Here’s the example, and the point of it is just to show that when Cantonese speakers write in MSWC (書面語), it’s not just a matter of choosing more "literary" or "formal" vocabulary words. The grammar is different too. 2/
Consider a sentence meaning ‘He eats faster than me.’
We'll start with the spoken sentences in Mandarin and Cantonese (which, remember are *different languages*).
3/
Spoken Mandarin:
“Tā chī de bǐ wǒ kuài.”
he / eat / COMP / compared_to / me / fast
Spoken Cantonese:
“Keoi5 sik6 dak1 faai3 gwo3 ngo5.”
he / eat / COMP / fast / surpass / me
[COMP = complementizer, you can think of it here as meaning 'such that']
4/
In these two sentences, we see three pairs of cognates—words in Cantonese and Mandarin that derive historically from the same single word of ancient Chinese. They are 1) dak1 : dé COMP 2) faai3 : kuài 'fast' 3) ngo5 : wǒ 'I, me'
5/
The pairs of words for ‘he’, ‘eat’, and ‘compared_to/surpass’ are unrelated. But beyond that, the whole grammatical structure is different.
6/
The word that is equivalent to English 'than' and does the grammatical work is different. And the word ordering of the three key elements is different:
Cantonese: Adjective gwo3 Noun
Mandarin: bǐ Noun Adjective
7/
Now let's look at Modern Standard Written Chinese, which both Mandarin and Cantonese speakers could use to write a sentence with this meaning:
MSWC: 他吃得比我快。
Mandarin reading: Tā chī de bǐ wǒ kuài.
Cantonese reading: Taa1 hek3 dak1 bei2 ngo5 faai3.
8/
The written MSWC sentence is easily read and understood by literate speakers of both Mandarin and Cantonese — and, indeed, speakers of any spoken Chinese language who are educated to literacy in Chinese.
9/
But note that the MSWC form of the sentence aligns with the spoken Mandarin exactly.
Mandarin reading of MSWC: Tā chī de bǐ wǒ kuài.
Ordinary spoken Mandarin sentence meaning the same thing: Tā chī de bǐ wǒ kuài.
10/
Thought of another way: if a Mandarin speaker reads the written sentence aloud, the result is an ordinary sentence of their colloquial speech. If a Cantonese speaker reads the sentence aloud, it is not something you would say in a typical speaking context.
11/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I recently wrote a thread in which I emphasized that spoken Cantonese 🇭🇰 and spoken Mandarin are distinct, non-mutually intelligible spoken languages. (They are two of the several dozen distinctly spoken languages that make up the Chinese language family.)
🧵
I wanted to show in that thread that there is a widely used *written* form of the spoken Cantonese language: Written Cantonese.
It's distinct in grammar and vocabulary from Modern Standard Written Chinese (MSWC), so not fully readable by speakers of other Chinese languages.
One claim I made in the course of that thread was disputed by some Cantonese speakers, particularly those living in Hong Kong. I appreciate the feedback and I’ve been ruminating on their comments.
I know! How about a thread on Written Cantonese? Yes, it’s the written language that is widely used by millions of people but largely invisible outside its community of users!
2/
My first visit to Hong Kong, as a young American with three years of college-level Chinese language study under my belt, was a bit of a shock. Nobody had prepared me for the reality of Written Cantonese. I didn’t know it existed.
1/ In this thread I’m going to talk about a highly unusual syllable gap in Standard Spoken Chinese, aka Modern Standard Mandarin, which is based on (but not identical to) the pronunciation of the Beijing variety of Mandarin.
2/ Sure, you can quibble with what’s been included in and excluded from this chart. Should “kei” be there? Should “den” (cf. dèn 㩐/扽 ‘to yank’) be left out?
We won’t worry about these details today, though they are interesting questions.
3/ The gap that I'm going to talk about is one that I suspect you have never noticed, let alone thought about. The reason I say it’s unusual is that it’s extremely rare in languages around the world. To understand how it got there, we’re going to need a historical perspective.
I can't resist having references to "Out here in the fields" and "Teenage wasteland", but at your request I've made a second version with no distractions:
And yes, it's very strange that Sinologists don't read reconstructions aloud, especially when it comes to medieval poetry. Sound is an integral part of poetry; you'd think scholars of poetics would be falling all over themselves to recite the sounds of the poems as written.
Can you imagine scholars of Old English literature thinking about, talking about, or analyzing Beowulf without reciting it aloud in the original?
Yet that practice is the norm for dealing with ancient Chinese poetry. I've never understood it. Perhaps it's a failure of my field
I’ve worked up a minute-long video recitation of a brief passage from the 3rd-century BCE Shāng Jūn Shū 商君書 (Book of Lord Shang) to try to give a feel for what the language might have sounded like around the time these words were first written. 1/
For the content, I chose the first few sentences from Chapter 2, Kěn Lìng 墾令 (Order to Cultivate Waste Lands), in response to this video and request from @stateswarring . For Old Chinese, I used Axel Schuessler (2009). 2/
I often recommend Schuessler’s “Minimal Old Chinese” reconstruction system to students of ancient China who aren’t specialists in historical phonology. It’s based on the framework of William Baxter’s influential 1992 Old Chinese, but strives to be less speculative. 3/