{"id":2578,"date":"2022-09-19T07:00:00","date_gmt":"2022-09-19T14:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/troubadourworks.com\/tiandi\/meotw\/?p=2578"},"modified":"2025-03-18T09:54:27","modified_gmt":"2025-03-18T16:54:27","slug":"ji%e2%80%90tong%e2%80%90ya%e2%80%90jiang","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/troubadourworks.com\/tiandi\/meotw\/2022\/09\/19\/ji%e2%80%90tong%e2%80%90ya%e2%80%90jiang\/","title":{"rendered":"j\u012b\u2010t\u00f3ng\u2010y\u0101\u2010ji\u01ceng"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\n\t\t\tj\u012b\u2010t\u00f3ng\u2010y\u0101\u2010ji\u01ceng<\/span>\n((j\u012b\nchicken<\/span>\n\u9e21\n\u96de\/\u9dc4<\/span>)\u2010(t\u00f3ng\n{together with}<\/span>\n\u540c\n\u540c\/\u4edd<\/span>)\u2010(y\u0101\nduck<\/span>\n\u9e2d\n\u9d28<\/span>)\u2010(ji\u01ceng\nspeaking<\/span>\n\u8bb2\n\u8b1b<\/span>)\n\u2192<\/span> [people not understanding each other because of speaking different languages (from Cantonese)]<\/span>)<\/span>\n\n \u2190 Tap\/click to show\/hide the \u201cflashcard\u201d<\/span><\/h3>\n\n

[Yes, this expression comes from Cantonese, but the above Mandarin version does appear in Mandarin dictionaries, so it qualifies as a Mandarin expression!]<\/p>\n

Recently, while out to dinner with one of the first families to serve in the local Cantonese congregation, along with the circuit overseer serving the local Chinese circuit and his wife, the subject came up of how Mandarin and Cantonese are actually different languages, not just dialects of the same language.<\/p>\n

Chickens Talking with Ducks<\/h4>\n

The wife of the circuit overseer asked what the difference is between a language and a dialect. So, I proceeded to explain something that is emphasized by American sinologist<\/a> and University of Pennsylvania Professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations<\/a> Victor H. Mair<\/a>, that a primary way accepted by most linguists to distinguish a language from a dialect is mutual intelligibility<\/strong>, as is discussed in this excerpt from the MEotW post<\/a> on \u201cf\u0101ngy\u00e1n<\/i><\/span>\n(f\u0101ng\u00b7y\u00e1n\n{direction \u2192 [place]} \u00b7 speech \u2192<\/span> [topolect; dialect (common but misleading translation)]<\/span>\n\u65b9\u8a00)<\/span>\u201d:<\/p>\n

\nIt has been said that \u201ca language is a dialect with an army and navy<\/a>\u201d, but in his article Professor Mair gives us a more linguistically correct and useful way to distinguish between a language and a dialect:<\/p>\n

Regardless of the imprecision of lay usage, we should strive for a consistent means of distinguishing between language and dialect. Otherwise we might as well use the two terms interchangeably. That way lies chaos and the collapse of rational discourse. Mutual intelligibility<\/strong> [emphasis added] is normally accepted by most linguists as the only plausible criterion for making the distinction between language and dialect in the vast majority of cases. Put differently, no more suitable, workable device for distinguishing these two levels of speech has yet been proposed. If there are to be exceptions to the useful principle of mutual intelligibility, there should be compelling reasons for them. Above all, exceptions should not be made the rule.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

What is mutual intelligibility<\/strong>? Simply put, in linguistics, two or more speech varieties are said to be mutually intelligible<\/a> if they are \u201cable to be understood by one another\u2019s speakers\u201d. For example, if one person only knows English, and another person only knows Spanish, they can\u2019t really understand each other if they try to talk to each other\u2014English and Spanish are not mutually intelligible, and are suitably recognized as being different languages, not just different dialects of \u201cEuropean\u201d.<\/p>\n

Similarly, if one person only knows Mandarin, and another person only knows Cantonese, they can\u2019t really understand each other if they try to talk to each other\u2014Mandarin and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible. So, while they may be \u201cf\u0101ngy\u00e1n<\/i><\/span>\n(f\u0101ng\u00b7y\u00e1n\n{direction \u2192<\/span> [place]}<\/span> \u00b7 {(patterns of) speech}<\/span>\n\u65b9\u8a00)<\/span>\u201d, linguistically, Mandarin and Cantonese should really be considered to be different languages<\/em>, not just different dialects of \u201cChinese\u201d.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Indeed, I have heard people use this week\u2019s MEotW, \u201cj\u012b\u2010t\u00f3ng\u2010y\u0101\u2010ji\u01ceng<\/i><\/span>\n((j\u012b\nchicken<\/span>\n\u9e21\n\u96de\/\u9dc4<\/span>)\u2010(t\u00f3ng\n{together with}<\/span>\n\u540c\n\u540c\/\u4edd<\/span>)\u2010(y\u0101\nduck<\/span>\n\u9e2d\n\u9d28<\/span>)\u2010(ji\u01ceng\nspeaking<\/span>\n\u8bb2\n\u8b1b<\/span>)\n\u2192<\/span> [people not understanding each other because of speaking different languages (from Cantonese)]<\/span>)<\/span>\u201d, to specifically describe Mandarin-speakers and Cantonese-speakers trying to talk to each other, and not understanding each other. \ud83d\udc13 \ud83e\udd86<\/p>\n

After I explained the gist of the above, one of the daughters of the family at the dinner\u2014who had been labouring for decades under the misconception that Mandarin and Cantonese are just dialects and that someone who knows one can easily learn the other\u2014said, \u201cNow I don\u2019t feel like an idiot.\u201d<\/p>\n

Uncommon Knowledge?<\/h4>\n

It could be said that ones such as this family and this circuit overseer and his wife, who have all worked so hard and served for so long in the Chinese language fields, should already have known such a basic thing about the Chinese languages. However, the following things are unfortunately true:<\/p>\n