Late last year, Chunjie (春節) was added to UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. While this recognition was a moment of pride for Chinese culture, it also reignited a long-standing debate: How should Chunjie be translated into English?
For decades, the holiday has been variously rendered as “Spring Festival,” “Chinese New Year” or “Lunar New Year,” each term carrying its own cultural and political implications. However, as the world becomes more interconnected, the question of which translation to use has become more than a linguistic curiosity — it is a matter of cultural identity and global influence.
Three main English translations are in use, with “Spring Festival” being the most favored, followed by “Chinese New Year” and “Lunar New Year.” The preference for “Spring Festival,” a verbatim rendition of Chunjie, reflects a desire to highlight the holiday’s unique cultural significance rather than framing it solely as a “new year” celebration. After all, Chunjie is deeply rooted in Chinese traditions, from family reunions and feasts to the iconic red envelopes, firecrackers and dragon dances. By adopting this straightforward literal translation, the holiday’s distinctiveness could be better conveyed.
In contrast, English-speaking countries tend to favor “Chinese New Year.” Major English dictionaries, including Oxford and Merriam-Webster, list “Chinese New Year” as the primary term, followed by “Lunar New Year” and “Spring Festival.” This preference is also reflected in large language corpora, such as the News on the Web corpus, which tracks over 20 billion words from English-language media.
The dominance of “Chinese New Year” in the English-speaking world underscores the holiday’s association with Chinese culture. However, it also raises questions about inclusivity, as the term implicitly centers China in a celebration that is also observed by other cultures, such as in Vietnam and South Korea.
In recent years, “Lunar New Year” has gained traction as more inclusive than “Chinese New Year.” This shift is partly driven by efforts from countries such as South Korea and Vietnam. Both nations have long-celebrated lunar new year traditions, but have increasingly pushed for the use of “Lunar New Year” to distance themselves from the Chinese-centric framing.
While “Chinese New Year” remains the most common term, its growth rate has almost plateaued out. Meanwhile, “Lunar New Year” has seen a significant uptick in usage, particularly in English-language media. This reflects a broader cultural and political movement toward de-Sinicization, as countries with historical ties to China seek to reclaim their narratives.
Amid these debates, some scholars and media outlets have advocated for using the Pinyin-transliterated “Chunjie” as the primary English term. Historical precedents offer valuable insights. This approach aligns with the way other traditional festivals are translated, such as Japan’s Tanabata (Lovers’ Day) and Obon (Festival of the Dead), South Korea’s Seollal (Korean New Year), or Vietnam’s Tet (Vietnamese New Year). Given these examples, the transliteration of Chunjie is not only natural but also consistent with global practices.
As the Year of the Snake approaches, let us embrace this opportunity to assert our cultural voice on the global stage. By adopting “Chunjie” as the primary term, supplemented by “Spring Festival” and “Chinese New Year,” we can ensure that our traditions are represented authentically and respectfully. After all, language is not just a tool for communication — it is a vessel for culture, history and identity.
Hugo Tseng holds a doctorate in linguistics, and is a lexicographer and former chair of the Soochow University English Department.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS