I’m going to disagree with you on this one. Before political correctness became the norm, (back in the mid to late 80’s) I had been corrected by Asian friends who said being referred to as Oriental was tantamount to calling a black person “colored.” It wasn’t considered deplorable but uneducated, if you will. One Korean girl I worked with would smile and say “Rugs are Oriental, people are not.” But she had a sense of humor about it. We were servers in a restaurant and one of the menu items was an “Oriental chicken wrap” which we would just refer to as the “oriental” Whenever we would call out to the cooks, “Oriental!”
Amy (the Korean) would yell out “Did someone call me?”
This is quite true. If you never grew up with certain sounds, even though you can hear the difference, it’s quite difficult to intuitively get your mouth and tongue to make the right shape to make that sound.
I was trying to help Sniffs_Markers get the distinct sounds of the French “ou” and “u” sounds and physically had to grab her face at times to try to get her to shape her mouth right, as well as watch her carefully to figure out where she was trying to put her tongue for the sharper “u” sound.
It helped to get her to approximate sounds using words she knew (like “zoo” vs. “stew”) or have her immitate animal noises. Seriously.
Truth <-“troof”
Problem <- “Plob blem”
Probrably <- “Plop plap ply” : Only when I’m speaking really fast and tired
Three -> “tree”
Cement -> “see men”
Tuition -> “tue shun”
Go -> “Go” (as opposed to “g ou”)
Two -> “to” (as opposed to “t ou”)
To answer the part about how Koreans pronounce the R and L sound, it’s somewhat like you’re just about to roll your r, like the Spanish rr. But don’t roll it. Stop just short of rolling it. To me, a native English/Korean speaker, it sounds completely different from an R or an L sound, but my American friends think it sounds more like an R. Hence the confusion. I think it’s just a matter of people trying to fit the sounds they hear to what they know.
Oh, and for the Japanese person who couldn’t say the name Bill and instead said Bih, it may be because in Japanese there is no consonant-vowel-consonant in one syllable sound. For instance, in Japanese there is no way to simply spell out “tot.” It would be something like “to-tuh.” So for the name Bill, it would have to be either “Bill-L/Ruh” or “Bih” and forget the last consonant. Oh, and disclaimer: I am not a Japanese speaker.
Oh, and I don’t mind Oriental, but I understand that others do, so might as well stop using it. Either that, or call everyone else Occidental. Which sounds a bit like accidental.
You really can’t harp on people for saying such things when the line between behavior and ethnicity is so blurry. After all, I’m willing to bet that the vast, VAST majority of native Japanese speakers are ethnically Japanese. If this is the case, is it really wrong to equate the language/culture with the ethnicity?
It’s certainly not comparable to someone asking “Why do black people _______ ?” Because of the incredible geographic and coltural diversity of people who would be considered black, it’s a much weaker generalization.
But if you say “Why do Japanese people _______?” and the _______ is something related to a language common to nearly all the native Japanese, it’s a generalization that isn’t far off, no?
If the OP had actually asked about just the Japanese rather than lumping all of East Asia into the same group then I don’t think anyone would have questioned it.
Sometimes he would lengthen “Bill” to two syllables… something like Bih-Uh. Now I know why. BTW this guy was an extremely hard worker and would be tutored in his English after work and on weekends but he was old enough that I don’t think he could ever overcome this particular problem.
Japanese have a big problem with any foreign word that can’t be written in the katakana syllabary (set of phoenetic syllables). Katakana can only express the approximately 90 sounds that are found in Japanese. English has about 130 sounds, yet the Japanese education system insists on teaching English as transliterated into katakana. Most of them will never figure out that they’re being taught a crippled version of the language. The few who do figure it out are overwhelmed by the task of re-learning what they’ve been incorrectly taught, or in other cases they blame it on a supposed deficiency i ntheir vocal anatomy.
As an assistant English teacher in Japan, this can be maddening. The native-Japanese teachers of English want it spelled in katakana without argument. They don’t want to hear "You can’t write this correctly in katakana because you don’t have a reliable L, R, B, V, soft S, or schwa. They don’t want to hear "This is a single-syllable word in English, all of the letters get the same stress.
So in the case of Japanese at least, it is not due to racial, ethnic, or genetic factors. It is only the stubborn insistence on transliterating English into an alphabet that it won’t fit into.
And I think it’s worth pointing out again that Asian and Oriental mean two entirely different things in British English, and are not interchangeable. Neither is “Oriental” considered pejorative. Many Chinese restaurants here have Orient or Oriental in the name, which has been chosen by their (usually) Chinese owners.
What’s the deal on this in Australia and New Zealand?
I wouldn’t say that it’s never pejorative: we’re back to the old noun vs adjective issue. Calling a restaurant by that name is very different to someone talking about “Orientals”. Which, if not frowned upon as much as ‘coloureds’ would be, certainly would make you sound very odd and out-of-touch.
(Oh, and on the restaurant name theme, they’re just being business-minded and calling it whatever will sound good. Note the number of ‘Indian’ restaurants that are Pakistani-run - doesn’t mean the workers don’t dislike being called Indian.)
WAG. off the top of my head, words like ‘Oriental’, ‘Hongkee’, ‘Yankee’, ‘Negro’, ‘Mongoloid’ etc for whatever reasons, doesn’t sound like respectful words describing people.
That means nothing. There’s a restaurant called “New Hong Kong” which is a chinese joint here in town and the owners are neither from Hong Kong nor are they one of the ethnically Chinese, they’re Vietnamese. As Gorillaman says, that’s just what brings in customers… it gives an air of “exoticness” to the place.
I never heard any of my fellow Asian friends or their parents call themselves Oriental back in the mid eighties and early nineties before the whole “PC Phenomena” was going around. This is why I always say it sounds stuffy and stilted as well as archaic… only people in their 70’s and 80’s I knew were still using “Oriental” to describe people back then.
I’m an Australian living in th UK. I can’t speak for New Zealanders, but most Australians would consider Oriental to be an outdated term. People from east Asian and south-east Asia are referred to by their specific nationality: e.g. Malaysian, Indonesian, Japanese, etc. In general usage, the descriptor Asian is used.
People from the India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka or Bangladesh are also referred to specifically, but never as “Asian”. Many Australians would probably make the mistake of referring to a Pakistani as Indian, if they didn’t know where they were from. This would probably be offensive in the UK, but since the level of Pakistani and Indian immigrantion to Australia is much less than that to the UK, it’s a mistake that often goes unremarked.
OTOH, the level of south-east Asian immigration to Australia is far higher than that to the UK. This is probably a reason why we are more sensitive to racial distinctions from this region, but less sensitive to differences betwen the countries of the Indian sub-continent.
I must admit hearing the term Oriental in the UK really sets my teeth on edge. I’m half-Singaporean–although I look like very Caucasian, so people aren’t careful around me–and it’s quite irritating to hear the term (not to mention the occasional casual racism).
There’s really no point in saying anything, however, since in most cases no offense is realised or intended.
