Talk:Cantonese/Archive 1

message: I reverted edits of 219.173.119.57  which had changed the tone names in the article from Pinyin to a Cantonese romanization of that anonymous user's choice for these reasons:
#The names in Pinyin are standardized labels in academia.
#Standard labels are necessary for English readers in comparative studies of geographical and chronological dialects.
#The pronunciation of those names in Standard Cantonese may be interesting information, but they are not as necessary. Omitting them makes the tables more compact.
#If one argues that tones should be named in the dialect being discussed, then why should tones in Middle Chinese be pronounced in Cantonese then?
#The user chose a personal romanization method that matched none of those listed in Wikipedia.
#If the consensus is to add those pronunciations, I recommend using the IPA system being described in the article for consistency.
Please discuss. -- Felix Wan 00:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I recommend using Jyutping throughout the article wherever pronunciation guide for Chinese words are necessary, because Jyutping is currently the most widely-accepted, typist-friendly and reader-friendly scheme of Cantonese romanization and pronunciation guide. Deryck C. 07:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's easy to input, but I don't think it's the most widely accepted. :-D — Instantnood 20:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was indeed also under the impression that it is the most widely accepted, since if someone chats with me about Cantonese in a somewhat technical way, that's what they'd use - though often they know it as "LSHK" rather than "Jyutping". -- KittySaturn 16:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Main Point: Jyutping is doubtlessly more writer- and reader-friendly than IPA. Deryck C. 09:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To KittySaturn: of course, because that's the only usable version on a keyboard. Deryck C. 04:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone names in Pinyin or a Cantonese romanization 

message: Finally, I decided to add the alternative view, quote my sources here in the talk page, and ask other Wikipedians for help in finding more definitive reference materials.  During a discussion, I learned the second view, which is verifiable by these:
* Hong Kong Dialect Phonology
* Guangzhou Dialect Phonology
We know that the two dialects should be very close to each other, yet the two pages use different approaches in phonological analysis. The "Hong Kong" approach is more well known as it is recorded in S. L. Wong, A Chinese Syllabary Pronounced According to the Dialect of Canton. The "Guangzhou" approach is actually using a method closer to the second one I mentioned in the article, and considered medials as part of the rime. Notice the presence of  and , and the absence of  and . Unfortunately, I have lost my link to a clearer article that supports the second approach. If anyone can find a book or paper supporting it, please add it here in the talk page. -- Felix Wan 03:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative view of finals analysis 

message: I noticed that this chart was unused. I'll leave it here for your consideration.
Peter Isotalo 21:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, this looks like a good chart, but it shows an  rather than .  I'll ask the original creator whether he can change this.  —Umofomia 22:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that I've cleared the mixup concerning  vs. , I have added the chart to the page.  —Umofomia 13:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vowel chart 

message: I came here looking to find how the first tone should sound.  I found a chart that does not explain what any of the tones sound like (for example:  "low," "low rising," "high," "high rising," etc.).  Can this be improved?  It's important.  Badagnani 02:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless I'm way off, the numbers indicate tone levels, so, for instance, "55" is "high level". I have attempted to deduce and add appropriate descriptions to the table. Some of them are the same as each other. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 07:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone section does not make sense 

message: Sichuan dialect is mutually unintelligible with Mandarin(Beijing dialect). So why is Sichuan dialect classified as a Mandarin language dialect anyway? It should be belonged in a separate dialect group like Wu, Gan, Min, etc. Therefore if Sichuan dialect is classifed as a Mandarin dialect, we can also justify that Teochew dialect and Hainanese dialect can belong to the Yue dialect group.Sonic99 05:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The classification of Sichuanhua as a Mandarin dialect is not intended to imply thaht they are mutually intelligible. The terminology used to talk about Chinese language varieties is always contentious, but that is not implied by "dialect" in this case. As for why it is classed as a Mandarin dialect, this is not a decision to be made by Wikipedia editors by linguists; then we, Wikipedia editors, report what linguists say. Linguists apparently believe that Sichuanhua is close enough to the other Mandarin dialects so that they constitute a group together. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 05:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How did the linguists come to the conclusion that Sichuanhua is a Mandarin dialect? Sichuan dialect as well as Wuhan dialect are mutually unintelligible with Beijing dialect. I would think these linguists are trying to promote Mandarin and classed more speakers into the Mandarin group. Teochew and Hainanese are similar to Cantonese in grammar and pronunications and, also the proximity of Canton and their continuous contact with each others, one can say that these dialects can be classified as Yue dialects. I think more linguists should research the Teochew and Hainanese dialects again. Sonic99 00:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to The Languages of China by R. Ramsey, what all the Mandarin dialects have in common, and the reason why Sichuanhua is grouped with Mandarin, is that they all lost the -p, -t, and -k endings, and they all use 他 for the third-person pronoun and 的 for the subordinative particle.  All the other non-Mandarin dialects do not fit into at least one of the above criteria. —Umofomia 22:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification of Chinese languages/dialects

message: The article currently lists [ɑ] (open back unrounded vowel) as the long-a vowel for Cantonese.  When I went to ask the creator of the vowel chart shown above to change his chart from [a] (open front unrounded vowel) to [ɑ], he said that it was [a] according to the source he reference from, The Handbook of the International Phonetic Association.  He said he would change it to [ɑ] if I could show him some references that listed [ɑ].  However, when I actually tried to find these references, none could be found.  All the ones that I found list [a].  This includes:
* Chinese University of Hong Kong Chinese Character Database Site
* Pronunciation guide at cantonese.ca
* Hutton, C. and Bolton, K., A Dictionary of Cantonese Slang
* Kwan, C., The Right Word in Cantonese
* Yang, M., A Concise Cantonese-English Dictionary
Not one source has listed [ɑ] for the value of the long-a vowel.  I never thought anything of the fact that [ɑ] was in the article since phonology is not my strong suit and its hard for me to tell vowels apart, but it looks like [ɑ] is wrong by sheer number of sources alone.  Should I go ahead and replace all instances of [ɑ] with [a]?  —Umofomia 09:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: you sure have enough backing :) and as a speaker of cantonese myself, it definitely sounds more like an [a] than an [ɑ] (e.g. the word for mountain definitely doesn't sound like a person pronouncing "sarn" in received pronunciation)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.43.82 (talk) 03:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [a] vs. [ɑ] 

message: Is there a userbox template that I can use to show that I speak cantonese? Thank you for understanding, that it is completely irrevelant to what this is about. Thank you.
GamePlayer623 01:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BBL#zh-yue_-_.E7.B2.B5.E8.AA.9E.2F.E7.B2.A4.E8.AF.AD_.28Cantonese.29  The Cantonese is written strangely. 呢个用户能够用熟练嘅粤语进行交流。"进行交流" is not "so Cantonese". Would" 傾偈" be better?--Kfsung 08:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I must say thanks. I learn something everyday, it seems. =). Sorry, I'm not familliar with the words. Can't read simplified chinese (ones computers use.).  If it IS simplified chinese that is.
GamePlayer623 03:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Something not quite right, from a native Cantonese speaker's perspective:
# Written cantonese is only written in traditional Chinese, not simplified Chinese.
# Some words are formal written Chinese, which are not used in spoken cantonese. Basically written cantonese is writing down spoken cantonese, character by character.
AbelCheung 14:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, please forget about my 1st comment, I completely forgot about people in Canton province. AbelCheung 14:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox template?

message: A new editor has just added a number of categories for Chinese surnames, which I believe to be very useful, particularly for grouping individuals with the same hanzi surname but using different romanizations.  As is usually the case at the Categories for Deletion area, the people who frequent that place generally try to delete every new category, regardless of whether they understand its use.  In this case, they seem not to understand the utility of being able to have a category for everyone with the name "Liu," for example.  Please voice your opinion here.  Badagnani 03:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese surnames categories up for deletion 

message: I ended up being away from Wikipedia for quite a while since I posted my last topic on this talk page.  Anyway, I didn't see anyone oppose the proposal I set 9 months ago, so if there are no objections, I will be making this change soon.  —Umofomia 11:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm doing this change now in this article and other Cantonese related articles I can find that happen to use the incorrect [ɑ].  —Umofomia 10:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [a] vs. [ɑ] redux 

message: What motivates analyzing the tone system of Cantonese as comprising nine tones, instead of the simpler analysis of 6, whereby the last three would be conflated into tones 1, 3 and 6 respectively? —Trevor Caira 17:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at 9 tones maintains a historical view of Standard Cantonese which is not wrong and accepted. I believe there is mention of why the 3 extra tones are based on what the linguist is analyzing. .:DavuMaya:. 05:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only that, counting chinese tones with the clipped 入 tones separate is how tones in all chinese dialects have been counted since at least the qieyun. Dioziu for example has exactly 8 tones, 6 non 入 tones and 2 entering tones.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.43.82 (talk) 03:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: In classic Chinese, there are four tones including the entering tone.  These tones are the basic how poems, prose and articles rhyme.  Tones are the quality of pronunciation.  Some are long and slow.  Some is rising. Some remains high. And the entering tone is short and heavy.  The quality is descriptive and it varies in different periods and areas.  The losing of voiced consonants in Cantonese language is compensated by one more similar set of tones for differentiate characters meaning. That's why Cantonese can rhyme classic poems written more than a thousand year ago.  --— HenryLi (Talk) 04:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why nine tones? 

message: The statement "Standard Cantonese is the de facto official Chinese spoken language..." is self contradictory. 
If it has official (legal) status then it should be "de jure" and not "de facto". If it does not have official status in law then using the word "official" is nonsense. Roger 18:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What theyre talking about is that Chinese is an official language of HK.  But it's not explicit which dialect.  In practice, both mandarin and cantonese are used.  I think this qualifies as official, but again, it is not explicit.  Either mandarin and cantonese are both officail or both de facto  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.77.167 (talk) 10:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  De facto official? 

message: I have reverted or modified these edits by user:ownedplant [] for the followings reasons: 
*[] the edit summary of "grammar fix" does not explain this edit, also "widespread" is vague and open to interpretation.
*[] has no edit summary, it is helpful to link to the wider spoken Chinese group that the subject of this article (Guangzhou speech) belongs to, as well as linking to the Chinese language article.
*[] has no edit summary.
*[] the edit summary of "to keep loanwords from being separated from phonology" does not explain this edit.
*[] has no edit summary. Information about Cantonese language media from HK is already mentioned. What does "independent success of Hong Kong" mean? HK was a British colony until 1997 and is now a part of the PRC. LDHan (talk) 14:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by user:ownedplant 

message: I have removed [] from the article because it does state the source of its figure, and does not meet the requirements of Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources. The webpage has a link to another website with the following words: "Other source and map: The World Bank Group, data and statistics", meaning that the other website is another source and has a map, not that it is the source of the figures and facts on []. There is also potential confusion between the subject of this article, Guangzhouhua, and the wider group to which it belongs, Yue, when citing any references. LDHan (talk) 15:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of speakers 

message: The phonology section needs attention.  It is very confusing and needs copy editing for clarification.  I do not understand the material well enough to attempt this myself.  Please help improve the style and clarity if you can.
Thanks
Helikophis (talk) 16:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonology 

message: Newzebra has re-requested the move we rejected at Talk:Yue Chinese. kwami (talk) 16:50, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Due to the terrible name of "Yue Chinese", certainly it should be moved to a proper place using a proper name with commonly used English word "Cantonese" by adding a tag or an adjunct to it, so as to make it clear, familiar to normal English speakers, rather than the confused and seldom-used term "Yue" or "Yue Chinese", which may also refer to Cantonese people. --Newzebras (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

text: It is a move request of Yue Chinese to a proper name. The request has nothing to do with this article. So let's discuss on the discussion page of Yue Chinese. kwami's adding "Requested move II" here is irrelevant. We should discuss one problem in one place, isn't that right?--Newzebras (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move II 

message: This page should not have been moved to "Guangzhou dialect." This is not the most commonly used term. Please move it back and engage in substantive discussion first. Thank you. Badagnani (talk) 19:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Move it back to where? You can join the poll above if you like. kwami (talk) 20:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yer bad move, not many English speakers will know this term, it is like moving the German Language to Hochdeutsch which is what is used to distinguish it from the various dialect of languages in German or to refer to High German. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 01:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horrible, horrible page move 

message: I wanted to bring this into discussion before there are any more reversions.  The first sentence of this article states:  The Guangzhou dialect, commonly known as Cantonese....  And accordingly I have provided a reference to the Chinese translation of "Cantonese" as a ref to the native name in the template at the top of this article - .  This is my justification for adding the ref.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But your ref does not support Guangdonghua as the name for Guangzhou dialect, which is the name of the article. Cantonese can also mean Yue, and I suspect that Guangdonghua may have the latter meaning. kwami (talk) 00:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

text: According to Chinese wiki, you got it reversed. They say 粵語，又叫廣東話, and 廣府話又叫廣州話、省城話、白話等. kwami (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

text: 粵語 (yueyu) is an academic term. 廣東話 (guangdonghua) is a generic term, but it may also refer to all languages of Guangdong, or refer to Chaozhou speech (a dialect of Min) and thus this term is ambiguous. Both 府 and 省城 mean capital city, so 廣府 means the capital of Guangdong and thus equal to Guangzhou. Cantonese is an English term; it is similar to 粵語 or 廣府話 or 廣東話, but the English term does not exactly equal to any one of them. The reason is that a century ago most people did not differentiate the concepts too much. Many studies of Chinese dialects only started after WWII. --✉ Hello World! 04:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Native name 

message: All of Cantonese dialect, Cantonese language, Standard Cantonese, Cantonese (linguistics) are preferable to me for this article over the current name of "Guangzhou dialect".  But in the interest of all editors involved in discussion both here and at Yue Chinese, I suggest we move both articles back to their original long-standing names before we engage in further discussion to provide possibly better names.  Both of the previous names stood for a long time without much of any dispute.  As soon as the recent page moves were made, long discussions sprung up.  Obviously a longer time to seek concensus was necessary.  Which means, this article gets moved back to Standard Cantonese, and Yue Chinese gets moved back to Cantonese for now.
Support
*Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Comment - Of course it's standardized; if it weren't it wouldn't be called "Standard Cantonese." It's the form of Cantonese that's used on TV, in schools, etc. Badagnani (talk) 21:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: -) That's like saying a starfish must be a fish, because if it weren't, it wouldn't be called a "starfish". The status of the dialect does not depend on what we call it. Cantonese Yue is like Beijing Mandarin or Taiwanese Minnan: it's a prestige dialect. There are lots of prestige dialects used on TV and in schools. Read the article on standard language and tell me how Cantonese fits. Another example: Urdu and Standard Hindi are both standard languages, but they are the same dialect, Khariboli. Khariboli itself is a prestige dialect, and the basis of the two standards. Unless you can demonstrate its legal status, I will insist on being explicit that Cantonese is not a standard language, regardless of what we call the article. kwami (talk) 23:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the issue of whether or not it is "standardised" was the original cause of the page move.  It looks like we're actually fast approaching concensus, or at the very least, a super majority.  This can be the first point of discussion after the page move (back).  Personally I don't care whether or not we say it's standardised, or even that we have "standardised" in the article name.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:02, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

text: I think the real thing that we should be careful is -- preventing somebody who lives in his/her world of illusion, continue to contort the world, contort the language, like the "maxim" he/she said.--Syaoranli☞李小狼 13:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

text: If there is anything ambiguous, it is easily identified by adding descriptions with "Cantonese" (e.g. XX Cantonese / Cantonese(XX)). There is no need to use the "Yue" that unfamiliar to the public. All should bear in mind that Wikipedia is set up for the public. "Yue" could be used inside the article (as it is used in some special fields), but not the title of the article.--Fongyun (talk) 04:43, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion and Poll