Chinese and the Brain

[yingguoguy]

Apologies as this thread is now way off topic.

Did some digging into tonal vs pitch-accent, just so I know what's really going on. Seems like no-one disputes the division between contour tonal (Mandarin) and pitch-accent (Japanese), but some linguist classify pitch-accent in with tonal languages whereas some don't.

Found this

In practical terms, accent is probably the least important aspect of Japanese pronunciation no matter what your level of language skill.

For the student of Japanese, a flat, even intonation will always be understood, and for Americans (and some Europeans) who tend to give their words very marked pitch accents, this may be a good way to eliminate some un-Japanese sounding speech habits.

Amego asked:

anyway are there any Western languages that are tonal?

From here

Some Indo-European are usually characterized as tonal, such as Lithuanian, Slovenian, Serbo-Croatian, Limburgian, Swedish and Norwegian, but they are in fact pitch accent languages or at best marginally tonal. (The same is true of some dialects of Korean, Japanese, and Ainu.) However, Punjabi is a true tone language where the tones arose as a reinterpretation of a consonant series in terms of pitch.

Ala, that audio is spookily Japanesesque. Will be heading down to Shanghai tomorrow, so will keep my ears open for this "Shanghaiese sounding like Japanese" phenomenon.

[amego]

鞋子没坏，鞋带先坏 ---> あつまわ、あたしわ（厚真は、阿多氏は, atsumawa atashiwa）.

That sentence is too concise though, in real colloquial Shanghainese it would be: 鞋子么还呒没坏塌了呢，鞋带先坏塌了 (あつまえまわたらね、あたしわたら atsuma ema watara ne, ata shi watara).

Ala, that audio is spookily Japanesesque. Will be heading down to Shanghai tomorrow, so will keep my ears open for this "Shanghaiese sounding like Japanese" phenomenon.

WOW to me its JUST PLAIN JAP, i couldn't believe my ears...i was dumbfounded for about 10s...haha...i had a Shanghainese fren back then, but his convo with his mum din occur to me as Japanesesque...haha, just very fast

真是大开眼界! A plain eye-opener!

[Mugi]

Originally Posted by mugi

In this one sentence you've listed practically every example where pitch accent plays a role in lexical distinction. And as someone above mentioned, this varies widely among dialects...

I don't think so. I can list hundreds of examples if you want. Here's another 5 off my head just for argument's sake: 桃moMO = peach, 股MOmo = thigh; 買うkaU = to buy, 飼うKAu = to raise; 居間iMA = living room, 今Ima = now/current; 声明seiMEI = statement, 生命SEImei = life; 鳴るnaRU = to ring/call, 成るNAru = to become.

ala, you're quite right that many homophones differ in pitch. I meant to say that you've listed practically every example where pitch accent plays a role in semantic distinction. With the possible exception of 声明 / 生命, all your other examples are semantically distinguished by context, not pitch accent.

[ala]

ala:

All you talked about was stressing of certain syllables. English does this' date=' too!!

If you heard, "KAmi, ichimai agete kudasai," would you understand it? Or would you think they were asking for one flat god? It would be like someone saying engLISH rather than ENGlish. You cann hardly call stressing a syllable a “tone.”

BTW, the kanji for 成る (naru) is almost never used.

--

This is what you mean--and it still does not make Japanese TONAL.

[url']http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_pitch_accent[/url]

Please follow the discussion more closely. Everyone knows Japanese has pitch accent.

Japanese accents are not distinguished by stress, they are based on pitch. Also English does not distinguish lexically based on stress (with minor exception of some connotation difference), Japanese do with its pitch accent.

The debate here as yingguoguy has clearly stated is whether Japanese pitch accent can qualify as being mildly tonal. It is important to point out that some linguists clearly state there are three types of tonal languages: contour (Mandarin, Cantonese, Thai), register (Shanghainese, African languages, Burmese), and pitch accent (Japanese).

If you heard, "KAmi, ichimai agete kudasai," would you understand it? Or would you think they were asking for one flat god?

So what? If you say the same sentence in Mandarin Chinese （请给我一张纸） with an incorrect tone for 纸 (say if you pronounced zhi2), you would also still be understood. That's how we understand foreigners with grave mispronunciations, by the context. Xinjiang Uighurs speak Mandarin just fine without any tones and I can understand them! Using context to downplay the significance of tone is a moot debate point.

BTW, the kanji for 成る (naru) is almost never used.

Oh really? A casual search on Google for 成る revealed 3,150,000 pages.

It is indeed used less frequently than kana なる in the informal or semi-formal setting, but the kanji is still definitely widely used in Japanese, hardly "almost never."

I used the kanji 成る as opposed to なる to purposely avoid ambiguity with 鳴る, since kana script does not distinguish pitch accent.

ala, you're quite right that many homophones differ in pitch. I meant to say that you've listed practically every example where pitch accent plays a role in semantic distinction. With the possible exception of 声明 / 生命, all your other examples are semantically distinguished by context, not pitch accent.

I don't see how you can say 買う, 飼う; 桃, 股 is not "semantically" distinguished by accent. If I look Japanese and I correctly pronounce moMO to a native Tokyo speaker, he is not going to think 股. Please explain in more detail how my earlier sake, kami, hashi examples are different from later momo, kau, naru examples. Sorry, I don't see any difference. Again, using context to downplay the significance of Japanese pitch accent is not a strong argument.

[yingguoguy]

I'm sorry, if you say the same sentence in Mandarin Chinese （请给我一张纸）with an incorrect tone for 纸 (say if you pronounced zhi2), you would still be understood. Using context to downplay the significance of tone is a moot debate point.

No there is a difference. In Japanese a foreign speaker can have hundreds of hours of conversation, with absolutely no awareness of proper pitch-stress on any of his words, with out any kind of misunderstanding arising or causing any difficulty to the native speaker.

It is simply not possible to hold a long conversation in Mandarin (I don't know about Shanghaiese) without thinking about and using tones without some kind of misunderstanding occuring or making the other person work really hard.

The debate here like yingguoguy has clearly stated is whether Japanese pitch accent can be qualified as a tonal behavior.

I think the important thing to realise is that 'tonal language' can mean different things to different people. It seems to be one of those words which if you're writing a paper, you need to say at the start 'by tonal language I mean this because it helps discuss this aspect'. No one's going to argue as you can make a good case either way.

In the context of Adrians original question, it doesn't make sense to call Japanese tonal as not producing the right pitches causes very few problems for foreign learners and isn't a real barrier to communication.

In the context of deezys post about perfect pitch, it might make sense to call it tonal if there were figures to show that Japanese and Chinese both have this amazing tendancy to have perfect pitch.

As a general rule though, I think it's kinda misleading to call Japanese tonal as there's so much discussion around Chinese style tones that it would lead to confusion as it has here.

[Ferno]

but his convo with his mum din[/b'] occur to me as Japanesesque

is this Singlish again?

[adrianlondon]

is this Singlish again?

tat sure is lah

[Green Pea]

i heard from somewhere that speaking Chinese (including dialects,topolects,whatever lects) makes use of the left and right brain as the word-processing and tone-processing are located at either side of the brain, thus they say the reason native speakers of English (and possibly other no-tonal languages) have a hard time with mandarin is because when they speak they only utilise one side of the brain, so when tones come in, the other side of the brain is not used to it, and thus the 怪腔怪调 (strange accents and tones...no offence )

So amazingly, 32.1% of Asian university students and in some schools, over half the Asian students reported perfect pitch!

You think Chinese/Asians speak English without strange accents and tones? If Chinese/Asians have higher levels of perfect pitch, then why can't they speak English perfectly? Singaporeans have the most horrific English pronounciation.

However, they found that both their left and right temporal lobes become active when they hear Mandarin.

This is probably true. I am not sure if that is necessarily efficient though. Seems to me is means less processing power to do other tasks, like spatial or logical skills. For a good time, watch a Chinese person try to back his car into a parking spot, especially under stress. That's why I don't like to fly on Chinese airlines.

[amego]

is this Singlish again?

tat sure is lah

aberthen "of course" =p

Singaporeans have the most horrific English pronounciation.

I TOTALLY DISAGREE. You don't know the difference between Singlish and Singapore English, when we speak properly (and we can, mind you. Please, we learn English from kindergarten) I'M SURE you can understand, OF COURSE in Singapore we speak Singlish and sometimes its not that up to standard, BUT hey this is Singapore, not any other Western countries, who are you to mind our business, why should we follow you??? Come on Singapore English is a dialect, a dialect doesn't need to follow the "parent language" exactly, if not its not a dialect anymore. If you don't know how to appreciate this unique culture, then too bad.

What we are just saying is that non-native speakers of Chinese may encounter more difficulties in tones.

This is probably true. I am not sure if that is necessarily efficient though. Seems to me is means less processing power to do other tasks, like spatial or logical skills. For a good time, watch a Chinese person try to back his car into a parking spot, especially under stress. That's why I don't like to fly on Chinese airlines.

This is just outright discrimination, STOP BEING RUDE. If you don't like it then don't fly.

[adrianlondon]

I agree with my new amigo, amego

[amego]

Thanks alot, adrianlondon! 非常感謝你

[Green Pea]

This is just outright discrimination, STOP BEING RUDE. If you don't like it then don't fly.

Discrimination sucks, doesn't it, especially when it's turned back on you. Next time, perhaps you will be more careful when you post mindless nonsense such as--

This--

they say the reason native speakers of English (and possibly other no-tonal languages) have a hard time with mandarin is because when they speak they only utilise one side of the brain, so when tones come in, the other side of the brain is not used to it, and thus the 怪腔怪调 (strange accents and tones...no offence )

And this--

WOW to me its JUST PLAIN JAP, i couldn't believe my ears...i was dumbfounded for about 10s...haha...i had a Shanghainese fren back then, but his convo with his mum din occur to me as Japanesesque...haha, just very fast

You don't think this is discrimination?

What we are just saying is that non-native speakers of Chinese may encounter more difficulties in tones.

[Mugi]

Originally posted by ala

I don't see how you can say 買う, 飼う; 桃, 股 is not "semantically" distinguished by accent. If I look Japanese and I correctly pronounce moMO to a native Tokyo speaker, he is not going to think 股...using context to downplay the significance of Japanese pitch accent is not a strong argument.

And just how often do you say the word もも without any context? Context plays an exceedingly important role in determining meaning - I can't understand how you could think otherwise.

Please explain in more detail how my earlier sake, kami, hashi examples are different from later momo, kau, naru examples. Sorry, I don't see any difference.

The accent is important in the following sentence (picture a scenario where you're at an izakaya and you've just eaten some grilled salmon and had a drink of sake): あぁ、サケが好きだ！ The likes of もも on the other hand is unlikely to ever appear in a confusing situation. ala, sometimes you take comments a little too literally - I'm not saying that every single one of your first examples are semantically distinguished by accent and every one of your latter ones not. I'm merely making a casual observation. My point is that there are very few instances in Japanese when accent is employed to differentiate words - it is almost always context that determines what a given homophone means.

[amego]

Discrimination sucks, doesn't it, especially when it's turned back on you. Next time, perhaps you will be more careful when you post mindless nonsense such as--

Yep, I got what you mean, perhaps I can alter my post so it doesn't sound that blunt. However in my opinion, I don't think its "mindless nonsense". I don't post nonsense on forums.

they say the reason native speakers of English (and possibly other no-tonal languages) have a hard time with mandarin is because when they speak they only utilise one side of the brain, so when tones come in, the other side of the brain is not used to it, and thus the 怪腔怪调 (strange accents and tones...no offence )

They say the reason native speakers of English (and possibly other non-tonal languages) encounter more difficulties in Mandarin is because when they speak they only utilise the left side of the brain,as compared to both left and right sides of the brain of Mandarin speakers, thus when the Mandarin tones come in, they are not used to it.

WOW to me its JUST PLAIN JAP, i couldn't believe my ears...i was dumbfounded for about 10s...haha...i had a Shanghainese fren back then, but his convo with his mum din occur to me as Japanesesque...haha, just very fast

After listening to the audio, I was totally surprised as to the fact that Shanghainese can sound really close to Japanese. I had a Shanghainese friend in the past, but his conversation with his mother didn't sound Japanesesque to me, just very rapid.

You don't think this is discrimination?

Sorry but I don't think so. Firstly i used the word "may", indicating that it is just a possibility. You may say:

"What we are just saying is that non-native speakers of English may encounter more difficulties in the accents."

No one will blame you and say that this is a discrimination, some may even agree with you.

Secondly, researchers too have voiced out this point. I refer you to this article again.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3025796.stm

"Native English speakers, for example, find it extraordinarily difficult to learn Mandarin."

So I'm not posting "mindless nonsense".

amego

[ala]

And just how often do you say the word もも without any context? Context plays an exceedingly important role in determining meaning - I can't understand how you could think otherwise.

I don't usually say 纸zhi3 or 桃tao2 in Mandarin without any context either.

Context is important, but it doesn't deny existence of another phonological quality in Japanese that would allow for the distinction of もも without context. And also context plays a role in tonal languages as well. Accents in Chinese speakers of Mandarin are very diverse, if you traveled around the country, you will immediately know that. Again, Xinjiang Uighurs speak Mandarin without tones (all neutral tone), yet we can understand them because of context. Mandarin has 4+1 tones, so it's a little bit harder, that's 4 times the possible meanings for a one syllable word... but like Shanghainese with only 2 tonal distinction and also being more polysyllabic, can you see how the layperson might think Shanghainese is non-tonal? Because he doesn't notice the tones himself until told otherwise. But this doesn't mean tones don't exist in Shanghainese, they still play a minor role, though not in the same league as Mandarin or Cantonese.

It is simply not possible to hold a long conversation in Mandarin (I don't know about Shanghaiese) without thinking about and using tones without some kind of misunderstanding occuring or making the other person work really hard.

Mandarin is indeed more tonal than Japanese, I don't think that was in contention. Mandarin has a possible of 5 tonal variations per syllable (that 5 permutations per syllable!), Japanese has only 2 variations per syllable with a maximum of 1 downstep . The scale of tonality is vastly different.

But if you were to speak Mandarin in a perfectly neutral manner, without way-out-of-there tonal inflections, then you will likely be understood (given context).

[Green Pea]

They say the reason native speakers of English (and possibly other non-tonal languages) encounter more difficulties in Mandarin is because when they speak they only utilise the left side of the brain,as compared to both left and right sides of the brain of Mandarin speakers, thus when the Mandarin tones come in, they are not used to it.

Yes, that's what they said, but not what you said originally. I quote you: "and thus the 怪腔怪调 (strange accents and tones...no offence)". Funny you put in "no offense". You were making a qualitative judgement on the research. You are not simply restating. And, now you've backtracked to the original research. I don't have a problem with the research, but I do take issue with your judgments. I know I am calling you out on this, but it's a common mantra. English speakers have strange accents and tones. Blah blah. Usually, it's said in the worst English possible by people who are too blind to realise their own poor English pronounciation. Often, these people are Singaporeans or HK Chinese who can't even speak Mandarin properly. It's a double standard.

Your attempt to pass off Singaporean English as a dialect and cultural is weak. If that's your excuse, then consider the idea that non-Chinese speak a dialect of Chinese, it's their culture, and you shouldn't bash how 怪 their dialect sounds. Sort of silly, huh? It's another double standard.

Sorry but I don't think so. Firstly i used the word "may", indicating that it is just a possibility. You may say:

"What we are just saying is that non-native speakers of English may encounter more difficulties in the accents."

No one will blame you and say that this is a discrimination, some may even agree with you.

If you're not being discriminatory, then neither am I.

[stephanhodges]

I found one of the references that show that native Mandarin speakers only use the LEFT side of the brain. Non-native speakers (at least while in early stages of learning), use both sides.

http://www.ku.edu/~kuppl/abstracts/crawtaomtbalafs.html

(Section 4 Discussion)

Although the native speaker data are based on one subject only, these results are consistent with previous findings in behavioral studies that lexical tones are predominantly lateralized in the left hemisphere by native speakers, whereas they are bilaterally lateralized by non-native speakers

There were other papers that discussed right brain usage in processing Hanzi (images), but this thread hasn't been discussing that, as far as I can tell, nor am I trying to widen the thread, having been caught too many times by "Mr. R" already...

[amego]

I found one of the references that show that native Mandarin speakers only use the LEFT side of the brain. Non-native speakers (at least while in early stages of learning), use both sides.

This experiment is about the identification of tones, and speaking Chinese and identifying Chinese tones are two totally different stories.

Yes, that's what they said, but not what you said originally. I quote you: "and thus the 怪腔怪调 (strange accents and tones...no offence)". Funny you put in "no offense". You were making a qualitative judgement on the research. You are not simply restating. And, now you've backtracked to the original research. I don't have a problem with the research, but I do take issue with your judgments. I know I am calling you out on this, but it's a common mantra. English speakers have strange accents and tones. Blah blah. Usually, it's said in the worst English possible by people who are too blind to realise their own poor English pronounciation. Often, these people are Singaporeans or HK Chinese who can't even speak Mandarin properly. It's a double standard.

By logic, a Chinese learning and speaking English should be easier than an English learning and speaking Chinese. Thus, there is some sort of "double standard"; An English speaking Chinese may be more 怪腔怪调 than a Chinese speaking English, by this logic.

Your attempt to pass off Singaporean English as a dialect and cultural is weak. If that's your excuse, then consider the idea that non-Chinese speak a dialect of Chinese, it's their culture, and you shouldn't bash how 怪 their dialect sounds. Sort of silly, huh? It's another double standard.

What we have here are two different things, firstly, Singapore's Mandarin is not really "Mandarin", its actually dialects(topolects) like Hokkien and Cantonese translated, usually directly translated to Mandarin, thus differing slightly from the Standard pronunciation. Remember, we do not have standard Mandarin teachers from Beijing to teach us, thus we develop a rather unique "Mandarin". The same thing is for our English.

So this pattern is Dialect>>>"Mandarin" (and English). I'm pretty sure that if we have such teachers in every school, we can speak better and more standard Mandarin and English (although I find that currently our Mandarin and English are already quite up to mark as Chinese and English-speaking natives understand us in all my experiences). Also, our Mandarin is up to standard in tones, and most words. I admit that many Singaporeans have problems with the "-h-" sounds, like "shi", "chen, cheng" etc.

As for the case of "non-Chinese speak a dialect of Chinese", normally, normally , its that they take classes, specialised classes, and the teachers are usually speaking Standard Mandarin or Cantonese, etc, and when their Chinese is 怪腔怪调, it shows that its really the case. BUT if they are learning Mandarin from a 怪腔怪调 teacher, and their Chinese is 怪腔怪调, I have nothing to say.

it's their culture, and you shouldn't bash how 怪 their dialect sounds.

Unless they are speaking "modified" dialects(including Mandarin) due to influx of many dialects and languages simultaneously, for a substantial period of time, until a "true" culture develops (Singlish is a unique brew of Hokkien, English, Mandarin, Cantonese, Teochiew, Malay, and many other dialects and languages), or othe similiar situations. When a non-Chinese is speaking his/her native language from birth, and takes weekend Chinese lessons, I don't see how its a culture. If a really large group of them is learning Chinese, and they begin to speak it with their unique tones and pronunciations, then I can say that they can break away from the Standard Chinese and go ahead, but until then, just stick to Standard Chinese for now.

[geraldc]

Singaporean English is an accent, it's not incorrect pronunciation. They just have stresses in different places. The Singaporean education system is based on the UK education system, and their school exams are actually set at a higher standard than the those set by the UK government. In fact, the board of Education works closely with the University of Cambridge Examinations syndicate, the same people who set the UK exams, however while the UK moved to GCSEs, Singapore remained on the O level.

My brother has an English accent like me, and in Singapore, everyone just assumed he was putting on an English accent, and wondered why he didn't speak with the local accent. He was running into problems with words such as "buffet", he'd repeat it several times to people, until someone would go "oh you mean buf-fet!!" He discovered for Singaporeans to understand the word buffet, you had to stress the last syllable.

With tones, quite a few Australians run into trouble in the UK, as a lot of the time they raise their tone towards the end of the sentance, so when they're making a statement, some people assume they're asking a question etc.

Asian students with perfect pitch, probably has more to do with Asian students being forced to have music lessons by their parents from a young age. Everyone has the potential to develop perfect pitch, but without training it will disappear.

[geraldc]

If someone posts something that you find offensive or insulting, can you just explain calmly what it is they've written that has offended you and ask them politely to change it, being insulting back or resorting to sarcasm obviously doesn't work...

With terms like "Jap", I think it's only in the US and UK that it's regarded as an offensive term, in regard to the way the term was used in WW2. Not everyone knows to avoid the abbreviation.

I'm not a mod or anything so feel free to ignore me, I just think this is a nicer board with fewer pointless arguments, and as this board is about increasing communication, perhaps we should do that, rather than resorting to handbags at 10 paces.