It's getting kind of late tonight, so I will keep my post for this topic brief. The subject: How we say "all/everything" in Hokkien.
Singapore: "long cong"
Penang: "ka-liau". I still hear some older folk using "long-cong", Occasionally, I hear "cuan pO' 全部. I sometimes use "cuan pO" in official stuff, as I personally find it more elegant.
Anyone want to help me with the Hanzi? My traditional question!
Penang Hokkien tends to use "ka liau" for just about every context where "all/everything" is implied. My opinion is that it is grammatically incorrect, as "ka liau" should only be used at the end of a verb/action, e.g. co ka-llau (all done), gia ka-liau (everything taken), cau ka-liau (everyone gone).
Although I am compelled by peer pressure to use it as a prefix for nouns, e.g. ka-liau lang (everyone), my opinion is that it is grammatically incorrect - in this case, "long cong" or "cuan pO" should be used. Any opinions?
PS. Sorry to generalise on the geography and demogaphics.
Everyone! Everything!
-
Andrew
-
Sim
Hi Mark and Andrew,
I use both "ta-(ta)" and "ka-liau".
I have always assumed that "ka-liau" was an abbreviated form of "kau1-liau2", i.e. non-sandhi: "kau3" (to reach) and "liau2" (finish). As Mark points out, it could have originated as an adverbial use: "co3(/1) ka(u)1 liau2" (do (until) reach finish = do everything).
This is further supported by the fact that "ta-(ta)" can be used in front of both nouns and noun-substitutes (i.e. measure words / noun classifiers), but "ka-liau" is more limited in its usage.
So, one can say:
... ta-(ta) lang5 [ person, human => everyone, NOUN ]
... ta-(ta) jit8 [ day => every day, NOUN ]
... ta-(ta) mih8 [ thing => everything, NOUN ]
and
... ta-(ta) pun2 [ measure word for books => every book ]
... ta-(ta) ciah7 [ measure word for animals => every animal ]
In contrast, I only know of the use of "ka-liau" in this way for the word "lang5".
... ka-liau lang5 [ => everyone ]
... ?*ka-liau mih8 [ seems a bit unusual ]
... ?*ka-liau jit8 [ seems even more unusual ]
and
... *ka-liau pun2 [ incorrect ]
... *ka-liau ciah7 [ incorrect ]
Further (as Mark said), "ka-liau" can be freely combined with verbs:
... co3(/1) ka-liau (do everything)
... ciah1(/7) ka-liau (eat everything)
... khua*3(/1) ka-liau (see everything)
So the adverbial usage of "ka-liau" is the normal/primary one.
Additional notes:
1. The * in front of a sentence shows a form which is "ungrammatical" / "incorrect". The ?* shows a form which is questionable.
2. With the adverbial usage of ka-liau, I seem to prefer the non-sandhi forms of the verbs. The sandhi-forms don't sound completely wrong, but sound a bit "Amoy" to me. This shows another feature of Penang Hokkien: I get the impression that Penang Hokkien does tone sandhi much less than other forms.
3. ka-liau can be used as a quantifier (i.e. in front of a noun) by adding "e" (the 'possessive/adjectival' particle) to the end:
... ka-liau e lang5
... ka-liau e mih8
... ka-liau e jit8
These all still seem slightly unusual (particularly the last one), but not completely incorrect.
This even more supports Mark's idea that "ka-liau" started out as an adverbial use. For example, in: "i1 kia*5 ti1 lO7-pi*1" (he walked on the side of the road), "ti1 lO7-pi*1" is an adverbial phrase qualifying "kia*5". To turn the adverbial phrase into something which can qualify a noun, i.e. to turn it into an adjective, one adds "e": hit8 e ti1 lO7-pi*1 e lang5" (the 'by-the-side-of-the-road' person).
Regards,
Sim.
I use both "ta-(ta)" and "ka-liau".
I have always assumed that "ka-liau" was an abbreviated form of "kau1-liau2", i.e. non-sandhi: "kau3" (to reach) and "liau2" (finish). As Mark points out, it could have originated as an adverbial use: "co3(/1) ka(u)1 liau2" (do (until) reach finish = do everything).
This is further supported by the fact that "ta-(ta)" can be used in front of both nouns and noun-substitutes (i.e. measure words / noun classifiers), but "ka-liau" is more limited in its usage.
So, one can say:
... ta-(ta) lang5 [ person, human => everyone, NOUN ]
... ta-(ta) jit8 [ day => every day, NOUN ]
... ta-(ta) mih8 [ thing => everything, NOUN ]
and
... ta-(ta) pun2 [ measure word for books => every book ]
... ta-(ta) ciah7 [ measure word for animals => every animal ]
In contrast, I only know of the use of "ka-liau" in this way for the word "lang5".
... ka-liau lang5 [ => everyone ]
... ?*ka-liau mih8 [ seems a bit unusual ]
... ?*ka-liau jit8 [ seems even more unusual ]
and
... *ka-liau pun2 [ incorrect ]
... *ka-liau ciah7 [ incorrect ]
Further (as Mark said), "ka-liau" can be freely combined with verbs:
... co3(/1) ka-liau (do everything)
... ciah1(/7) ka-liau (eat everything)
... khua*3(/1) ka-liau (see everything)
So the adverbial usage of "ka-liau" is the normal/primary one.
Additional notes:
1. The * in front of a sentence shows a form which is "ungrammatical" / "incorrect". The ?* shows a form which is questionable.
2. With the adverbial usage of ka-liau, I seem to prefer the non-sandhi forms of the verbs. The sandhi-forms don't sound completely wrong, but sound a bit "Amoy" to me. This shows another feature of Penang Hokkien: I get the impression that Penang Hokkien does tone sandhi much less than other forms.
3. ka-liau can be used as a quantifier (i.e. in front of a noun) by adding "e" (the 'possessive/adjectival' particle) to the end:
... ka-liau e lang5
... ka-liau e mih8
... ka-liau e jit8
These all still seem slightly unusual (particularly the last one), but not completely incorrect.
This even more supports Mark's idea that "ka-liau" started out as an adverbial use. For example, in: "i1 kia*5 ti1 lO7-pi*1" (he walked on the side of the road), "ti1 lO7-pi*1" is an adverbial phrase qualifying "kia*5". To turn the adverbial phrase into something which can qualify a noun, i.e. to turn it into an adjective, one adds "e": hit8 e ti1 lO7-pi*1 e lang5" (the 'by-the-side-of-the-road' person).
Regards,
Sim.
-
hong
Prof.chiu say usually there are no other noun like tak-mih besides 逐個,逐人,逐i日and for time 逐擺,etc.Sim say ka-liau e mih but I only heard people adding 物件 minnh-kiann and 日子jit-ci.。
Minnan in Klang/Kuala Lumpur don't know long-cong is all but only say Semua.It is listed in putonghua and wu langauges,so we should use it more often.
We can surely use ham-pa-lang for all which is from wu language.It is also used in cantonese.計共=ke-kiong.
There are at least 2 more for total amount in money.合總-hap-cong
總開 for total spending..
過過=全部 is also useful. My grandmother always use this word when it is time for dinner.
Minnan in Klang/Kuala Lumpur don't know long-cong is all but only say Semua.It is listed in putonghua and wu langauges,so we should use it more often.
We can surely use ham-pa-lang for all which is from wu language.It is also used in cantonese.計共=ke-kiong.
There are at least 2 more for total amount in money.合總-hap-cong
總開 for total spending..
過過=全部 is also useful. My grandmother always use this word when it is time for dinner.
Hi, Hong,hong wrote: Minnan in Klang/Kuala Lumpur don't know long-cong is all but only say Semua.It is listed in putonghua and wu langauges,so we should use it more often.
By "...use it more often...", I presume you are referring to "long-cong", not "semua". I have heard "semua" used among Minnan speakers in KL.
"long-cong" is in putonghua? How do you write it? Can't be 隆重, right?
Regards,
Mark
-
Guest
Hi Hong,hong wrote:...Sim say ka-liau e mih but I only heard people adding 物件 minnh-kiann and 日子jit-ci...
Like I said, "these all still seem slightly unusual (particularly the last one), but not completely incorrect".
You're totally correct, only "ka-liau e lang5" is ok. The other two are still slightly strange. And I also agree with you that adding "-kia*" and "-ci" to make them "mi-kia*" and "jit-ci" make them much better.
Many thanks for pointing this out.
Sim.
Oops... missed out "ta-ta" 逐逐. Yes, I use that, too. Though, again here I make a clear distinction when using "ta-ta" and "ka-liau" / "long-cong" / "cuan-pO". For me, "ta-ta" 逐逐 is used in the same way as mui-jit-le 每一個, i.e. "each...".
Grammatically, I feel that in any language, there is a clear difference between the word "each" (implying a distinct identity for each entity considered) and the word "every" (grouping all entities considered collectively). For that matter, even in the Malay language, there is a difference between "tiap-tiap" and "semua". That is how I effect the differentiation.
Grammatically, I feel that in any language, there is a clear difference between the word "each" (implying a distinct identity for each entity considered) and the word "every" (grouping all entities considered collectively). For that matter, even in the Malay language, there is a difference between "tiap-tiap" and "semua". That is how I effect the differentiation.
-
Andrew