What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Discussions on the Hokkien (Minnan) language.
SimL
Posts: 1407
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:33 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by SimL »

Ah-bin wrote:Not at all! If liáu doesn’t cause sandhi, kà(u) will sound exactly the same as kā(u)...
Yes, indeed it would. But for my particular pronuncation, I pronounce it "ka1_liau2" (sandhi-tone written for first syllable), not "ka3_liau2". In other words, my first syllable of ka-liau is identical in pronuncation to "ka1" (= "to cut with scissors").

I think that is what caused amhoanna some puzzlement a few replies back.

Could you listen out for the tone of this first syllable in your podcasts... I don't recall people saying "ka3_liau" in my youth.
amhoanna
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by amhoanna »

This kaliau thing totally confuses me.

My Hoklosense says "ka" should be in its running tone. This "liau" is not the sentence final particle "liau".

Yet, if it's T3, then its RT would be high-level.

But Sim says its tone is actually mid-level.

So ... it's not the same "ka", but a different one? Or maybe the same "ka", after a tone mutation?

Goá thàuté hoe kà liáu ·a.
Ah-bin
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:10 am
Location: Somewhere in the Hokloverse

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by Ah-bin »

This "liáu" is not the sentence final particle "liau".
Ah, yes! It is the verb meaning 'to finish', in which case the rules might be different and the relevant question is not about whether the liáu makes verbs sandhi or not, but rather whether or not kàu sandhis when placed directly in front of other verbs.

In 'phah kàu sí' (beat to death) does the kàu sandhi or not? I don't remember hearing this sort of construction without a pronoun separating the kàu from the verb 'phah kàu i sí' (beat him to death) in which the kàu would not sandhi.
Yet, if it's T3, then its RT would be high-level.
Penang 'high level' is quite low at 33 (as opposed to TW 'high level' which is nearer to 55) and low level (ā and à) are something like 21, much closer in Penang Hokkien than the difference between TW 55 and 33/21. so I could just be mishearing it. I've never heard you speak, but if you are using a Taiwanese accent to pronounce your words, then I guess the difference between 'kā-liáu' and 'kà-liáu' will be much more extreme than in PGHK, and it is therefore more important that you know whether it is 3 or 1 in the first syllable.

This sort of thing gives me a headache too, so I avoid it by sticking firmly to one variety and learning and using only the words from that variety in the context of that variety. I've been a bit slow to realise, but Amhoanna, is it right to say that you are aiming at learning a larger inclusive unified sort of Hokkien that includes all the riches of the different varieties? That's a much better ambition i think than a narrow standard that excludes anything not from Amoy, as it makes everyone happy. The reason why i try to stick to Penang only (even avoiding conversations in Taiwanese) is partly out of fondness and partly because there is still no good record of the language, and I don't want to go injecting bits and pieces of non-Penang Hokkien into my final description.
SimL
Posts: 1407
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:33 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by SimL »

Ah-bin wrote:In 'phah kàu sí' (beat to death) does the kàu sandhi or not? I don't remember hearing this sort of construction without a pronoun separating the kàu from the verb 'phah kàu i sí' (beat him to death) in which the kàu would not sandhi.
Spot on question! Half the art of good linguistics is finding the right test-cases :mrgreen:.

Indeed, the most normal way to say it is with the "i". But *if* one leaves it out - and, to me, it doesn't sound wrong without the "i", just not what one would 'normally say' - then the "kau" does sandhi. Which helps to support the idea that "ka-liau" might indeed be an elided form of "kau-liau", with "liau" being a full verb.

Nice.
amhoanna
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by amhoanna »

Which helps to support the idea that "ka-liau" might indeed be an elided form of "kau-liau", with "liau" being a full verb.
Not sure if this applies here, but kàu regularly elides to kà in Formosan Hoklo. In a lot of contexts, unelided kàu sounds weird to me and might even be incorrect.
I've never heard you speak, but if you are using a Taiwanese accent to pronounce your words, then I guess the difference between 'kā-liáu' and 'kà-liáu' will be much more extreme than in PGHK, and it is therefore more important that you know whether it is 3 or 1 in the first syllable.
People who hear me speak usually think I'm from somewhere else. TWnese usually think I have a Malayan sound, Malayans think I'm from Taiwan or some other island in Nusantara, and Hokkienese think I'm from Kwongtung. :lol:

Now, I think the tone band in TWnese Hoklo (and other dialects too, inc. Amoy) is actually pretty narrow, and subjectively low. My impression of PgHK is that it goes pretty high. Then again, I still can't tell who's a native spkr vs who's speaking it with a Teochew or Canto lilt. All I know is that I always have to remind myself to squash my tone band when I speak Hoklo. In Amoy and TW, it can be the difference btw people switching to Mandarin on me or not! Day and night.
This sort of thing gives me a headache too, so I avoid it by sticking firmly to one variety and learning and using only the words from that variety in the context of that variety. I've been a bit slow to realise, but Amhoanna, is it right to say that you are aiming at learning a larger inclusive unified sort of Hokkien that includes all the riches of the different varieties? That's a much better ambition i think than a narrow standard that excludes anything not from Amoy, as it makes everyone happy.
Well, Ah-bin, U're sticking to one dialect (actually two) for the sake of mastering it and describing it. That's probably necessary. Yeah, I do subscribe to a unified theory of Hokkien-Teochew! In TW and Amoy I feel constrained to use the localized Hoklo that I've learned. I always feel set free in MY and even SG to talk Hoklo any damn way I see fit. I'm driven by aesthetic urges and by ideology as well. I won't argue with Freud here. The Hoklo urge is tied to the sex drive for me. :mrgreen: For me, no dialect of Hoklo is less sexy than TWnese, with its clipped cadences, Japanese influences e.g. overuse of Tng 唐 literary readings and lack of female spkrs of childbearing age. :lol: If some people ever read this and get offended, good! Things didn't have to be this way.
AndrewAndrew
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:26 am

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by AndrewAndrew »

amhoanna wrote:
Which helps to support the idea that "ka-liau" might indeed be an elided form of "kau-liau", with "liau" being a full verb.
Not sure if this applies here, but kàu regularly elides to kà in Formosan Hoklo. In a lot of contexts, unelided kàu sounds weird to me and might even be incorrect.
This is the same in Pg Hokkien also. All the "[adj] ka-be [vb]", such as "phainn-khoann ka-be si", "phainn-lim ka-be au" would sound weird with kau. Even when it is not elided but is left hanging, such as "I pui ka ..." ("He is so fat (that) ..."
amhoanna
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by amhoanna »

I was gonna ask, what's that "au"? Then I realized it's probably 嘔 TO THROW UP.

It's cool that "áu" can be used like that in PgHK. A "Macanism", maybe? In TW the common word is thò·. Áu is only used in longer words like áuthò·, which I've never heard used...
niuc
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 3:23 pm
Location: Singapore

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by niuc »

AndrewAndrew wrote:
amhoanna wrote:
Which helps to support the idea that "ka-liau" might indeed be an elided form of "kau-liau", with "liau" being a full verb.
Not sure if this applies here, but kàu regularly elides to kà in Formosan Hoklo. In a lot of contexts, unelided kàu sounds weird to me and might even be incorrect.
This is the same in Pg Hokkien also. All the "[adj] ka-be [vb]", such as "phainn-khoann ka-be si", "phainn-lim ka-be au" would sound weird with kau. Even when it is not elided but is left hanging, such as "I pui ka ..." ("He is so fat (that) ..."
Same for my variant. It seems applicable to most (all?) Hokkien variants...
amhoanna wrote: Áu is only used in longer words like áuthò·, which I've never heard used...
I thought áu was never used in my variant. However, my mom says that it is used in one phrase i.e. áu-hông 嘔紅, the euphemism for thò·-huí 吐血.
SimL
Posts: 1407
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:33 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by SimL »

amhoanna wrote:I was gonna ask, what's that "au"? Then I realized it's probably 嘔 TO THROW UP.

It's cool that "áu" can be used like that in PgHK. A "Macanism", maybe? In TW the common word is thò·. Áu is only used in longer words like áuthò·, which I've never heard used...
I missed seeing this when it was first posted. Indeed, "au" *is* the normal word in Penang Hokkien for throwing up; "to feel nauseous" is "ài-áu". I'd even venture to say that many Penang speakers might not even know "thO" (none of my paternal Baba family would have). I think I posted somewhere else that for most of my youth, I thought "áu-lông" (for food that's *really* gone off) was "vomit of a wolf" :mrgreen:, but I now realise that this was silly, because if it had been derived from this meaning, it would probably have been expressed as "lông-áu".
amhoanna
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: What is “Hokkien” (and what is not)?

Post by amhoanna »

Áulỏng? That's great... And it proves that adjective-later word order is still productive in Hokkien, at least for Sim. And for orang Kelate too. At least that's what I've heard.

I've come across the word ảuhỏng too. Can't remember where. Probably some academic paper :lol: I like áu over thò·, but I wouldn't use it in most of Hokloland b/c of the homophony with áu TO FOLD. Aduh.

Speaking of adjectives, did U know that the VNmese word for ADJECTIVE is tính từ 性詞?

In Hoklo, sèngsủ would be so much more thirst-quenching than hẻng'iỏngsủ 形容詞, which is also used in Mand, Jap, and Korean.

It's easy to see why the JMK languages can't use 性詞: they don't have enough contrasts to deal with such simplicity. Such elegance would overwhelm the circuitry of JMK.

But not VNmese. Nor Hoklo.

From now on, I'ma call them sèngsủ 性詞 in Hoklo. Join me if U will, but quickly, before hẻng'iỏngsủ catches on! :lol:

Link to my VNmese "loan idea" spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/a/tawa.asia/spr ... h_TW#gid=0

I don't see any reason not to include other languages, e.g. Canto and the JMK languages. Actually, M is already on there to help people navigate.

Who wants to work on this spreadsheet, when the spirit moves them? Email me.
Locked