By Zhou Rongchen

SMRT has ended its trial runs of Mandarin announcements of station names on the North-South and East-West MRT lines. Now that the dust has settled on the recent controversy, it may be time to relook into this seemingly harmless move by the transport operator that instead resulted in much controversy and unhappiness. The simple act of adding an official language to train announcements should not be such a big deal as to warrant so much anger. Would the reaction be the same if this had happened five years ago? Is this merely a convenient opportunity and outlet to vent our frustrations on other related issues? Perhaps we need to take a step back and look at the situation from a different perspective, and examine what some commuters are really outraged about.

Most comments published in online forums and blogs have been strewn with anger and frustration, with some claiming that this is a threat to the language ideology of English as our common language in Singapore. The main arguments against the Mandarin announcements are firstly, that providing only Mandarin translations alienates the Malay and Indian communities; secondly, that this is a politically-driven move to cater to immigrants from Mainland China (the PRCs); and thirdly, that elderly Singaporeans have had no problems taking the MRT since the network opened in the eighties, so this is unnecessary. I think that the case is the strongest for the first argument, whereas the second and third arguments should be carefully re-examined. I would personally advocate having announcements in all four official languages, instead of limiting announcements to English only.

Station names have been announced in both English and Mandarin, but not in Malay and Tamil on the SBS Transit-run North-East Line since the line opened in 2003, and it has not been the topic of criticism in the past 9 years, at least not for the reasons state above. So, why now? When the North-East Line opened in 2003, trains were running at low capacity to the then-not as densely populated northeastern suburbs. Anti-immigrant sentiments were low, if not unheard of. Major train breakdowns were rare occurrences, and public transport was still efficient and not overcrowded. It is rather unfortunate that the SMRT trial run coincided with a period in time with high anti-immigrant sentiment. The recent strikes by PRC SMRT bus drivers have also incited significantly more public resentment and unhappiness into the event.

On alienating the Malay and Tamil speakers, SMRT could have handled the delicate issue with more sensitivity.  SMRT cited the reason that Malay and Tamil names sound mostly identical to the English names, hence the reason for omitting announcements in these two official languages. Apparently, this is not the case. Station names like City Hall and Redhill are Dewan Bandaraya and Bukit Merah respectively in Malay, which sound very different from their English names. Besides, this argument does not hold water because many of the Chinese translations are also transliterations of the station names. For example, the Chinese names for Eunos “友诺士 (yǒu nuò shì)” and that for Pasir Ris “巴西立 (bā xī lì)” sound almost identical to their original names.

On a related note, most cinemas in Singapore screen English-language films only with Chinese subtitles. It would be a stretch to suggest that this is a move to cater to the influx of PRC immigrants. The fact is that there are indeed many local elderly Singaporeans who need subtitles to enjoy English-language films. In an all-inclusive society, the needs of its ethnic groups have to be taken into consideration, and restricting the usage of an official language (e.g. removing Chinese subtitles from movies) defeats the essence of an equal society. Signs at Changi Airport are in English, Chinese, Malay and Japanese, but no Tamil. The decision by relevant authorities to include a foreign language, but to exclude an official language, deserves to be examined.

Is the addition of Mandarin announcements a move to cater to the influx of PRC immigrants? According to SMRT, the decision to include Mandarin announcements of station names was based on survey results, showing significant public demand for Mandarin announcements to benefit older train users. To better inform the public, SMRT should have released a statement on the survey results before starting the trial. In addition, the Mandarin announcements are not done in PRC-accented Mandarin, as some of the voices have pointed out online. These announcements are enunciated in an accent that is understood and accepted by local Chinese, as taught in schools. Older Mandarin train announcements from the nineties were also done in the same accent.

Online opinions also include sweeping statements that our elderly Singaporeans have had no problems getting around on the MRT system in the past decades. Most people who take the MRT can understand English announcements, and may assume that everyone else can do the same. However, there remains a group of elderly citizens who have stopped taking the MRT because of the language barrier, and they still exist in the bigger picture. I would like to point out that I personally know of elderly relatives, like my own grandmother, who have stopped taking the MRT altogether for years, for fear of getting lost in the network. These elderly Singaporeans therefore rely on buses, particularly trunk services to get to other parts of the island. The main reason is because buses travel above ground, and it is easy to see where one is going, as opposed to the increasingly-underground MRT lines. They do not have to rely on station names in English or other languages on buses.

It would be lamentable for our national ideology to enforce a one language (English)-for-all stance that ignores the needs of our own people, in order not to be seen as catering to the needs of foreigners. Instead, I would prefer emphasising the multicultural and multilingual ideology of Singapore by bringing back the original transfer announcements that were made in the four official languages to all interchange stations, old and new. Most of the elderly get lost when it comes to making transfers, and transfer announcements at interchange stations made in an accessible language would be critical to them, more so than translations of individual station names. The old announcements took a long time to finish, and trains would have reached the next station even before the Tamil announcement ended. They can be shortened to concise announcements. Professionals can be consulted for this task, and public feedback should be collected.

Of station names and their translations

The controversy surrounding train station announcements has also brought up a problem concerning station names and their translations that has largely escaped public attention. While older train users tend to get lost on the MRT network due to the language barrier, young people too, sometimes lose their way because of the inappropriate naming of stations. Many of the station names on the Circle Line are given new English names – The city stretch of the Circle Line (excluding Dhoby Ghaut and Bras Basah) is made up of station names with similar meanings, like Esplanade, Promenade and Bayfront, leading to much confusion. These new names are probably more problematic to the older Singaporeans than the familiar local names like Dhoby Ghaut and Bras Basah. Even young Singaporeans are getting lost in the labyrinth of these new stations, many of whom proclaim to only speak English, and have no need for announcements in any other languages.

Take for example, the Promenade station. This station is located at the piece of reclaimed land known as Marina Centre and near a well-known bus terminal with the same name. However, both its English and Chinese names do not reflect this characteristic. Its Chinese name “宝门廊 (băo mén láng)” is more accurately a transliteration of the English name. The literal meaning of its Chinese name reflects “a hallway of a precious gate”, and there is no such “hallway” or “gate” near that area. The two stations could have been better renamed as the following to better reflect their locations and characteristics: The current Esplanade station as “Esplanade” in English and “滨海艺术中心 (bīn hăi yì shù zhōng xīn)” to reflect its location near the Esplanade Theatres by the Bay; and the current Promenade station to be renamed “Marina Centre” in English and “滨海中心 (bīn hăi zhōng xīn)” in Chinese. There was also considerable controversy over the Chinese transliteration of Bayfront as “贝佛兰 (bèi fó lán)”. The Chinese translation name went through several changes like “海湾 (hăi wān)” and “海湾舫 (hăi wān fáng)” before eventually settling on “海湾舫” for its meaning associated with the bay, instead of a meaningless transliteration.

Another area of confusion regarding station names concerns the respect for heritage and geographical history. Despite the good intentions of train companies to display Chinese names of stations and to announce them in Mandarin, our local dialect-speaking elderly may not be familiar with these names. For example, the Chinese names for Bugis and Outram Park are more commonly known to the locals, especially the older citizens as “Peh Swa Poo (白沙浮)” and “Si Pai Po (四排坡)”. Their respective current Chinese names of “武吉士 (wŭ jí shì)” and “欧南园 (ōu nán yuán)” are transliterations of the English names. These officially-translated names do not have the same level of familiarity as it negates heritage information and disregards the familiar geographical knowledge of many commuters. It is hence, more appropriate to treat the naming of stations with cultural respect and reduce the use of transliterations. While station names that originate with English proper names like Lavender, Newton, Dover, Bartley and Caldecott can use transliterations for their various translations, English station names like Expo, HarbourFront, Stadium, Holland Village and Downtown should be meaningfully translated into the various ethnic languages.

With all the confusion station names have caused, perhaps a major renaming/review exercise of station names and train announcements needs to be in place. In addition to the above, names which are too similar like Farrer Park, which is located nowhere near Farrer Road, can be renamed. Perhaps Farrer Park can be renamed as Kitchener or Race Course station. Misnomers like Botanic Gardens can also be renamed as Botanic Gardens End to avoid confusion, as its actual location is at the little-known, newly-opened Bukit Timah gate, at the end of the Gardens. The future Thomson Line station at its familiar main Tanglin gate can then take the rightful Botanic Gardens name. Marina Bay is another tricky misnomer that should be renamed, since it is not actually near Marina Bay, and because other stations like the new Bayfront station and the future Downtown station are now much closer to the Bay. This renaming exercise would also serve as a good chance to review other controversial station names like Tan Kah Kee. The controversy started because many felt that it was inappropriate to name the station after the founder of Hwa Chong Institution, but not after any of the names the area is known as. Historians and urban planners should be consulted in this exercise to ensure that the revised station names are consistent with the geographical locations and history.

Singapore is increasingly becoming an English-language dominated state. Do we want our future city and citizens to be stripped bare of our cultural roots? It is already happening, and the sad part about this is that many of those who vehemently protest against the Mandarin announcements, and insist on reverting back to English, but not to include the other official languages, are young Singaporeans. Perhaps many of them have grown accustomed to hanging out in their own circles of purely English-speaking friends, and therefore are not aware of the large demographic of ageing Singaporeans who are not well-versed in English.

One of the reasons many local Chinese find the Chinese names strange and alien could be because prior to this saga, they were oblivious to these names that have already been long in existence. The Chinese transliteration names have been around for a long time, so it is strange that names like “索美塞 (suǒ mĕi sài)” (Somerset) and “加冷 (jiā lĕng)” (Kallang) are now being made fun of. It does strike one as a tad too late, and a little silly, for people to start complaining about badly-translated names that have existed for decades – names that have been widely and consistently used in the Chinese language media. For “索美塞”, there are three pronunciations of the character “塞”, of which sè or sāi is better than the vulgar-sounding sài. “加冷”has been made fun of for its unintentionally nonsensical meaning – To literally ‘increase the coldness’. A more appropriate Chinese translation for Kallang would be “火城 (huŏ chéng)”, as the area used to be well-known for the Kallang Gas Works landmark.

Looking at this incident positively, it has provided us Singaporeans with an avenue for a collective reflection of our society, and what we stand for. So, what’s in a name? A healthy dose of identity and pride, it seems, and hopefully, a lesson learned by the next station!

—————-

Zhou Rongchen is a research assistant with the Institute of Policy Studies.

Join IPS Commons’ Facebook page here.