Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is completely wrong...Do not listen to this person. I have studied Chinese my entire life and I can assure you, tones are extremely important. Tones are not "dropped", even in fast speech. The problem is actually that the above poster cannot hear them. This idea, that tones are not important, is an extremely widespread misconception, and as I see it, relates to three factors: 1) the general poor quality of weste…
"This is completely wrong" "Do not listen to this person." Please tone down a bit. Moreover, I agree with grand-parent: tones should not be held as the most important part when studying Mandarin. It is not. Tones are completely different from one part of China to the other. In Sichuanhua, a horse is MA4 (down), while it is MA3 (down-up) in Beijinghua and in Putonghua. Quite the opposite. Beside these differences, Sic…
Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
41–50 of 58 posts
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is completely wrong...Do not listen to this person. I have studied Chinese my entire life and I can assure you, tones are extremely important. Tones are not "dropped", even in fast speech. The problem is actually that the above poster cannot hear them. This idea, that tones are not important, is an extremely widespread misconception, and as I see it, relates to three factors: 1) the general poor quality of weste…
"This is completely wrong" "Do not listen to this person." Please tone down a bit. Moreover, I agree with grand-parent: tones should not be held as the most important part when studying Mandarin. It is not. Tones are completely different from one part of China to the other. In Sichuanhua, a horse is MA4 (down), while it is MA3 (down-up) in Beijinghua and in Putonghua. Quite the opposite. Beside these differences, Sic…
Why does it matter if you ever cared about tones or not? I would take the word of someone who is actually fluent in the language, personally.
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
British English uses a hell of a lot of implicit meanings, though this is declining with the rise of both modern soundbite politics forcing public discourse to be more literal, which also combines with public discourse being less implicit to benefit a more multicultural society. Nuance takes a long time to learn, and it's easy to take things the wrong way if you don't have heavy experience with it. I don't speak Viet…
Can you give some examples of implied meanings in British/Australian English? As an native American English speaker, I've never had this opinion of British/Australian English. I mean, I do feel that Americans are more straightforward, whereas the British are rather reticent. But I don't think this is extensively reflected via linguistic differences.
hrm
a classic example of implied (but not really) is cockney rhyming slang
... but really it's about reading between the lines. I can recall the point when I realised that the 'old way' of implied speech was dead in public discourse with this article
http://blogs.smh.com.au/thedailytruth/archives/2006/11/dirty...
It's not going to make a lot of sense out of context. In context, it was an article that came out when a superstar athlete in swimming, a national hero, announced his retirement, and the media pundits were basically of the opinion that he was somehow being a traitor to Australia.
This article is lampooning the slavering media, not the athlete. To someone brought up with classic Australian English (similar in nuance to British), it's blisteringly obvious what this article is getting at by halfway through the second sentence. As in, 'it's not worth pointing out' obvious. I thought the article was tedious and waaaaay too long, but the premise was funny.
What was scary was that only about 10% of the people commenting understood what the article was about - the rest completely missed the point, thinking that this was another article calling the athlete a traitor, and rushing to his defense. The article was actually saying "leave the athlete alone, damn the media are reactionary idiots".
Like I said, you'll read it now and it'll probably seem more obvious out of context.
Examples are kind of hard to come up with off the cuff, so what other examples... When we first started watching 30 Rock, we were fairly puzzled and joked that "surely this doesn't have American writers" due to the high amount of innuendo and unpsoken communication in it; jokes that are woven into discourse without having to be focused on and made obvious.
Compare to the more frequent style of US TV, my classic example of a Friends episode where the joke is "Books are so expensive, if only there was a place you could borrow them, and give them back when you're finished!", which gets a dirty look from character B. Joke made, move on. Nope, character B has to say "There is, it's called a library". That kind of punchline being eviscerated from a joke and laid out on a plate is anaethema to British comedy.
I also find it more difficult to speak in metaphor with an American audience, who usually take a much more literal interpretation of what's being said (of course, it varies considerably among Americans - New Englanders seem to understand this kind of speech much more easily).
I do agree that British English speakers are more reticent, but in something of a different way. I spent three months going coast to coast in the US and one thing I loved about it was that Americans just talk to strangers in a way you don't get in other English-speaking countries. Random people walking in the same direction or on the same public bus would just start talking and you'd end up with a good conversation out of it. That rarely happens here.
I've probably waffled on enough at this point (I'm a little drunk), so perhaps best leave it there :)
NOTE: I hate the way HN expires internal links. What, am I going to maliciously link to this reply page? Just because the above took a while to write in this little box shouldn't mean I should run the risk of having to lose a comment I spent some time on. Luckily this time I had it in pageback, but I've lost other comments on other browsers. The point of proscribing pondered (perhaps ponderous?) positations is perfectly puzzling, I put forth. Pshaw!
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just from the information available in the time article, and from a tiny bit of thinking, I presume there are 2 things going on here: First the article claims that 1 is set arbitrarily to Vietnamese for the value of information density. There are many common ways to normalize measurements, it is obviously not 1/SPSvietnamese for this case. There are most likely other considered factors in the information density calc…
> if you want to do the incredulous thing, please put some thought in first Didn't I just do that? You seem to assume I am incredulous about the paper whereas I commented on the article.
1 cm left 4 cm up
If you drop '4 cm up' you go from a 2D to a 1D but replace up with blue does not mean anything.
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Vietnamese is much like Chinese, I wouldn't be surprised. Chinese speakers don't specify much. They tend to hollar low-context imperatives at each other, and hope that everyone already knows their job. Linguists call this a "high context" language, because if you don't have a good idea of the existing context you won't figure much out. I suspect it's related to the extremely strict and ridged hierarchies in China,…
What word is this? Learning Chinese now, curious. Thanks.
I think it is 让.
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#46Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#47I've been living in Vietnam and trying to learn the language for a while now and this confirms my impression that Vietnamese is very information dense. Most words are monosyllabic and the same syllable pronounced with different tones has completely different meanings. Also, a lot of things we state explicitly in English are left implicit in Vietnamese. You'd expect that a language with greater information density wou…
If Vietnamese is much like Chinese, I wouldn't be surprised. Chinese speakers don't specify much. They tend to hollar low-context imperatives at each other, and hope that everyone already knows their job. Linguists call this a "high context" language, because if you don't have a good idea of the existing context you won't figure much out. I suspect it's related to the extremely strict and ridged hierarchies in China,…
In Mandarin, the words for "buy" and "sell" are the same phoneme with different intonation. To my untrained ear, they both sound like "my" -- but they mean opposites.
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is completely wrong...Do not listen to this person. I have studied Chinese my entire life and I can assure you, tones are extremely important. Tones are not "dropped", even in fast speech. The problem is actually that the above poster cannot hear them. This idea, that tones are not important, is an extremely widespread misconception, and as I see it, relates to three factors: 1) the general poor quality of weste…
"This is completely wrong" "Do not listen to this person." Please tone down a bit. Moreover, I agree with grand-parent: tones should not be held as the most important part when studying Mandarin. It is not. Tones are completely different from one part of China to the other. In Sichuanhua, a horse is MA4 (down), while it is MA3 (down-up) in Beijinghua and in Putonghua. Quite the opposite. Beside these differences, Sic…
The thing is, subtitles are everywhere in China (Watch any movie or newscast), because it is difficult if not impossible to understand dialect speakers, and beyond that, to understand the non-standard mandarin that has been influenced by the these dialects.
The problem with the sentiment "I can get by just fine without tones"(obvious paraphrase) is that "get by just fine" and "without tones" are both statements that need further qualification.
I maintain my central point: Tones are obviously important in a tonal language, and the extent you can be understood without using them is determined almost entirely by the skill of the listener, as well as their acquaintance with other non-standard speakers and/or foreigners.
The reason for my tone in these posts is that I think this sort of attitude speaks badly for all foreigners studying Chinese. It betrays a sort of borderline arrogant exceptionalism that says "I can learn Your language, but on my terms. And in English, there are no tones". The reality is that Chinese speakers have come to expect very little from foreigners who are studying their language...and ironically this just continues the cycle, and these cocksure foreigners receive affirmation for simple, atonal phrases that native speakers must work hard to understand.
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#49Actually English has very few syllables compared to Filipino or Spanish. Nearly a third of the words are one syllable and most of the multiple syllable words have either Latin, French, or Greek origin. I think there was an attempt by early humans to make words have as less syllables as possible to simplify communication. Then as our thoughts became more complex they either changed the tone of the syllable (as in Chin…
> I think there was an attempt by early humans to make words have as less syllables as possible to simplify communication There doesn't seem to be any common-accepted definition of what a word is, especially across difference languages. See Martin Haspelmath's 2010 paper at www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/staff/haspelmath/pdf/WordSegmentation2010.pdf His abstract: '''The general distinction between morphology and syntax is wid…
Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others
#50From what I can tell, Chinese will often drop tones, just as English will drop vowels (substituting most vowels for a schwa - a kind of "e" or "uh" sound) if the meaning is not too ambiguous. People who learn Chinese often fret about getting the tones right. The tones just aren't that important - Chinese speakers can generally guess the meaning, though they will think you sound like a 4-year-old if you don't pronounc…
This is completely wrong...Do not listen to this person. I have studied Chinese my entire life and I can assure you, tones are extremely important. Tones are not "dropped", even in fast speech. The problem is actually that the above poster cannot hear them. This idea, that tones are not important, is an extremely widespread misconception, and as I see it, relates to three factors: 1) the general poor quality of weste…