“Proper Cantonese pronunciation”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

Starting in the 1980s, proper Cantonese pronunciation has been much promoted in Hong Kong, with the scholar Richard Ho (何文匯) as its iconic campaigner. The very idea of "proper" pronunciation of Cantonese Chinese is controversial, since the concept of labeling native speakers' usage and speech in terms of correctness is not generally supported by academic linguistics.^[1] Law et al. (2001) point out that the phrase "lazy sounds" ({{lang|zh-hant|懶音}} laan⁵ jam¹), most commonly discussed in relation to phonetic changes in Hong Kong Cantonese, implies that the speaker is "unwilling to put forth sufficient effort to articulate the standard pronunciation".^[2]

Origins and influences

The promotion of "proper" Cantonese Chinese pronunciation is partly a reaction to so-called "lazy sounds" adopted by the younger generations. These "lazy" pronunciation variants, or sound changes include:

The nine attested phonetic sound changes in Hong Kong Cantonese, or "lazy sounds" in the format of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) can be tracked in the following table:^[3]

To, Mcleod and Cheung delve deeper into these sound changes in contemporary Hong Kong Cantonese, and focus in particular on the four syllable-final consonants: [-ŋ], [-n], [-k], and [-t]. After conducting original research on the pronunciation of words containing these syllable-final phonetic changes, To et al. argue that syllable-final environment sound changes occur due to the tongue position at the preceding vowel, as it opts for maximum ease. Thus, their argument attests for two process: alveolarization (occurring in [-ŋ] > [-n] transitions and [-k] > [-t] transitions) and velarization (occurring in [-n] > [-ŋ] transitions and [-t] > [-k] transitions).

The following table shows the environments where the processes of alveolarization and velarization tend to occur:^[12]

Alveolarization tends to occur when there is a preceding mid-front or central vowel, and velarization tends to occur when the attested preceding mid-back vowel [ɔ] is present. The last example in table 2 indicates that the attested [ɪŋ] sequence doesn’t change, as the position of the tongue for the high, lax, front vowel is already in close proximity to the position needed to make the velar consonants.

To et al.'s research presents that the process of co-articulation accounts for the birth of "lazy sounds". In Hong Kong Cantonese at present, alveolarization is a more popular phenomenon than velarization, and the syllable-final alveolar consonants [-n] and [-t] tend to be preserved even when the preceding vowels prompt a tongue position that is further back. An example would be “dry” [kɔn]. It is rare for people to pronounce this with a syllable-final [-ŋ], although it still occurs, as 7.1% of adults tested by To et al. do this.^[13]

This result is presented alongside a ranking of attested preceding vowels of the [-ŋ]~[-n] pair that demonstrate the process of alveolarization, from least likely to have a succeeding 'alveolarized' consonant, to most likely: ʊ = ɪ > ɔ < ɛ < ɐ < a < œ. The vowels [ʊ] and [ɪ] share the same percentage of alveolarization, resulting in a 0.0% chance of sound change, while the highest ranking vowel, [œ], resulted in a 37.5% chance of sound change.^[14]

TV and radio programs, including game shows, have been made to promote "proper pronunciation". The campaign has also influenced the local media. Some news reporters and masters of ceremonies in Hong Kong have adopted the "proper" pronunciations.

Arguments

The "proper" readings promoted by Richard Ho are based on the fanqie spelling of Guangyun, an ancient rime dictionary reflecting the sounds of Middle Chinese. Ho states that, Cantonese Chinese phonology being the descendant of the Guangyun system, there are highly regular correspondences between the sounds of Middle Chinese and those of modern Cantonese Chinese. He also holds that the "flat" ({{lang|zh|平}}) and "sharp" ({{lang|zh|仄}}) tonal distinction in Middle Chinese is the most important feature from which modern Cantonese Chinese should not deviate, especially when reciting ancient literature (Ho 1995:151). He allows exceptions in some cases of colloquial speech, but not in any cases in reading ancient literature (ibid. 152).

Ho's approach to pronunciation is prescriptive. For instance, talking about the "wrong" pronunciation of final consonants of the youth, he says: {{cquote|In general, today's youth pronounce the final consonants in the wrong way because they have since childhood imitated unconsciously the wrong pronunciations of the broadcasters and artists, and those of their seniors and friends. Fortunately, there are still some families who insist on proper pronunciation. Therefore, the wrong pronunciations have not spread (sic) to the whole society, and there is still a ray of hope to right the wrongs. {{lang|zh-hant|(現在，一般年輕人錯誤的韻尾發音，主要是從小不自覺模仿播音員、藝員、長輩或朋輩的錯誤發音所造成的。幸好有些家庭堅守發音要正確的原則，這種錯誤發音才不至於擴散到整個社會，使撥亂反正仍有一線希望。)}} (Ho 2001:33)}}

He expresses his attitude towards sound changes, when talking about the gradual merge of [n-] and [l-] initials in Cantonese Chinese: {{cquote|Regarding sound changes, we can study them objectively. When the changes are fixed, there is no need to restore them. Now if [n-] and [l-] have already merged, there is nothing we can do about it. But the fact is [n-] has yet to disappear in Cantonese Chinese. More and more people are pronouncing [n-] as [l-] only because of the bad influences of some language teachers and broadcasters, who inadvertently made the mistake. We still can, and should, correct the error. {{lang|zh-hant|(我們硏究語音的變化，可以客觀地研究變化的現象。變化定了，也無須刻意去回復舊觀。所以，如果現在粵音[n-]已和[l-]相混，那也沒辦法。但目前情況卻非如此，[n-]在粵音中並未消失。越來越多人所以把[n-]讀成[l-]，只不過是一些把[n-]讀成[l-]的語文敎師和廣播員無意中造成的不良影響而已。現在要改正過來是絕對可以的，也是我們應該盡力去做的。)}} (Ho 1995:154-155)}}

A major critic of Ho's approach is Wang Tingzhi. He calls Ho's prescriptive pronunciations "demonic". One of his concerns is that Cantonese Chinese comprises six historical strata, not just the one represented by the Guangyun. (Wang 2005)

Media

Ever since the arguments made around the correct way of pronouncing Chinese characters in Cantonese, different media companies in China have used their own interpretation of the correct pronunciations when broadcasting.

Hong Kong TV stations

In 1981, Hong Kong TV stations followed the majority rule in terms of the correct pronunciation. At the time, the most common pronunciation for "Time" ({{zh|t=時間}}) was to say the last character with the same pronunciation as the word "time rape" ({{zh|t=時姦}}) in China.

The shocking effect from this was realized when kindergarten kids started talking about a show "The friends time" as "The friend's rape time" due to slightly different pronunciations. After that incident, the TV stations started to realize the importance of the correct way of pronouncing characters to avoid misinterpretations.{{Citation needed|date=June 2013}}

Effects on Cantonese pronunciation

Changes in pronunciation in Hong Kong's Cantonese pronunciation have affected the Cantonese spoken in other regions, including Guangdong ({{zh|t=廣東}}) and Guangxi ({{zh|t=廣西}}) Provinces.

Variations in Cantonese pronunciation across different regions are still a major topic of discussion. Some are seen as too informal while others are seen as having other flaws.

See also

References

Notes

1. ^{{citation|last=Trudgill|first=Peter|title=Sociolinguistics and Linguistic Value Judgements: Correctness, Adequacy and Aesthetics|publisher=Universität Duisburg-Essen|year=1976|page=5|url=http://www.linse.uni-due.de/laud-downloadliste/articles/sociolinguistics-and-linguistic-value-judgements-correctness-adequacy-and-aesthetics.html}}
2. ^Law, Sam-Po, Roxana S.Y. Fung and Robert S. Bauer. "Perception and Production of Cantonese consonant endings". Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing, 6:3, 2001, pp. 179-195.
3. ^To, Carol K.S., Sharynne Mcleod and Pamela S.P. Cheung. “Phonetic variations and sound changes in Hong Kong Cantonese”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, Vol. 29, No. 5. Taylor & Francis, 2015, pp. 333-353.
4. ^Cheung, H. N. Xianggang Yueyu yufa de yanjiu [Cantonese as spoken in Hong Kong]. Hong Kong: ChineseUniversity of Hong Kong, 1972.
5. ^Cheung, H. N. Xianggang Yueyu yufa de yanjiu [Cantonese as spoken in Hong Kong]. Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1972.
6. ^Cheung, H. N. Xianggang Yueyu yufa de yanjiu [Cantonese as spoken in Hong Kong]. Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1972.
7. ^Wang, L. Hanyu yuyin shi [The History of Chinese Phonology]. Beijing, China: Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Chubanshe, 1985.
8. ^Ball, J. D. Cantonese made easy (3rd ed.). Singapore: Kelly & Walsh, 1907.
9. ^Bauer, R. S. Alveolarization in Cantonese: A case of lexical diffusion. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 7, 1979, 132–141.
10. ^Zee, E. Change and variation in the syllable-initial and syllable-final consonants in Hong Kong Cantonese.Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 27, 1999, pp. 120–167.
11. ^Zee, E. Change and variation in the syllable-initial and syllable-final consonants in Hong Kong Cantonese.Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 27, 1999, pp. 120–167.
12. ^To, Carol K.S., Sharynne Mcleod and Pamela S.P. Cheung. “Phonetic variations and sound changes in Hong Kong Cantonese”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, Vol. 29, No. 5. Taylor & Francis, 2015, pp. 333-353.
13. ^To, Carol K.S., Sharynne Mcleod and Pamela S.P. Cheung. “Phonetic variations and sound changes in Hong Kong Cantonese”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, Vol. 29, No. 5. Taylor & Francis, 2015, pp. 333-353.
14. ^To, Carol K.S., Sharynne Mcleod and Pamela S.P. Cheung. “Phonetic variations and sound changes in Hong Kong Cantonese”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, Vol. 29, No. 5. Taylor & Francis, 2015, pp. 346.