What's the deal with the Taiwanese adding 有 and 啦 everywhere?

[OneEye]

Both 有 and the relatively higher frequency of sentence-ending particles are both due to the Minnan influence, not English. If you're actually interested, the phenomenon is called language contact. I know that Cornelius Kubler has published on language contact in Taiwan.

 

A preference is one thing. Calling something wrong, saying it irks you, insinuating that something is inherently feminine, strange, etc. are another. That's not stating a preference, but making a value judgement. The reason (I think) that people including myself get so defensive about Taiwanese Mandarin is that it's very rare to have such a conversation without such value judgements, without people making Taiwanese Mandarin into a somehow inferior bastard version of the "true" Chinese Mandarin. I'm all for preferences. I personally prefer Taiwanese Mandarin, because I've lived here for 3 years, learned almost all of my Chinese here, and love the country and the people. But stating a preference is not what the OP was doing.

 

OP, I think you'll find that many of the top professors in the US learned Chinese in Taiwan. Edward Shaughnessy and Victor Mair are two that I can name for sure off the top of my head, but there are many more. Before the IUP moved to Beijing in the mid-late 90s, it was based in Taipei (which is now the ICLP), and was pretty much the place for students from the top American universities to work on their Chinese, so for decades, that's where the best of the best went. And they still do. I know people who have gone there in the past two years who have degrees or are in the process of getting degrees in Chinese studies from Harvard, Oxford, Brown, Berkeley, Chicago, and Michigan. I couldn't imagine them going back, now with professional-level academic proficiency in Chinese, just to be given a bad grade by a teacher at their home institution because they said 有 where a mainlander wouldn't. (Here's a secret: many of the Chinese teachers in the US are from Taiwan.)

 

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it until these ridiculous posts stop: you'd be doing damn well to actually sound like a Taiwanese person. I'd personally laugh at anyone who tried to insinuate that I speak "incorrect" or somehow inferior Mandarin because I talk like a Taiwanese person. When the overwhelmingly vast majority of people who speak Chinese as a second language have terrible, very thick foreign accents, bad grammar, and use odd, nonnative collocations, niggling over someone who sounds like a native speaker (from anywhere) because of their regional accent would be (ought to be) unthinkable. But for some reason, for many on this forum, if the person in question sounded like a Taiwanese person, they'd somehow be wrong.

 

If Taiwanese Mandarin were the preferred variant worldwide, people would be saying "Why don't they ever use 有 in China the way it *should* be used?" But the thing is, using one country's language standard to judge the usage of another country is absurd, no matter from which direction. The vast majority of Taiwanese people don't care one bit about conforming to China's language standard. And why should they? If you told them they were wrong because they don't speak standard 普通話, they'd probably laugh and start making fun of Chinese accents. Same deal if you told a Mexican that he wasn't speaking good Spanish because he doesn't use the vosotros form pronounce his c's like they do in Spain.

 

Side note to Nathan Mao: it isn't the dentals/retroflexes that are "blurred" in Taiwan, at least among native Mandarin speakers, but the retroflexes and palatals. However, there is no situation in which a syllable beginning in j q or x has the same final as one beginning in zh ch or sh, so there is no chance of misunderstanding if you've tuned your ears to the accent. People only think it's a z/zh c/ch s/sh problem because they're not listening closely enough.

 

Anyway, bottom line: you need to learn to understand a wide variety of accents if you want to be good at Chinese (or any language). You don't have to talk like they do, but you do need to learn to accept that that's simply how they talk without putting a value judgement on it. If you really want to understand, as you said, then leaving your value judgement at the door is the first step.

[Shelley]

I wonder if the use of 有 is supposed to sound like the yo that young people like to say as in Yo dude.

 

Just a random thought.

[Nathan Mao]

 

 

This is one of those things that "irks" me, and I don't mean your comment in particular because you are not passing judgment on the issue -- you just happened to bring up this particular topic ;)

The "Beijing" "er" is sometimes attributed to the Manchurian influence during the Qing dynasty, but if you read classic literature from Ming times, you will still find it written -- it is common in Water Margin, for example.

Erhua is not a Beijingy corruption of Mandarin, it is a part of the spoken Mandarin language. It is also a part of the vast majority of dynastic and early Republic literature. 

Some people choose to ignore this particular part of the language, but it doesn't make erhua any less correct. 

 

My point was only that the "er" continues to exist because it adds some useful assistance in comprehension. That was my only point.  

There are other dialects/accents that use other ways to assist comprehension w/o the "er". 

But the totality of my point is that the "er" continues because a critical mass of language users (subconsciously?) find it useful.  I meant nothing more and nothing less.

[renzhe]

By mandarin do you mean putonghua? I ask because I understood that Beijingers use a lot more "er"s than is taught as putonghua?

I'm talking about all (most) varieties of Mandarin. They have varying amounts of erhua.

As with everything else, the putonghua standard fixed a very specific amount of erhua as "correct", and you're right, Beijingers tend to use erhua much more than the standard prescribes.

This is also "incorrect" if you blindly adhere to the standard, but it is certainly legitimate to speak like that -- it's their mother tongue and that is their accent.

[淨土極樂]

It's completely ridiculous how some people just see attacks on TW in pretty much any topic that compares mainland and Taiwan.

 

Saying that BJ people talk like they have food in their mouth is okay on this forum, but god forbid you say that TW men overuse particles and thus sound feminine. Even though both are very common stereotypes.

 

As for dialects and their worth. My wife is from 陕北 and I can speak 延安话, which is very close to 普通话, but with some different initials, finals, tones and vocabulary. It's 99% comprehensible by other Mandarin speakers, but still, people are to going to be annoyed if we try to speak this anywhere but 陕北. Or a more direct example, what if one goes to TW and speaks with a heavy BJ accent there.... The point is, it's perfectly okay to be annoyed by someone's dialect/accent.

 

Anyway, I sill haven't got any linguistic explanation for my questions, apart from "Taiwan is a country and they can do whatever they want".

[renzhe]

But the totality of my point is that the "er" continues because a critical mass of language users (subconsciously?) find it useful. I meant nothing more and nothing less.

I know, and I didn't mean to imply that you did.

I just used the mention of erhua in your post to address a specific grievance of mine, that's all.

[Ruben von Zwack]

 

Anyway, I sill haven't got any linguistic explanation for my questions, apart from "Taiwan is a country and they can do whatever they want".

 

Yes you did, don't you read answers? Several people here said it's a Min Nan influence. One Eye referenced a particular author and his works. You aren't waiting for him to read those and post an abstract here just for you, or are you?

[renzhe]

It's completely ridiculous how some people just see attacks on TW in pretty much any topic that compares mainland and Taiwan.

Every topic which contains references to both Mainland China and Taiwan inevitably comes down to Communism vs. Nationalism, Mao vs. Chiang, independence vs. unitarianism, yada yada.It is a tragedy, really, but you should get used to it because it's unlikely to change soon. People get very defensive about these topics, so it's a good habit to address such issues with a bit of extra care.

Anyway, I sill haven't got any linguistic explanation for my questions, apart from "Taiwan is a country and they can do whatever they want".

You got an explanation from several people: it's interference from Minnanese, the native dialect of Taiwan, in which such use is common.

[OneEye]

Anyway, I sill haven't got any linguistic explanation for my questions, apart from "Taiwan is a country and they can do whatever they want".

 

Sure you did. Language contact. Minnan. Cornelius Kubler. You're welcome.

[Nathan Mao]

 

 

Side note to Nathan Mao: it isn't the dentals/retroflexes that are "blurred" in Taiwan, at least among native Mandarin speakers, but the retroflexes and palatals. However, there is no situation in which a syllable beginning in j q or x has the same final as one beginning in zh ch or sh, so there is no chance of misunderstanding if you've tuned your ears to the accent. People only think it's a z/zh c/ch s/sh problem because they're not listening closely enough.

 

Who said anything about j/q/x?

 

There is a z/zh, c/ch s/sh blurring that is negatively impacting communication in Taiwan, and I heard that directly from a Taiwan native.  He said in most cases, context makes it clear.  For example, cong/chong is blurred to the point of ambiguity, but it is still clear when a person is asking 你从那里来？ or saying 那个虫子很麻烦。

However, in some cases the blurring causes ambiguity...I can't remember the exact cases he said...I thought it was 张先生 vs 脏先生 and 甥女 vs 僧女...in any case, he gave 4-5 examples of situations where the z/zh, c/ch/ and s/sh blurring could turn a normal statement into an insult and/or ribald joke.  

 

So my assumption was that things like adding 有 might act as additional markers that would reduce ambiguity.  Maybe not, I haven't sat down and studied it.  

 

But the blurring of z/zh, c/ch, and s/sh is increasing ambiguity, and that will have (has had) an impact in the Taiwan version of Mandarin as people (have) learn(ed) other ways to reduce ambiguity and ensure effective communication.

 

In any case, here is a good scholarly work discussing the retroflex in Taiwan.

Some of the conclusions are fascinating:

[Nathan Mao]

@renzhe

 

 

I know, and I didn't mean to imply that you did.
I just used the mention of erhua in your post to address a specific grievance of mine, that's all. 

Ah, got it. Thanks for the clarification.  I didn't want anyone to think I was trying to make a judgment on the Beijing er.

[renzhe]

Who said anything about j/q/x?

Taiwanese people often pronounce zh/ch/sh similar to j/q/x. This is what OneEye is referring to, and what people refer to as "soft retroflexes". Often you can clearly hear this in Taiwanese speech, but it doesn't quite "sound right" to somebody used to northern Mainland pronunciation.

At the same time, it is true that some Taiwanese substitute zh/ch/sh with z/c/s, as do many Mainland Chinese, especially in the south. There is a very wide range there, some Taiwanese have perfect retroflexes.

[Nathan Mao]

 

 

...some Taiwanese have perfect retroflexes. 

That article I linked talked a little bit about that.

 

Among the conclusions were that the retroflex is absent in Taiwan as much as inconsistent, and when someone in Taiwan does use the retroflex, it is often for clarity, emphasis, or formality.  

 

For clarity, this is a study done by a National Taiwan University scholar that specifically cites the blurring of z/zh, c/ch, s/sh, and n/ng.

[Guest realmayo]

I'm talking about all (most) varieties of Mandarin. They have varying amounts of erhua.

 

Renzhe, are you sure it's as widespread as you suggest? I'd thought that nowhere in China traditionally uses the same erhua as you find in standard putonghua: places like Beijing use a lot, places like Hubei use none. i.e. "too much" or "too little". But maybe there are places like Harbin which are extremely close to the putonghua standard?

 

Anyway, there's nothing "correct" about the amount of erhua that Beijingers use: it's a local standard that is different from putonghua. The OP is referring to a Taiwan standard that is different from putonghua. Same thing, right? The only difference is the difference in status etc between Beijing and Taibei in the modern Chinese-speaking world.

 

And that difference in statuses means you'll get fewer odd looks if you rock up in a random Chinese-speaking place with your mouth full of 儿s than if your sentences are dripping with 啦s.

 

For what it's worth, I don't think it's odd that someone might say "ooh, Taiwan-style mandarin sounds a bit girly to me" because, well, it does if you're used to the mainland standard. French or Russian can sound a bit sexy if you're used to, say, English. Welsh valley accented English can sound quite sing-songy. The Birmingham accent is not much-loved by most English people. Apparently the Scottish accent is the most nice-sounding accent (or most trusted or most reassuring) in the UK, for UK residents. Then again, I remember a newspaper article saying 'foreigners' preferred the Birmingham accent!

 

To deny these preferences is crazy. But to assume that Taiwanese men must be effeminate because that's how their language sounds to you -- that's what's daft.

[Lu]

It's completely ridiculous how some people just see attacks on TW in pretty much any topic that compares mainland and Taiwan.

(...)

Anyway, I sill haven't got any linguistic explanation for my questions, apart from "Taiwan is a country and they can do whatever they want".

Perhaps consider rereading both your own original post, and the various replies that offered a number of explanations for your question, as well as reasons why your original post is rubbing people the wrong way.

 

Taiwanese people often pronounce zh/ch/sh similar to j/q/x.

I don't think I ever heard someone do that? zh/ch/sh usually sounds more like z/c/s (as you mention later).

To deny these preferences is crazy. But to assume that Taiwanese men must be effeminate because that's how their language sounds to you -- that's what's daft.

I couldn't agree more.

[renzhe]

I don't think I ever heard someone do that? zh/ch/sh usually sounds more like z/c/s (as you mention later).

I mean a "soft" retroflex that sounds different from both a retroflex sound like [zh] and a dental like [z].

Whether it is palatalised or not, I do not know. It just sounds more like a [j] than either [zh] or [z].

The notation inside the brackets is pinyin.

[renzhe]

Renzhe, are you sure it's as widespread as you suggest? I'd thought that nowhere in China traditionally uses the same erhua as you find in standard putonghua

The putonghua standard is artificial by design: it uses the "best practices" and the vocabulary of the literary canon written in baihua, and the pronunciation is supposedly based on the pronunciation of the well-educated Beijing elite.

So it seems that somebody used to used the "Goldilocks" amount of erhua 100 years ago Beijing language has moved on in the meantime, as did other accents and dialects.

But I meant erhua in general, not the specific usage prescribed by the Mainland putonghua standard. Most Mandarin dialects have some erhua in them*, some of them have little, some have loads.

* I really didn't do a proper study on this, it's just something I pulled out of my sleeve. I'd love to be proven wrong or right

[Meng Lelan]

Here's a secret: many of the Chinese teachers in the US are from Taiwan

 

 

 

Back in the 1970s, 1980s that was true but I'm not sure about now? Because it seems like now most of the Chinese teachers in the US are from the mainland. Whenever I go to the Chinese language teachers conferences that's what it seems like. 

[hedwards]

This is interesting. There's a few things to note.

Not all Chinese languages are equally preferable, even if you normalize for the rates at which they're spoken. This is something that shows up in any language that's large enough for regional dialects and registers to develop. Americans tend to prefer the midwestern accent for historical reasons as it's the accent that developed by virtue of it's close proximity to shipping traffic on the Mississippi river and consequently became a sort of de facto dialect for a huge chunk of the nation. In the UK there are similar dialects that exude power and sophistication that lead to being treated with more respect than if you're speaking with an accent that's commonly associated with poorly educated people that work in lower class jobs.

 

It's perhaps unfortunate, but the preferable accents are going to be the ones that bear the most resemblance to the people who have the power and influence. It happens in other languages. Suggesting that there aren't preferable variants of Chinese is ignoring that you get treated differently based upon how you speak and which accent you use.

 

As far as the blurring goes, that's inevitable and tends to happen more quickly when populations aren't doing much mixing. The native dialect will tend to dictate that certain sounds are easier or harder because there's less practice with them. I remember from my time in Guangdong that when you get down there that the "h"s tend to disappear from a lot of words. And you always have the issues of precisely where does one phoneme start and another end.

 

Lastly, native speakers are worse at identifying and handling these things than non-natives are. Yes, there's a widely recognized deficit early on, but because non-natives come with their own ears that aren't so wired into specific frames of communication, there's a much better chance to handle the language variety that pops up. This is why non-natives shouldn't aspire to do everything the same way as the natives do you wind up with inferior results while throwing out the advantages that you have..

[Tiana]

Back in the 1970s, 1980s that was true but I'm not sure about now?

 

That is true. Back in he 1970s, 1980s there was no such thing as the so-called "Confucius Institute".