Boy

“Boy, go catchee two piecey tea.” ­­– This is perhaps the best way to describe this photograph.

The Chinese man standing in the middle, though looked rather mature, was designated “Boy”. The class of personal servant in British Indian and Hong Kong, Canton, and Shanghai was called “boy” without connotation of youthfulness. According to the Hobson-Jobson dictionary, the term boy was commonly used in Southern Indian and China to refer to a personal servant. It was also used as a summon. In the 19th century, it was commonplace for European families to employ from a few to a dozen servants to keep the households running. Carl Crow, an old China hand, praised highly of the Chinese servants, describing them as “patient and industrious and loyal”. Employers often found themselves spoiled by the servants because they learnt the needs of the households and most importantly “the likes and dislikes of the master and mistress.”¹

In the book The Treaty Ports of China and Japan (1867), the writers hoped to give readers some tips some practical information on these two countries. One of the topics they presented was about hiring servants. For Hong Kong, they noted that “Most of the servants employed by Europeans are of Cantonese origin, and possess a greater or less knowledge of “pidgin English” a queer compound of Anglicised Chinese and Chinese-rendered English, with a few words of Malay and Portuguese origin. A facility in speaking this barbarous jingle of words is a necessary accomplishment for holding communication with the servant class in Hongkong, though of late years the Chinese have improved in this efforts to acquire a correct manner of speaking English.”² An example of pidgin English is the instruction at the beginning of the post – Boy, go catchee two piecey tea – a typical way a master expressed his request.

Catchee (from English catch) was a handy verb to express orders in pidgin English. The meanings of catchee varied depending on the context in which it appeared. In this sentence, catchee meant ‘bring’. Two piecey tea was structurally similar to 兩杯茶 (loeng5 bui1 caa4) ‘two cups of tea’ in Cantonese. 兩 (loeng5) refers to the numeral ‘two’. 杯 (bui1) can refer to the object cup. It can also be used as a classifier or measure word (量詞) to indicate type or measure of a noun. Finally, 茶 (caa4) is ‘tea’. You may notice that the classifier piecey was used instead of cup. Why? Well, since Cantonese has plenty of classifiers for sorting different types of nouns, speakers of pidgin English preferred to make things simpler and reduced all classifiers to one word – piecey, apparently from English piece.   

As for the number of servants to be employed, it depended on the size of the household. The book recommended that: “For a single man the usual establishment is one “boy” (a corruption of the Hindostani bahi) who is both body servant and major domo, and the head of the other servants: – one house coolie who performs the more laborious and dirty portion of the household work: – one cook, who generally furnishes assistant at nominal wages and upon whom falls the burden of the ordinary culinary duties of the house: and two chair coolies – the hire of the latter being somewhat discretionary. If married, an Amah or female servant is required in addition, while an establishment including a number of children requires at least two or more. An “outside” coolie, paid by the month, carries away the slops &c. of the establishment, there being no arrangement for underground sewage in connexion with the houses. The scale of wages is as follows:

Since the wages of servants were so cheap, even a single person could afford the services of 3 to 4 servants. Note that as the “boy” was more superior in rank than other servants in the household, he had an air of dignity and would refuse tasks that he deemed inappropriate for his position. Those tasks belonged to “coolie pidgin”. So what was the “boy pidgin”? If you were the master, here’s an example of what your boy would do for you: “The duties of your boy consist in looking after your room, dusting it, &c., taking care of your linen and clothes, serving you at table, standing behind your chair all the time, and attending upon you solely.”³

Being newcomers, Europeans often needed assistance from the Chinese in looking for servants. For example, in the following a British wanted to employ a “boy” and asked a Chinese linguist (interpreter) to “secure” him.⁴

You savey that boy? My want one piecey boy number one good. You think he truly good; he no makey that lallylung (thief) pigeon: he no makey lob that watch, that dollar. Well, then, you can secure this number one boy makey all ploper pigeon. Suppose he makey lun away and steal, you makey good to my all that dollar, all that watch?

Savey was the way Portuguese saber ‘to know’ was pronounced. Besides things, piecey could also be added before animate nouns like boy. If someone/something was number one, it was ‘the best’. Honesty was an important quality for the boy, therefore he shouldn’t be engaged in lallylung pigeon. Lallylung came from the Portuguese word ladrāo ‘thief, robber’. Here, pigeon was not a type of bird but an alternative spelling of pidgin ‘business.’ Not only the boy shouldn’t lob (i.e. rob)the master’s property, he should make sure that everything in the household was ploper (proper). Should the boy be dishonest, the Chinese linguist had to take full responsibility as he had guaranteed the boy’s integrity.

¹ Crow, Carl. 1921. The Travellers Handbook for China (Including Hongkong). Third edition. Shanghai: Dodd, Mead & Co. New York.

² Mayers, Wm. Fred, N.B. Dennys and Chas King. 1867. The Treaty Ports of China and Japan. London: Trübner and Co./Hongkong: A. Shortrede and Co.

³ Anonymous. 1860. The Englishman in China. London: Saunders, Otley, and Co.

⁴ Fisher, C.B. Lt.-Colonel. 1863. Personal Narrative of Three Years’ Service in China. London: Richard Bentley.