When Chinese officials accuse foreigners of "hurting the feelings of the Chinese people," do they know how silly it sounds to a lot of westerners?
This seems to be a very common phrase. I believe the original Chinese phrase is 伤害中国人民的感情 which translates straightforwardly to "hurting the feelings of the Chinese people."
Maybe this is considered a very serious thing in Chinese culture and the problem is just that the gravity is being completely lost in translation (though I asked a Taiwanese person about this and she had the same reaction I did) but to the ears of many native English speakers, this sounds like something a small child would complain about after being teased in school, not something a major world power would issue a press release about. It in some sense has the opposite effect of the apparent intent: instead of making the offender out to be a scoundrel, it makes China seem hypersensitive and easily upset, like the offending party has made China want to go stand in a corner and cry.
Do the official spokespeople know this and just not care? Does 伤害中国人民的感情 sound like a very grave offense to mainland Chinese? What would a better English translation be for the concept they're attempting to express here?
Maybe this is considered a very serious thing in Chinese culture and the problem is just that the gravity is being completely lost in translation (though I asked a Taiwanese person about this and she had the same reaction I did) but to the ears of many native English speakers, this sounds like something a small child would complain about after being teased in school, not something a major world power would issue a press release about. It in some sense has the opposite effect of the apparent intent: instead of making the offender out to be a scoundrel, it makes China seem hypersensitive and easily upset, like the offending party has made China want to go stand in a corner and cry.
Do the official spokespeople know this and just not care? Does 伤害中国人民的感情 sound like a very grave offense to mainland Chinese? What would a better English translation be for the concept they're attempting to express here?
26 Answers
Of course the real Chinese people will feel sad and angry when they are offended, just like other ordinary human beings.
In my opinion, this phrase of "hurting the feelings of the Chinese people" is carefully chosen by the CCP media to depict China and the Chinese people as the weaker side/victim of the conflict. In traditional Chinese culture, if one is perceived to have attacked someone weaker, he will be considered a huge moral bad-ass (e.g. colonization is almost always negatively received by the Chinese). The media's expectation is thus that the other side of the conflict (i.e. the west usually) would feel guilty to have initiated the conflict and withdraw.
But I think they fail to understand that the west values more the Darwinian principle of "the fittest survives", so demonstrating one's weakness during a confrontation showcases cowardliness at best in their eyes.
PS: The Taiwanese and mainland Chinese language are different enough that some subtitles wouldn't be well understood. Ask a mainlander about the matter next time.:)
In my opinion, this phrase of "hurting the feelings of the Chinese people" is carefully chosen by the CCP media to depict China and the Chinese people as the weaker side/victim of the conflict. In traditional Chinese culture, if one is perceived to have attacked someone weaker, he will be considered a huge moral bad-ass (e.g. colonization is almost always negatively received by the Chinese). The media's expectation is thus that the other side of the conflict (i.e. the west usually) would feel guilty to have initiated the conflict and withdraw.
But I think they fail to understand that the west values more the Darwinian principle of "the fittest survives", so demonstrating one's weakness during a confrontation showcases cowardliness at best in their eyes.
PS: The Taiwanese and mainland Chinese language are different enough that some subtitles wouldn't be well understood. Ask a mainlander about the matter next time.:)
No, I would say most Chinese officials have no idea how silly the literal English translation sounds to a lot of Westerners. They don't have the linguistic context to realize it sounds childish.
I want to simplify Zenobia Zhang's answer and say a more accurate translation of that Chinese phrase would be something like "this damages your relationship with the Chinese people".
As Zenobia correctly points out, 感情 has multiple, broad meanings, as does 伤害. The key here in making the phrase sound less childish is probably in translating 感情 as "relationship" instead of "feelings", and 伤害 as "damages" instead of "hurts".
A lot of other answers here are a bit heavy on socio-political commentary that doesn't really address the question. My little contribution to that would be that invoking "the Chinese people" rather than "China" (as a generalized political entity) is itself something of a fallacy. It appeals to the notion of--and speaking on behalf of--the "many". Granted, this is a rhetorical trick abused in politics everywhere.
So yeah, think of the phrase as being more like "you're damaging the relationship between us", which is kinda like a passive-aggressive way of saying "you're pissing us off". :D
As other answers have mentioned, the Chinese phrase is certainly made with consideration to the Chinese domestic audience and what the government wants its citizens to understand as its stance (on behalf of them of course), so not just the foreign audience. In this regard, you can think of it as "what X has done damages the relationship between China and X."
Finally, I suspect the English version was the result of a translator who has functional English fluency but lacks the cultural linguistic context of how their English translation actually sounds to native speakers. I suspect a lot of better translators subsequently knew the translation could be translated to not sound so patently childish but weren't at the helm.
Nowadays, I suspect a lot of Chinese media continue to use the English phrase in their English reports because they don't know any better. In juxtaposition, I suspect a lot of English media continue using the English phrase because they either don't know any better or they subversively find the phrase way too amusing to translate it more accurately.
I want to simplify Zenobia Zhang's answer and say a more accurate translation of that Chinese phrase would be something like "this damages your relationship with the Chinese people".
As Zenobia correctly points out, 感情 has multiple, broad meanings, as does 伤害. The key here in making the phrase sound less childish is probably in translating 感情 as "relationship" instead of "feelings", and 伤害 as "damages" instead of "hurts".
A lot of other answers here are a bit heavy on socio-political commentary that doesn't really address the question. My little contribution to that would be that invoking "the Chinese people" rather than "China" (as a generalized political entity) is itself something of a fallacy. It appeals to the notion of--and speaking on behalf of--the "many". Granted, this is a rhetorical trick abused in politics everywhere.
So yeah, think of the phrase as being more like "you're damaging the relationship between us", which is kinda like a passive-aggressive way of saying "you're pissing us off". :D
As other answers have mentioned, the Chinese phrase is certainly made with consideration to the Chinese domestic audience and what the government wants its citizens to understand as its stance (on behalf of them of course), so not just the foreign audience. In this regard, you can think of it as "what X has done damages the relationship between China and X."
Finally, I suspect the English version was the result of a translator who has functional English fluency but lacks the cultural linguistic context of how their English translation actually sounds to native speakers. I suspect a lot of better translators subsequently knew the translation could be translated to not sound so patently childish but weren't at the helm.
Nowadays, I suspect a lot of Chinese media continue to use the English phrase in their English reports because they don't know any better. In juxtaposition, I suspect a lot of English media continue using the English phrase because they either don't know any better or they subversively find the phrase way too amusing to translate it more accurately.
I think a crucial point is being missed here. It's not about "feelings".
As in "loss of face" or "gaining face". The Chinese term for this is, lian.
EDIT: Per Li Pengcheng — This concept is also covered by the Chinese term guanxi (see: What is Guanxi?)
Western people live in a Low Context culture and, all too often, simply cannot relate to the concept of a High Context Culture. It is a primary reason why Westerners have traditionally portrayed Asian cultures as being "inscrutable".
I refer you to the superb piece, "Face | Beyond Intractability" by Sarah Rosenberg. It is one of the very few that successfully synopsizes this issue.
In America and Europe (both Low Context cultures), complete strangers can walk right up to each other and begin exchanging meaningful, reliable information. This same sort of interaction is almost unthinkable in many High Context cultures. Introductions must first be made, discreet inquiries into one's social status and caste along with position, income and kinfolk all play a part in any initiation of acquaintance.
While this may be changing to a greater extent in some Asian countries, much of the Middle East is still bogged down in the minutiae of High Context culture. If anything symbolizes this best, it is attitudes towards marriage that persist throughout Asia and the Middle East.
This inability to comprehend "face" continues to dog most Western state departments and explains a lot about the difficulty they have in dealing with such pressing issues a foreign relations and Islamic terrorism. There is a good case to be made that a better understanding of "face" might have helped avert the Pacific conflict with Japan in World War II.
Perhaps this gives you an idea of how crucial an understanding of this concept is with respect to comprehending many foreign cultures, especially the Chinese.
It's about "face".
As in "loss of face" or "gaining face". The Chinese term for this is, lian.
EDIT: Per Li Pengcheng — This concept is also covered by the Chinese term guanxi (see: What is Guanxi?)
Western people live in a Low Context culture and, all too often, simply cannot relate to the concept of a High Context Culture. It is a primary reason why Westerners have traditionally portrayed Asian cultures as being "inscrutable".
I refer you to the superb piece, "Face | Beyond Intractability" by Sarah Rosenberg. It is one of the very few that successfully synopsizes this issue.
In America and Europe (both Low Context cultures), complete strangers can walk right up to each other and begin exchanging meaningful, reliable information. This same sort of interaction is almost unthinkable in many High Context cultures. Introductions must first be made, discreet inquiries into one's social status and caste along with position, income and kinfolk all play a part in any initiation of acquaintance.
While this may be changing to a greater extent in some Asian countries, much of the Middle East is still bogged down in the minutiae of High Context culture. If anything symbolizes this best, it is attitudes towards marriage that persist throughout Asia and the Middle East.
This inability to comprehend "face" continues to dog most Western state departments and explains a lot about the difficulty they have in dealing with such pressing issues a foreign relations and Islamic terrorism. There is a good case to be made that a better understanding of "face" might have helped avert the Pacific conflict with Japan in World War II.
Perhaps this gives you an idea of how crucial an understanding of this concept is with respect to comprehending many foreign cultures, especially the Chinese.
No, because they are accustomed to and obsessed with this kind of Party Legged Essays(党八股）or Communism Chinese Cliches.Without this kind of bullshit, they can't speak like human beings.
Although during the Yan'an Rectification Movement, Mao Zedong himself wrote the article Anti-Party Legged Essasys(反对党八股）to denounce and ban the usage of communism cliches plagued his party, it was no surprise when the CCP seized the power and turned China into Oceania under George Orwell's 1984, the new language was not only adopted in politics buts also infiltrated to Chinese people's everyday life.
When we look into these party cliches, there are certain characteristics:
1. the pronoun shall be outnumbering and always focus on collective instead of individual. Always use Chinese People , the counterpart shall be always the minority party.
2.the verb shall be used with bad words to change the disagreement over opinions into opposition between parties with different opinions.
3.the adjective shall be with overuse of those most colorful words such as “毫无根据”（baseless），“捕风捉影”（g
4.the noun shall be with exaggeration and distortion of the counterpart's opinions. For example when talking about democracy, it shall be in pursuit of extreme democracy, and emphasis on individual shall mean disregard the whole society.
5. The logic shall be disregarded, draw the conclusion directly as there is no need in argument.
Of course these kinds of party cliches is typical bullshit under Harry G Frankfurt's On Bullshit, which is not lie, but to manipulation of audience in a very inflexible and even awkward manner. As those who speak this bullshit has no interest in truths and even don't know what truths are, it is more harmful than the lies who at least respect the correctness of truths.
Hurting the feelings of the Chinese people is a typical kind of this party cliche. Although its original intention is just to express disagreement over certain issues, this sentence is closely related to Chinese indulgence in victim mentality as it regarded it had been humiliated by the western powers for more than a decade, which can definitely ensure its moral superiority.
This article 不要再来伤害我--那些“伤害中国人民感情”的国家 | 方可成的博客 (sorry in Chinese only) had provided statistics on the frequency of those foreign countries hurting the feelings of Chinese people on the basis of database of People's Daily from 1946 to 2006, whose conclusion was quite interesting. According to this article, during this 6 decades, Chinese people's feelings have been hurt by at least 19 countries for 115 times, which are in Asia, Europe, Africa, North and South America. It looks like Chinese people are so sensitive and vulnerable that they get hurt from time to time. On the other hand, it need strong nerves for Chinese people as to keep friendship with these countries after they hurt our feelings.
Although during the Yan'an Rectification Movement, Mao Zedong himself wrote the article Anti-Party Legged Essasys(反对党八股）to denounce and ban the usage of communism cliches plagued his party, it was no surprise when the CCP seized the power and turned China into Oceania under George Orwell's 1984, the new language was not only adopted in politics buts also infiltrated to Chinese people's everyday life.
When we look into these party cliches, there are certain characteristics:
1. the pronoun shall be outnumbering and always focus on collective instead of individual. Always use Chinese People , the counterpart shall be always the minority party.
2.the verb shall be used with bad words to change the disagreement over opinions into opposition between parties with different opinions.
3.the adjective shall be with overuse of those most colorful words such as “毫无根据”（baseless），“捕风捉影”（g
4.the noun shall be with exaggeration and distortion of the counterpart's opinions. For example when talking about democracy, it shall be in pursuit of extreme democracy, and emphasis on individual shall mean disregard the whole society.
5. The logic shall be disregarded, draw the conclusion directly as there is no need in argument.
Of course these kinds of party cliches is typical bullshit under Harry G Frankfurt's On Bullshit, which is not lie, but to manipulation of audience in a very inflexible and even awkward manner. As those who speak this bullshit has no interest in truths and even don't know what truths are, it is more harmful than the lies who at least respect the correctness of truths.
Hurting the feelings of the Chinese people is a typical kind of this party cliche. Although its original intention is just to express disagreement over certain issues, this sentence is closely related to Chinese indulgence in victim mentality as it regarded it had been humiliated by the western powers for more than a decade, which can definitely ensure its moral superiority.
This article 不要再来伤害我--那些“伤害中国人民感情”的国家 | 方可成的博客 (sorry in Chinese only) had provided statistics on the frequency of those foreign countries hurting the feelings of Chinese people on the basis of database of People's Daily from 1946 to 2006, whose conclusion was quite interesting. According to this article, during this 6 decades, Chinese people's feelings have been hurt by at least 19 countries for 115 times, which are in Asia, Europe, Africa, North and South America. It looks like Chinese people are so sensitive and vulnerable that they get hurt from time to time. On the other hand, it need strong nerves for Chinese people as to keep friendship with these countries after they hurt our feelings.
