tone retards...

[Haizi]

"father in Chinese should be ba4ba5"

A fifth tone! Why not just leave out the number (like the diacritic is left out in the other system)?

Tones can't be that important to the Chinese otherwise they wouldn't be able to understand songs. It's not like changing vowel sounds Haizi. To do that in Chinese' date=' you would ... change the vowel sounds.[/quote']

The digit 5 was used to represent the so-called "neutral tone" in accordance of the "Standard for the Scheme of Chinese Phonetic Alphabet Input with Universal Keyboard." The national standard was released on Feb. 23, 2001 and implemented starting from Jun. 1, 2001.

Being able to understand Chinese songs doesn't negate the importance of tones in Chinese. Messing up tones in Chinese to me is not unlike English expressed in the following way: thes centance shuld bea steel sumewaut kumprihensable. It just takes a lot guess work to figure out its possible meaning.

[smithsgj]

Mr Child, I still don't get it.

para 1: the 5 is redundant, why did any standard settle on this? Pinyin has nothing for the neutral tone, while bopomofo has nothing for the first tone, bizarrely (it denotes neutral tone with a dot).

Anyway why is it written as a neutral tone at all? The question particle 嗎 ma only occurs on the neutral tone, but this is not true of 爸 ba. When the tone of of 國guo changes in the context 美國人 meiguo ren, it's still written with the tone recorded in the dictionary (3) not the one on which it's pronounced, surely.

The pitch of the neutral tone depends on the preceding/following tones, doesn't it? It can't be characterized as say "falling" like the 4th tone -- it's not associated with any pitch pattern, that's why it's neutral. I thought.

para 2: so how do the Chinese understand song lyrics? There's a line in a Yang Nai-wen song "Tai-wan" which I had always assumed meant Taiwan, cos that's how it sounds; but it made no sense until I realized it was Too late! Perhaps native speakers run into this kind of problem all the time?

[Tsunku]

Haizi, I was able to understand that sentence really easily actually. Guesswork wasn't needed because the context was more than sufficient to convey the meaning. I don't think that's the right analogy.

I agree that it may be painful to listen to foreigners mangle the tones. However, context alone is almost definitly assure that you're going to be understood, unless your pronounciation is so far off base its not even funny. I've never had my Chinese friends not get what I'm saying due to poor pronounciation. Chinese people in China are to some extent used to hearing tonal variations (in kunminghua, for example the word 好 is pronounced with the 4th tone rather than the 3rd), mostly due to regional differences. They'll figure you out regardless. Native speakers wouldn't have problems understanding song lyrics (although I'll disagree with the idea that tones aren't paid attention to in music, I think they are, although perhaps the rules get bent more) because the context of the songs is going to clue them in.

Tones are important, but context and word choice are equally important. You can get all your tones right, but if your grammar is backwards, you'll be less understandable than someone with great grammar who messes up the tones from time to time.

[Quest]

if u speak in sentences without stuttering, u should be understood fine with wrong tones. if you speak word by word slowly and with wrong tones, it would be a problem.

[willsi2]

i think haizi picked up on a

good point that learning the

tones with the language as opposed to rectifying them later is best...I know a chinese guy who,s been learning english for 7 years

he has pronounciation problems, but am confident he will be better in time.!!

[Haizi]

Mr Child' date=' I still don't get it.

para 1: the 5 is redundant, why did any standard settle on this? Pinyin has nothing for the neutral tone, while bopomofo has nothing for the first tone, bizarrely (it denotes neutral tone with a dot).

Anyway why is it written as a neutral tone at all? The question particle 嗎 ma only occurs on the neutral tone, but this is not true of 爸 ba. When the tone of of 國guo changes in the context 美國人 meiguo ren, it's still written with the tone recorded in the dictionary (3) not the one on which it's pronounced, surely.

The pitch of the neutral tone depends on the preceding/following tones, doesn't it? It can't be characterized as say "falling" like the 4th tone -- it's not associated with any pitch pattern, that's why it's neutral. I thought.

para 2: so how do the Chinese understand song lyrics? There's a line in a Yang Nai-wen song "Tai-wan" which I had always assumed meant Taiwan, cos that's how it sounds; but it made no sense until I realized it was Too late! Perhaps native speakers run into this kind of problem all the time?[/quote']

Assigning a number to the neutral tone makes sense to me. Pinyin is often written without tones for various reasons. Sometimes, people don't think it is necessary to include tones; in other times, people are not conscious about tones. As a result, haizi could be hai2zi5 or hai3zi3. When you see ba4ba5, you see the tones of both syllables are clearly defined. I think it is a good notation system for CFL learners to use because it makes them more aware of the correct tones.

I don't know what dictionary you are using, but my dictionary (The Contemporary Chinese Dictionary, 2002 Edition) indicates that guo (country) should be in the second tone, whether it is in Mei3guo2 or guo2jia1. My dictionary does not mark tone changes. For example, bu4zai4hu5 is actually pronounced as bu2zai4hu5 in the real world but printed as bu4zai4hu5 in my dictionary. However, please note that neutral tones ARE reflected in Pinyin.

Whether the neutral tone is truly "toneless" is debatable. Some people prefer to call it the "unstressed tone." Wo3 de5 jia1 could be pronounced as wo3 de4 jia1, but not as wo3 de1 jia1, wo3 de2 jia1, or wo3 de3 jia1 really.

Native Mandarin speakers cannot get the Mandarin lyrics right all the time, not unlike that native English speakers cannot always get the English lyrics right, when hearing it in a song. On the other hand, both groups don't "run into this kind of problem all the time." Maybe, this is more of a problem with Mandarin compared with English, but I haven't seen any study on this, nor have I observed that Chinese people are particularly in need to clarify the lyrics that they have heard in a song.

[Haizi]

Haizi' date=' I was able to understand that sentence really easily actually. Guesswork wasn't needed because the context was more than sufficient to convey the meaning. I don't think that's the right analogy.

I agree that it may be painful to listen to foreigners mangle the tones. However, context alone is almost definitly assure that you're going to be understood, unless your pronounciation is so far off base its not even funny. I've never had my Chinese friends not get what I'm saying due to poor pronounciation. Chinese people in China are to some extent used to hearing tonal variations (in kunminghua, for example the word 好 is pronounced with the 4th tone rather than the 3rd), mostly due to regional differences. They'll figure you out regardless. Native speakers wouldn't have problems understanding song lyrics (although I'll disagree with the idea that tones aren't paid attention to in music, I think they are, although perhaps the rules get bent more) because the context of the songs is going to clue them in.

Tones are important, but context and word choice are equally important. You can get all your tones right, but if your grammar is backwards, you'll be less understandable than someone with great grammar who messes up the tones from time to time.[/quote']

I think you are missing the point. I didn't intend to argue with anybody here about to what extent a foreigner can mess with Chinese language and still get away with it. Of course, you can have many errors in your Chinese and still be understood. Is this a good reason for you to strive for learning poor Chinese -- Chinese spoken with wrong tones and written with wrong characters? How ridiculous! How sad!

[Tsunku]

Well, we're just missing each other then, because I've never said that one should strive to learn poor Chinese or forget about learning the tones, or writing the correct characters. That is ridiculous and sad, no argument here. I think you misinterpreted my original point, which didn't really have anything to do with how important tones are to being understood, but rather with how I chose to aquire my pronounciation. My tones aren't perfect, but they're not atrocious either. I think you're kind of beating a dead horse with trying to convince us that tones matter. Of course they matter, they're a part of the language. Do I think they're the end all be all of Chinese? Not really, but I'm not suggesting throwing them out the window because of that.

[Quest]

It's good to be perfect, but if your tones are not too far off, we can understand you.

[Haizi]

Well, we're just missing each other then, because I've never said that one should strive to learn poor Chinese or forget about learning the tones, or writing the correct characters. That is ridiculous and sad, no argument here. I think you misinterpreted my original point, which didn't really have anything to do with how important tones are to being understood, but rather with how I chose to aquire my pronounciation. My tones aren't perfect, but they're not atrocious either. I think you're kind of beating a dead horse with trying to convince us that tones matter. Of course they matter, they're a part of the language. Do I think they're the end all be all of Chinese? Not really, but I'm not suggesting throwing them out the window because of that.

Fine. If you all realize the importance of learning correct tones, then I have nothing more to say for this matter. The reason I was "beating a dead horse" here is because I read comments like:

Chinese people also use wrong tones;

You will be understood even if you use wrong tones;

Correct tones cannot be maintained in songs; etc.

As a Chinese language teacher, I have seen many students who didn't lay a good foundation of pronunciation and were thus hindered by this deficiency in their later study. I just can't help but stress the importance of acquiring the correct Chinese pronunciation, in which tones play a major part, in a CFL learner's beginning stage.

[smithsgj]

I don't know what dictionary you are using' date=' but my dictionary (The Contemporary Chinese Dictionary, 2002 Edition) indicates that guo (country) should be in the second tone, whether it is in Mei3guo2 or guo2jia1. My dictionary does not mark tone changes. For example, bu4zai4hu5 is actually pronounced as bu2zai4hu5 in the real world but printed as bu4zai4hu5 in my dictionary. However, please note that neutral tones ARE reflected in Pinyin.

Whether the neutral tone is truly "toneless" is debatable. Some people prefer to call it the "unstressed tone." Wo3 de5 jia1 could be pronounced as wo3 de4 jia1, but not as wo3 de1 jia1, wo3 de2 jia1, or wo3 de3 jia1 really.

[/quote']

I meant to give an example of tone sandhi, and got it wrong!

But your bu4zai4hu5 illustrates the point perfectly. If the dictionary gives the primary tone for the four major tones, not the real world pronunciation, why does the same not hold when one of the major tones changes to neutral in a particular context?

[Haizi]

I don't know what dictionary you are using' date=' but my dictionary (The Contemporary Chinese Dictionary, 2002 Edition) indicates that guo (country) should be in the second tone, whether it is in Mei3guo2 or guo2jia1. My dictionary does not mark tone changes. For example, bu4zai4hu5 is actually pronounced as bu2zai4hu5 in the real world but printed as bu4zai4hu5 in my dictionary. However, please note that neutral tones ARE reflected in Pinyin.

Whether the neutral tone is truly "toneless" is debatable. Some people prefer to call it the "unstressed tone." Wo3 de5 jia1 could be pronounced as wo3 de4 jia1, but not as wo3 de1 jia1, wo3 de2 jia1, or wo3 de3 jia1 really.

[/quote']

I meant to give an example of tone sandhi, and got it wrong!

But your bu4zai4hu5 illustrates the point perfectly. If the dictionary gives the primary tone for the four major tones, not the real world pronunciation, why does the same not hold when one of the major tones changes to neutral in a particular context?

Tone changes have patterns. That's why many dictionaries do not mark them because you can kind of figure out the changes by knowing the patterns. In contrast, the appearance of neutral tones doesn't follow any neat patterns. You just have to learn them one by one. That's why it is necessary for dictionaries to mark them. For example, ke4qi5 and jie3jie5 do not follow any patterns and won't change in different contexts.

[Quest]

ke4qi5 and jie3jie5

qi and jie do not have to be pronounced in the unsounded tone (5) at all. In fact, in standard mandarin you should really pronounce them as Ke4qi4 and jie3jie1.

[Haizi]

ke4qi5 and jie3jie5

qi and jie do not have to be pronounced in the unsounded tone (5) at all. In fact' date=' in standard mandarin you should really pronounce them as Ke4qi4 and jie3jie1.[/quote']

I don't know what "standard mandarin" you are talking about. My dictionary (The Contemporary Chinese Dictionary, compiled by the Language Research Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Science in 2002) doesn't advise its readers to pronounce ke4qi4 or jie3jie1.

FYI, in the real world, most Beijingers would say ke4qi5 rather than ke4qi4.

[Quest]

I know, but it doesn't sound bad either when you say ke4qi4, that's like enunciating vs casual speech in english when people get lazy and start skipping t's and d's.

in the real world, "either" can be pronounced as "ee th er" or "i th er".

if you speak fast enough ke4qi4 would sound like ke4qi5 anyways.

[adambsmurf]

That eternal question: how to get the tones right.

I don't have any particular hints, but I have to say that it really is important to the language. I disagree with anyone who claims that all you have to do is learn basic tones or half-ignore them. I think the person who wrote about not thinking too much about them and just speaking naturally is a mistake, you _have_ to get the tones right.

The difference is huge. If you don't speak tones or speak them randomly, you cannot be understood well at all. You will have to be asked over and over again to repeat, and the accent you carry will be so thick that no matter how fluent you get people will always remark (probably not to you though) that your pronunciation is rather poor.

Ignore any advice anyone gives that doesn't implore you to study the tones and pronunciation first and foremost, and not to study more difficult sentences beyond just basic conversation without having mastered the tone.

It is often remarked that Chinese is taught poorly, and this is largly true because no one understands just how important the tones are. That is what should be mastered first and foremost -- not just tones in and of themselves but in combinations in sentences, in questions, in different contexts, etc.

Imagine meeting a speaker of English always saying a b sound for an f sound, so everytime they say father they say bother instead. You just will never get over the fact that it's so strange. Additionally, that many foreigners settle for a toneless or almost toneless standard of language I feel is a major reason why many Chinese regard foriengers as (almost) incapable of learning their language well.

Again: Master the tones with practice practice practice. There is no secret method. Invent your own means, but practice is the main ingredient.

[smithsgj]

Haizi thank you for your explanation as to why major tone changes are not recorded in dictionaries. I understand now (although I still think it would be helpful if dictionary compilers gave the real pronunciation, rather than a theoretical one subject to change by rule, but anyway...)

Haizi you pointed out earlier (and I think you are quite right) that "tone neutralization" is often just the instantiation of an unstressed syllable. Do you agree that in running speech a lot of syllables (most, maybe) are unstressed (whether the rules say they should be transcribed as tone 5 or not)? In careful speech, say reading from a list of words, would a Beijingese pronounce keqi and jiejie with a neutral tone?

A Taiwanese would not; but then, nor would they in running speech, as many of the neutral tone syllables get the major tone pronunciation in the Mandarin spoken here.

What about elsewhere in the first-language-Mandarin world, including other bits of China? Is all this neutralization basically Beijing regional speech, like all those quaint rs at the end or words?

[smithsgj]

Adam I agree that learning tones is important. I think everyone does really. And at the end of the day, if you're learning a rather complex character, the native language meaning, and a pinyin pronunciation, then learning that one extra feature -- the tone -- ought not to be too much of an ordeal.

That's not the difficulty. Nor is pronouncing a syllable in isolation. What is hard is stringing it all together into a sentence, in the same way that a native speaker would do it. This does not consist of enunciating each syllable with its theoretical tone value, leaping from 1st to 4th to 2nd to 1st etc, but gliding from the tone value of one important syllable to the next, more or less glossing over those in between.

You have to get the phrasing, the overall prosodic pattern of the sentence, right as well. I believe this is just as important for comprehension as the getting the correct tone values.

This is why Adam is right to emphasize the importance of learning tones in different sentential contexts. If you do enough listening, and apply what you hear, you need to be less concerned with the theoretical tone values. That's how native speakers do it, after all!

[Tsunku]

smith, you just made my point a lot better than I ever managed to.

[adambsmurf]

I agree. If there is any secret to learning tones, the secret is being able to hear them in their natural environments. As an ESL teacher, I'm constantly telling them that listening is the single most important ability of all.