Written Material

[Altair]

From what I have read, Hongkongers are generally educated in Cantonese. I assume this means that oral instruction is given in Cantonese, but that all the written material is in standard Putonghua. If this is correct, what language do Hongkongers actually read in? Do people act as if they are reading Mandarin and so read unfamiliar words in Mandarin, or does everyone read to themselves while mentally using Cantonese pronunciations of the characters?

If my question is hard to understand, imagine the following. Suppose you read something surprising in the newspaper and want to read it out loud to someone next to you. Would a Hongkonger read the text with Mandarin pronunciations or with Cantonese pronunciations? Would the reader attempt to substitute Cantonese words for any of the Mandarin words, or just change the pronunciations?

Do speakers of other dialects have this issue, or does everyone else simply read in Mandarin?

[Guest Yau]

Verbally and mentally, everything is in cantonese. In hongkong, all chinese textbooks are written in standard putonghua, but we read and interpret them by cantonese. We also read newspaper, ancient or modern peoms and any written materials in cantonese too.

In fact, the written form of cantonese has been developed notly after WWII in the mass media. However, this form of writing is treated as inappropriate and inferior by most teachers. If you use written cantonese in the examinations, marks will be heavily deducted.

Interestingly, though putonghua is widely taught in hong kong schools after the handover in 1997, the written cantonese earns its unprecedented popularity with the rise of Internet. Today, almost all popular hongkong forums use written cantonese. The most top selling newspaper, Apple Daily and Oriental Daily (both with more than million circulation every day!), are well-known for their heavy use of written cantonese.

If you're interested to see how hongkong cantonese looks like, you may visit here:

http://www.pumb.org

http://www.akzone2.com/forum/list_forum.php

[Quest]

Suppose you read something surprising in the newspaper and want to read it out loud to someone next to you. Would a Hongkonger read the text with Mandarin pronunciations or with Cantonese pronunciations?

Cantonese pronuncations.

Would the reader attempt to substitute Cantonese words for any of the Mandarin words, or just change the pronunciations?

up to the reader.

does everyone read to themselves while mentally using Cantonese pronunciations of the characters?

right.

For example:

我是每天都会到这论坛上混的。

would be read as: ngo si mui teen dou wui dou ze luin taan seung wun dic.

[ala]

For example:

我是每天都会到这论坛上混的。

would be read as: ngo si mui teen dou wui dou ze luin taan seung wun dic.

Which leads me to wonder whether that is still 粤语 or rather 粤音. Same with Cantonese songs.

[Quest]

maybe 粤音...

粤语 would be (somewhat awkwardly) 我係每日都会嚟呢个论坛度混嘅。

Same with Cantonese songs.

yes, it's hard to find real Cantonese songs now.

The following is a song from the 80s sung in real Cantonese (by Sam Hui).

http://www.mastvu.ah.cn/jszy/jsj/mp3/rbww.MP3

and this is a Cantonese rap from 2002 by (MP4 and 张茵):

http://www.99music.net/song_1_1.asp?id=22512&songurl=hk/mp4/2003-01/01.ra&musicname=

[Altair]

In fact, the written form of cantonese has been developed notly after WWII in the mass media. However, this form of writing is treated as inappropriate and inferior by most teachers.

Interesting. What about written Putonghua/formal Cantonese? How did people make the switch from writing in Wenyan to writing in Putonghua without any reinforcement from spoken language. At the beginning of the 20th Century, was in common for the Cantonese elite to speak Putonghua?

By the way, I became interested in this topic because of something surprising I heard from a Cantonese speaking colleague in the U.S. He told me that he had recently begun learning Mandarin from friends and was surprised that Mandarin was spoken just like Cantonese people wrote. This implied to me that he had grown up thinking of his written language as Cantonese, whereas I had assumed that Cantonese speakers saw themselves as writing in Putonghua. What a complicated linguistic and social situation.

By the way, I agree nearly 100 percent with the linguistic arguments Dmoser and others made on that other, endless forum, but situations like that of Hong Kong lead me to look at the social possibilities and social currents differently.

By all rights, Hongkongers should be hopelessly illitterate . It seems like a well educated Hongkonger must be proficient in the chaotic logic of English spelling, spoken English, written Putonghua/formal Cantonese in both simplified and traditional characters, 粤音 (TV News Cantonese?), traditional Cantonese, and now spoken Putonghua . It's a wonder Hongkongers have time to do anything else in school, let alone attain the high rate of literacy that apparently exists.

[Quest]

it's called 两文三语教学。

[skylee]

Yeah, 两文三语 indeed. And according to some survey/statistics, HK people do have the highest IQ in the world.

[Quest]

yes but not enough 就业机会 and 发展空间, 浪费了很多人才。

[amperel]

many chinese from southeast asia has to learn a lot more than that

[Jive Turkey]

Interesting topic. Some people find it a bit strange that Cantonese speakers speak Cantonese in the classroom but learn to read and write according to the rules of Mandarin. I also think it's a bit strange, but you've also got to consider that for every spoken language that has a developed written form, the written form has rules of its own. Yes, the written and spoken forms will share some aspects of grammar, but the rules of written language are much stricter than those of spoken language. Proficiency in a spoken language, especially when it is the first language, can be easily achieved without formal instruction. In contrast, I dare say no human could learn to write articulately without years of formal instruction. That is true for users of any language. Spoken language comes naturally; written language does not.

The gap between spoken Cantonese and standard written Chinese might be quite big, but don't forget that there is a gap between spoken and written language even for native speakers of Putonghua. Bear in mind also that before the 20th century, all writers of what was considered well written Chinese were in the same boat: the written language followed the rules of none of their spoken languages. That allowed the language to be somewhat universal, but at the same time, limited the number of people who could become truly literate.

As for 两文三语, I don't think many HK people are achieving that goal. That's not necessarily because it is an impossible goal, but because Chinese teaching in HK hasn't adopted any of the modern techniques used for teaching Chinese in the PRC and Taiwan. English teaching techniques are also hopelessly backward in HK, but that's for another forum.

I almost wonder if HK would be better off with a 三文三语 policy. The way it is now, students are arguably learning to read and write a foreign language rather than their own language. Learning to read in your mother tongue has a profound multiplier effect on how quickly and thoroughly you learn all aspects of your language and on how well you can acquire knowledge. At present, HK children are pretty much denied that multiplier effect. True, learning to write in standard written Chinese still opens the door to a lot of vocabulary, but when it comes to grammar, style and the ability to construct an articulate argument, HKers are at a huge disadvantage when compared to a Beijinger who is learning a written language that is much closer to his mother tongue. That has been made clear to me during the time I've studied Chinese in HK.

For one of my classes, I have to write a composition every week. The teachers are all moderately educated northerners or Taiwan waishengren. However, none of them have actual degrees in Chinese; most of them were actually English majors. They only correct mistakes; they don't give thorough explanations. Because of this, I've often asked HK friends for help with proofreading. They all have at least a degree, some of them a degree in Chinese. To make a long story short, my teachers actually home in on a lot of the sentences that were previously corrected by a Hong Konger. The teachers never say such sentences are flat out wrong and they don't know that these sentences were corrected or polished by a Hong Konger, but they often correct them in a way that in hindsight is vastly more articulate than what a HKer may have suggested in the first place. When I've shown these corrections to the HKer who originally suggested how I should write something, they have always said "oh, yeah, that sounds a lot better." This has happened dozens of times with about a dozen HKers and half a dozen Putonghua teachers.

I'm not saying that there aren't any HKers who can write well. There are obviously HKers who can write quite well. However, if we look at the average writing skills of all HK students and then compare them to the writing skills of students in Taipei or Beijing, it is the kids who speak Putonghua as their first language who will come out on top.

In my opinion, HK has two choices regarding Chinese language education. The first choice is to formalize written Cantonese and teach it at school; standard written Chinese would be taught in Putonghua class starting in about primary 4 or 5. Ignoring politics and looking at it from the perspective of a linguist or languge teacher, it would be extremely easy to formalize and teach Cantonese writing. Unlike Minnanhua or Hakka, pretty much everything in spoken Cantonese can be written syllable for syllable with hanzi. There are already commonly used, Cantonese specific characters.

The second policy would be to dump Cantonese and implement full Putonghua education. Over a long period, such a policy would mean that Cantonese would cease to be such a strong dialect. I'm sure the northerners would just love that. Bastards.

[Guest Yau]

Jive, your observation is accurate.

Some hongkong schools have voluntarily started teaching chinese language in putonghua after 1997 while leaving all other subjects to be taught in either cantonese or english, and some surveys suggest that the result is encouraging.

In fact, during the colonial period, chinese was regarded as an inferior language in hongkong though this island was once filled with hundreds of reputable chinese writers and literature magazines. You just couldn't be promoted because of the proficiency in chinese but you could even get a fail in chinese language to gain an admission to university. (you must pass in english) No wonder why there was no any incentive to improve chinese writing at that time.

[Ian_Lee]

两文三语 is not necessarily an unattainable goal. If the Dutch can mostlly manage more than one foreign language, I think HK kids can do that too provided improvement in the teaching method.

The learning of Putonghua does not also necessarily decrease the importance of Cantonese in the territory. For most people who learn Putonghua, their underlying motive is purely utilitarian -- just like why they learn English. HKers have never been culturally attached to Putonghua.

Right now the syllabus in High School is divided into Chinese Language and Chinese Literature. Chinese Literature can always be taught in Cantonese since Classical Chinese is grammatically different from either Mandarin or Cantonese.

[Ian_Lee]

You just couldn't be promoted because of the proficiency in chinese but you could even get a fail in chinese language to gain an admission to university.

A pass in Chinese language & literature at the matriculation exam has always been a prerequisite for Chinese U. But for HKU that was not a prerequisite (in fact it was not compulsory).

But considering that some applicants were not ethnic Chinese (i.e. Indians), it is understandable that such requirement was waived.

[ala]

两文三语 is not necessarily an unattainable goal. If the Dutch can mostlly manage more than one foreign language, I think HK kids can do that too provided improvement in the teaching method.

The foreign languages that the Dutch learn are more closely related than English and Mandarin/Cantonese. Learning English is hard.

[ala]

The gap between spoken Cantonese and standard written Chinese might be quite big, but don't forget that there is a gap between spoken and written language even for native speakers of Putonghua.

What is the difference between "Standard Written Chinese" (if such a thing exists) and Putonghua? Essentially formal written Cantonese is in another language. The situation for written Cantonese is not quite analogous to colloquial and literary English or Putonghua.

I almost wonder if HK would be better off with a 三文三语 policy. The way it is now, students are arguably learning to read and write a foreign language rather than their own language. Learning to read in your mother tongue has a profound multiplier effect on how quickly and thoroughly you learn all aspects of your language and on how well you can acquire knowledge. At present, HK children are pretty much denied that multiplier effect. True, learning to write in standard written Chinese still opens the door to a lot of vocabulary, but when it comes to grammar, style and the ability to construct an articulate argument, HKers are at a huge disadvantage when compared to a Beijinger who is learning a written language that is much closer to his mother tongue. That has been made clear to me during the time I've studied Chinese in HK.

I agree about the effect of writing on the perception and development of language. I definitely support literary development of all major Chinese dialects.

[Ian_Lee]

Learning to read in your mother tongue has a profound multiplier effect on how quickly and thoroughly you learn all aspects of your language and on how well you can acquire knowledge. At present, HK children are pretty much denied that multiplier effect.

The theory may say so but the experiment (or the flawed experiment) has failed miserably.

In fact, the SAR government implemented a drastic educational reform right after the transition by ordering "teaching in mother tongue" in most schools.

A lot of Christian and public schools which used to have English as the medium of instruction were forced to switch to Cantonese.

But the result failed miserably and a lot of well-off parents protest by taking out their kids from the education system and enroll them in International Schools.

Of course, the principle that "teaching in mother tongue" may be valid but the high-handed and often inconsistent educational policy should be more to blame.

Anyway, I seriously doubt about the practicality of the development of a form of written Cantonese officially in Hong Kong.

[Guest Yau]

But the result failed miserably and a lot of well-off parents protest by taking out their kids from the education system and enroll them in International Schools.

Several report suggests the totally contrary results for the mother-tongue education reform. Some said they are better off in most subjects but worse off in english exam.

However, i really doubt how many parents can afford the huge school fee (more than US$13,000 annually) to let their children to study in international schools.

[Jive Turkey]

The theory may say so but the experiment (or the flawed experiment) has failed miserably.

In fact' date=' the SAR government implemented a drastic educational reform right after the transition by ordering "teaching in mother tongue" in most schools.

A lot of Christian and public schools which used to have English as the medium of instruction were forced to switch to Cantonese.

But the result failed miserably and a lot of well-off parents protest by taking out their kids from the education system and enroll them in International Schools. [/quote']

Sorry, but you're not going to get away with that. Failed miserably? By what account? Before the reforms, even band 5 kids with no English whatsoever were given English textbooks and taught with a mixture of Chinglish and English. Just because most parents are too stupid to know what's best for their children doesn't mean that the government should have continued with a policy of trying to educate children in a language they could not use for even the simplest of tasks. I just about blow a gasket every time I hear an older HK teacher telling me in Chinglish about how the quality of English is falling because of mother tongue education and that children need to spend the whole day learning in "English" (read: Chinglish taught by someone who knows nothing about how languages are acquired or how they should be taught) in order to become proficient in the language. Even for so called "elite" schools, English language education in HK has broadly been an unqualified failure if we consider how much time and resources have been thrown at it. At least with mother tongue education, kids will have some hope of becoming articulate speakers of one language.

Ah, kids flocking to international schools. They're not going to get much better of an education there. The ESF and the international schools were all started in order to educate kids from an English-as-mother-tongue background. After the handover, the number of British civil servants and expat business people with kids in HK has fallen off significantly. The ESF and the international schools have had to keep their numbers up by taking more and more kids who don't necessarily have good enough English skills to learn in English. This is a huge problem for all of these schools. They simply don't have the resources to cope with it. Almost none of their teachers have a TESL background; they are just regular teachers who came over from England or whereever to teach the subjects they are qualified to teach. Most "special education" classes at ESF schools are actually remedial English courses for the Chinese kids who can't keep up. Sure, they are learning a hell of a lot more English than what they would learn at backward institutions like St. Paul's, DBS or LaSalle, but the large numbers of students who aren't native English speakers at these schools are causing the whole system to be dumbed down. Many expat or native English speaking parents are so dissatisfied with the system at ESF or the international schools that they are pulling their kids out to send them to boarding schools back home. These schools simply don't have the resources to deal with such large numbers of non-native English speaking students. Nevertheless, they're still doing better at English education than the local schools.

[skylee]

Personal experience - I went to a Chinese primary school, a Chinese middle school (Clementi) and the Chinese University of HK which all taught in Cantonese (well of course in CUHK it depended on the lecturers' preference). English was taught as one of the subjects, and I didn't learn Mandarin properly until I was an undergraduate. And I consider myself passable in both Chinese (including Mandarin) and English. I am therefore in support of mother tongue education. I think the trick is that you need to have good teachers. And this is quite difficult when most students who end up in 教育學院 nowadays are those who can't get into other universities.