User talk:Justinrleung/Archive 29

About "Talk:chhia̋ng-póng"

Sorry for replying late. I find that there are people using the 5th-tone (mid-rising tone) mark for the 9th high-rising tone. Maybe influenced by the fact that there are no the 9th tone mark in POJ (there are 9th tone mark in TL), even though it'll break the tone sandhi rule in POJ [5th-tone syllable is not pronounced in rising tone if it's not final syllable].

For example:

I hőng o-ló. (He's praised. in correct TL)

I hông o-ló. (He's praised. by some POJ writers) --Yoxem (talk) 08:45, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Yoxem: Hi, the entry was deleted before the "reform" in how Chinese varieties other than Standard Chinese should be treated for WT:CFI, so we needed three durably archived sources for the entry to pass RFV. Now, Hokkien is considered WT:LDL, so we would need just need one reliable source to keep the entry. The issue with this is that we only allow POJ and not TL. I'm not sure if the 9th tone is usually marked with the double acute accent in POJ, even though that is what we are doing for now for our pronunciations in {{zh-pron}}. It is much more common to see the 5th tone mark used, which would mean it might be better to have the entry at the 5th tone mark version even though it's not accurate to the pronunciation. I have also seen people use the breve accent (hŏng), but I'm not sure how widespread that is. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

There are no example in Barclay's translation of The Bible for the ninth tone, and there are not one form for the tone, maybe you can ask Taiwanese Romanization Association (台灣羅馬字協會) for the question. Yoxem (talk) 04:37, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Blog

Just so you know, for the blog I have been citing, the guy who writes it is from Medan. See this post: [1]. The dog2 (talk) 18:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @The dog2: Yes, I dug a little deeper and found where they mentioned it. Sorry for the revert. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: I'm reading it a little more carefully, and it seems like the blog is describing something more general than Medan Hokkien because it has features that aren't typical of Medan, like png instead of puinn for "rice" or pueh instead of peh for "eight". It seems like they also lived in Singapore before, so I'm not sure if their Hokkien might also be influenced by Singaporean Hokkien. What do you think? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:00, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

The pronunciation seems to have been influenced somewhat by Singapore Hokkien, but the vocabulary has terms that we do not use in Singapore. For instance, 桌頂 means "on the table" in Singapore, while "table" is 桌. It seems that only Penang and Medan use 桌頂 to mean "table". And likewise, 水房 is not a term we use in Singapore to mean "bathroom". The dog2 (talk) 19:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Okay then, thanks for finding this resource! It might not be perfect, but it's better than nothing. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

By the way, do you have any way to check the character for the Medan Hokkien word for 鍋 (pot)? He writes the pronunciation as "ló", but that's also not a term we use in Singapore. I've confirmed with my Hokkien relatives than the word for "pot" in Singapore is 鍋, which is pronounced "oe" or "er" in Singapore, depending on who you are talking to. The dog2 (talk) 19:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Hmm, I wonder if they made a mistake and it's actually the stove, like 爐. I think we would have to hold off on adding this. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: I just checked Timothy Tye's dictionary and apparently they also use 爐 for cooking pot in Penang Hokkien, so I think it'd be 爐. I guess its meaning shifted from stove to pot because of hot pot? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I won't be sure because we don't use that term to mean "pot" in Singapore, but I guess that's a possibility. As I previously mentioned, in Singapore, "pot" is 鍋. But speaking of which, I wonder if 爐 is be used in this sense in Zhangzhou and Yilan, since Penang, Medan and Yilan Hokkien were all derived from Zhangzhou Hokkien. And to my knowledge, Penang and Medan Hokkien are very similar. In Singapore, our Hokkien tends to be more of a mix of Quanzhou and Xiamen. The dog2 (talk) 20:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: I don't think it's used like that in Zhangzhou or Yilan, but this could be an innovation in Penang and Medan, which are closely related. @Freelance Intellectual, I'm wondering if the Penang Hokkien dictionaries you have on hand have this word. Or maybe @Fredrick Campbell might know about this. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Tan has:

chàu	n. 1) a stove. khì chàu a gas stove 2) a fireplace. 3) a furnace.
hiauⁿ-lɵ̂	n. an urn for joss sticks; a censer.
liēn-lɵ̂	n. a dinner of raw food which is first dipped in boiling soup in a "steamboat".
lɵ̂	n. 1) a furnace; a stove; an oven. 2) a fireplace. Variant: húe-lɵ̂.
tiáⁿ	n. 1) a frying pan; a wok. 2) a tripod. kim-tiáⁿ a tripod with a shallow pan for burning joss paper 3) a cauldron.
ue	n. a small enamel, metal or porcelain pot. chiú-tε̂-ue a wine jug

De Gijzel has:

pan (for cooking)	tíaⁿ
pot (earthen)	phûn
* cooking pot	bók-kèng, oe
steamboat (dish)	lô͘, jiān-lô͘, liān-lô͘
stove	chàu

I don't think lô͘ is the most common term for "cooking pot" or "stove", but its range of meanings is broad enough to potentially cover both. A culturally important term that I couldn't find in Tan and De Gijzel's dictionaries is ûi-lô͘, but I've personally heard it, and it's included in Churchman's unpublished work. Freelance Intellectual (talk) 23:41, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: So, I was busy with my exams and spent more time playing a certain game after my exams were over for a few more months. Locally, I have not heard of ló for pot. A similar sound that I have heard is lô· for steamboat, frequently paired with 食 (tsia̍h) to make 食爐 (tsia̍h-lô·). I don't know the character for lô· and the usage of 爐 is post-hoc. I got the character from the earlier dialogue where the character was suggested. On a separate note, how do I type the ō͘ but with different diacritic marks? Fredrick Campbell (talk) 10:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Fredrick Campbell: Thanks for your input. I think 爐 should be right for lô͘. What would you call a cooking pot? To type POJ characters, I usually use the FHL Taigi-Hakka IME. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 11:29, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: A cooking pot is usually called oe. Fredrick Campbell (talk) 11:39, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Pontianak Teochew

Just so you know, I found this: [2]. It has some grammatical stuff in it, but unfortunately, there's no vocabulary list with Chinese characters. The dog2 (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Thanks for finding this! It's probably not systematic enough for us to get a lot out of it, but it does have example sentences with glosses. I'll look through it to see if it's worth adding this as a point. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

By the way, I also found a few papers doing a quick Google search, mainly about phonology: [3], [4]. And here's one about grammar: [5]. I'm not experienced at IPA, but maybe you could extract data from these given your background in linguistics. The dog2 (talk) 23:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Nice, I'll look into these! I think there should be at least some basic words, so I might add Pontianak (and Jambi) in as points later. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: These's a vocabulary list of Pontianak Teochew (as well as Jieyang, Chaozhou and Shantou) in 印尼坤甸潮州方言词汇研究——兼谈印尼华裔学生的汉语教学. --沈澄心✉ 01:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@沈澄心: Ah, thanks! Oh, and I just realized that we already have Pontianak Teochew in the module. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Country names

Just wondering, should we have a dialectal synonyms table for country names, for instance, Indonesia is 印度尼西亞 in China, but 印尼 in Singapore, Laos is 老撾 in China but 寮國 in Singapore, Australia is 澳大利亞 in China but 澳洲 in Singapore, New Zealand is 新西蘭 in China but 紐西蘭 in Singapore and so on. The dog2 (talk) 18:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2:, good question. I was working on making a separate module for these kinds of words. That said, there seem to be words that might be specific to certain varieties like 露西亞 for Russia in Taiwanese Hokkien and Hakka. @Suzukaze-c, RcAlex36, 沈澄心, what do you think? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Speaking of which, you seem to have reverted the tags I added to some of those entries. Is there any particular reason for that? The dog2 (talk) 23:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Both 印度尼西亞 and 印尼 are used in Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau and Singapore, and the same with 澳大利亞 and 澳洲. See search results from LiVaC: 印度尼西亞, 印尼, 澳大利亞, 澳洲. The labels introduce a false dichotomy between the terms. Of course, the terms may be used to different extents, but the labels make them absolute differences, which is not right. I have told you many times not to make these black-and-white distinctions with labels. Please do not add labels like these without more research. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Support. --沈澄心✉ 05:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Support, and I wrote {{dial syn}} (my reimplementation of {{zh-dial-syn}}) with Justin's idea in mind.

Names like 露西亞 seem to be confined to a country anyway, so we could use the qualifier tag. (another example)

—Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

How would we treat cases like 韓國 / 大韓民國 / 南朝鮮? —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Suzukaze-c: It looks like we have already implemented several country names using {{zh-dial}} rather than my old idea of having a different kind of template for place names only. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

That works too. 🤷 —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Suzukaze-c, 沈澄心, The dog2 The only issue I see is when the formal names are different between two regions, like 老撾 / 寮國. It seems like we have defaulted to having Mainland China's name as the main form, but it's not a neutral way of doing things. (There are other cases with non-country names where we have adopted the Mainland China form as the main form, but those are perhaps less problematic?) — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I actually don't have a problem with using the mainland Chinese name as the main form. After all, the vast majority of Chinese speakers in the world are in mainland China, and simply acknowledging that is not making a political statement. But yes, if you want a new dialectal module that is more suitable for country names, go ahead and create one. I have no problem with that. And regarding your previous example, even if 印度尼西亞 may be used in the official version of Chinese in Singapore, hardly anyone says that in daily speech. At least in my conversations, I've always used 印尼, so perhaps a separate module can reflect things like this better. The dog2 (talk) 20:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Yes, the modules would be a better way of representing what people use colloquially. The labels are more describing the word, but the tables represent the common words to each region, i.e. they serve different purposes. Of course, it might even be better to also include usage notes that are more nuanced than labels.

As for the main form, it's not only a political issue but a matter of treatment of language varieties. We don't want to suggest that Mainland China's word is the standard for all Chinese varieties spoken around the world. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I see what you mean. Yeah, it's probably a little complicated. Like should we find a way to reflect standard written Chinese in Hong Kong? As we know, the standard written form of Chinese in Hong Kong is based on Mandarin, even though most Hongkongers do not speak Mandarin. (Even mainland Chinese friends told me that whenever they visited Hong Kong, the locals preferred to communicate in English instead of Mandarin, and some people even find it offensive if you address them in Mandarin). The dog2 (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

black gangster

Hello. Any idea how to define this? It seems to have been a criticism of political opponents by Mao Zedong. Equinox ◑ 16:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Equinox: I'm not familiar with the term, and I'm not entirely sure what the Chinese equivalent is. It might 黑幫歹徒 in Chinese, but I couldn't find much after a quick Google search. @RcAlex36, Tooironic, 沈澄心, any idea what this is? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea. ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:08, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Me neither. --沈澄心✉ 02:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

See w:zh:黑帮 (文革). 70.175.192.217 22:03, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

茶籮

What does the word 茶籮／茶箩 (cháluó) (found as chhà-lò in Hakkanese) mean? --Apisite (talk) 00:47, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Apisite: Entry created. Next time you can just request entries at WT:Requested entries (Chinese). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

具足

Hiya. I am getting an error here:

Lua error in Module:zh-forms at line 356: The heading "===Etymology ''n''===" or "===Pronunciation ''n''===" must be followed by a subheading one level lower. Backtrace: [C]: in function "error" Module:zh-forms:356: in function "chunk" mw.lua:525: ? [C]: ?

Have no idea what is causing this. Would you mind taking a look? ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:55, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tooironic It's picking up on ===Etymology 1=== in the Japanese section (even though there's only one etymology section), which I fixed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Taishanese Romanisation

Unfortunately, I don't speak Taishanese, so I'm not exactly familiar with the tone structure, but do you have specific resources to check the right tones. This clip features the Taishanese pronunciation of 朋友, but I don't know which tone numbers to put. The dog2 (talk) 05:46, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2 I usually check this dictionary as my first source, which is usually good. The only thing that deviates from this dictionary is how we treat -i. If you are interested, I can tell you more, but if it's just once in a while, you can just ask me. BTW, thanks, @RcAlex36 for adding it into the entry. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:15, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Module:ltc-pron and Module:och-pron in Latin-Script Entries

While trying to figure out how to lighten the memory load on a couple of single-letter entries in CAT:E, I was surprised to find these in the transclusion list. There are Chinese internet slang terms in nothing but Latin letters, and {{tl:zh-pron}} apparently always loads those modules to see if a given term goes back to Middle or Old Chinese. I see no problem with using {{tl:zh-pron}} in such entries, but I was wondering if we could add code to the module that loads the historical modules to only do so for Han character entries. Can you think of any non-Han-character entry (say Min-Nan POJ or Dungan) that would have Old Chinese or Middle Chinese content in {{tl:zh-pron}}? I'm deliberately narrowing this to {{tl:zh-pron}}, because obviously any etymology that goes back to Chinese could have a direct link to Middle Chinese or Old Chinese. If we can be certain that there are no Latin-script entries with ltc or och content in {{tl:zh-pron}}, it would be a shame to load some fairly large modules just to check for what we already know isn't there. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk)

@Chuck Entz: I've just changed to code to only load these when |mc= or |oc= are called. I don't think there's a need to load these modules when these parameters aren't called. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

仙草

Just wondering if you have anymore dialectal data points on this. The dog2 (talk) 20:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2, I'll have to take a look. Also, I'm not sure if the list given in 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典 is referring to grass jelly or the plant. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:29, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2, I checked other sources, and it seems like the list in 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典 should be referring to the dessert. I moved the table to 仙草凍 so that we could use 仙草 for the actual plant. BTW, do you have a source for Shantou? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

There was a video Allan Tan posted on YouTube: [6] (0:38). The accent sounds closest to a Shantou accent to me. The dog2 (talk) 22:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: It's probably not a good idea to just judge based on the accent. The tone sandhi in 草粿 makes me think that it's actually not Shantou, because Shantou doesn't change the second syllable to a low falling tone. But I think I found other videos, like this one. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:09, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

I see. I knew it wasn't Chaozhou because the way the diphthongs were pronounced did not sound like Chaozhou. Singapore Teochew does change the second syllable to a low falling tone, so it might be influences from other Teochew varieties. The dog2 (talk) 00:16, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: The low falling tone is in Chaozhou, Jieyang and Chenghai, so it's not unlikely that it's also in Singapore Teochew. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

言歸正傳

When you get a minute would you mind checking this lua error for me? ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:27, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@Tooironic: Fixed. Please make sure you use “normal” g’s for pinyin next time. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 12:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:49, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Chinese surname bug

Hi Justin. I noticed a bug in the presentation of Chinese surnames, e.g. at 王 and 司馬, "Wang" and "Sima" are now placed on the line underneath the definition. Do you know what's going on here? ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:05, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

@Tooironic: thanks for letting me know. I think it should be fixed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:30, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Teochew for 什麼事情

Could you look at this clip: [7]? Towards the end, I wonder if the guy was saying 什乜事 or 是乜事. If it's the formal, perhaps the expression in Singapore Teochew actually came from Chaozhou and was not an influence from Hokkien after all. When you watch Teochew dramas from Shantou, the expression they will use is 乜事, so perhaps this was a difference between Chaozhou and Shantou after all. And this might be one of the few cases where Singapore Teochew follows Chaozhou instead of Shantou. The dog2 (talk) 12:50, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: Hmm, I'm not actually sure which it is. It sounds like 是乜事, but 是 doesn't seem right in the context. I wouldn't go so far to say that this is clearly a difference between the two dialects, though, since it's one example only. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I'll post more clips when I hear them, but this is not the only time I've heard it in a clip from Chaozhou. I was hesitant to post those because I was wondering if what I actually heard was 是乜事. The dog2 (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

@Austin Zhang Come to think of it, could you please perhaps comment on this as a native Teochew speaker? The dog2 (talk) 18:54, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: I'd say he's saying 是乜事, just because I've never say 什乜事, also the pronunciation doesn't sound like 什. But I'm not sure if it's a regional thing, I'm speking Puning-Chaoyang mixed dialect living in Puning downtown, and I've never heard of that 什乜事. --Austin Zhang (talk) 19:32, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation of 印歐語系

The pronunciations of "語" in different dialects are systematic. The reading gí for 語 doesn't even exist in Taipei Hokkien, and I am sure they'll pronounce "語系" as gú-hē instead of gí-hē. That's not "inferring readings" at all. --TongcyDai (talk) 07:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai Perhaps you are right in that it should be gú in Taipei, but this is still inferring based on the individual characters rather than based on actual usage from a native speaker. It’s especially problematic when you bring in dialects like Philippine Hokkien, which probably would not use this term at all. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 10:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

I think this kind of wording that binds other Hokkien dialects with Philippine Hokkien is suspiciously chauvinistic. And while you mentioned above that there are no native speakers who use locally pronounced academic vocabulary, as far as I know, that is what language researchers in Taiwan and Mainland China generally do when they meet; they pronounce such words in local dialect pronunciations rather than using Mandarin loanwords. If you have specific knowledge of Philippine Hokkien, I apologize; but your behavior is, in fact, kidnapping other Hokkien languages. --TongcyDai (talk) 13:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: I did not say that there are no native speakers who use locally pronounced academic vocabulary. I meant that your edits are based on the assumption that the term is used in all those varieties that you added readings for, which may or may not be true. I am not trying to rob any dialect of anything. I am trying to be cautious with what we provide to the public, which should not be our assumptions, but a reflection of verified knowledge. Being silent on something is better than adding something based on inference because we assume that speakers will use the same term across varieties. We have active editors who speak Philippine Hokkien, like @Mar vin kaiser, and we can always see what they think. We don’t have access to native speakers of those other varieties you have put, so there is no way of verifying your edit unless you have other evidence (that is not from the pronunciation of 語 alone). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:21, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

I've removed the "ph" label, and I would love to listen to the opinions from native speakers. However, Southern Min language has a long and extensive tradition of literary reading (bûn-tho̍k/文讀), and all languages/dialects distributed in Taiwan and Mainland China have a fairly systematic and idiomatic system of literary reading. I'm sorry if Philippine Hokkien doesn't have this, but it's not the norm for Hokkien language. --TongcyDai (talk) 16:54, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai While this particular word doesn't have multiple readings in the characters, IMO it is still not good to assume a reading purely based on the individual characters. There are words like 大學, where different regions choose to different readings (Mainland uses 白讀, while Taiwan usually 文讀), and there could be anomalous readings specific to certain words, like with certain place names. The chance of these issues is slim, but I think we should still be cautious and work with what we do know for sure, like 100%, no guesswork. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm not guessing though, I am 100% sure that's how native speakers (in Mainland China and Taiwan) pronounce it. And I'm a native speaker, too. :) --TongcyDai (talk) 17:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: You're a native speaker of Taiwanese, I think, but that doesn't mean you would necessarily know how Mainland speakers would say things, right? Like I am a speaker of Hong Kong Cantonese, but I can't be 100% sure of how Guangzhou speakers would say things even though HK and Guangzhou Cantonese are probably 99% the same. I can be 99% sure that Guangzhou speakers would say jan3 au1 jyu5 hai6, but there's still a slim chance that they say something else (maybe another term) altogether. Are you exposed to Xiamen, Quanzhou and Zhangzhou speakers enough to say that it's actually how they say it? This is not a common everyday term that people would say. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

As I've mentioned before, Southern Min language has a long and extensive tradition of literary reading, and though the term is not frequently used, there are poeple using the pronunciation to read academic monographs, and their pronunciation just follow the tradition and rules. I need not be a Chiang-chiu-oā (漳州話) or Choân-chiu-oē (泉州話) speaker to know all the pronunciations, because they're systematic, and that's how the language works, at least in this case. Also, please check out Altaic gú-hē, Hàn-gú-cho̍k on nanwp. --TongcyDai (talk) 18:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: In the ideal world, it would be awesome for there to be systematicity in reading words, but I don't think it is always the case. I've pointed out 大學 as an example, but there are other examples like it, such as 支持, 充滿 and 抱歉 where certain dialects use 白讀 while others may use 文讀. Also, if there really is a long extensive tradition of literary reading, does it actually apply to 白話文 of today, which is based on Mandarin? I don't think people were talking about 印歐語系 when 文言 was the norm for writing. I would like to see some documentation of such a tradition, or at least a video showing such a tradition in action. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:06, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

The examples you've mentioned contain at least one character with 文音 and 白音; however, in this case, 語 has only one reading in each dialect and one reading correspond to each others in other dialects. That is, gí for 漳風口音, gú for 泉風口音, and gír for 老泉口音. It will be insane if you tell me "語言" in Mandarin is pronounced as "yǔyán" but pronounced as "yùxì" or something in "語系". It just can't go wrong. --TongcyDai (talk) 19:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: Well, see 言語 for how insane 言 could be. I know this particular word probably doesn't have any issues, but as a principle, I don't think it's a good idea in general to infer readings at all. Also, I just noticed that while 語 doesn't have 文音 and 白音, 歐 does have several possible readings. For example 歐元 is au-goân in Xiamen and Zhangzhou, but o-goân in Quanzhou (according to 闽南方言大词典). But this may or may not apply to 印歐語系; we simply don't know (cf. 廈門大學 Ē-mn̂g Tōa-o̍h vs. 廈大 Hā-tāi). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: Hi, although I'm sympathetic to your view that in certain cases, it seems reasonable to assume that a certain word can only be pronounced a certain way across all major Hokkien dialects, for this one though, the character 歐 has multiple pronunciations, like au, o, io, and o͘. So it might not be as straightforward as you think. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 08:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser: Thanks for your valuable opinions! I'm wondering how the term is pronounced in your native tongue, since I can hardly find any relevant information on the Internet. --TongcyDai (talk) 13:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I hope we can first reach a consensus that there cannot be any problem with the pronunciation of "語". And it's not "insane" for the reading gân for "言" in Chiang-chiu-oā, it's still systematic. And for "歐", just check out how it is pronounced in dialects. The character has several readings does not mean all of them are used in compound words. In 當代泉州音字彙 (2012), only au is included (for all terms, like 歐洲 and 歐陽), and in 闽南方言大词典 (2006), as you've mentioned, 廈門 and 漳州 use au in 歐元 (au-goân, o-goân for 泉州 is marked as 又音). In 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典 (2011), all terms (歐盟, 歐式, 北歐, 歐陽 etc.) only use the reading au. Therefore, au for "歐" is in used for the meaning "Europe" in the above dialects. Then, what will a native speaker pronounce "印度, 歐洲"? io for "歐"? Nah, Ìn-tō͘, Au-chiu is undoubtedly the most likely answer. As o and o͘ still have chance occurring in scattered terms (I believe they are both 異讀 for au; also, in 廈門音新字典 (1913), o͘ is used in o͘-ló͘-pà (歐羅巴), which is a loanword by homophonic translation), I'll double check with the native speakers. --TongcyDai (talk) 13:15, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: Sorry, I meant the Mandarin readings of 言 in 言語 (pronunciation 2) - just to illustrate how "insane" things could be. Of course this is an extreme case because it's a colloquial term, but it illustrates characters do not always have the same reading across words. I would agree that the issue here may not have to do with 語 (though if you check 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典, you'd see that gú is 文 while gí/gú is 白, which means it is a little more complicated than we would like to imagine; in actual usage, I do think that the "gú is 文" probably goes out the window, making this a non-issue). The main issue is that 歐 has multiple readings, as pointed out above. For now, just to put it simply, I think we can only be okay with Ìn-Au gí-hē for General Taiwanese (混合腔 of the Kaohsiung type) based on Wikipedia (which could be a problematic source unless the article was written/edited by native speakers - I'm giving benefit of the doubt to this, so I'm letting this be a source) and your judgment as a native speaker. If it's okay, I will take away the other readings for now until we find out about other varieties. In the meantime, I've also requested this term at Forvo to see if there are people who will provide their input. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I doubt the Mandarin readings yuányi, niányu in 言語, since the parameter is basically for Standard Chinese, it is not appropriate to add dialectical Mandarin readings in it. For 語 in Hokkien, only 泉海腔 takes gí as 白讀 and gú as 文讀, but other 漳腔 accents only have gí, for both 文讀 and 白讀. I'll say the 文/白 marking is actually wrong in 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典 in this case. Finally, if you are worried about the correctness of 歐 in Mainland China accents, you can just delete them, but I am sure that in Taiwan we only use au. That is, I confirm that |mn=kh,tn,yl,hc,tc:Ìn-Au gí-hē/lk,sx,hc:Ìn-Au gír-hē/tp,mg:Ìn-Au gú-hē is correct. --TongcyDai (talk) 16:57, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: Hmm, really... here are some things that would cast doubt on what you confirm. 1) Lukang says Io for the surname (臺灣閩南語辭典 by 董忠司). 2) 董忠司 also lists o͘ and io as 文讀. 3) Tainan actually says gú, not gí (traditionally; I won't be surprised if younger people are starting to use gí, though). I think I would only be comfortable with |mn=twk:Ìn-Au gí-hē/twt:Ìn-Au gú-hē at the very most. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

On Mandarin, we allow Beijing dialect readings in |m= as well. I'm not sure about niányu either. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:28, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I would be grateful if you can list some examples for the usage of o͘ and io. I'm afraid that the two readings are only used in reading Classical Chinese books. And thanks for pointed it out, Tainan mainly use gú, so it should be |mn=kh,yl,hc,tc:Ìn-Au gí-hē/lk,sx,hc:Ìn-Au gír-hē/tp,tn,mg:Ìn-Au gú-hē.--TongcyDai (talk) 17:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I think you're probably right in speculating that o͘ and io are only used for 文言 texts generally, but as I said, 董忠司 says Lukang uses Io for the surname, and this dictionary also lists an example of the surname 歐陽 with both au and io as possible readings (歐陽春 au¹ / io¹ iong⁵ cun¹ [in TLPA]). This would mean io is not out of the realm of possibility. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:58, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Maybe Io-iông does exist, there is no io-chiu in any accents in record. I'm asking for local Lukang Hokkien users for the pronunciation for 歐洲, and other dialects should be just fine. --TongcyDai (talk) 18:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: 歐 in 歐洲 is not necessarily the same as 歐 in 印歐語系, cf. 廈門大學 Ē-mn̂g Tōa-o̍h vs. 廈大 Hā-tāi. If you're asking, please ask about 印歐語系 or at least 印歐. I still think being ambiguous with our labelling is the way to go. There is no need to be specific to the city/town level unless we have confirmed it for that specific location. Our module only shows IPA for Kaohsiung and Taipei anyway. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:04, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that occurs in this case. Basically we don't use other readings except au, and as you see, nanwp editors use Ìn-Au gí-hē instead of Ìn-Io gí-hē or others. If we only use twk and twt, then the reading with gír will disappear, and changing the labelings won't dispel your doubt about 歐. --TongcyDai (talk) 20:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: Well, nanwp editors only need to pick one - and it would be the one that is likely the more common one. I'm okay with having twt:Ìn-Au gú-hē along with twk:Ìn-Au gí-hē because this would probably be what 臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典 would do if they were to include this word in their dictionary. I also think it is quite unlikely for the io reading to be in this word, but since io is used by some as a surname, especially in 偏泉 varieties, I would think we cannot be confident enough to say it should be Ìn-Au gír-hē. The varieties that use gír are uncommon in Taiwan AFAIK, so it would be nice to wait until you get an answer from whoever you're asking the Lukang pronunciation from to include a form with gír. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I've almost forgot to reply you: here are the posts. 1 2. --TongcyDai (talk) 12:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: Wow, thanks for posting these, and it seems like there's a lot of variation for 印歐語系, including the use of io. How do you plan on synthesizing this data? Some of the locations have two pronunciations (usually variation between gú and gí). People were only specific to the city level sometimes, so I don't know if these variations are due to being from different parts of the city or if one variant is a case of moving towards the general accent (通行腔). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

I think it is fine to include all the pronunciations, since that's the way we pronounce the words. If not sure how to specify the locations, just put them in twv. --TongcyDai (talk) 15:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

@TongcyDai: I've added pronunciations based on the responses with locations. Though some people from Taipei and Tainan reported Ìn-Au gí-hē and I think some from Kaohsiung reported Ìn-Au gú-hē, I didn't include these because I don't know if it's due to a tendency towards 通行腔 or local variation (since Taipei and Kaohsiung seem to have both Quanzhou-like and Zhangzhou-like accents). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, that looks pretty good! --TongcyDai (talk) 08:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Add "GT - General Taiwanese (no specific region identified)" to some Module:zh/data/dial-syn/*

Hello. I found this note lost in some of the modules (less than 50, see [8]). If other users won't deal with this, I'll deal with this in 7 days (with some python). EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Done. EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 12:30, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

@EdwardAlexanderCrowley: Thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Teochew for 低

@Austin Zhang also just in case, do you by any chance know what this word is: [9] (0:35) ? The dog2 (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: The 本字 is 下, but it’s usually written as 低. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Should we do a dialectal table for this? I think the Hokkien word is similar (except for the slightly different vowel). The dog2 (talk) 03:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and created it, but feel free to delete if you feel it's inappropriate.

@RcAlex36, 沈澄心, Mar vin kaiser in case you guys have any data points to add. The dog2 (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I added the "low" sense in Hokkien and Teochew to the 下 entry, but I wonder if you have a better way of phrasing it. The dog2 (talk) 16:51, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: I've moved it up to the first part of the definitions. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

首次

I created the table for this. I believe you will have more to add. The dog2 (talk) 01:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

珍惜

Do you want to check the Xiamen Hokkien pronunciation. One thing I'm having trouble discerning from the clip is whether it's a nasalised vowel or not. The dog2 (talk) 19:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: It's clearly not that word, but 疼惜. Please check [10] and [11] before thinking that these are readings that differentiate dialects or something like that. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

NMSL NM$L 你🐴死了

Is it time to remove rfv from these entries? EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 09:18, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

@EdwardAlexanderCrowley: It could be since it's been sitting there for a long while. They have all failed verification. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Codeswitching

How do you think we should deal with this in Singaporean Mandarin. For instance, while 豆腐乳 is the official Mandarin name for fermented bean curd in Singapore, in practice we will just code switch to Hokkien when we want to refer to the item. And this is actually quite a common phenomenon, especially when it comes to food. For instance, it's extremely rare that you will hear people say 雲吞 in Mandarin; everyone just codeswitches to the Cantonese name. The dog2 (talk) 17:06, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

@The dog2: I think this is a tricky thing to deal with, and it's a question of what people think and how it's said. Ideally, if they are conscious that it's not Mandarin, and it's clearly pronounced in a Hokkien or Cantonese way (without phonological adaptation), and those speakers are fluent in Hokkien/Cantonese, then I'd probably say it's not Mandarin. Of course, in Singapore, people might not necessarily be fluent in Hokkien/Cantonese but may still use terms in those languages because of contact with people who speak those languages. The line is kind of blurry, and I think I'll have to leave it up to you and other Singaporeans to decide. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a complication. For instance, everybody in Singapore knows the most common Hokkien vulgarities regardless of whether or not they actually know how to speak Hokkien, including the Malays and Indians. And with 雲吞, Cantonese speakers are a minority in Singapore, but everyone just uses the Cantonese pronunciation even if they don't speak Cantonese. And the same goes with many dim sum dishes like 蝦餃 and 燒賣. And likewise, many Hokkien and Teochew food names are just referred to with their Hokkien or Teochew names, even by people who don't know how to speak Hokkien or Teochew. And I'd hesitate to call those terms Mandarin terms because there is no phonological adaptation to Mandarin. As you know, unlike Mandarin, Hokkien and Teochew have voiced initial consonants, and when someone who otherwise doesn't speak the language uses the Hokkien or Teochew name, the voiced initial consonants are preserved. The dog2 (talk) 18:01, 27 May 2021 (UTC)