Talk:蟮蟲

Teochew

@The dog2, do you have a source for this diff? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Justinrleung I don't know if the video is still up after so long, but it's the same one as the one that I used for Chaoyang in the dialectal table. The dog2 (talk) 18:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@The dog2: I see. I wonder if the tones are actually what you wrote, since the Chaoyang dialect's tones sound quite different from Chaozhou/Shantou/Jieyang. I also am not sure if she's speaking with a Chaoyang accent. (See the comments for the netizens' doubts.) If not, is she actually from Chaoyang, and can we trust what she says? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:22, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@The dog2: I checked 福建漢語方言基礎語彙集, and it says Chaoyang says siŋ33 naŋ55, but I'm not exactly sure what the tone categories are. @Fish bowl, would you be able to help? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

The introduction indicates that 33 is (pre-sandhi 陰平 and) post-sandhi 陰去. 55 is pre-sandhi 陽平 (and post-sandhi 陰去, again). —Fish bowl (talk) 03:17, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Fish bowl: Thanks, but just to clarify, post-sandhi 陰去 can be both 33 and 55? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:41, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

陰去に由来するものは陰平33（乃至は陽平55）に交替する。 Those originating from yinqu sandhi to yinping 33 (or yangping 55). —Fish bowl (talk) 03:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Fish bowl: Hmm, I see. That's kind of weird (unless it's conditioned by the following tone). It doesn't seem to match what 潮阳方言的连读变调 describes, though 🙃 — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: sorry to interfere, but I have been researching the Teochew tones recently and came upon this word. You can listen 蟮蟲 pronounced in this video (on 01:45).

The works by 张盛裕 describe Chaoyang tones as similar to those in northern Teochew, but all other studies I've seen disagree with him.

The citation tone 陰平 is low falling (21~31) in Chaoyang, and 陽去 is mid-falling (42~32). The sandhi in Chaoyang is understudied. Some works, like 粵東閩語語音研究, say that both 陰平 and 陽去 are 21 in sandhi, but others say that they are both 33 — either way, they are merged in urban dialects (like the former 棉城), so sing-nâng and sīng-nâng should be pronounced identically. In rural Chaoyang and Chaonan, they are probably distinct in sandhi (陰平 is 33, and 陽去 is 21), but I am not sure about it. --121.157.218.62 16:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! It seems to me that Chaoyang and Chaonan have many different tone sandhi systems, as described here. I do wonder why 张盛裕's work seems to describe a minority variety - it might have to do with who he surveyed? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: The problem is that there is an ongoing tone shift in Chaoyang (though even the most conservative speech does not match the 張盛裕's description).

The citation tones are studied extensively by 張靜芬 ("Tono-types and Tone Evolution: The Case of Chaoshan"). She, however, does not describe tone sandhi.

The work you've just mentioned is based on a survey by 黄綺燁, which is the only source to my knowledge that covers all of Chaoyang counties, but it has some problems. First, it says that it limits its informants to men aged over 50 (in around 2015), and they speak a conservative variety judging from 張靜芬's works. Second, this study may contradict with others in notation, e.g. it has tones 53 and 31 for what other studies label as 553 and 52. It also describes the citation tones as the same in all of the historical Chaoyang (incl. Haojiang & Chaonan), which seems to be not the case. — 211.186.206.87 21:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh and for 蟮蟲 I think that sing5 nang5 is correct. This may be somehow related to 檐龍 and Puning's 神龍 sing5 lêng5, rather than the Hokkien word. The IPA should be /siŋ²³⁻³² naŋ²³/ or /siŋ²³⁻⁴⁴ naŋ²³/ for Chaoyang county seat. Isn't something like that pronounced in that video too? — 211.186.206.87 22:12, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I wonder if Chaoyang has a particularly large number of returning overseas Chinese from Southeast Asia. At least from initial observation, Chaoyang Teochew seems to have stronger influences from Hokkien than other Teochew dialects, which is a feature you find in places like Singapore where large numbers of Hokkien and Teochew people would have come into contact with each other. The dog2 (talk) 16:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@The dog2: I don't think it's necessarily recent influence from Hokkien, but possibly retention of shared things between Hokkien and Teochew? What are some other things you've observed? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I don't have extensive exposure to the Chaoyang dialect, but an example is 蕳砃, which comes from Malay "kentang". That's something we find in the Hokkien and Teochew varieties in Singapore and Malaysia, but in theory should not be found in the varieties spoken in China. Also 查某 for "woman" appears to be an influence from Hokkien, and that is the word that Singaporean Teochew speakers use as well. In China, the usual Teochew word for "woman" (as spoken in Chaozhou and Shantou) is 諸娘. It is sometimes used in Singapore as well, but 查某 is way more common. The dog2 (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@The dog2: 蕳砃 is used in other Teochew-speaking areas in Mainland China as well, as you can see in the table at 蕳砃. This is indeed a word brought back from SEA, but it's not unique to Chaoyang. 查某 has been attested in Teochew works in the past (usually as 查厶 IIRC); its usage seems to have dwindled in some regions due to semantic narrowing to "female prostitute". — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:38, 8 January 2024 (UTC)