Improving my accent... but which one?

[Yadang]

 

 

Technically the -r is a retroflex, but when I hear 'retroflex' I think about zhi chi shi, not erhua. Reading that sentence, I also get the impression that that poster thinks erhua=retroflex, and that is not the case. 

 

Yes, I was under the impression that the erhua is retroflex, but not all retroflexes are erhua (ex: zhi, chi, shi)...

 

Now I'm a bit confused...

[Guest realmayo]

Isn't the point that:

 

If you retroflex, the vowel of a 'zhi' will naturally sound different to if you don't?

 

It's logical that the vowel will sound different, because the position of tongue affects the dimensions of 'chamber' in the mouth.

No doubt there's a more intelligent way of expressing that, but I think the concept holds: if you retroflex, your vowels change. 

 

What's more, I think there's a natural tendency to erhua your vowels if you get your retroflexes on full bore. I presume it's because the tongue is basically already in prime position to erhua (seems that it's just a little lowering of the tongue?). 

 

My point is that the previous poster was using "retroflex" to refer to 儿话, but there is no curl of tongue in 儿话. 

 

Am I right that both do involve a raised (base of the) tongue?

 

 

I don't dislike the curled tongue in principle, it's the Beijing vowels I'm allergic to.

[Lu]

Of course, there are lots of people in China who can't speak with such an accent - people with a Mandarin accent that other native speakers would really struggle to understand - but social class and generational factors mean that it's unlikely a Westerner would interact with them very much.

Chengdu taxi drivers come to mind. But generally you're right of course.

And yes zhi chi shi ri and er are all retroflexes but not all retroflexes are erhua. But if you want to make sure people realise that when you say 'retroflexes' you're also talking about erhua, imo it's better to explicitly say retroflexes and erhua.

If you retroflex, the vowel of a 'zhi' will naturally sound different to if you don't?

There's a vowel in zhi??

[Guest realmayo]

Oh, there's no case for calling it a vowel?? Or, the less you retroflex the more there's a case for calling it a vowel.

[OneEye]

It's definitely a vowel. Look at #8 there.

[Lu]

Ah ok, I stand corrected, it's merely over my head. I don't know much linguistics.

[Guest realmayo]

One thought from that link from OneEye:

 

If you recorded a mainland newsreader saying "zhi" and then saying "zi", then just compared the sound of the "i", these would sound different, right? 

 

And if they're different, would there be a difference as well for either

 

1) Someone from a part of China where zh and z both sound exactly like z

 

or

 

2) Someone from Taiwan who deploys OneEye's "alveolo-palatals rather than retroflexes".

 

 

That is, with the whole standard putonghua zh/ch/sh thing versus the rest, should we be thinking more about the 'vowels' that follow those sounds rather than being completely hung up on the initials.

 

 

I've always thought it doesn't matter much in certain southern speakers turn zh into j etc, because the vowels that follow are different in, I think, all cases?