19/06/2026
Our bilingual policy remains our core foundation, but can we still find a comfortable balance that leaves room for cultural and dialect preservation?
The use of dialect is a matter close to my heart. I picked up Hokkien as a child by listening to my relatives and have kept it alive over the years by using it whenever I could. I also picked up basic Teochew to better connect with seniors in Hougang, for whom it remains a common language. I value dialect not only as a way to reach seniors who are more comfortable speaking it, but as a direct expression of our heritage and culture. Beyond sentiment, certain vocabulary that appears in the Hokkien and Teochew lexicon has no Mandarin equivalent, and some nuances may be lost in translation.
I therefore fully appreciate the sentiments over Infocomm Media Development Authority of Singapore’s decision to dub the general release of the hit movie “Dear You 给阿嬷的情书” in Mandarin. My friend Cai Yinzhou 蔡引舟 has filed a Parliamentary Question seeking further information on IMDA’s decision. He has raised important questions about how heritage and cultural preservation factor into such decisions.
At the same time, it is also important to put things in perspective. Eight screenings of the Teochew version will be held between June 18 and 21, amounting to 4,800 tickets, an indication that there is already some flexibility built into the policy. Many of us would also recall “Vaccinate Already? 您打疫苗没?”, a song commissioned by the government and sung in Mandarin, Cantonese, and Hokkien, and hosted on gov.sg’s YouTube channel, a further sign that dialect continues to be embraced.
The question, then, is not whether the bilingual policy should be abolished, but where its limits should sit. Can we accommodate objectives like dialect preservation, while still promoting Mandarin as the lingua franca among Singapore’s Chinese population?
I believe the bilingual policy remains broadly relevant, but today’s circumstances differ from those that gave rise to the Speak Mandarin Campaign in 1979. Like any policy, it should be reviewed against current realities, whether to better serve its original aims or to make room for objectives that can sit alongside them. I look forward to Minister Josephine Teo’s response when Parliament next sits on 7 July.
我对方言的使用，始终怀有一份特殊的感情。我从小听家中长辈交谈而学会了福建话，并多年来尽量在生活中使用，使这门语言得以延续。我也学了一些基本的潮州话，以便更好地与后港的年长者沟通，因为潮州话对他们而言仍是一种常用的语言。我重视方言，不仅因为它能让我更贴近那些更习惯说方言的长者，也因为它是我们传承与文化的直接体现。除了情感因素之外，福建话和潮州话中有些词汇在华语里找不到对应的说法，翻译时也可能流失一些细微的语感。
因此，我完全能够理解大家对IMDA决定将热门电影《Dear You 给阿嬷的情书》配上华语配音所感到的失望。我的朋友蔡引舟已就此事向国会提出问题，要求IMDA就这项决定提供进一步说明。他提出了一些重要的问题，探讨在做出这类决定时，应如何兼顾传承与文化保育的考量。
与此同时，我们也应该把事情放在更全面的视角来看待。6月18日至21日期间，将安排八场潮州话版本的放映，共提供4800个座位，这显示政策本身已具备一定的灵活性。许多人应该也还记得《您打疫苗没?》这首由政府委托制作、以华语、粤语和福建话演唱、并在gov.sg的YouTube频道上架的歌曲，这也进一步说明方言并未被边缘化，反而持续受到重视。
因此，问题的关键并不在于双语政策是否应该废除，而在于它的界限应设在哪里。我们能否在继续推广华语作为新加坡华族通用语的同时，也兼顾方言保育等其他目标？
我认为双语政策在大体上仍然具有现实意义，但今天的环境，已与1979年推行讲华语运动时的情况有所不同。正如任何政策一样，双语政策也应该根据当下的实际情况加以检讨，看看是应该放宽还是收紧，从而更好地达成原有目标，或者为与之并行不悖的其他目标留出空间。我期待杨莉明部长在国会7月7日复会时所作出的回应。
News report in image courtesy of CNA
