‘The end of the common world’: COVID anxieties, bordered lives and democratic censorship in Taiwan

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Cultural Studies Pub Date : 2023-10-11 DOI:10.1080/09502386.2023.2261973
Chih-ming Wang, Zhai Gong
{"title":"‘The end of the common world’: COVID anxieties, bordered lives and democratic censorship in Taiwan","authors":"Chih-ming Wang, Zhai Gong","doi":"10.1080/09502386.2023.2261973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThis paper provides ethnographic sketches of the struggles of bordered lives – mainland spouses and their families, PRC students and overseas Taiwan – during the pandemic time when their rights to enter or return to overseas Taiwanese was denied as part of the preventive measures against COVID-19. By conducting interviews with mainland spouses from a distance and looking at the discussion of a Facebook group called ‘Overseas Taiwanese COVID-19 Self-Help Group’ as an archival site, we seek to understand and analyse the reasons why their right to enter or return was silenced, discredited, denied and attacked, and used these ethnographic sketches as the basis for explaining the emergence of democratic censorship, a paradox that sadly is part of the living reality in Taiwan. Furthermore, inspired by Michel Foucault’s discussion of raison d’etat as the rationale for the state’s, rather than people’s, survival, we situate democratic censorship in the context of tense China–Taiwan relations and call for the ‘de-Cold Warring’ (Chen Citation2010) of consciousness as the key to save democracy from the spectre of autocracy.KEYWORDS: Mainland spousesPRC students‘Xiao Ming’‘Xiao Hong’Overseas Taiwanese COVID-19 Self-Help Groupraison d’etat Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Situated on the coast of Fujian Province, Kinmen and Matsu are what Szonyi (Citation2008) calls ‘Cold War islands’ that were used as garrisons against China during the Cold War era. Though closer to the Chinese mainland than to Taiwan in distance, they are separated from the Chinese mainland despite deep historical connections of migration. In January 2001, as a signal of the Taiwan–China reconciliation, the travel between Fujian and Kinmen and Matsu was re-established, as part of the attempt to materialize the three ‘direct communications’ – in commerce, travel, and postage – across the Taiwan Strait. The eruption of Covid-19, however, put a halt on this travel in February 2020. It was not resumed until 25 March 2023.2 Taiwan’s cultural anthropologist, Sau-hua Liu notes that naming Covid-19 in Chinese was a tortuous political process: while the original translation was more neutral, since 21 February 2020, the Taiwan government decided using ‘Wuhan Pneumonia’ as its official name in Chinese, subjecting the term to stigmatization and discrimination (Citation2020, p. 21).3 At the initial stage, there were debates about the origin of the virus, and many have pointed to the wet market in Wuhan, though some sources suggested otherwise. Such an association between the virus and Wuhan, and later China, thanks to Donald Trump, has racist implications. See A. Liu (Citation2022); Lynteris (Citation2018).4 According to Article 17 of the “Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area” (《大陸地區與台灣地區人民關係條例》), it takes four stages for mainland spouses to obtain the Taiwanese citizenship: get together (團聚), stay with family (依親居留), long-term stay (長期居留), and settlement (定居). Mainland spouses of Taiwanese citizens could apply to enter Taiwan for family reunion; once permitted to enter, they can apply to stay with their family. After staying with family for four years, with more than 183 days in residence each year, they will be allowed to apply for long-term stay. After 2 years of long-term stay, again with more than 183 days in residence each year, mainland spouses will be allowed to apply for settlement and obtain citizenship. See Mainland Affairs Council (Citation2022). It should be noted that in comparison, foreign spouses only need 5 years to obtain citizenship, and whereas foreign spouses ‘naturalize’ to become Taiwan citizens, the same process for mainland spouses is called ‘settlement’.5 To understand the experiences and struggles of mainland spouses and their children, from January 2020 to September 2022 we conducted interviews by WeChat and Line messages, when meeting face-to-face was impossible due to pandemic concerns. The interviews are semi-structured, focusing on the interviewee’s life experience, family situation, petitions in detail and interaction with the Taiwan government. Out of the 58 people we interviewed for our study, 15 were sojourners in Wuhan, 22 are children of cross-Strait marriages who were unable to return to Taiwan until August 2020, and 21 are mainland spouses who were yet to obtain the long-term stay permit. All interviews were done with the interviewees’ consent. In addition to interviews, we also observed their petitions in front of government buildings, participated in and helped organize the social platforms – public hearings, news briefings, or news programs – sponsored by the Nationalist Party (KMT) and the media. For understanding overseas Taiwanese’s response to shifting COVID policies, we registered as members of the group as silent observers lest our comments stirred and changed the dynamic of the discussion. All names mentioned in our ethnographical account are alias.6 For children of mainland spouses, there are two ways of obtaining residential permits in Taiwan. If the parent of the child is not yet a Taiwanese citizen, the child can only apply for the ‘long-term stay permit for visiting family’ (長期探親); if the parent of the child is a Taiwanese citizen, the child can apply for a ‘permit for staying’ (專案居留), but there is a quota system for both. Moreover, whereas the ‘long-term permit for visiting family’ is issued to children or spouses of cross-Strait marriages who would ‘rely on families’ (依親) in Taiwan, newly married spouses who come to Taiwan to ‘get together’ (團聚) would only be issued an entry permit (入台證) without the right to reside. Though mainland spouses with one of the residential permits mentioned above could enter Taiwan in spring 2020, their children of previous marriage could not, because they are deemed as PRC citizens.7 ” According to Liberty Times (2/12/Citation2020), a government mouthpiece, Shih-chung Chen’s explanation is favourably supported by the netizens.8 On 19 August 2020, the Ministry of Education announced that international students of high school and below, including those from mainland China, could return to Taiwan for school. The total number that benefitted from this policy is 2532, of which only 206 are from China. See Ministry of Education (Citation2020).9 Online interview conducted via Line (Taiwan’s instant messaging application) on 22 June 2020.10 Online interview conducted via WeChat (China’s instant messaging application) on 24 Jul 2020.11 Since phenotypically, Taiwanese and Chinese are not of different races, we decided to identify Taiwanese discrimination towards PRC Chinese as ‘national’ – rather than racial – hate, to signal both its difference from racial discrimination and its nationalist context in which such discriminatory behaviours arose.12 This is seen most notably in the media, where pro-government media, such as Sanli TV 三立, Formosa TV 民視 and Liberty Times 自由時報, received support from the government, publicly advocating for or defending the government’s policies. Media that are critical of the government are slighted to the margin. The closure of CTI News (中天新聞) in November 2020 is a case in point. The more effective indicator is the increasing crack-down on so-called ‘fake news’ by the government, which has a chilling effect on democratic discussion. For instance, the Keelung City Police Bureau (Citation2020) announced online that it encourages citizens to report on fake news which will be punishable by fine or imprisonment, based on Article 14 of the ‘Stipulates on the Serious Special Epidemic Pneumonia Prevention and Bailout Revitalization’ (嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎防治及紓困振興特別條例).13 In fact, foreign workers and spouses from Southeast Asia were also blamed for disseminating the virus in Taiwan at the early phase of the pandemic. See Shih (Citation2021).14 This petition was written by Chih-ming Wang and Wen-chian Huang, which was first published as an op-ed piece entitled ‘Saving without Differentiation, Response without Harm: Refusal to Package Discrimination in Pandemic Public Health Measures’ (救無別類、應物無傷:拒絕以防疫包裝歧視) in United Daily News (聯合報) on 24 February 2020. Both Wang and Huang were mid-rank professors in Taiwan. The op-ed piece was followed by an online petition in March, seeking public endorsement from the society. The petition, with more than a thousand endorsement, quickly invoked widespread criticism in pro-government social media and news outlets, condemning the initiators as pro-China and calling the petition a form of gaslighting.15 Brian D. Loader and Dan Mercea, for instance, believe that social media produces innovations in participatory politics, but such views were soon challenged and modified. See Loader and Mercea (Citation2012); Persily and Tucker (Citation2020).16 For instance, there is another Facebook group called ‘Overseas Taiwanese Covid-19 Mutual Help Group’ (海外台灣人Covid-19互助會), which was created on 20 October 2020. Though we have not been able to confirm this, the Mutual Help Group appears to be the spinoff from the Self-Help Group, as it renamed itself as ‘mutual help group’ on 11 November 2021. As of 9 December 2022, this group claims to have 36,863 members.17 It is estimated that about 50,000 to 70,000 people were deprived of their right to vote in the local election held on 26 November 2022. See Hsu and Shen (Citation2022).18 For instance, Erica Frantz in a primer on authoritarianism published in Citation2018 by Oxford University Press still maintains an Orientalist view, ascribing authoritarianism to poor, undeveloped countries in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. This view is not only dated, but moreover misses the point of authoritarianism as rested on the monopoly of power, breeding a form of autocratic culture that resists and silences dissent.Additional informationNotes on contributorsChih-ming WangChih-ming Wang is an Associate Research Fellow in the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica. His research focuses on Asian American literature and cultural studies in transpacific and inter-Asian contexts. He is working on a manuscript about Asian American return narrative and post/Cold War entanglements.Zhai GongZhai Gong is a Ph.D candidate in the Institute of Social Research and Cultural Studies at National Yangming Chiaotung University. She is finishing a dissertation on marriage migration across the Taiwan Strait during the Covid years.","PeriodicalId":47907,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Studies","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cultural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09502386.2023.2261973","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis paper provides ethnographic sketches of the struggles of bordered lives – mainland spouses and their families, PRC students and overseas Taiwan – during the pandemic time when their rights to enter or return to overseas Taiwanese was denied as part of the preventive measures against COVID-19. By conducting interviews with mainland spouses from a distance and looking at the discussion of a Facebook group called ‘Overseas Taiwanese COVID-19 Self-Help Group’ as an archival site, we seek to understand and analyse the reasons why their right to enter or return was silenced, discredited, denied and attacked, and used these ethnographic sketches as the basis for explaining the emergence of democratic censorship, a paradox that sadly is part of the living reality in Taiwan. Furthermore, inspired by Michel Foucault’s discussion of raison d’etat as the rationale for the state’s, rather than people’s, survival, we situate democratic censorship in the context of tense China–Taiwan relations and call for the ‘de-Cold Warring’ (Chen Citation2010) of consciousness as the key to save democracy from the spectre of autocracy.KEYWORDS: Mainland spousesPRC students‘Xiao Ming’‘Xiao Hong’Overseas Taiwanese COVID-19 Self-Help Groupraison d’etat Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Situated on the coast of Fujian Province, Kinmen and Matsu are what Szonyi (Citation2008) calls ‘Cold War islands’ that were used as garrisons against China during the Cold War era. Though closer to the Chinese mainland than to Taiwan in distance, they are separated from the Chinese mainland despite deep historical connections of migration. In January 2001, as a signal of the Taiwan–China reconciliation, the travel between Fujian and Kinmen and Matsu was re-established, as part of the attempt to materialize the three ‘direct communications’ – in commerce, travel, and postage – across the Taiwan Strait. The eruption of Covid-19, however, put a halt on this travel in February 2020. It was not resumed until 25 March 2023.2 Taiwan’s cultural anthropologist, Sau-hua Liu notes that naming Covid-19 in Chinese was a tortuous political process: while the original translation was more neutral, since 21 February 2020, the Taiwan government decided using ‘Wuhan Pneumonia’ as its official name in Chinese, subjecting the term to stigmatization and discrimination (Citation2020, p. 21).3 At the initial stage, there were debates about the origin of the virus, and many have pointed to the wet market in Wuhan, though some sources suggested otherwise. Such an association between the virus and Wuhan, and later China, thanks to Donald Trump, has racist implications. See A. Liu (Citation2022); Lynteris (Citation2018).4 According to Article 17 of the “Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area” (《大陸地區與台灣地區人民關係條例》), it takes four stages for mainland spouses to obtain the Taiwanese citizenship: get together (團聚), stay with family (依親居留), long-term stay (長期居留), and settlement (定居). Mainland spouses of Taiwanese citizens could apply to enter Taiwan for family reunion; once permitted to enter, they can apply to stay with their family. After staying with family for four years, with more than 183 days in residence each year, they will be allowed to apply for long-term stay. After 2 years of long-term stay, again with more than 183 days in residence each year, mainland spouses will be allowed to apply for settlement and obtain citizenship. See Mainland Affairs Council (Citation2022). It should be noted that in comparison, foreign spouses only need 5 years to obtain citizenship, and whereas foreign spouses ‘naturalize’ to become Taiwan citizens, the same process for mainland spouses is called ‘settlement’.5 To understand the experiences and struggles of mainland spouses and their children, from January 2020 to September 2022 we conducted interviews by WeChat and Line messages, when meeting face-to-face was impossible due to pandemic concerns. The interviews are semi-structured, focusing on the interviewee’s life experience, family situation, petitions in detail and interaction with the Taiwan government. Out of the 58 people we interviewed for our study, 15 were sojourners in Wuhan, 22 are children of cross-Strait marriages who were unable to return to Taiwan until August 2020, and 21 are mainland spouses who were yet to obtain the long-term stay permit. All interviews were done with the interviewees’ consent. In addition to interviews, we also observed their petitions in front of government buildings, participated in and helped organize the social platforms – public hearings, news briefings, or news programs – sponsored by the Nationalist Party (KMT) and the media. For understanding overseas Taiwanese’s response to shifting COVID policies, we registered as members of the group as silent observers lest our comments stirred and changed the dynamic of the discussion. All names mentioned in our ethnographical account are alias.6 For children of mainland spouses, there are two ways of obtaining residential permits in Taiwan. If the parent of the child is not yet a Taiwanese citizen, the child can only apply for the ‘long-term stay permit for visiting family’ (長期探親); if the parent of the child is a Taiwanese citizen, the child can apply for a ‘permit for staying’ (專案居留), but there is a quota system for both. Moreover, whereas the ‘long-term permit for visiting family’ is issued to children or spouses of cross-Strait marriages who would ‘rely on families’ (依親) in Taiwan, newly married spouses who come to Taiwan to ‘get together’ (團聚) would only be issued an entry permit (入台證) without the right to reside. Though mainland spouses with one of the residential permits mentioned above could enter Taiwan in spring 2020, their children of previous marriage could not, because they are deemed as PRC citizens.7 ” According to Liberty Times (2/12/Citation2020), a government mouthpiece, Shih-chung Chen’s explanation is favourably supported by the netizens.8 On 19 August 2020, the Ministry of Education announced that international students of high school and below, including those from mainland China, could return to Taiwan for school. The total number that benefitted from this policy is 2532, of which only 206 are from China. See Ministry of Education (Citation2020).9 Online interview conducted via Line (Taiwan’s instant messaging application) on 22 June 2020.10 Online interview conducted via WeChat (China’s instant messaging application) on 24 Jul 2020.11 Since phenotypically, Taiwanese and Chinese are not of different races, we decided to identify Taiwanese discrimination towards PRC Chinese as ‘national’ – rather than racial – hate, to signal both its difference from racial discrimination and its nationalist context in which such discriminatory behaviours arose.12 This is seen most notably in the media, where pro-government media, such as Sanli TV 三立, Formosa TV 民視 and Liberty Times 自由時報, received support from the government, publicly advocating for or defending the government’s policies. Media that are critical of the government are slighted to the margin. The closure of CTI News (中天新聞) in November 2020 is a case in point. The more effective indicator is the increasing crack-down on so-called ‘fake news’ by the government, which has a chilling effect on democratic discussion. For instance, the Keelung City Police Bureau (Citation2020) announced online that it encourages citizens to report on fake news which will be punishable by fine or imprisonment, based on Article 14 of the ‘Stipulates on the Serious Special Epidemic Pneumonia Prevention and Bailout Revitalization’ (嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎防治及紓困振興特別條例).13 In fact, foreign workers and spouses from Southeast Asia were also blamed for disseminating the virus in Taiwan at the early phase of the pandemic. See Shih (Citation2021).14 This petition was written by Chih-ming Wang and Wen-chian Huang, which was first published as an op-ed piece entitled ‘Saving without Differentiation, Response without Harm: Refusal to Package Discrimination in Pandemic Public Health Measures’ (救無別類、應物無傷:拒絕以防疫包裝歧視) in United Daily News (聯合報) on 24 February 2020. Both Wang and Huang were mid-rank professors in Taiwan. The op-ed piece was followed by an online petition in March, seeking public endorsement from the society. The petition, with more than a thousand endorsement, quickly invoked widespread criticism in pro-government social media and news outlets, condemning the initiators as pro-China and calling the petition a form of gaslighting.15 Brian D. Loader and Dan Mercea, for instance, believe that social media produces innovations in participatory politics, but such views were soon challenged and modified. See Loader and Mercea (Citation2012); Persily and Tucker (Citation2020).16 For instance, there is another Facebook group called ‘Overseas Taiwanese Covid-19 Mutual Help Group’ (海外台灣人Covid-19互助會), which was created on 20 October 2020. Though we have not been able to confirm this, the Mutual Help Group appears to be the spinoff from the Self-Help Group, as it renamed itself as ‘mutual help group’ on 11 November 2021. As of 9 December 2022, this group claims to have 36,863 members.17 It is estimated that about 50,000 to 70,000 people were deprived of their right to vote in the local election held on 26 November 2022. See Hsu and Shen (Citation2022).18 For instance, Erica Frantz in a primer on authoritarianism published in Citation2018 by Oxford University Press still maintains an Orientalist view, ascribing authoritarianism to poor, undeveloped countries in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. This view is not only dated, but moreover misses the point of authoritarianism as rested on the monopoly of power, breeding a form of autocratic culture that resists and silences dissent.Additional informationNotes on contributorsChih-ming WangChih-ming Wang is an Associate Research Fellow in the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica. His research focuses on Asian American literature and cultural studies in transpacific and inter-Asian contexts. He is working on a manuscript about Asian American return narrative and post/Cold War entanglements.Zhai GongZhai Gong is a Ph.D candidate in the Institute of Social Research and Cultural Studies at National Yangming Chiaotung University. She is finishing a dissertation on marriage migration across the Taiwan Strait during the Covid years.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“共同世界的终结”:台湾的新冠焦虑、边缘生活和民主审查
摘要本文从民族志的角度描述了在疫情期间,作为防疫措施的一部分,大陆配偶及其家人、中国大陆学生和海外台湾人入境或返回海外台湾人的权利被剥夺的挣扎。通过对大陆配偶进行远程访谈,并以Facebook“海外台湾人COVID-19自助小组”的讨论作为档案网站,我们试图理解和分析他们进入或返回的权利被压制、抹黑、否认和攻击的原因,并利用这些民族志概要作为解释民主审查出现的基础,这一悖论可悲地成为台湾生活现实的一部分。此外,受米歇尔·福柯(Michel Foucault)关于国家而不是人民生存的理由的讨论的启发,我们将民主审查置于紧张的中国-台湾关系的背景下,并呼吁意识的“去冷战”(Chen Citation2010),这是将民主从专制的幽灵中拯救出来的关键。关键词:大陆配偶中国学生小明小红海外台湾人新型冠状病毒自救小组监狱披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。注1:位于福建省沿海的金门和马祖被Szonyi (Citation2008)称为“冷战岛屿”,在冷战时期被用作对抗中国的要塞。虽然与中国大陆的距离比与台湾的距离更近,但它们与中国大陆是分开的,尽管它们有着深厚的移民历史联系。2001年1月,作为台湾-中国和解的信号,福建与金门和马祖之间的旅行被重新建立,作为实现台湾海峡两岸商业、旅游和邮资“三通”的一部分。然而,2019冠状病毒病的爆发在2020年2月停止了这种旅行。直到2023年3月25日才恢复使用。台湾文化人类学家刘秀华指出,用中文命名Covid-19是一个曲折的政治过程:虽然原翻译更为中立,但自2020年2月21日以来,台湾政府决定使用“武汉肺炎”作为其官方中文名称,使该术语受到污名化和歧视(Citation2020,第21页)在最初阶段,人们对病毒的起源有争论,许多人认为是武汉的菜市场,尽管一些消息来源认为并非如此。由于唐纳德·特朗普,这种病毒与武汉以及后来的中国之间的联系具有种族主义意味。参见刘a . (Citation2022);Lynteris (Citation2018)。4根据《台湾地区与大陆地区人民关系条例》第17条的规定,大陆配偶获得台湾公民身份需要四个阶段:团聚(团圆)、与家人团聚(团聚)、长期居留(团聚)和定居(团聚)。台湾公民的大陆配偶可以申请入境团聚;一旦获准入境,他们就可以申请与家人住在一起。在与家人一起居住四年,每年居住超过183天后,他们将被允许申请长期居留。在长期居留2年后,每年在港居住超过183天,大陆配偶将被允许申请定居并获得公民身份。见大陆事务委员会(Citation2022)。值得注意的是,相比之下,外籍配偶获得公民身份只需要5年时间,而外籍配偶“归化”成为台湾公民,而大陆配偶的相同过程称为“定居”为了了解大陆配偶及其子女的经历和挣扎,从2020年1月到2022年9月,我们通过b微信和Line消息进行了采访,当时由于担心大流行,无法面对面交流。访谈是半结构化的,聚焦于受访者的生活经历、家庭状况、详细的上访以及与台湾政府的互动。在我们的研究中采访的58人中,15人是在武汉的外国人,22人是在2020年8月之前无法返回台湾的两岸婚姻的子女,21人是尚未获得长期居留许可的大陆配偶。所有访谈都是在受访者同意的情况下完成的。除了采访,我们还在政府大楼前观察他们的请愿,参与并帮助组织由国民党和媒体主办的社会平台——公开听证会、新闻发布会或新闻节目。为了了解海外台湾人对新冠肺炎政策变化的反应,我们以沉默观察员的身份注册为小组成员,以免我们的评论引起讨论的骚动和改变讨论的动态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cultural Studies
Cultural Studies Multiple-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
6.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Cultural Studies is an international journal which explores the relation between cultural practices, everyday life, material, economic, political, geographical and historical contexts. It fosters more open analytic, critical and political conversations by encouraging people to push the dialogue into fresh, uncharted territory. It also aims to intervene in the processes by which the existing techniques, institutions and structures of power are reproduced, resisted and transformed. Cultural Studies understands the term "culture" inclusively rather than exclusively, and publishes essays which encourage significant intellectual and political experimentation, intervention and dialogue.
期刊最新文献
‘Water, asylum, metamorphosis, freak show’: flourishing through streaming karaoke play in China Memoryscapes of liberation: activist mnemonic labour in the queer press Dripping in molasses: Black feminist nostalgia and Kara Walker’s A Subtlety Streaming Black to the future: post-soul aesthetics & competing Nostalgia in FX’s snowfall and POSE Streaming Black girlhood: biculturality, nostalgia and hypervisibility in Cuties
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1