Fear-mongering over Chinese signages continue unabated in Malaysia; sparks heated debate

 

THE usage of Chinese characters in business signages has been a bane of contention for many years.

On the one hand, some see such signs as a celebration of diversity and reflective of a melting pot society. On the other, there will be those who see them as an affront to a national identity, more so when Bahasa Melaysia (BM) is relegated to secondary status – or worse – nowhere in sight.

An example of the latter was evident in a posting by Aduan Rakyat (@RakyatAduan) on X which highlighted the neon signage in the aisles of the OUG outlet of the Food Merchant in Old Klang Road, Kuala Lumpur.

Sounding the alarmist siren, the poster enquired: “2026 and BM is fading from public spaces while Mandarin signs take over. Who decided (that) this was okay?”

Tagging DBKL for good measure, the poster further added a few pertinent questions that hinted that it was ludicrous that Malaysian Chinese were unable to read BM or English.

If these were for the benefit of Chinese Mainlanders, should more signs be replaced? Observing that Tamil was missing, this is surely not in the spirit of muhibah (racial harmony), it was wryly observed.

There were some keyboard warriors who were quick to add fuel to the fire by calling for a boycott.

It was then succinctly pointed out by some commenters that this particular grocer did NOT cater to the “majority race” as it was piled high with non-halal items.

A few observant commenters noted that these were aisle signages inside the premises, NOT signboards adorning the front of the store. Hence, they were not subject to municipal authority jurisdiction requiring BM to be on the signboard.

Further clarifying the matter, one commenter explained that the City Hall (DBKL) only had authority over storefront signages while the Domestic Trade and Costs of Living Ministry could only ensure that product and price details are prominently displayed.

However, it was contended that local traders should have more self-awareness towards respecting for the national language.

Another commenter also supported the use of BM but was of the opinion that it was the business owners’ right to determine what signages they wish to use inside their own premises.

It was also wryly noted that Sarawakians would not give the time of the day for what they would perceive as a non-issue.

Highlighting economic realities, one commenter pointed out that business owners make decisions for their business to prosper, not engage in idealism.

Some felt that the poster was over-reacting and should just chill out. Moreover, he is not leading by example given he himself is expressing his thoughts in English when he should have done so in BM.

After all, as it was not a big deal in Australia, it shouldn’t be a big deal here, pointed out one obviously well-travelled commenter.

Does the poster have a point? After all, it can’t be so difficult to include the aisle signage in BM as well. However, on the flipside, is this use of Chinese language in public spaces really a poke in the eye to national identity?

You decide. –  Focus Malaysia