Hello, everyone!
I have been reading all the interesting forums on the Hokkien dialect on this website, and decided I should take the plunge and sign up!
I was born and bred in Petaling Jaya, but spent 6 years of my working life in Penang. It was there that I first picked up the Hokkien dialect. The whole idea of a Chinese dialect surviving so well despite a total lack of education and media support (compared to Cantonese) impressed me, and I committed myself to learning the dialect to the best of my ability (to the extent that I can now speak it far better than my native Fui Chew Hakka!).
My experience with the Penang Hokkien dialect led me to two distinct groups of speakers - those who speak the dialect with minimum code-switching between Mandarin/English, and those who code-switch heavily. Being a puritan linguist at heart, I sought out the former group in attempt to learn the dialect in its so-called "pure" form. And my quest led me to compiling my own Penang Hokkien dictionary - the difference between mine and Tan Choon Hoe's highly commendable effort (apart from mine never having reached the print shop!) is that I tried wherever possible to include the Hanzi for all words and phrases learnt.
This long exercise led me to the conclusion that contrary to popular belief, the Penang Hokkien dialect as spoken by the above-mentioned group, can and should be preserved in written Hanzi form.
For instance, most of today's generation of Penangites use the English word "start" without realising that there exists a direct Hokkien equivalent for 開始, i.e. "khai3 see1" (I know a Penangite friend who uses this term extensively). On the other hand, a native Penang Hokkien friend of mine (non-Chinese educated) knows the phrase "iu han kong si" (有限公司) as "company" by heart, without realising that "han" 限 in itself can stand alone as a word meaning "limit" - the irony is, she resorts to code-switching "oo limit" when the need to use the word "limit" arises. The point is that without congruency between the spoken and written words, the preservation of vocabulary hangs solely on oral transmission and rote learning, and eventually lost over successive generations.
The difficulty in setting the Hokkien dialect in writing stems mainly from the different words used that no longer belong to the common putonghua vocabulary, e.g. "晡" (sunset) in "下晡" (下午) and "埔"(field/grounds) in "草埔" (草場). But the beauty is that words with their origins in Classical Chinese are perfectly fossilised in their original Hanzi forms. (This begs the implication that Hokkien as written in Hanzi can only make sense if written in wenyan, or highly compacted putonghua - an assertion that I shall reserve for another thread.)
I am sure many Chinese educated Penang Hokkiens are unaware that the phrase "男女平等" renders itself directly and correctly into Hokkien as "lam3 lu4 peng3 teng4". On that account, I have to totally disagree with Lewis (1994) that Penang Hokkien "...is not a language to be used for intellectual abstraction...". The reason is simply because the general speaker has a limited vocabulary, and this stems from a lack of preserved literature. If such an uncommon word as "蔡" can be rendered into the Hokkien pronunciation Chua (a very common Min surname), my take is that abstraction is hardly an issue. While it is true that not all words in Hokkien can be rendered into Hanzi, the reverse is not true - all Hanzi words can be rendered into a Hokkien pronunciation - 有字必有本.
Could the Penang Hokkien words for "who", i.e. "chi chui", be really be "孰誰", the 孰 being "which" in Classical Chinese? Is the "bin" in "bin ch'ng" (bed) really "眠" (sleep), i.e. 眠床 - all synonyms, including"kun" 睏 now reduced to simply 睡 in putonghua? The Min dialect has nicely preserved the single word "tu" 箸 for chopsticks, now superceded in putonghua by the later-developed bi-syllabic "筷孖".
Point to note: Mathews' Chinese-English dictionary suggests that the "dei" in "ngo dei" (we) in Cantonese is not "地" as is commonly used in colloquial Cantonese writing in Hong Kong, but "等" (which, apart from "wait" also means "plural" or "etc."), with the final -ng disappearing over time.
While I agree with a comment placed by someone in this forum that colloquial terms that cannot be written in Hanzi inevitably crop up in everyday conversation, there is no reason why the literal equivalents cannot be set down in writing. The same analogy can be drawn with Cantonese in Hong Kong - scores of English loan words abound in Hong Kong Cantonese, yet it remains the bastion of the Cantonese-speaking world.
Where am I going with all this, then? In a word, posterity. While there are practical reasons behind the promotion of Mandarin, the preservation of the migrant dialects - the true "mother tongues" - are being lost. I agree that languages evolve naturally, and loan words form part of that natural process. But if that "natural process" of taking in foreign loan words is a result of the lost/forgotten proper Hokkien words due to general apathy, then it is really sad.
Like the other dialects, Hokkien has suffered degeneration to the status of "lower class Chinese" in relation to Mandarin, where it once stood on equal footing with Mandarin as a dialect before the turn of the century. In that sense, I disagree with the catch phrase Singapore uses in promoting Mandarin, i.e. "Speak Mandarin, Not Dialect" - call me rebel/oddball, but to me, Mandarin will always be a dialect, no better or worse than the others. It achieved ascendency as a written and spoken standard in China by majority and political push forces, nothing more. I know I go against the tide of practicality when I assert that the one true "standard Chinese" will always be wenyan.
Recently, I saw on a billboard advertisement in Kuala Lumpur, which read "stail, kualiti" - whatever happened to perfectly good Malay words as "gaya, mutu"?
I know I have left this topic open-ended. I hope to add more to it over time. In the meantime, I welcome comments. I am no linguist, but I am an enthusiast... and a keen learner.
PS. I am aware that my article above speaks mainly about Penang Hokkien. My bias stems partly from my personal contact with this branch of the dialect, and also from the fact that Penang Hokkien appears to suffer more siege as an "unpure" variant of Hokkien owing to its extensive stock of loan words from Malay, Thai and English. It is not my intention to exclude the other sub-dialects of Hokkien, and most (if not all) of the above points hold for them, too.
Cheers,
Mark
Preserving Hokkien in written form
-
Andrew
Mark,
Welcome to the board. I look forward to seeing excerpts of your compilation, although I am surprised that you consider Tan Choon Hoe's book to be excellent. I have not seen the book myself, but judging from the excerpts cited in http://thepenangfileb.bravepages.com/au ... 2023-1.htm , the author has either a very bad ear or a very lazy orthography. Unfortunately most Penangites have not learnt any of the systematic romanisation systems such as the missionary romanisation that is used by most people on this board.
A.
Welcome to the board. I look forward to seeing excerpts of your compilation, although I am surprised that you consider Tan Choon Hoe's book to be excellent. I have not seen the book myself, but judging from the excerpts cited in http://thepenangfileb.bravepages.com/au ... 2023-1.htm , the author has either a very bad ear or a very lazy orthography. Unfortunately most Penangites have not learnt any of the systematic romanisation systems such as the missionary romanisation that is used by most people on this board.
A.
-
hong
two comments,
Khai-si for start is not chinese but japanese loan word as mentioned by Mr.Ong from Taiwan.It should be chhim-thau,chhann,etc in minnan.
Buy taiwanese dict ,you will find shu 孰 is siok and chia.There are some taiwanese use chia for who.
誰has a baidu cui .cicui is only use by some xiamen. Most xiamen people use siang like chuanchiu.They use siang a lot in xiamen news from China.
chuanchiu city people use siong a while yongchun use tiang.Chiangchiu use cua and ti cua.
However,north malaysian use a self invented word ha mi lang joint become ha mang.
ha mi is from Longhai ann become ha for what.Some guys just add minnh at the back like sim minnh.
South malaysians are wrong as well because as a yongchun they use only siang but no tiang.
Khai-si for start is not chinese but japanese loan word as mentioned by Mr.Ong from Taiwan.It should be chhim-thau,chhann,etc in minnan.
Buy taiwanese dict ,you will find shu 孰 is siok and chia.There are some taiwanese use chia for who.
誰has a baidu cui .cicui is only use by some xiamen. Most xiamen people use siang like chuanchiu.They use siang a lot in xiamen news from China.
chuanchiu city people use siong a while yongchun use tiang.Chiangchiu use cua and ti cua.
However,north malaysian use a self invented word ha mi lang joint become ha mang.
ha mi is from Longhai ann become ha for what.Some guys just add minnh at the back like sim minnh.
South malaysians are wrong as well because as a yongchun they use only siang but no tiang.
-
hong
-
hong
-
Guest
Just curious... what are the Hanzi for "chhim-thau" and "chhann"? I would like to look them up in 康熙.hong wrote:two comments,
Khai-si for start is not chinese but japanese loan word as mentioned by Mr.Ong from Taiwan.It should be chhim-thau,chhann,etc in minnan.
Since 開始 is a Japanese loan word, does it mean that the Chinese dialects (Mandarin, Cantonese, etc.) borrowed it from Japanese, and it is now part of putonghua?
Since "ha mi" and "sim minnh" are not of the same Hanzi origin, is it pssoble then that "ha mi" is 何物 (which means "what" in wenyan)?hong wrote: ha mi is from Longhai ann become ha for what.Some guys just add minnh at the back like sim minnh.
South malaysians are wrong as well because as a yongchun they use only siang but no tiang.
I never really figured this out: What is "tiang"/"siang" in Hanzi? Some people told me it is a fusion of "sia-lang" 誰儂, but I find that impossible to believe, since "cui" and "sia" are phonetically too different.
Hi, Andrew,
Thanks for your words of encouragement. I will find some time to dig out my old files and post them piece-meal on this forum (I wrote them using NJStar v4.2, so I will need some time with the file migration).
I do agree that Tan Choon Hoe's book has some linguistic flaws. In my opinion, the three obvious ones are:
1. His assertion that Penang Hokkien has no written form. This point, of course, is open to argument, given the significant stock of non-Chinese loan words. However, the bulk of the words are still of Hanzi origin, and these are what I am referring to.
2. As you correctly point out, his phonetics are somewhat inconsistent (I think he was trying to make it simpler for the foreign reader by using words in English that approximate in sound to the Hokkien words).
3. Too much use of English loan words, where the Hokkien equivalent not only exists, but is in general use.
My reason for commending his effort is simply because he has pioneered the effort in committing this unique sub-dialect of Hokkien to writing. Further improvements, of course, are in order, but it is still a nice first step!
My copy of it is replete with pencil markings of the Hanzi characters. As a cross-reference, I use the 2-volume "Amoy Hokkien" written by Nicholas Bodman (available via Amazon), and a book called "廈門方言志".
By the way, a little-known but excellent bookstore in Kuala Lumpur that stocks good Chinese dialect books is this shop on the 2nd floor, 3 doors to the right of the McDonalds in Jalan Silang (behind Kota Raya).
Thanks for your words of encouragement. I will find some time to dig out my old files and post them piece-meal on this forum (I wrote them using NJStar v4.2, so I will need some time with the file migration).
I do agree that Tan Choon Hoe's book has some linguistic flaws. In my opinion, the three obvious ones are:
1. His assertion that Penang Hokkien has no written form. This point, of course, is open to argument, given the significant stock of non-Chinese loan words. However, the bulk of the words are still of Hanzi origin, and these are what I am referring to.
2. As you correctly point out, his phonetics are somewhat inconsistent (I think he was trying to make it simpler for the foreign reader by using words in English that approximate in sound to the Hokkien words).
3. Too much use of English loan words, where the Hokkien equivalent not only exists, but is in general use.
My reason for commending his effort is simply because he has pioneered the effort in committing this unique sub-dialect of Hokkien to writing. Further improvements, of course, are in order, but it is still a nice first step!
My copy of it is replete with pencil markings of the Hanzi characters. As a cross-reference, I use the 2-volume "Amoy Hokkien" written by Nicholas Bodman (available via Amazon), and a book called "廈門方言志".By the way, a little-known but excellent bookstore in Kuala Lumpur that stocks good Chinese dialect books is this shop on the 2nd floor, 3 doors to the right of the McDonalds in Jalan Silang (behind Kota Raya).
-
hong
We must use Kangxi dict with books like taiyudazidian to find out the words.Do you know where they put xiao in minnan in this dict?Without their help,it is impossible.
There will not be a hanzi for hann /ha minnh because ann in longhai is drop of the s in sann 啥。
Yongchun tiang is 底+儂.The rest is 啥+lang.
ci cui.是誰
ci is 是or 巳baidu.I don't know for sure.
何ho and ua。 更king,kinn all do not match the sound.
There will not be a hanzi for hann /ha minnh because ann in longhai is drop of the s in sann 啥。
Yongchun tiang is 底+儂.The rest is 啥+lang.
ci cui.是誰
ci is 是or 巳baidu.I don't know for sure.
何ho and ua。 更king,kinn all do not match the sound.