>>sandhi tone of 獅 'sai1' (lion) is the tone of 象 'chiu*7' (elephant)
Im happy to see that.... yes.. we also use that.
My explanation on Filipino Hokkien tones are actually the original tones. Our tones for tiger (ho) and horse (be) are really the 1st tone.
But in the word 马车 (be chia)-carriage, our sandhi tone for horse (be) is similar to Mandarin 3rd tone.
When my 3-kim says "gua le kong" (I'm saying) with her Xiamen accent, the "kong" uses the Cantonese mid tone, while Filipino Hokkien tone is like the Mandarin 1st tone.
Thanks for your explanation. It means Filipino Hokkien tones differ a lot from ours. So far I have never heard the merge of 1st and 7th tones in other Hokkien accents. Is it throughout the Philippines? Very interesting indeed
I think that it should be throughout the Philippines. Our Hokkien is standardized. I didnt feel any strange when I speak with my Zamboanga friends or with my Bicolano uncles. Some of my friends that grew up in Iloilo or Isabela have a "huan na" accent though. They sounded like foreigners trying to speak Chinese. hehe
Some variants that I have heard so far in Philippine Hokkiens are:
The interchange of D and L: eg. Di <--> Li
Meat: Mostly 'mah' but others say it as 'bah' and very rarely as 'hiak'
Jade: Giak <--> Giok
Pig: ti, but once ty/ter/t@ from my thesismate.
In my original posting which started this thread, I gave the standard Hokkien sandhi rules, and indicated two of them which did not match how I myself perceived that I spoke Penang Hokkien:
Andrew partially agrees with my perception of (A), and fully agrees with my perception of (B), and the variants he gives are the ones I think of as the ones I use (always nice to have someone independently confirm one's perceptions).
This results in the following set of rules for Penang Hokkien:
[ I post this more for Yisheng's benefit, because he asks in the Philippine Hokkien thread what Penang Hokkien sandhi rules are. I could have replied to his posting there, but thought it might be better to keep my reply in the "sandhi" thread. ]
I know I'm running the risk of bashing my pet theory to death on this Forum, but as a "descriptive linguist", I'll try to explain my point of view one last time.
While not disagreeing with the tone and sandhi analysis of Standard Amoy Hokkien (or any other form of Hokkien for that matter), I have always had the "private theory" that:
1) Penang Hokkien only has 4 tones, and
2) The sandhi rules are relatively simple.
This is how the theory is arrived at.
From my previous post, the sandhi rules for Penang Hokkien appear to be:
Now:
#) (g) and (i) are not longer distinguished as separate rules, because there is no difference between what happens to -h and not-h for tone 4.
#) 3 and 7 sound the same (from other discussions and replies).
#) 8 sounds like 1, except that it ends more abruptly.
#) 4 sounds like 3 and 7 except that it ends more abruptly.
Now:
#) (e) (f) and (h) are also no longer distinguished as separate rules, because there is no difference between what happens to -h and not-h for tone 1/8.
#) (c) and (g+h) are no longer distinguished as separate rules, because there is no difference between the tone contours of 3/4/7.
This leaves actually only 4 distinct tones, with "4 and a half" rules:
Isolation ... Sandhi
Tone ........ Tone
5 ........... 3 [A]
3 ........... 1 , with some exceptions, where 3 ........... 3
2 ........... 1 [C]
1 ........... 3 [D]
The exceptions are the so-called tone-3's which don't change in compounds.
To be honest, I think that is how my version of Penang Hokkien is stored "in my head": I distinguish only 4 tones and I have 4 sandhi rules, with rule B having a list of exceptions.
This is precisely why I used to wonder why most tone-3's changed tone in sandhi, but some, like "tua" (big), didn't.
Ok, that's the last time I'm going to mention tone and sandhi-rule simplification in Penang Hokkien on this Forum!
I don't know are all minnna sects have this kind of 再变调(It was mentioned by Taiwanese prof)。7>3>2or 3>2>1 .
tui 7 hia kiann ,tui should be 3 but people also change to 2 in china.
tua 3=stay,some change to 1 in china.
We have to wait for articles from china. I cannot find any article at this moment.Above examples are from ciangciu in china.
Last edited by ong on Sat Nov 04, 2006 1:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
I have an article by a japanese scholar on Tang uann published 13 years ago. A special sect in 同安 out of six small towns over there,it is called 莲河
There are 阳上 in this sect ，only one 去声 11
1=44(44)
2=53(24)
3=11(53,22)
4=3(5)
5=24(22)
6=21(22)
8=5(3)
There are er,ir in this town,it is not 同安腔。后 ＝hio,口＝khio
I can only find one special word in the 同音字表。busy is muainn24 bo+uainn.
I guess Douglas Tang uann is ainn but this town use uainn 闲。
Thanks a lot for the info. May be because 同安縣 Tang5-ua*1-kuai*7 (Tong-an district) last time was quite big, so there have been several variants/dialects there. There was a time when 廈門 E7-mng5 (Xiamen/Amoy) and 金門 Kim1-mng5 (Kinmen/Quemoy) were under Tang5-ua*1, but now Tang5-ua*1 is under E7-mng5.
My variant of 同安話 Tang5-ua*1-ue7 has different tones for 陰去 (tone 3) and 陽去 (tone 7), each with different sandhi. It has er and ir (y) sounds too, but 后 is ho`7 and 口 is khau2. There is a variant that has 魚 as hu5 but mine is hy5 (hir5). And in mine 閒/閑 is ai*5.
I don't know are all minnna sects have this kind of 再变调(It was mentioned by Taiwanese prof)。7>3>2or 3>2>1 .
This seems not applicable for my dialect. 7>3 is correct but 3>1 or sometimes sound like 3>8. [Tone 8 in my variant may sound like tone 2 in some others, may be that's why.] In my dialect, tone 2 has sandhi that is not found in original tones; it sounds like tone 7 combined with tone 1. So in short, the sandhi for my dialect:
1 -> 7
2 -> [7+1]
3 -> 1 (or 8)
4 -> 8
5 -> 3
[6 = 2]
7 -> 3
8 -> 3 [by right it should be 4 but it sounds more like 3]
Your 8th tone is not the same with us,it is 53 as written in China's book. This is also the case for some cities in taiwan.I think your sandhi for 2 nd tone is just like almost all cuanciu sects ,it is a rising version 阳平 ,maybe people in china is 24 but yours become 233.
I think yours is not 3>8 but just 3>2 since both 8 and 2 are falling .The strange thing is 3 rd tone is 12 and 2 nd tone is only 32 in china's book.
Another thesis 8th tone is 5 .
Last edited by ong on Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
