Public Romanization in Canton
« previous post | next post »
Sign on the wall of a school:
The sign says:
Jiǎng Pǔtōnghuà xiě guīfànzì
讲普通话 写规范字
"Speak Mandarin* write standard characters**."
—
*Putonghua (Modern Standard Mandarin [MSM])
**The official set of simplified Chinese characters
Some things to note about the Romanization here:
1. Mandarin, not Cantonese
2. toneless
3. all caps
4. word division, not syllable by syllable or all strung together
As we are all too aware on Language Log, it is quite common to provide English / Chinglish translations on signs and notices written in Chinese characters in the PRC. The fact that the ruby glossing here is in MSM tells us that the purpose of the annotations is to promote that pronunciation for Chinese characters in a Cantonese speaking area. Seldom do we see Cantonese Romanization annotations, except in Hong Kong, and then it is almost always ad hoc or loose, because Cantonese does not have an official Romanization supported and promoted by government. A small number of language specialists have developed and advocate Jyutping, but it is rare for non-linguists to be proficient in it.
Selected readings
- "Uppercase and lowercase letters in Cantonese Romanization" (5/28/20) — includes a long list of relevant posts
- "Hong Kong protesters' argot" (9/7/19) — includes a long list of relevant posts
- "Linguistic Advice in the Lavatory: Speaking Mandarin is a great convenience for everyone" (9/11/07)
- "Cantonese and Mandarin interwoven" (8/20/14)
- "Spoken Hong Kong Cantonese and written Cantonese" (8/29/13)
- "Speak Cantonese" (6/10/16)
- "Cantonese: still the main spoken language of Hong Kong" (6/1/17)
- "Cantonese is not dead yet" (6/9/17)
- "Forcing Mandarin on Hong Kong" (1/27/18)
- "National Language versus Mother Tongue" (10/16/09)
- "Loose Romanization for Cantonese" (9/21/19)
alex wang said,
May 31, 2020 @ 3:10 am
It seems there are a few wechat groups for Cantonese. I am in 2 mainly out of curiosity. There seems to be many people from around the country and expats that are studying it.
I see from the wiki there is Jyutping and Cantonese Pinyin
I was curious is the preference of linguists for jyutping? which one is easier to learn?
Michael Watts said,
May 31, 2020 @ 5:01 am
This seems like a leap. The ruby glossing is in Mandarin everywhere. Why would the fact that what's true everywhere else is also true here tell us anything more than "this is how they make signs in China"?
Philip Taylor said,
May 31, 2020 @ 5:48 am
Until Michael commented, the significance of "the ruby glossing" didn't really impinge on my stream of consciousness. But now that it has, I assume that it is the small text, lower right. And if so, in what is it written ? Is it what my Taiwanese friends would call Bopomofo ? Is it what John DeFrancis would have called "Zhùyīn Zìmŭ" / "Guóyin Zìmŭ" / "Zhùyīn Fúhào" ? And if not, what is it ?
Bob Ladd said,
May 31, 2020 @ 6:21 am
@Philip Taylor:
I think "ruby glossing" refers here to the pinyin transcription – VHM is apparently generalising from the use of the term to refer to any sort of phonetic notation that runs alongside the hanzi. The small characters at the lower right are definitely just regular hanzi. My knowledge of hanzi has decayed so badly that I can only recognise the first (leftmost) two characters, which say Guangzhou.
Philip Taylor said,
May 31, 2020 @ 6:25 am
Ah, thank you Bob. That had been my initial interpretation, although I had never heard Pinyin referred to as "ruby" previously, but when Michael commented on it I revised my impression. Unfortunately the characters at lower-right were too small for me to read, whence my question.
Victor Mair said,
May 31, 2020 @ 6:55 am
The small writing in the bottom right corner of the sign is in simplified Chinese characters and tells us that it was put up by the Guǎngzhōu shì yǔyán wénzì gōngzuò wěiyuánhuì bàngōngshì 广州市语言文字工作委员会办公室 (Office of the Guangzhou Municipal Language and Script Working Committee). Ruby glossing is interlinear annotation. We have discussed it numerous times on Language Log. Bopomofo Mandarin phonetic symbols (bopomofo, etc.) and Japanese furigana are examples of such ruby glosses.
You can even use "English as ruby annotation for Chinese" (11/16/14).
We have also encountered English glossing of Japanese kanji, e.g., "car" for kuruma / カー 車.
See also:
"Furigana-like glossing in Mandarin" (8/11/16)
"Pinyin for phonetic annotation" (10/27/18) — with an extensive selection of readings
etc.
This usage of the technical term "ruby" for interlinear annotations is not my generalization or innovation. It is, as the above citations make clear, standard among script scholars.
David Marjanović said,
May 31, 2020 @ 7:09 am
Ah, but why is it in Mandarin everywhere?
Precisely "to promote that pronunciation for Chinese characters" in the whole country.
Victor Mair said,
May 31, 2020 @ 7:22 am
"'this is how they make signs in China'"
No, this is not how they make signs everywhere in China. Most signs in China do not have ruby phonetic annotations. It occurs more often in areas where topolect usage is still relatively strong. The government language and script commissions at various levels (national, municipal, etc.) are charged with promoting Mandarin (tuīxíng Pǔtōnghuà 推行普通话). Signs with Pinyin phonetic glosses are noticeably more prevalent in Cantonese speaking areas than elsewhere. This is especially so in schools where the authorities have explicit rules against speaking Cantonese. This is a phenomenon that I've been well aware of since the early 80s, one that we have repeatedly discussed before on Language Log. So, not "a leap".
[I see that David Marjanović has already made this clear in his own way while I was composing and posting this comment.]
Guan Yang said,
May 31, 2020 @ 11:11 am
From the W3C specification for ruby annotation on the origin of the name: “The name ‘ruby’ in fact originated from the name of the 5.5pt font size in British printing, which is about half the 10pt font size commonly used for normal text.”
John Swindle said,
May 31, 2020 @ 11:22 pm
The sign says to write standard characters. Is that specifically the characters on a certain list, like the 2013 通用规范汉字表 Tōngyòng Guīfàn Hànzì Biǎo (Table of Chinese Characters for General Use) that I see on the Web? The exhortation to use standard characters implies that students may be tempted to use something else. Traditional characters? Unofficial simplified characters? Characters representing local topolect? Rare characters? All of the above?
Michael Watts said,
June 1, 2020 @ 6:13 am
Sure, it's Mandarin everywhere because that is the national standard.
But it isn't possible to argue that the reason Mandarin-based pinyin is used on signs in Beijing (see e.g. https://www.thebeijinger.com/blog/2018/06/04/beijing-road-signs-are-color-coordinated-show-you-way ) is to promote Mandarin pronunciations for the characters in a Mandarin-speaking area.
So again, the fact that a sign in a Cantonese-speaking area follows exactly the same format as every other sign anywhere in China just isn't good evidence of special treatment for Cantonese-speaking areas, or in fact any evidence of anything. If a transcription is present at all, it will obviously be a Mandarin transcription. Given that certainty, the fact that a transcription is in Mandarin carries exactly zero information. You could try to draw a conclusion from the fact that a transcription is present, but not from the fact that it's in Mandarin.
cliff arroyo said,
June 2, 2020 @ 5:10 am
Since this post is about digraphia and/or script replacement (in a way) does anyone have any comments on the announcement in March by the Mongolian government?
https://news.mn/en/791396/
Is there any reason to believe this attempt will work any better than a similar idea did in the 1990s?