Final Particles

[Ah-bin]

I've just started to pick up that the sentence final particle "ni" in Penang Hokkien is not always used like the ne 呢 in Mandarin. In Mandarin it is a question particle meaning "and what about...?" In Penang Hokkien it's also used like this, but it seems to have an additional meaning "and as for...." At least I think that's what it means... or does it connect one sentence with a following sentence?

Anyway, that got me thinking about other particles.

I was thinking what difference these particles make if you add them to 是
是啦 si la! Yes it is! (in disagreement) actually I think there are different pitches of la for different meanings
是啊 si a. (low tone) Yeah, that's right (mild confirmation, agreement)
(high tone) = simple question "is it?"
是囉 si lo. - not quite sure of the shade of meaning this conveys - perhaps "It's like this you know?"
是咩 si me "Is it really?" (this one may be from Cantonese, but it's very useful)
I can't imagine what 是呢 would mean,. but I think I've heard it.
是hohN/haHN "Isn't it?" (casually)

I'm not really sure if I have them right, or whether some are missing.

These are very difficult to sort out, but they make a big difference for expressive speaking, as they take the place of intonations in non-tonal languages.

I'd be very interested to hear how they would change a sentence like:
唔是汝个 "It's not yours"
If added to the end.

Thanks for any comments about these.

[niuc]

Hi Ah-bin

Your observation is interestingly true. In my variant 呢 is also 'ni1', but as a sentence particle usually it becomes 'le1' -> 汝呢? 'ly2 le1?' (How about you?).

唔是汝个 "It's not yours"
唔是汝个啦 -> It's not yours! (or "Come on, it's not yours" -> much milder, may be joking, depends on the way it is spoken)
唔是汝个啊 -> Yeah (true), it's not yours.
唔是汝个囉 -> It's just not yours!
唔是汝个咩 -> Is it really not yours?
唔是汝个hor*2 -> It's not yours, is it?
唔是汝个呢? (doesn't sound possible for me, including 是呢)
汝个呢? ly2 e5 le1? How about yours? (or: Where is yours?)

[Ah-bin]

Wow, thanks Niuc, this is just the sort of thing I was looking for!

Even Bodman doesn't go into particles very much, only ni/le a little.

I saw this huge long list in an old Cantonese textbook which consisted of 係 plus all sorts of particles, but the definitions were in Nineteenth Century English "I say it is indeed the case" etc.

To speak any kind of Sinitic language well, it is essential to have a working knowledge of particles. Of course, for native speakers or those with a passive knowledge by listening, it is easy. If you come from language where everything is done by intonation on the concrete vocabulary it is a lot more difficult. It's actually quite difficult to represent in text too... that is probably why there are so many of these used nowadays....

[niuc]

Hi Ah-bin

You're welcome. I agree with you that it must be not easy for non native. Even for native speaker, it is easier to listen than to read, because different intonation does change the meaning.
E.g. 唔是汝个啊 (a7 in my variant) -> Yeah (true), it's not yours.
唔是汝个啊 (a0 in my variant) -> Is it not yours? (surprised)
唔是汝个hor*2 -> It's not yours, is it? (looking for agreement)
唔是汝个hor*5 -> It's not yours, OK? (reminding); It's not your, right? (sarcastic, when someone doesn't admit of owning the thing).

Another "final particle" in my variant is 'mi0' (neutral tone), actually a contraction of 'm7-si7' 不是(唔是).
汝个mi0 -> It's yours, isn't it?
唔是汝个mi0 -> It's not yours, is it?
汝唔是講此本唔是汝个mi0 -> Didn't you say that this [book] was not yours, did you?

[SimL]

Hi Ah-bin and niuc.

Yes, great topic. You've managed to "feel" the subtle meaning of these particles quite well, Ah-bin.

My usage is similar to Niuc's, with some differences.

Niuc, how come you're writing hor*? It that your convention of hO*, the open-o? Or have Bagan Hokkien speakers acquired an -r- sound .

I have two 啊:
- "a1" (mid-high level) 唔是汝个啊1: "It's not yours!" (Re-emphasizing something which should be known or obvious to both speaker and listener, perhaps with some indignation on the part of the speaker - "m-si lu-e a1, lu an-cuaN teh lai iong." (= "It's not yours, how could you take it and use it!")
- "a3/7" (low level) 唔是汝个啊3/7: "It's not yours?" (Expressing surprise, "I thought it was!")

I have two 啦:
- "la2" (high, perhaps slightly falling) 唔是汝个啦2: "So, it's not yours!" (with some explanation preceding this phrase, like: "wa ca-huiN hO lu cap-khO-gin, so hit-pun cheh m-si lu e la!" (= "I gave you 10 dollars yesterday, (so I've more or less covered the cost of the book), so it's not yours (any more)". Perhaps similar to the one Ah-bin gives as "lo". It's used to show that the phrase is the conclusion which can be drawn from some logical thought process, without the listener necessarily being expected to have drawn the conclusion in the past, but where the listener is now being invited to see the obviousness of that conclusion.
- "la3/7" (low level) 唔是汝个啦3/7: "(It should be obvious to you that / I've reminded you a couple of times in the past already that) it's not yours." (With perhaps a hint of impatience or annoyance on the part of the speaker).

I have a high, slightly falling tone for 咩, and it's definitely "mE" not "me". When I was on holiday in KL last December, I noticed that the friend I was visiting also uses "mE", not "me" for this particle, even though he's not a speaker of non-Penang Hokkien. I think this "mE" is quite widespread in Malaysian Hokkien, even among speakers who don't have "E" in other words. 唔是汝个咩2? "Isn't it yours? I have thought all along that it was!" (I.e. expressing surprise that something is or isn't the case). Note that it's not just only for 'negative' sentences; it can also be used for 'positive' sentences: "lu be khi mE?" (= "Are you going? I thought you couldn't stand those sorts of holidays! / I thought you couldn't stand that guy, who's also going!").

As a phrase-final particle, I only have "ha(h)N3/7" and "hO(h)N3/7" (I tend to drop or not have an -h- in both). They're particles affirming or emphasising the truth of what was said. I think the Buddhist monk who gives those lectures available on the internet uses these a lot. These seem to be to be interchangable, not much difference in meaning. They can also be used stand-alone as "yes", with "ha(h)N3/7" being perhaps more common as a stand-alone "yes".

But I also have "haN5" and "hON5" (low rising tone), and here the usage is different.

- haN5: cannot be used phrase finally, just as an independent exclamation of surprise or doubt, only at the beginning of a phrase. "haN5? i mana u kau lui thang be an-nE tua keng e chu" (= "Huh? Where would he have enough money to buy such a big house?"). It can be used preceding phrases having the second 啊 above: "haN5, 唔是汝个啊3/7?" (= "Huh? Isn't it yours? I thought it was"). As far as I can see, in usage it matches exactly English "huh?".

- hON5: can only be used phrase finally, to ask for confirmation of something the speaker expects the listener to know to be true. "Lu ma-cai be khi ka lang, hON5?" (= "You're coming with us tomorrow, aren't you? (that's what we've all assumed all along / you said you would two weeks ago / etc).")

Hope this helps. I'll cover "ni" in a later reply.

[SimL]

I have three usages of "ni2".


1. It is used in a similar way to the Mandarin "ne0" - most commonly used in "汝呢?" (= "what about you?"). However, in my Hokkien, I quite regularly say "伊呢?" (= "what about him/her?"). I haven't come across "他呢?" that much in my Mandarin language texts, but that could be just limited exposure on my part.


2. It is used to emphasize hypothetical situations begun with "na7" or "na7-si7", where a pre-condition to the hypothetical situation is also stated (which sort of forms a 'conclusion'). E.g. "i na-(si) be khi ni2, i tioh be heng wa lui thau-seng." (= "If he/she wants to go, then he/she has to pay me back the money first."). I can't detect that much difference in meaning in this sentence with or without the "ni2". Perhaps adding it makes it more hypothetical, or emphasizes the IF/THEN nature of the utterance:

[WITHOUT] - "i na-(si) be khi, i tioh be heng wa lui thau-seng." (= "If he/she wants to go, he/she has to pay me back the money first.")

[WITH] - "i na-(si) be khi ni2, i tioh be heng wa lui thau-seng." (= "IF he/she wants to go, THEN he/she has to pay me back the money first.")


3. It is used to emphasize that something is the logical reason for something else. E.g. "i tong-kim cin-nia khiam - mai khai-lui, in-ui i mE-ni be khi eng-kok ciah-hong ni2". (= "he/she's being very careful with his/her money at the moment, doesn't want to spend it on anything, because he/she wants to go for a holiday to England next year.")

Again, I can't detect that much difference in meaning in this sentence with or without the "ni2". Perhaps something like:

[WITHOUT] - "i tong-kim cin-nia khiam - mai khai-lui, in-ui i mE-ni be khi eng-kok ciah-hong". (= "he/she's being very careful with his/her money at the moment, doesn't want to spend it on anything, because he/she wants to go for a holiday to England next year.")

[WITH] - "i tong-kim cin-nia khiam - mai khai-lui, in-ui i mE-ni be khi eng-kok ciah-hong ni2". (= "he/she's being very careful with his/her money at the moment, doesn't want to spend it on anything, because he/she wants to go for a holiday to England next year, YOU SEE.")


Perhaps this last one is the one which you're thinking of, Ah-bin?

P.S. When my brothers and I were young, we would speak Hokkien with one another. If one of us said "汝呢?", the other would often reply "Don't call me a 'loony'!"

[SimL]

- haN5: cannot be used phrase finally, just as an independent exclamation of surprise or doubt, only at the beginning of a phrase.

After some reflection, I realised that there is a (quite common) situation where I use "haN5" phrase finally.

- "lang2 tong1-kim1 chut4 khi3 kiaN5(,) haN5" (= "We'll go for a walk now, ok?" / "Let's go for a walk now" / "We should go for a walk now").

It's used for suggesting something, where the speaker indicates that what he/she is suggesting is the thing which he/she definitely wants to do. It is of course quite different from the phrase-initial "haN5", which is the equivalent of English "huh?".

[niuc]

Hi Sim

Niuc, how come you're writing hor*? It that your convention of hO*, the open-o? Or have Bagan Hokkien speakers acquired an -r- sound .

Hehehe, of course no -r- sound lah...
Usually I write it as -o` (following POJ, a dot on right top), but sometimes '-or' (compare to -er for schwa) as it's commonly written that way in Singapore, surely due to "or" and "er" (as in "her") sound in English. If not mistaken, Aokh also writes it that way.

In my variant, 唔是汝个啊 with 'a1' tends to mean "It's not yours anymore!". In this case it should be linked to 了, often 'a0' (neutral tone), but in exclamation mode sometimes it becomes 'a1' -> 來啊 'lai5 a1' -> already came/arrived. Another tone, 'a7' e.g. 來啊 'lai5 a7' can mean either a friendly "OK, come!" or a challange "come if you dare", depends on the context.

[SimL]

Hi niuc,

I know that you mean about the "-or" .

Yes, I can "feel" your meanings, even if I don't use it quite the same way myself. Strange isn't it, how these particles can express so much meaning.

Thanks for the feedback.

[niuc]

Hi Sim

Yes, I can "feel" your meanings, even if I don't use it quite the same way myself. Strange isn't it, how these particles can express so much meaning.

Indeed! Those particles are very expressive. In (informal) Indonesian we also find many expressive final articles e.g. lah, sih, dong, kok, kek, deng, tuh, toh, ah, lho, deh; many of them do not have exact match in Hokkien final particles. So far I never heard of final particles in Malaysian or Singaporean Malay except 'lah'.