Hi,
I noticed some very curious behaviour of the adjectives "tua7" (big) and "se3" (small) with respect to noun classifiers.
If we take the "general" classifier "e5", we can put any adjective in front of it:
... tua7/3 e5 (a big one)
... se3/1 e5 (a small one)
... Ok7 e5 (a fierce one), ia2 e5 (a wild one)
... i*5 e5 (a round one), pi*2 e5 (a flat one)
... teng5 e5 (a long one), te2 e5 (a short one)
... ang5 e5 (a red one), O1 e5 (a black one), ..., etc
But, if we take very specific classifiers, like "ciah4" (for animals), "liap8" (for roundish objects), "ki1" (stiff, stick-like objects), then only "tua7" and "se3" can be put in front of them.
ciah4:
... tua7/3 ciah4 (a big animal)
... se3/1 ciah4 (a small animal)
but not:
... *Ok7 ciah4 (a fierce animal)
... *ia2 ciah4 (a wild animal)
... *ang5/7 ciah4, *O1/7 ciah, etc (a red, black, etc animal)
liap8:
... tua7/3 liap8 (a big round one)
... se3/1 liap8 (a small round one)
but not:
... *i*5/7 liap8 (a round roundish object - THIS MAKES SENSE, I suppose)
... *pi*2 liap8 (a flat roundish object)
... *ang5/7 liap8, *O1 liap8, etc (a red, black, etc roundish object)
ki1:
... tua7 ki1 (a big stick-like object)
... se3/1 ki1 (a small stick-like object)
but not:
... *teng5/7 ki1 (a long stick-like object)
... *te2 ki1 (a short stick-like object)
... *ang5/7 ki1, *O1 ki1, etc (a red, black, etc stick-like object)
I noticed this a couple of months ago, and thought I'd share it with other members of the Forum. Does Mandarin behave similarly?
Sim.
Curious behaviour of "tua7" and "se3"
-
hong
-
niuc
Hi Sim
Thanks for this topic. I was not aware of this before!
Just now I already wrote several paragraphs about this topic but I hit wrong button and all gone, so I just write the main point here
I think tua7 大 & sue3/se3 小 (big & small) can be used with classifiers because they are about the size. And classifiers are usually about the shape. So it's about the size of the shape i.e. big/small cia4 (shape of animal), big/small liap8 (grain, round shape), etc. While other adjectives such as ok4 惡 (fierce), it's not the shape of animal that is fierce but the animal itself. So we don't say ok8-cia4.
Adjectives about shape such as i*5 圓 & tng5 長 can be used with classifiers. Ok here it's late now, will continue tomorrow.
Thanks for this topic. I was not aware of this before!
Just now I already wrote several paragraphs about this topic but I hit wrong button and all gone, so I just write the main point here
I think tua7 大 & sue3/se3 小 (big & small) can be used with classifiers because they are about the size. And classifiers are usually about the shape. So it's about the size of the shape i.e. big/small cia4 (shape of animal), big/small liap8 (grain, round shape), etc. While other adjectives such as ok4 惡 (fierce), it's not the shape of animal that is fierce but the animal itself. So we don't say ok8-cia4.
Adjectives about shape such as i*5 圓 & tng5 長 can be used with classifiers. Ok here it's late now, will continue tomorrow.
-
hong
-
Sim
Hi Niuc,
Very sorry to hear that you lost a posting. I find it really frustrating when that happens! After I have lost it, I spend a lot of energy trying to "reconstruct" what I said, and it often takes far longer than the original piece I wrote (along with the feeling that what I try to re-capture was never as good as the original version!).
Thanks very much for your analysis. I think it's a very perceptive way of looking at what (on the surface) looks like a strange phenomenon. Certainly classifiers like "liap8" and "ki1" are *entirely* based on shape. I never thought of "ciah4" as being based on shape, but I really like this idea of yours. It suggests that we can view "ciah4" as meaning something like: "(optionally "rectangularish") animal shape".
[This nicely explains why some varieties of Hokkien say "cit4 ciah2 cun5" (though I think in Penang we tend to say "cit4 teng1 cun5") for "one boat/ship" - because it also has a "rectangular-ish animal shape". Before your insight, I used to think it was very strange that "ciah4" was used for "animals, and boats"!]
This way of viewing classifiers also fits "cit4 tiau*7/tiu*7 cua2" (a sheet of paper). I always used to think of this more as a classifier related to the "amount" of (the substance) "paper", parallel to "a bowl of water", "a glass of milk", but using your idea, we can see it as just a shape-related thing too: "flat, flexible, rectangularish" objects.
So, the new idea is that many classifiers can be viewed as shape related, and then the qualifier like "big" or "small" can be applied to the shape, but "fierce" and "wild" cannot be. Great!
This means that we still need to examine "long" and "short" which could also be applied to the shape. You say that can be used with classifiers, but I'm not really aware of that usage (remember, my Hokkien really is quite limited!). I look forward to some examples from your usage where you do this. As I mentioned above, in my version of Penang Hokkien "*teng5/7 ki1" (a long stick-like object) and "*te2 ki1" (a short stick-like object) are not really said.
Thanks again, Niuc,
Sim.
Very sorry to hear that you lost a posting. I find it really frustrating when that happens! After I have lost it, I spend a lot of energy trying to "reconstruct" what I said, and it often takes far longer than the original piece I wrote (along with the feeling that what I try to re-capture was never as good as the original version!).
Thanks very much for your analysis. I think it's a very perceptive way of looking at what (on the surface) looks like a strange phenomenon. Certainly classifiers like "liap8" and "ki1" are *entirely* based on shape. I never thought of "ciah4" as being based on shape, but I really like this idea of yours. It suggests that we can view "ciah4" as meaning something like: "(optionally "rectangularish") animal shape".
[This nicely explains why some varieties of Hokkien say "cit4 ciah2 cun5" (though I think in Penang we tend to say "cit4 teng1 cun5") for "one boat/ship" - because it also has a "rectangular-ish animal shape". Before your insight, I used to think it was very strange that "ciah4" was used for "animals, and boats"!]
This way of viewing classifiers also fits "cit4 tiau*7/tiu*7 cua2" (a sheet of paper). I always used to think of this more as a classifier related to the "amount" of (the substance) "paper", parallel to "a bowl of water", "a glass of milk", but using your idea, we can see it as just a shape-related thing too: "flat, flexible, rectangularish" objects.
So, the new idea is that many classifiers can be viewed as shape related, and then the qualifier like "big" or "small" can be applied to the shape, but "fierce" and "wild" cannot be. Great!
This means that we still need to examine "long" and "short" which could also be applied to the shape. You say that can be used with classifiers, but I'm not really aware of that usage (remember, my Hokkien really is quite limited!). I look forward to some examples from your usage where you do this. As I mentioned above, in my version of Penang Hokkien "*teng5/7 ki1" (a long stick-like object) and "*te2 ki1" (a short stick-like object) are not really said.
Thanks again, Niuc,
Sim.
-
hong
I think everyone in North Malaysia know how to say te ki cha5 材。
隻 used for plane is by wu and min language based on imagination because it looks like bird. It is a classiffier for animal 飛禽走獸 in minnan like mandarin.It has nothing to do with shape for minnan if I am not wrong .mandarin can say 一只箱子。 隻=只 in mandarin but it has a ci2 sound in minnan.we can only say cit le siunn =a box /or khia1(奇) siunn in minnan.
I hope Mark is not confused by Sim saying tiaunn for 張=一張紙。It is a mistake for North Malaysian until my sister was asked to explain what kind of sound is that in Taiwan.Just say tiunn/tionn1 will do.
There are too many classifier we don't know how to use
攬=lam2﹐聲=siann1,味=bi7.
隻 used for plane is by wu and min language based on imagination because it looks like bird. It is a classiffier for animal 飛禽走獸 in minnan like mandarin.It has nothing to do with shape for minnan if I am not wrong .mandarin can say 一只箱子。 隻=只 in mandarin but it has a ci2 sound in minnan.we can only say cit le siunn =a box /or khia1(奇) siunn in minnan.
I hope Mark is not confused by Sim saying tiaunn for 張=一張紙。It is a mistake for North Malaysian until my sister was asked to explain what kind of sound is that in Taiwan.Just say tiunn/tionn1 will do.
There are too many classifier we don't know how to use
攬=lam2﹐聲=siann1,味=bi7.
-
Sim
Hi Hong,hong wrote:...
I hope Mark is not confused by Sim saying tiaunn for 張=一張紙。It is a mistake for North Malaysian until my sister was asked to explain what kind of sound is that in Taiwan.Just say tiunn/tionn1 will do. ...
I think many Penang people use "tiau*1/tiaunn1" (do you Mark?). Does this have a different hanzi from the "tiunn/tionn1" which you give, or are they both 張 and are you just saying that you disagree with the "-u" in "tiau*" and want Penang people to say it with "-o"?
Regards,
Sim.