely believed that the Portuguese were permitted to settle there because of their help with the suppression of pirates (pp. 10, 73), but this is still not certain. Also, Macau was not "granted" (p.73) to the Portuguese, in the sense of bestowing possession or legal right, their occupation being made subject to various payments, that included customs dues and taxes and (later) payment of an annual ground rent, whilst Chinese were excluded from their jurisdiction, being placed under their own official. (For a useful, fairly recent, compendium, see R.D. Cremer (editor), Macau, City of Commerce and Culture, 2nd Edition: Continuity and Change (Hong Kong, API Press, Ltd., 1991).
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.