Re: Related languages (Re: A China-Sumer connection)

From: Lee Sau Dan (danlee_at_informatik.uni-freiburg.de)
Date: 03/27/05 

Date: 27 Mar 2005 14:24:02 +0800

>>>>> "Comm" == Comm <no@spam.com> writes:

    Comm> I can't read what you wrote there cha2 or ts'a21. But Chai
    Comm> and Tsai. It also sounds like the regular word Tea when
    Comm> some say it :) Like Tsee.

You still haven't learnt that [t'e24] in Hokkien or Taiwanese means
"tea"?

    Comm> So I don't think it comes from the Chinese, unless you think
    Comm> that the Russians got the word from the Tatars who got it
    Comm> from the Chinese?

So, you believe that Russians or Tatars invented tea and spread the
word to Chinese?

    Comm> I also like Chinese tea, black and jasmine.

In China, we have hundreds of varieties of teas. Black and Jasmine
are just two of them.

    Comm> I'm a coffee drinker usually, but occasionally I want tea -
    Comm> strong tea.

I hate coffee.

    Comm> Not what I meant. And you seem to think the differences are
    Comm> the same. You seem to think I'm insulting tone speaking
    Comm> people. Not so. I find it amazing. THINK: - deaf/dumb
    Comm> people read lips. There is no way they'd be able to read
    Comm> lips if the word "ma" is different words depending on tone.
    Comm> They'd see the lips making "MA."

Is there a way to read lips and tell which syllable is being stressed?
Is there a way to lip-read nasal vowels?
And how does a lip-reading read an uvular "r"?

    Comm> Don't stoop to that level with me. In't obvious I did not
    Comm> know that about other languages? In't? Yes? I did nothing
    Comm> to deserve that. I did not KNOW about tonal African
    Comm> languages (that I have to tell you that speaks tons). I
    Comm> heard some are spoken with clicks, tho. I am not a
    Comm> linguist. You know that.

Neither am I. You don't know that?

    Comm> - even if some of us have tonality in the way we speak -
    Comm> sort of - we don't use the same tones for the same words.

>> Do you use the same consonants for the same words?

    Comm> I said we do NOT use the same tones for the same words.

And we don't use nasalization on vowels to distinguish different
words, either. So? How is that better or worse than languages with
nasal vowels?

>> If so, then what's wrong with using the same tones for the same
>> words?

    Comm> You miss my meaning. Chinese word "ma." Different tones.

And the English blah/blow. Different vowels/diphthongs. So? How is
using vowels to distinguish meangings better than using tones to
distinguish meanings? And how do you differentiate "object(v.)" and
"object(n.)" in English?

    Comm> Tones determine the meaning of the word "ma." For us, "ma"
    Comm> is the same word.

For us, they aren't. So what? What makes it better or worse?

For you, stress position changes the meaning of a word. How is that
superior?

    Comm> If I say Durte, no matter what tone I put on it, up, down,
    Comm> flat, it's still durte - tone does not change the word at
    Comm> all. Tone does change the word ma in Chinese. That is what
    Comm> I meant. A kid calling his mother, tone rises Ma? Tone is
    Comm> flat: Ma. Kid wants something: MaaaaaAAA. And so forth.

So. Chinese uses tones to tell distinguish words. English uses
stress to distinguish words. How is one better than the other?

>> How is using chopsticks to eat in any way stranger than eating
>> with knives and forks? Just different ways of doing things,
>> and, most importantly, both work.

    Comm> So does eating with your hands. Fried Chicken? Fruit?

We can use chopsticks to do all of them.

    Comm> On the other hand, related languages should sound similar

    Comm> Hold on, I did NOT say that.

>>> Ask an English speaker to listen to Swiss German, and see if
>>> he thinks

    Comm> those 2 languages "sound similar".

No. They don't.

    Comm> I see people from Switzerland and Germany all the time at
    Comm> the beach (I live where many foreigners come to vacation,
    Comm> btw). They sound similar to me. It's subjective.

I mean Swiss German vs. English. You've got me wrong.

>>> Personally, I find French and Italian sound very different,
>>> although

    Comm> they're closely related.

That doesn't imply they have to sound alike.

    Comm> Tell that to every single Italian I also know, who does not
    Comm> understand Spanish enough to speak to USA's Hispanic unarmed
    Comm> invaders. I'm all for what China does to its unarmed
    Comm> invaders. The only Italians I know that understand Spanish
    Comm> learned to speak it.

I happen to know Italians who confirmed me that they can understand
Spanish without learning Spanish. And I know Spanish-speaking peoples
who told me that they understand Italian without learning Italian.
I've even met people who told me they could understand Italian
(resp. Spanish) not because they've learnt it, but because they've
learnt Spanish (resp. Italian).

So, all these people are lying?

    Comm> I wonder to this day how or why on earth anyone would get
    Comm> phonetic "Pee King " out of "Bei Jing." What, they can't
    Comm> say Bye? Or Jingle? Bye Jing would make the right sound.
    Comm> Where did they get Pee King - those sounds?

And how come "Florence" is called "Firenze" (no "l"!) in Italian and
"Florenz" in German? How come "Venice" is called "Veneze" in Italian
and "Venedig" in German? How come "Praha" in Czech is "Prague" in
English? And why do you call it "Moscow", when Russians call it
"Muskva".

"Peking" is from an earlier (maybe 200 years ago) pronunciation,
likely something like [pei kiN] or [pe? kiN]. "Beijing" reflects a
more modern pronunciation [pei cCiN] and is spelt according to the
Hanyu Pinyin standard (an ISO standard).

    Comm> Why can't they even begin to pronounce foreign names when we
    Comm> have no problem pronouncing their names?

So, how do you pronounce "Paris"? Do you really pronounce the "s"?
How come you can't pronounce it the French way?

    Comm> That should tell you something - that people not only
    Comm> subjectively hear sounds of words, but they might be hearing
    Comm> a whole other sound and not the sound actually being
    Comm> produced.

No. Your "Peking" vs. "Beijing" example is a wrong for demonstrate
that. "Peking" and "Beijing" shows 2 historical changes: 1) Sound
change in Mandarin over the centuries; 2) A change in the Romanization
system.

My "Firenze" example also shows a historical sound change. Italian
dropped the "l" and "o" and inserted an "i" there, while German and
English have not followed suit and they simply kept the old name.

    Comm> MOST importantly of all: Do all linguists have perfect
    Comm> pitch? Hmmm?

Neither do any speaker of tone languages. Would you find it hard to
believe that there are very bad singers who speak tone languages
perfectly? 

-- 
Lee Sau Dan                     §õ¦u´°                          ~{@nJX6X~}
E-mail: danlee@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee

Relevant Pages
Loading