Neutral tone (轻声) in Cantonese?

[HashiriKata]

The neutral tone (轻声) is comon in Mandarin. I just wonder if neutral tone is also comon in Cantonese, and whether it is used in a similar way (when the stress is gone，as in 椅子， for example.)

Thanks,

HK

[Claw]

Cantonese doesn't have a neutral tone. Tones of every single character is pronounced, even in particles (though sometimes there may be tone changes in some words).

Also, Cantonese tends not to use 子 very much. So 椅子 would simply be 椅 /yi2/ (though 凳 /dang3/ is more commonly used to refer to a chair depending on the context).

If one were to say 椅子 though, the tone on 子 would still be pronounced: /yi2 ji2/

Note: Yale romanization used

[Quest]

椅子 is 凳仔

Tone changes occur when two 4th tone characters come together. (The 4th tone in Cantonese is similar to the 3rd tone in Mandarin) The second character is changed to the 2nd tone.

This rule applies to words like 骑楼，楼盘，阳台，绵羊. However, in a formal speech, they can be both pronounced with the 4th tone.

No neutral tone in Cantonese.

[HashiriKata]

Thanks for very informative responses. They confirm my suspicion that Mandarin is heading towards an even greater trend of sound-simplification (continuously but over a very long period of time, of course!)

HK

[naus888]

Between Mandarin and Cantonese lies Wu (Shanghai, Suzhou, Hangzhou, Wenzhou) and Min (Hokkien, Fuzhou, Xiamen, Minnan, Taiyu). Both Wu and Min exhibit far more disregard toward citation tones than either Mandarin or Cantonese. In Wu, it is a systematic loss of citation tones; (every non-initial syllable in an utterance can be considered to have a neutral tone, as the stress always occurs on the first syllable in Shanghai Wu, and subsequent syllables lose all tonal information).

I disagree with HashiriKata's suspicion that Mandarin is heading towards greater tonal loss. Much of the neutral tone in Mandarin is limited to a very small class of lexical terms (with syllable repetition or diminutives such as 子 or 头 in 椅子, etc) and minor grammatical usages (verb repetition). Many other areas where the neutral tone exists in Mandarin are due to words loaned or influenced from other dialects, most notably from the Wu family (小姐, etc).

The kind of neutral tone that exists in Mandarin can be found in almost all Chinese dialects except Cantonese (Yue). You can think of Mandarin's neutral tones as a very limited form of Wu sandhi changes.

[HashiriKata]

I disagree with HashiriKata's suspicion that Mandarin is heading towards greater tonal loss.

No, I didn't quite say that . What I said is "greater trend of sound-simplification (continuously but over a very long period of time, of course!)".

The reason for my statement is that I've looked into a large number of Chinese borrowings in languages such as Korean, Japanese & Vietnamese and found that these borrowings show traces of sounds which are no longer in Mandarin (the final M,K,P,T, for example). There are also evidence that the tone system in modern Mandarin is no longer as rich as in older Mandarin, which makes Tang poems (and the like) sound less harmonious/ rhythmical than in some other dialects still with a greater number of tones.

Anyway, I'm interested to know what made you think the neutral tone in the Mandarin 小姐 is due to influences from other dialects.

Welcome to the board, by the way!

[naus888]

What I said is "greater trend of sound-simplification (continuously but over a very long period of time' date=' of course!)".

The reason for my statement is that I've looked into a large number of Chinese borrowings in languages such as Korean, Japanese & Vietnamese and found that these borrowings show traces of sounds which are no longer in Mandarin (the final M,K,P,T, for example). There are also evidence that the tone system in modern Mandarin is no longer as rich as in older Mandarin, which makes Tang poems (and the like) sound less harmonious/ rhythmical than in some other dialects still with a greater number of tones. [/quote']

True, however, the development of Mandarin arose not by its own spontaneous process, but because of Han peoples mingling with northern steppe peoples (who lived in what is today Beijing) since the Liao and Jin/Jurchen dynasties a thousand years ago. Today the people in the steppe are all assimilated Han Chinese; besides ethnic Mongolians and a handful of diehard Manchurians, no one still speaks an Tungusic language in China. No more Khitans, Jurchens, Manchurians left, hence this source of influence on Mandarin doesn't exist anymore today. With the standardization of Beijing Mandarin under pinyin and national broadcasting, it has become even harder for Mandarin to develop very much phonetically (other than minor variations in the retroflexes, v, and er-hua). That's why I don't think Mandarin is heading toward any dramatic path of phonological changes, instead I believe smaller and more juxtaposed dialects like Wu will undergo greater changes (this is indeed observed for the past 100 years).

Also when we talk about Mandarin, we need to point out that Standard Mandarin is overwhelmingly based on Beijing Mandarin (Beijing became capital of China during the Mongolian Yuan Dynasty). The Mandarin just north of the Yangtze River (called Jiang-Huai region) is very different from Beijing Mandarin, it still retains the Ru/Entering (short) syllables, and has 7-8 tones. Its vocabulary is very similar with the neighboring Wu dialects. The Jiang-Huai region is thus a buffer region between Beijing Mandarin and Wu.

See this link for the colloquial language 汉儿 "Haner," which is believed by many as proto-Northern-Mandarin: http://omniknow.com/scripts/wiki.php?term=Haner_language

The Mandarin used by the Ming and early Qing were actually from Jiang-Huai region (Nanjing), but became corrupted by the Northern Mandarin already established around Beijing.