Re: Looking for Genuine PAP Supporters Member to articulate views effectively
'Trivial' issue of national anthem sparks intense and frank debate
(147th Singapore Prostitute Press, 22 July 1991)
* PM's community visit to Bukit Panjang *
Reports by Zuraidah Ibrahim and Philip Looi
* Majulah Singapura in another language?
IT WAS introduced as a "trivial" issue. But the question of changing the language of the national anthem, Majulah Singapura, sparked an intense and frank discussion between community leaders and Mr Goh Chok Tong yesterday.
While some felt that the song was not meaningful or emotive enough for those who do not understand Malay, others wanted it kept as it is.
The issue was raised by lawyer Lee Bon Leong who noted that he was asking a "trivial" and yet sensitive question in asking for a change of the national anthem because of changes in the language situation here.
But he felt that "adjustments" had to be made to the national anthem, as many Singaporeans now did not understand Malay and thus did not have "strong feelings, or strong sense of emotion" when they sang the anthem.
After hearing the views of six grassroots leaders, the Prime Minister said he preferred to take the "practical approach" by keeping the national anthem as it is, while ensuring that its translations in other mother tongues were more easily available.
With all understanding the song better, Singaporeans would sing with more feeling and emotional attachment.
He acknowledged that the problem was peculiar to multi-racial societies, and
was not easy to resolve.
"Yes, it is important that we all sing the national anthem in the mother tongue, so that we can be emotive about it. But then, on National Day, which is the most important day for the country, which song do we sing?
"If everyone wants to sing in his own language, then, far from uniting the country, we will surely be on the road to dividing it," he said.
One grassroots leader, Madam Soh Teng Hua, said in Mandarin that she did not wish to change the anthem but "to add to it" by having it translated into other languages.
Madam Charlotte Song, who also spoke in Mandarin, said that translated versions of the national anthem would enable Singaporeans to feel greater emotional attachment to it.
Recounting her own experience, she said she only learnt to sing the national
anthem in school and has since forgotten the meaning of the words.
Mr Ramli Puteh, an Annur Mosque representative, felt the national anthem had to be viewed from the historical perspective, that is, when Singapore became independent in 1965.
Changing the language would also mean changing the "spirit, mood and feeling from that period", he added.
He provided an instant English translation of the song, noting that it had "only 18, very plain, simple Malay words" which could be easily learnt and understood.
Rounding up the debate, Mr Goh said that it was easier to change names or logos of a place than it was to change something as emotive and stirring as a national anthem. To change it would be to divide the country, he said.
What was more important was for Singaporeans to ensure that all would develop an emotional attachment to the anthem over time.
'Trivial' issue of national anthem sparks intense and frank debate
(147th Singapore Prostitute Press, 22 July 1991)
* PM's community visit to Bukit Panjang *
Reports by Zuraidah Ibrahim and Philip Looi
* Majulah Singapura in another language?
IT WAS introduced as a "trivial" issue. But the question of changing the language of the national anthem, Majulah Singapura, sparked an intense and frank discussion between community leaders and Mr Goh Chok Tong yesterday.
While some felt that the song was not meaningful or emotive enough for those who do not understand Malay, others wanted it kept as it is.
The issue was raised by lawyer Lee Bon Leong who noted that he was asking a "trivial" and yet sensitive question in asking for a change of the national anthem because of changes in the language situation here.
But he felt that "adjustments" had to be made to the national anthem, as many Singaporeans now did not understand Malay and thus did not have "strong feelings, or strong sense of emotion" when they sang the anthem.
After hearing the views of six grassroots leaders, the Prime Minister said he preferred to take the "practical approach" by keeping the national anthem as it is, while ensuring that its translations in other mother tongues were more easily available.
With all understanding the song better, Singaporeans would sing with more feeling and emotional attachment.
He acknowledged that the problem was peculiar to multi-racial societies, and
was not easy to resolve.
"Yes, it is important that we all sing the national anthem in the mother tongue, so that we can be emotive about it. But then, on National Day, which is the most important day for the country, which song do we sing?
"If everyone wants to sing in his own language, then, far from uniting the country, we will surely be on the road to dividing it," he said.
One grassroots leader, Madam Soh Teng Hua, said in Mandarin that she did not wish to change the anthem but "to add to it" by having it translated into other languages.
Madam Charlotte Song, who also spoke in Mandarin, said that translated versions of the national anthem would enable Singaporeans to feel greater emotional attachment to it.
Recounting her own experience, she said she only learnt to sing the national
anthem in school and has since forgotten the meaning of the words.
Mr Ramli Puteh, an Annur Mosque representative, felt the national anthem had to be viewed from the historical perspective, that is, when Singapore became independent in 1965.
Changing the language would also mean changing the "spirit, mood and feeling from that period", he added.
He provided an instant English translation of the song, noting that it had "only 18, very plain, simple Malay words" which could be easily learnt and understood.
Rounding up the debate, Mr Goh said that it was easier to change names or logos of a place than it was to change something as emotive and stirring as a national anthem. To change it would be to divide the country, he said.
What was more important was for Singaporeans to ensure that all would develop an emotional attachment to the anthem over time.
