最近遇上兩中文上的小事，但從這些小事，或是中文的詞義，便可以從中明白香港或中國人世界中的迂腐古舊思維。
第一個是我最近在寫Bronte Sisters。因為Brontesisters是一家出了三個流傳千古的作家，我自己最初用「一門出三傑」，但也不記得為何，可能擔心覺得editor 會認為「傑」是指男性，所以自我審查成「一門三女傑」。
然後文章在明報刊登後，自己重看，一看到「一門三女傑」，我便即時皺眉，點解要額外加個「女」字？ 或者也只能說在香港社會文化長大，不經不覺也給這些傳統父權概念「洗腦」，思考不足，發問不夠，就覺得很多字及概念是認定是只給男性的。縰使按字典解䆁，傑是指「才智優異、特出的人。」，根本無性別的區限，但在我的腦袋中還是會認為「傑」是有明顯的性別指向。所以我們還是會說成語「女中豪傑」，這個應該在21世紀不應再用不再relevant 的字眼。
另一件是看到Nephew 的功作紙中，竟然是要介紹自己「家鄉」（以前我的年代是叫藉貫）。當初我即時理解到這基本上是「愛國教育」，要小朋友認定自己與大陸的關係，不然，現在小童一般父母也是出身在香港，鄉下自然就多是香港了。再者，為什麼「鄉下」要是指父親來自的地方，而不是父母雙方的地方？（我意思是為什麼是singular而不是plural）。
不過，當時也不特別想「家鄉」這字詞，只覺得這字好陌生少見，沒有細想。以前我們多說故鄉／鄉下。點知隔了一陣再細想，其實家鄉對我來說是完全怪異，完全想不到實際意思，或與鄉下的分別，亦想不到究竟英文的equivalence，家鄉不是home town 呀？再google ，才知道原來家鄉等如Homeland/mother land，基本上本身就是帶有愛國主義，由藉貫變家鄉，就係要洗腦迫你愛國。這是wiki 的解釋：
家鄉是一個文化地理學上一個民族集團世代流傳且富含文化意義的概念-一個已存在國家概念的國家。作為一個常用名詞，它一般隱含着那個個人的出生地的意思。作為一個特定用語，這個詞在其它語言常有愛國主義的含義。依照其所在國家及語句中的用法，家鄉又常被稱作父國、母國等的比喻。
題外話，很多香港人的特性有時真的令人摸不著頭腦，也不知要怎樣理解，又或是像而家特首的小圈子政治連續劇，人人追得上腦，又點又盛，仲見有人不斷John Tsang John Tsang 打氣，好似自己有得選咁。其實，同大陸果d投票，但一定要投畀A 果種，都係好鬼中國，係咪。
圖片取自香港不合作運動
To speak on behalf of the majority of Hongkongers who have been pursuing freedom and democracy for decades, I am writing to urge the BBC to expend the coverage on the democratic situation in Hong Kong in order to make the world aware that China has been maliciously handling Hong Kong just like what they have been doing to Tibet and other minorities in the country. Frankly We have been very disappointed with the BBC and the likes of the prestigious international media for failing to cover the gradually deteriorating human right and democratic situation in Hong Kong.
This year is the critical time for the future of Hong Kong. Not only because the Hong Kong government has been ferociously undermining our autonomous government body and our local cultures under the influence of the central government of China, but also China blatantly violated the “One country two systems” agreement between Britain and China by releasing a white paper in which it reinterprets “One country two systems” in June this year.
Stating that our sovereign power is strictly limited to how much the central Chinese government is willing to delegate, the white paper delineates the sovereignty of Hong Kong, and it also claims that the leader of Hong Kong has to be patriotic to both China and Hong Kong. In this case, in other words, it simply implies that the chief executive of Hong Kong must be a pro-Beijing politician. This revision to the One Country Two System policy is an alarmingly vile and destructive measure from the central Chinese government side to take over Hong Kong.
On top of this, a week ago, the legislative council forcefully and, allegedly, unlawfully passed a bill that blurs the border between Hong Kong and China intentionally regardless of a series of lengthy large-scale protests and the backlash in the society.
We have been crying for international help and tried to plead with the British government for urgent involvement, but to no avail. It comes to the point that we pretty much suspect it might boil down to the ubiquitous political pressure from China, the fastest-growing economy on earth. Hong Kong is going to become – or has already become – an authoritarian regime, and the Hong Kong government, which has completely lost its credibility, is not a government we can rely on whatsoever. We, therefore, urgently need international attention and support. Please, restore our trust in humanity and the trust in the BBC and the like.
Best regards,
Damon Chan
