Basic Minnan/Teochew Grammar

[AndrewAndrew]

M-sai almost always means "you don't have to/ you're not compelled to", as distinct from be-sai "you must not / you are compelled not to", whereas m-bian can "you don't have to" but also simply "don't", like Mandarin 別 or 不要. Whereas as Sim has noted, m-sai in that context would mean "please, you don't have to".

[SimL]

... whereas m-bian can "you don't have to" but also simply "don't", like Mandarin 別 or 不要.

For "stronger" admonitions not to do something I would use "m7-thang1". In my speech, this is frequenty reduced to "mang1" (which sandies to mang7 when the verb is added).

"mang / m-thang jip khi pang-keng, i ti khun" (= "don't go into the room, he's sleeping")
"mang / m-thang ti-ti cha i, i bo eng ka puaN-si" (= "don't keep bothering him, he's busy as hell")

But when it comes to "lighter" forms of don't, I would use "mian":

"ma-cai mian lai" (= "don't come tomorrow" / "you needn't come tomorrow")
"lu chut-khi e si, mui mian kham" (= "when you leave, don't (bother to) close the door")

[amhoanna]

Penang Hokkien seems to be a really "cool" dialect of Hoklo. Everything is said in a very "cool" way. I can see how most speakers wouldn't use a "comic", "funky" word like "oáⁿko", for example.

(True, these kind of observations can be really sìsoàⁿ.)

Here's an interesting thread related to what I said about Canto-Hoklo cognates, in hanji Canto and Mand: http://bbs.cantonese.asia/viewthread.php?tid=25373

[Ah-bin]

Right, I've finally tracked down my grammar notes for Penang Hokkien, and I had noted 知 著 是 敢 and 捌 as five verbs negated with m!

[niuc]

Always fascinating to know what goes on in Bagan Hokkien. It's probably closer to "19th century maritime Hoklo" than any other dialect of Hoklo spoken today, except for the random Thai words.

Probably. Due to Bagansiapiapi being relatively isolated, both transport (the road to other towns was open only in 90s, prior to that all by ships) or media, its variant of Hokkien was barely influenced by others. But now with satellite dishes and Taiwanese tv channels everyday, I think Taiwanese Hokkien may have some impact on it.

Also "ún" for "to look for". I've only read and heard it a few times, and always in the context of looking for work. Cognate with Canto wán, which is the core word for "to search".

Would this "ún" be 允, meaning to promise or to book/reserve instead of to search?

Also Hoklo "mih", Canto "màt". Seems like this is the second morpheme in "símmih" / "siáⁿmih" / "hámih". At least in TW, though, it doesn't seem to conform to tone rules. It's high level when running, and high falling when standing. (Now that I put it that way, maybe it just moved to the imciūⁿ tone...)

In my variant, it is a regular mi8 (mih8), conforms to standing & running tone of "iong5-jip8".

But I recall seeing words like "mihtāi" in writing at some pt. Probably not used in TW. But related to "mei wa".

'Mi8 tai7?' (mi8 in standing tone; short form of 'sim2-mi8 tai7-ci3?'), equivalent to "什麼事?" in Mandarin, is the question used by my paternal relatives, as this is Kim1-mng5-ue7 金門話. Bagan people mostly are from Tang5-ua*1 同安 and usually say 'An3-cua*2?' instead (although ''sim2-mi8 tai7-ci3' is common too). However, in certain context, e.g. instead of asking 什麼事 'sim2-mi8 sy7', "native" Bagan-ue is 'sim2-mi8 tai7-ci3?'

[amhoanna]

Well, the ún I'm talking about definitely has the meaning of "apply for a job", like 見工 kin3-kung1 in Canto, and I think it also has the broader meaning of "look for work" in general. In some dialects, it's ín.

So, Niuc, if I read your post right, your actual tone contours for a phrase like símmih tāicì would be something like 33, 1, 11, 11 (on a 3-level scale)? Or maybe 23, 1, 11, 11?

For me it would be 33, 3, 11, 11.

[niuc]

Hi Amhoanna

允工 'un2-kang1' in Bagan means to look and agree (promise) to take/give a job. The term can be used for both employer and employee. So it may be different from the ún you're referring to.

Our tone 8 is high and short. Using 3 level scale:
sim2/mi8/tai7/ci3 = 1, 3, 22, 11 (each standing tone).
sim2-mi8 tai7-ci3 = 23, 3, 11, 11.

So ours is very similar to yours! But is mih8 by its own, meaning all standing tone of tone 8, also 3 in yours?

Wow, thanks a lot for this 3 level scale. I used to see 5 or 4 level scale and always felt confused. It seems that our tone 1 is really 33 (long Mi) instead of 44 or 55.

Now I can map Bagan Hokkien tones:
Key C = Do = 11
T1: 33 - 22 (standing/ST - running/RT)
T2: 1 - 23
T3: 11 - 3 (RT sounds the same as ST for T8)
T4: 1 - 3 (same ST as T2)
T5: 13 - 11
T6: -> merged to T2
T7: 22 - 11
T8: 3 - 11 (RT sounds the same as ST for T3, not T4)

[Limet]

In Teochew it seems that m and bo are interchangeable for all verbs except for si and u respectively. I agree with the poster that stated that there is a slight difference in meaning in some words (bo jiah - don't eat, m jiah - not willing to eat). As for boi (boe), it is used with adjectives and means not or couldn't/wouldn't, ex:

boi jai - wouldn't/couldn't know (sense of not having the capability to)
bo jai - doesn't know
m jai - doesn't know

In Teochew, mbak, mjai, mgidek (m记得), mhat (to like), and other "thinking" words tend to take m, but bo is also intelligible.

My further question is how the yes/no question structures work. In my Teochew (my family is from Cambodia) we have the following ways to ask yes or no questions.

1 simi ... (a) ?
2 u... (a) bo?
3 oi... (a) boi?

Structure 1 is more like Mandarin shibushi (mi is a contraction of m and si), I'm not sure why I don't use "si... (a) mi", but it sounds a bit odd to me. Do various types of Hokkien allow for this "shibushi" construction? Its strange considering 2 and 3.

[amhoanna]

Niuc,

My ún is probably your ún, and your definition for it probably applies throughout the Hoklosphere. I guess adult learners get thrown by false cognates (to Canto, in this case) pretty easily.

Your mi̍h behaves just like the Taiwanese one. Apparently it's always high-level no matter what. Kind of weird, huh? It doesn't play by the same rules as other question words, e.g. saⁿh, siaⁿh, tó.

Âng Ûijîn (one of TW's leading Hoklologists) has always used the 3-level scale for mainstream Hoklo. He actually discusses it in one of his essays. He says there is no point in having 5 levels if they're not distinct in the language itself. He also mentioned that some dialects of Hoklo have 4 levels. The standard dialects of Cantonese also have 4 levels (but I think KL has three?).

Here are my tones (running-standing):

T1: 22-33
T2: 33-32 (vs. your 23-11)
T3: 31-11 (vs. your 33-11)
T4a: 3-21 (-p/t/k, some -h)
T4b: 31-21 (some -h)
T5: 22-12
T6: merged
T7: 11-22
T8a: 1-2 or 1-3 chìnchái kéng* (-p/t/k)
T8b: 1-2 or 1-32 (-h) chìnchái kéng**
* I associate -3 with old dudes in the south, but I've learned a lot from stuff written by old dudes in the south.
** Most TWese probably aren't so chìnchái, but there are lots of people using either type.

So, T2 and T3 are where we differ. I gotta say your T2 is especially wild. So when you guys say "Sure, alright," it's actually hó with a low tone? That's crazy!

[amhoanna]

Cool. So the TC is very similar. Bô cai has a nice ring to it. I've never heard it in TW.

TW Hoklo allows for the sī m̄ sī construction. In "good" Hoklo, using the sī m̄ sī / sī mī structure means you figure the answer is probably going to be yes.

When there's a real good chance the answer will be no, a common structure is:
... kám ...?

But kám can also be used rhetorically, or to cast doubt on something, so:

Ánne kám ēhù?

Could mean either "Will it be in time?" or "Isn't that too rushed?" or a little of both.

I'd like to hear what Niuc and the Penang crew have to say about kám too. I don't think I've ever heard kám in Sg/M'sia.

Bô doesn't ever seem to be used as a question particle except with ū, but there is sī..bô. Most people say it as hioh. A question can also end in "sī..m̄" or "tio̍h..m̄".