Bulletin Autumn‧Winter 1996

We are very fortunate that the founding fathers of The Chinese University of Hong Kong decades ago had the foresight to make this a bilingual university f r om the outset. At the time, it was not the fashion and definitely against the trend ； but to steer the course they did was an act of wisdom. So, as you w i ll no doubt agree, we have always been right in emphasizing the importance of both Chinese and English. Is the purpose of b i l i n g u a l i sm to r e n d er easier communication w i th more people around the globe or is it to increase the potential for job opportunities for our graduates? Perhaps both. Whichever is the case, it was an a dm i r a b le p o l i c y. N o w , w i t h the necessary infrastructure already in place, and w i t h the relevant culture already prevalent, I am confident that we shall succeed in meeting public expectations and demands. Bilingualism is a part of our distinctiveness — and it should remain so. Another part of the answer to the policy of b i l i n g u a l i sm must be the fact that l a n g u a ge is n ot o n l y a t o o l f or communication but also an integral part of our culture. Dr. J ohn s on called it the 'pedigree of a nation'. I believe that our f o u n d i ng fathers saw bilingualism as a means to integrate b o t h Western and Chinese cultures so that our graduates could have the best of both worlds. Dr. Johnson was perhaps Britain's answer to Confucius, so I should remind you also of what Confucius and his follower Me n c i us h ad to say a b o ut language. Confucius said, in his typically pithy way, ‘If a p e r s on does not use l anguage, who can k n ow what is on his mind? Yet language lacking in cultivation will not travel far .'（子曰：不言，誰知其志？言之無文，行 而不遠。） Mencius, again typically, was more forthcoming. In his reply to a question as to what he excelled in, he said, 'I have an insight into words. I am good at cultivating my “flood-like qi" ： (我知言，我善養吾浩然 之氣。） His elaboration on 'insight into words' was ： 'From biased words I can see wherein the speaker is blind ； f r om immoderate wo r d s, w h e r e in he is ensnared ； f r om heretical words, wherein he has strayed from the right path ； from evasive words, wherein he is at his wits' end.' (詖辭知其所 蔽，淫辭知其所陷，邪辭知其所離，遁辭知 其所窮。） Speaking personally, I cannot lay claim to 'flood-like qi, nor am I as sensitive to language as Mencius, but I i n t e nd to persevere along the way Confucius showed. Let us all then make the best of both worlds, and the best of ourselves. Ourselves? Is there a question which goes begging here? At this historic moment in Hong Kong, questions of identity do arise. We w i ll have to define ourselves, as precisely as we are able to, in the wider context of who we are, and more pertinently, in terms of w h o we think we are. The answer to the first question of who we are depends on w h om one talks to. If theologians regard us as fallen angels, anthropologists may like to think of us as rising apes. But Chinese and Western philosophers have l ong recognized the duality of man — good versus evil, positive forces against negative forces, all within the same person. Central to this existence is our enormous intellectual curiosity which is the driving force behind our endeavours. It is this that sets us apart f r om other animals o n t h is p l a n e t. We are c a p a b le o f i n d e p e n d e nt t h i n k i n g, we l i ke to ask questions about the unknown, and want to preserve what has been achieved. This basic quality of man is the essence of a university. As institutions, universities appear to have evolved from preservation of the Bible in the Western w o r l d and 51st Congregation for the installation of Prof Arthur K. C. Li as the Vice-Chancellor 7