formal reading of characters in dialects + word invention

[Quest]

In Cantonese, words like 嚟 翻 冇 畀 are invented/picked to correspond to the Cantonese pronunciation of 来 返 无 (被recent invention?) (In Mandarin too actually, e.g. 一起 was invented to represent 一齐, and in Shanghainese 眼立水/眼泪水 etc), because someone before us decided to give these original characters a formal reading.

Do you think it is appropriate to give these original characters formal pronunciations one would never use in daily conversations, and then "invent" new strange characters to correspond to the colloquial speech?

[Claw]

In Cantonese, words like 嚟 翻 冇 畀 are invented/picked to correspond to the Cantonese pronunciation of 来 返 无 (被recent invention?)

BTW, 畀 is not an invented character for Cantonese. It's actually a character used in standard written Chinese, meaning "to bestow." Here are a few examples found by a person in another forum thread:

"加拿大目前畀予十種不同優惠稅率" / "任何有關集會遊行之法規對行政官員之授權不得畀予過量之行政裁量權" / "我亦畀予該外交機構人員同等優惠"

"不得逾越本公約所畀予之任務" / "其實他甚為欣賞東坡高才，一度有意畀予重任"

"離開學校立即畀與高位" / "因此對於「魄力型」的領導者，一般人均畀與很深的期望"

I guess 畀 is relatively rare in modern Mandarin writing though since it is mostly Classical Chinese usage. See http://140.111.1.22/mandr/clc/dict/GetContent.cgi?Database=dict&DocNum=6113&GraphicWord=yes&QueryString=%E7%95%80

Do you think it is appropriate to give these original characters formal pronunciations one would never use in daily conversations, and then "invent" new strange characters to correspond to the colloquial speech?

In general, I don't like the practice of inventing new characters for colloquial pronunciations. For instance, /lai4/ in Cantonese is so obviously 來 (even though the literary pronunciation is considered to be /loi4/), so there's no need to invent a character such as 嚟 to represent /lai4/ (especially one that looks so ugly and is hard to write).

The colloquial/literary pronunciation difference occurs in Mandarin too. Here's an example cited by a post in one of the threads that I link below:

Yes, it happens to Mandarin too.

e.g. 血

xue4 - literary pronunciation

xie3 - colloquial pronunciation

Take a look at these threads which discuss this phenomenon:

http://www.cantonese.sheik.co.uk/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=11705&t=11705 (some of the characters proposed by johannes in the thread are most likely wrong, but you get the point)

http://www.cantonese.sheik.co.uk/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=17130&t=17130

[ala]

There are problems with going to the original character too.

For example he/she/it in Shanghainese is commonly written today as 伊 yi [ji]. However, it used to be pronounced [gi] 其 (which is also the Classical Chinese term) just a couple hundred years ago (there are still nearby Wu dialects that pronounce he/she/it as gi).

[gi] 其 --> [dZi] --> [Zi] --> [ji] 伊

If we go back to using 其 for he/she/it, then the existence of words like 其他 which is pronounced [dZi tha] in Shanghainese, would mean 其 would get one additional reading, which is not a problem. But if this practice is expanded to all characters, then it would mean some characters will have 3, 4, 5 different readings.

Also in Shanghainese, 勒 [l@?] is derived from 在 [zE]. However, after hundreds of years of departure, there are now 勒勒、辣海、辣该、来勒 variants, and each with a different usage. How would going to the original character solve the problem where the character has developed into a polysyllabic word? Also, at the same time words like 现在 [ji zE] and 在时 [zE zi'] continue to use [zE].

But I agree, the Cantonese 嚟 / 来 example is kind of ridiculous. A similar example is 闲话 in Shanghainese, as in 上海闲话 (Shanghainese), the 闲话 should really be 言话 (language/speech). I've had many Mandarin-speaking friends ask me why the Shanghainese consider languages to be all "gossip" (闲话）. Some even went into this deep analysis of the psychosis of Shanghainese speakers. The Shanghainese word for gossip is actually gasewu.