Citations:Wade-Giles
English citations of Wade-Giles
Romanization edit
| 1947 1960s 1977 1981 1992 | 2000s 2010s 2020 2022 2023 | ||||||
| ME « | 15th c. | 16th c. | 17th c. | 18th c. | 19th c. | 20th c. | 21st c. |
- 1947 May, Earl Swisher, “MacNair, China”, in Pacific Historical Review[1], volume XVI, number 2, University of California Press, →ISSN, →OCLC, page 214:
- The pronunciation aids to Chinese names are of doubtful value. They are not phonetic, being only a slight modification of the Wade-Giles system, and become really confusing when Mandarin pronunciations are given for Cantonese or historical spellings.
- 1960, Edwin O. Reischauer, “The Pronunciation of Chinese, Korean and Japanese”, in East Asia The Great Tradition[2], Houghton Mifflin Company, →OCLC, page 675:
- The Romanization systems used in this book are those generally considered standard in the English-speaking world: Wade-Giles for Chinese (with the omission of a few unnecessary diacritical marks); McCune-Reischauer for Korean; and Hepburn for Japanese. There is one major exception to this rule, however. Common Chinese geographical names are normally given according to the Chinese Post Office system, which often follows southern Chinese pronunciations and not the Peking pronunciation of standard Northern Chinese (Mandarin or kuan-hua). For example, the city that has been the capital of China for most of the past five and a half centuries is generally Romanized Peking and pronounced accordingly, but the Wade-Giles Romanization of the name would be Pei-ching, pronounced something like Bay-jing.
- 1969, “A note on transliteration”, in Joseph Kitagawa, editor, Understanding Modern China[3], Quadrangle Books, →LCCN, →OCLC, page 7:
- The problem of romanizing Chinese place names is a difficult one. Solutions differ from language to language, and there are several so-called "systems" used even in the English-speaking world.
The system most widely accepted by professionals is the Wade-Giles system. One of its key advantages is that it permits the reader to check back to the original Chinese characters, since most dictionaries are arranged according to this romanization system.
- 1977, “Explanatory Notes”, in Robert Dunn, editor, Chinese-English and English-Chinese Dictionaries in the Library of Congress[4], Library of Congress, →ISBN, →LCCN, →OCLC, page vii:
- In accordance with the LC manual of bibliographic style, the heading for each entry contains the essential bibliographic data taken from the corresponding LC catalog card. The Chinese titles are given in Wade-Giles romanization. If the English title and/or the title in Pinyin romanization appear in the original work, they are also provided.
- 1981 December 4, Immanuel C. Y. Hsü, “Preface”, in China Without Mao: The Search for a New Order[5], →ISBN, →LCCN, →OCLC, page xvi:
- A word about the methods of romanizing Chinese characters seems in order. I follow the principle of using the system generally accepted in the geopolitical region of reference. Thus, in reference to mainland China the Pinyin phonetic system is used, and in reference to Taiwan, the Wade-Giles system. Though this requires familiarity with more than one system, it should cause the least confusion in identification of people, places, and literary works (see the guide provided in the back of the book).
- 2003, John Davidson, “Editorial Notes”, in A Treasury of Mystic Terms[7], volume 1, Science of the Soul Research Centre, →ISBN, →OCLC, page xxxii:
- The roman transliteration of an emboldened headword is first given in the Wade-Giles system of romanization. The standard Pinyin romanization follows in parentheses. In the main text, only Wade-Giles romanization is used.
- 2004 April 13, John Eckersley, “Questions answered”, in The Times[8], →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 14 December 2022[9]:
- Who decides how words transliterated from the Chinese are spelt? If feng shui should be pronounced “fung shway”, why isn’t it spelt like that?
Chinese names and words used to be transliterated according to the Wade-Giles system, in which the letters of the Roman alphabet have roughly the same sounds as in English.
- 2007, Phil Macdonald, National Geographic Traveler: Taiwan[10], 2nd edition, National Geographic Society, →ISBN, →OCLC, page 6:
- An ongoing frustration for visitors are the different transliterations of Chinese place-names into English—various city and county administrations can't agree on a standard method, tussling over the Wade-Giles, tongyong, and hanyu systems.
- 2008 September 23, Matt Gross, “Feasting at the table of Taipei”, in The New York Times[11], →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 2022-12-04, Travel[12]:
- Travelers should be aware that in Taiwan Chinese is still mostly converted into the Latin alphabet using the Wade-Giles system, but transliterations in pinyin, adopted by Beijing in 1979, are sometimes used. Chung Hsiao Road, for example, is sometimes rendered as Zhongxiao Road.
- 2016, Karen Steffen Chung, “Wade–Giles Romanization System”, in The Routledge Encyclopedia of the Chinese Language, Taylor & Francis, →ISBN, →OCLC:
- Most influential in further establishing the Romanization scheme first set down by Wade was Giles' 1,415-page A Chinese–English Dictionary, which became a standard reference work soon after its release in 1912. The orthography it employed came to be known as the Wade–Giles system of Romanization, and it was soon adopted by English-language academia, and then by the media and general public.
In fact Giles' Romanization was only very slightly modified from Wade's – the differences are miniscule. Tones continued to be marked in the Wade–Giles system with numeral superscripts, with the neutral tone either being unmarked, or occasionally given the number '0' or '5'.
- 2017 January 22, Martin Boyle, “Pinyin and a Taiwanese identity”, in Taipei Times[13], →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 21 January 2017, Editorials, page 6[14]:
- No longer does the ROC claim to be China and the writing systems that Taiwan uses for Chinese have changed to reflect this. Taiwan has held on to traditional characters and bopomofo, resolutely resisted simplified characters, mostly retained Wade-Giles and Yale for personal, political and geographical names in Taiwan, but grudgingly accepted the linguistic arguments for Hanyu pinyin signage in public spaces.
- 2018 March 12, Sophie Zhou, “The T/Daos shall meet: The failure and success of English transliterations of Mandarin Chinese”, in English Today[15], volume 35, number 1, , →ISSN, →OCLC:
- The two most prominent systems of transliterations of Mandarin are Wade-Giles and Pinyin. Wade-Giles, established in the 19th century (Kaske,2008) is named after Herbert Allen Giles[...]
- 2020, “Saisiyat”, in Council of Indigenous Peoples[16], archived from the original on 08 October 2021[17]:
- In the Qing dynasty, Saisiyat people combined the clan system with the family name in Han culture and translated their clan names into Chinese characters either phonologically or semantically. These Saisiyat surnames include: Tou or Zhao from tawtaw-azay, Zhu from titiyon, Feng from ba:-ba:i’, Gao from kaybaybaw, Pan and Qian from sa:wan, Gen from kaS-a:mes, Chang from min-rakeS, Sha from hayawan, Xie (crab) from kar-karang, Ri from tanohila:, Shi from tataysi’, Qiong from Say-na-‘ase:, Hu (fox) from bot-botol, Chan from kam-lala:i’, Shi, Xie from katiramo, and Mo (fascia) from tabtabilas. Later, they changed the characters for Xie from “crab” to the fief name in ancient China, for Hu from “fox” to the common Han surname, for Chan from cicada to Jian (a different character for the same Romanization in the Wade-Giles system).
- 2020 April 24, Kristen Schott, “The Language of Self-Discovery: On Jessica J. Lee’s “Two Trees Make a Forest””, in Los Angeles Review of Books[18], archived from the original on 07 July 2020:
- Lee starts her memoir with a recollection of hiking with her mother shortly after Gong, the author’s grandfather, has passed away, and the narrative veers into a discussion of translation. Lee explains that she uses traditional Chinese characters, and both the Wade-Giles romanization system and Hanyu Pinyin to transliterate certain details from Mandarin. By extent, this exemplifies the language variations not only in Taiwan but also in her own family. Wade-Giles, she notes, is employed by her elders, though she has been taught Hanyu Pinyin. “The gaps that bind us span more than the distances between words,” she writes.
- 2022 February 22, Courtney Donovan (石東文) Smith, “The joyous variety in Taiwanese chosen names”, in Taiwan News[19], archived from the original on 22 February 2022:
- When it comes to names used to face the outside world, the government issues passports using a bastardized version of Wade-Giles romanization.
- 2023 February 8, James Carter, “The birth of pinyin”, in The China Project[20], archived from the original on 08 February 2023, Society & Culture[21]:
- The Wade-Giles system, which remains commonly used, especially in Taiwan, was introduced in the 19th century. That system, devised by linguist Thomas Wade and diplomat Herbert Giles, became widespread.
- 2023 February 10, Michael Auslin, “‘Fragile Cargo’ Review: The Long Rescue of China’s Past”, in Wall Street Journal[22], archived from the original on 05 March 2023:
- Aside from some stylistic unevenness (Mr. Brookes uses both modern pinyin and older Wade-Giles transliterations, when lay readers probably would find it easier to read only the latter, given its continued familiarity for historic places and names) and a few lapses into therapeutic editorializing, “Fragile Cargo” is a fascinating and inspiring story of triumph and the tragedy of war.
Proscribed Use edit
Wade-Giles, taken to refer to any non-Hanyu Pinyin romanization scheme for a Chinese language. Comapre to [23][24].
- 2022, Matthew Galway, “Note on Languages”, in The Emergence of Global Maoism: China's Red Evangelism and the Cambodian Communist Movement, 1949-1979[25], Cornell University, →ISBN, →LCCN, →OCLC, page xiii:
- This book employs the Pinyin system of romanization in all cases except in instances when a Wade-Giles romanization is the standard. For historical figures whose names have been generally romanized in Wade-Giles, such as Chiang Kai-shek and Sun Yat-sen, I use the widely used standard. The same is true for place-names such as Hong Kong and Taipei. This also applies to those rare cases below in direct quotes or references that employ Wade-Giles.