The difference between 'q' and 'ch'

[Jose]

This is because they are two completely different sounds, made in different places in the mouth. I can't imagine anyone with good Chinese, be they native or not, pronouncing these two the same way. They might be related, but so are, for example, p, k and t, yet no one with decent English (Dutch, Spanish, etc) would mix them up.

I am not arguing against how different they are, only stating that they have limited distinctive value, and that is a very important criterion to know how much margin for mispronunciation you have before you're misunderstood. Jerry Norman's "Chinese" has a short section (page 140) about the disputed phonemic status of the palatals in Mandarin Chinese. You will not find anyone disputing the phonemic status of p, k and t in Chinese or in any European language. Whether two sounds are allophones or distinct phonemes does not depend on how much their points of articulation differ, but on whether any minimal pairs can be found that are distinguished solely because of either sound being used. For example, in English, the difference between the two consonants /d/ and /ð/ is essential, as "day" and "they" are different words, but much less so in Spanish, where the two sounds exist as variants of the "d" phoneme (and native speakers are not even aware that there is a difference). You can pronounce a word like "candado" as /kan'dado/ and you will sound fine (just a tad foreign) even if native speakers say something like /kaŋ'daðo/.

Anyway, I'm deviating too much from the original question. I only wanted to point out that when we start to learn Chinese we may spend too much time trying to understand the difference between "chu" and "qu" as a difference in the initial consonant, and it helps if you're aware that "qu" is pronounced with the ü vowel. Because few consonants can occur in front of that vowel, if you get the vowel and the tone right you will be understood, even if your "q" is not palatal enough. But, of course, if you learn to produce a nice aspirated and palatal consonant, that will be much much better.

[atitarev]

Jose,

I also agree with other posters that the distinction is very important, much more important than your example in Spanish. Dialect speakers may mix shi/si, chi/ci, zhi/zi but never palatalized with unpalatalised (qi/chi) or aspirated with unaspirated (qi/ji). This mix sound very foreign and wrong, besides, not close enough to be understood in many cases. Try saying "7-8" in Mandarin without palatalisation, you'll know what I mean.

Europeans have no problems picking up the difference between si/shi but usually have more difficulties with qi/chi or qi/ji, whereas dialect speakers or speakers of some Asian countries have the reverse.

I am one of the fans of Hanyu Pinyin system and I think it's a very good system, if it's understood and used properly (Pinyin must be learned in combination with the Chinese phonetics).

[Lu]

if you get the vowel and the tone right you will be understood, even if your "q" is not palatal enough. But, of course, if you learn to produce a nice aspirated and palatal consonant, that will be much much better.

Again, getting it approximately right is fine if you just want to learn some quick Chinese for a holiday, but if the OP is serious in learning Chinese, I think it's a very bad idea to start out with only getting it chabuduo right. It'll be much harder to correct in the future.

Btw, sure if you get the vowel and the tone right you'll likely be understood, but many English speakers have trouble with exactly that u, let alone tones.

I think the best thing the OP can do is find him/herself a native speaker to explain this sound.

[leosmith]

I am not arguing against how different they are, only stating that they have limited distinctive value, and that is a very important criterion to know how much margin for mispronunciation you have before you're misunderstood.

If you don't distinguish between the two, you will not be well understood, perhaps not understood at all. You would know this if you actually tried it, right?

I agree with the others - a combo of Sinosplice, FSI, and Mandarin Chinese Phonetics will explain it. For a summary:

1. to make the q sound, your tongue needs to be in the e (as in "eel") position. Without changing its location, try to make a ch sound like in english.

2. to make the ch sound, your tongue needs to be in the ch (as in "churn") position. Without changing its location, try to make a ch sound like in english.

[Prase]

jose: Even if the theory is correct, (I think it isn't) how can you know that s/q/j are allophones to sh/ch/zh and not to h/k/g or s/c/z?

[here2learn]

Wow, plenty here about where to put your tongue.

I thought I had nothing left to contribute, BUT....

No one has mentioned our sexy lips.

Really... to make CH SH in English we pull the sides of our lips/cheeks in a bit. In chinese we rarely do this. Relax the cheeks and mouth/lips, they may feel awkwardly "wide" at first, but don't force them into anything, just relax them; don't pucker or pull them inward at all.

This goes for all the q,j,x, ch,sh,zh and probably more sounds. English has a lot of cheek movement; chinese doesn't.

When I was learning French my cheeks often got tired; they should not get tired in Mandarin or you're doing something wrong.

[LaVandez]

Great stuff here but I get lost in this stuff on palatials and allophones. I think some of this stuff has to be able to be explained in an easier less technical way so I do like it when there are approximations but for me in this case I try to imagine exactly what is going on and I still don't know if I quite get it.

[leosmith]

1. to make the q sound, your tongue needs to be in the e (as in "eel") position. Without changing its location, try to make a ch sound like in english.

2. to make the ch sound, your tongue needs to be in the ch (as in "churn") position. Without changing its location, try to make a ch sound like in english.

Great stuff here but I get lost in this stuff on palatials and allophones. I think some of this stuff has to be able to be explained in an easier less technical way so I do like it when there are approximations but for me in this case I try to imagine exactly what is going on and I still don't know if I quite get it.

Still don't get it?

[Prase]

To get x, try to pronounce english sh while touching your lower teeth with your tongue. As sh cannot be pronounced with the tongue in this position, you should get x.

To get pinyin sh, try to pronounce sh with the tongue curled back. Or you may try this:

http://www.chinese-forums.com/index.php?/topic/2-favourite-chinese-musician2844

Then it shouldn't be too much difficult to get q and j from x and zh and ch from sh.

However, it is absolutely necessary you can distinguish them in speech of natives first. Otherwise you will not be able to recognise if you pronounce them correctly or not. You would be like a deaf man who is trying to learn to speak.

[AthenaLaFay]

Sorry mirgcire, but that is another example of confusing and inaccurate information that can lead you totally astray. Sadly, much of the advice on pronunciation offered on these forums, and of what you can dig up on the web, is simply wrong.

Again, go to the sinosplice site and find out. The explanations found in the pronunciation modules of the FSI course are also very good and can be trusted.

Also, all explanations based on "similar" sounds in English are just rough approximations. They can help you get the general idea initially but if you are serious about learning you'd better just ignore them and go straight for the accurate information at sinosplice and in the FSI course.

I'm using the FSI course. Actually, that p and r course is where my problem with these sounds really started to confuse me as I didn't understand their explanations.