beijing18.ppt - san francisco state universityuser · 2013-12-19 2 historical linguistics...

2013-12-19

1

由歷史語言學透視北京話的古往今來

The Peking Dialect: Past, Present and Future

A Historical Linguistic Perspective

李文肇

Chris Wen-chao LiSan Francisco State University

Outline• PAST:

– Phonology 音韻學

• 入派三聲（入聲演變）

• PRESENT

– Historical linguistics 歷史語言學

• Ongoing change 音變

• Spread through 普通話

• CASE STUDY: dialect enclave 方言孤島

• FUTURE

– Sociolinguistics 社會語言學

• diglossia 雙語並存／雙語分工

• language death 語言滅絕

Methodology• SCOPE:

– focus on specific features

– not a comprehensive survey of phonology, lexicon and syntax

• ORIENTATION– theoretically-oriented

– armchair scholarship (rather than field work)

Background

1. What is historical linguistics? (歷史語言學):

2. What is Peking Mandarin [vs Modern Standard Chinese]

(北京話、北京官話、國語、普通話)

3. Myths about Peking Mandarin

Historical linguistics 歷史語言學

• Misconceptions RE history

• Historical linguistics = study of language change


• Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913): father of modern linguistics

– diachronic vs synchronic linguistics

– 共時語言學共時語言學共時語言學共時語言學 vs 歷時語言學歷時語言學歷時語言學歷時語言學

2013-12-19

2


• Foundation of historical linguistics

– 新語法學派 Neogrammarian hypothesis (19th C.):

• „ Ausnahmslosigkeit der Lautgesetze“; (Sound laws know no exceptions)

• “…every sound change, inasmuch as it occurs mechanically, takes place according to laws that admit no exception. That is, the direction of the sound shift is always the same for all the members of a linguistic community except where a split into dialects occurs; and all words in which the sound subjected to the change appears in the same relationship are affected by the change without exception.” (Osthoff & Brugmann 1878)

• vs lay thinking

– story-telling 穿鑿附會

– non-falsifyable (萬用解釋; theory that explains everything)– teleology 目的論


• Areas of historical linguistics

• Sound change

• Lexical change

• Syntactic change

北京話 vs 北京官話• 北京話北京話北京話北京話 (Peking dialect)：

– 北京市區及近郊的固有口語類型 (小範圍

、階層限制、場合限制)

– a.k.a. 老北京話；京片子

– 北京官話的「京師片」

• 北京官話北京官話北京官話北京官話 (Beijing Mandarin)

– 方言學術語：方言片，範圍比北京話大

– 北京官話分布圖（林焘 1987: 167）

– (北京話是北京官話的一種)

北京話 vs 國語

• 北京話北京話北京話北京話 (Peking dialect)：

– 北京市區及近郊的固有口語類型 (小範圍、階層限制、場合限制)



• 國語國語國語國語（新國音）

– Against「老國音」(1913)

– 1920 南京高等師範學校英文科主任張士《國語統一問題》:

– 「以至少受到中等教育中等教育中等教育中等教育的北京本地人北京本地人北京本地人北京本地人的話為國語的標准」(specific locale and social class)

– Codified in 1932《國音常用字彙》

– Used in Taiwan to this day

北京話 vs 普通話

• 北京話北京話北京話北京話 (Peking dialect)：

– 北京市區及近郊的固有口語類型 (小範圍、階層限制、場合限制)



• 普通話普通話普通話普通話 (1955年「全國文字改革會議」和「現代漢語規範問題學術會議」通過)

– 語音 Phonology：「以北京語音為標準音」

• C.f. 國語──no class or register restriction

– 詞彙 Lexicon: 「以北方話為基礎方言」

• C.f. 國語──extends beyond 北京話 and 北京官話

– 語法 Syntax: 「以典範的現代白話文著作為語法規範」

• C.f. 國語── based on literature rather than spoken language

Peking dialect: Common misconceptions

• 王力 (1957) 《漢語史稿》:

–自從 1153 年金遷都燕京（即今北京）以來，

到今天已有八百多年，除了明太祖建都南京和

國民黨遷都南京共五十多年以外，都是以北京

為首都的。這六百多年的政治影響，就決定了

民族共同語的基礎。

• COUNTEREVIDENCE:

– Population records

– L2 learners on “standard pronunciation”

2013-12-19

3


• 北京人口遷徙（張清常1992: 268-269）:

– 1125 年 (遼)：「南京析津府」（今北京）人丁40,000

– 1126 年 (金)：自汴梁（金河南開封）虜皇室宗親3,000人及大批工匠、娼妓、優伶安置燕京（今北京）。

– 1368 年 (明洪武元年)：令原大都（北京）居民全遷居河南開封。

– 1371 年 (明洪武四年)：遷山後（今山西、河北內外長城之間）93,878人來北平；又遷雲南 192,027人來北平

– 1644 年以降：東北八旗（滿軍及漢軍）236,771人入駐北京內城及西北近郊，佔人口總數 33.56％


• 第二語言習得者觀察：

– Korean textbooks / manuals (transcriptions in Hangul [since 1443])

•《洪武正韻譯訓》（1455, 申叔舟）──正音、俗音

•《四聲通考》（1517, 崔世珍）──正音、俗音、今俗音

•《翻譯老乞大》（1517, 崔世珍）

•《翻譯朴通事》（1517, 崔世珍）

•《老乞大諺解》（1670）

•《朴通事韻解》（1677）


• 第二語言習得者觀察：

– European missionaries

• Francisco Varo (1627-1687): “one must understand the way in which such words are pronounced by the Chinese. Not just any

Chinese, but only those who have the natural gift of speaking

the Mandarin language well, such as those natives of the Province of Nân kīng.” (Coblin, 2000, p. 540)

• Robert Morrison (1782-1834): “[Beijing pronunciation] is now

gradually gaining ground, and if the [Qing] dynasty continues

long, will finally prevail” (Coblin, 2000, p. 540).

• Joseph Edkins (1823-1905): “the Nanking Mandarin is more widely understood than that of Peking ... the Peking dialect

must be studied by those who would speak the language of the

imperial court” (Coblin, 2000, p. 541).


• Against language purism

– Archaising purism: attempt to resuscitate the linguistic

material of a past golden age, an exaggerated respect

for past literary models, an excessive conservatism

towards innovations or a recognition of the

importance of literary tradition. (Thomas, 1991, pp. 76-81)

• Hybrid vitality (c.f., biology; English language)

1. 北京話的過往

• 由「入派三聲」檢驗北京話的 DNA

1. 北京話的過往：由「入派三聲」檢驗北京話的DNA

• Biological analogy

2013-12-19

4

1. 北京話的過往：由「入派三聲」檢驗北京話的DNA

• Biological analogy


• What is 入聲 (terminology)

–By syllable type (音節結構):

•陰聲

•陽聲

•入聲

–By tone (聲調):

•舒聲（平、上、去）•入聲



–By syllable type (音節結構):

•陰聲 (vocalic ending 母音結尾)

–比[pi]、來[lɑi]、毛[mɑu]

•陽聲 (nasal ending 鼻音結尾: m, n, ŋ)

–三[sɑm]、單[tɑn]、東[tuŋ]

•入聲 (stop ending 塞音結尾, p, t, k)—in Middle Chinese, Cantonese, Min etc.

–八[pat]、塞[sǝk]、臘[lɑp]



–By tone (聲調):

•舒聲（非短促聲調，i.e. 平、上、去 [at the time]）

–平 (level pitch): 高、三、天

–上 (rising pitch): 死、手、走

–去 (falling pitch): 正、愛、菜

•入聲（短促聲調; with stop ending 塞音結尾, p, t, k ）

–八[pat]、塞[sǝk]、臘[lɑp]

– Survives mostly in southern dialects --

Cantonese, Min etc.

1. 北京話的過往• 入聲: Geographical distribution (《漢語方言地圖集》 2008)

– ● 保留

– ● 部分保留

– ● 其他


• 入聲: Degrees of preservation

STRATEGY 塔蠟骨殺落脈

Middle Chinese 中古漢語

tʰɒp lɒp kuәt ʂat lɒk mac

Cantonese 粵方言

(preservation) ta:p la:p kuɐt sa:t lɔk mak

Taiwanese (Southern Min)閩南方言

(preservation) taʔ laʔ kuәt sat lak mek

Sino-Japanese 日本漢字

compensatory lengthening or vowel insertion to: ro: kotsu satsu raku myaku

Sino-Korean 韓國漢字

weakening; gliding tap nap gol sal nak mak

Mandarin (literary reading)北京文讀

consonant deletion tʰa: la: ku: ʂa: lwɔ: mɔ:

Mandarin (colloquial reading) 北京白讀

weakening; gliding tʰa: la: ku: ʂa: lau mau

2013-12-19

5


• Dating the loss of 入聲

–遼、金、元（907-1368）(Shen 2011)

• BEFORE: linguistic records (e.g., rhyme

dictionaries; rhyme charts) consistent with existence of 入聲入聲入聲入聲 category

• AFTER: some northern dialects start to drop 入聲 category or confuse 入聲 and non-入聲 entries


• Explaining the loss of 入聲 – Why?

–Markedness considerations

–Language contact in northern China (simplification)


• Explaining the loss of 入聲 – Why?

–Markedness considerations

• Unmarked (無標/普遍): CV

–巴[pa]、母[mu]、沙[ʂa]

• Marked (有標/不普遍): CVC

–八[pat]、木[muk]、殺[ʂat]

– NOTE:

• C=consonant 子音（輔音）

• V=vowel 母音（元音）

1. 北京話的過往• Explaining the loss of 入聲 – Why?

– Language contact in northern China (Charles Li 1995; Norman

1982; Hashmoto 1986, 1970)

• Language simplification──c.f. history of English

• Altaicization :

– “the way they developed this type of ‘pidgin Chinese’ must be that these original Altaic residents accommodated into their mother tongue(s) the Chinese lexicon and morphology in their entirety, maintaining however their own syntax and perhaps most of their phonetics. We also suspect that this is how ‘genuine Pekinese’ was created by the variety of ethnic groups who came under the political control of the Manchus.” (Hashimoto 1986)

– Evidence from Khitan Lesser Script (契丹小字), Jurchen Script (女真文) and hP’ags-pa Script (蒙古字韻) (Shen 2011)


• Loss of 入聲 – Experiment


• Loss of 入聲 – Process

– Syllable structure change

– Tonal merger

2013-12-19

6

1. 北京話的過往• Loss of 入聲 – Process

– Syllable structure change

• 刪除刪除刪除刪除 Deletion (of final consonant) -- (CVC to CV)

–八: [pat] > [pa]

–木: [muk] > [mu]

–殺: [ʂat] > [ʂa]

• 弱化弱化弱化弱化 Weakening (of final consonant)-- (CVC to CVG)

–拍: [pʰac] > [pʰai]

–麥: [mac] > [mai]

–北: [pǝk] > [pǝi]

1. 北京話的過往• Loss of 入聲 – Literary vs colloquial contrast

– Deletion (CV) vs weakening (CVG)

Char Middle Chinese (CVC)中古音

Peking Colloquial (CVG)白讀層 (北京口語)

Peking Literary (CV)文讀層 (南京讀書音)

Gloss

勒 lәc lәi lә to strangle

得 tәc tәi tә must

脈 mɒc mai mɔ artery

核 xɒc xai xә core

曝 buk pɑu pʰu expose

學 xjɒk ɕjɑu ɕɥe to learn

角 kjɒk tɕjɑu tɕɥe horn

薄 bɒk pɑu pɔ thin

落 lɒk lɑu lwɔ to fall

嚼 dzjɒk tɕjɑu tɕɥe to chew

削 sjɒk ɕjɑu ɕɥe to sharpen


– Tonal merger

Early Middle Chinese

Late Middle Chinese (after tonal split)

Modern Mandarin

舒聲 lax 平陰平Yin Ping 陰平Yin PingTone 1

陽平Yang Ping 陽平Yang PingTone 2

上陰上Yin Shang 上ShangTone 3

陽上Yang Shang 去QuTone 4

去陰去Yin Qu

陽去Yang Qu

入聲

abrupt入陰入Yin Ru

入聲消失，混入舒聲

Mixed into other tones

陽入Yang Ru


– Tonal merger (after 劉勛寧 1995: 448)

膠遼官話

Peninsular Mandarin

東北官話

Northeastern Mandarin

北京官話Beijing

Mandarin

冀魯官話

Northcentral Mandarin

中原官話Central Plains

Mandarin

籃銀官話

Northwestern Mandarin

西南官話

Southwestern Mandarin

江淮官話Yangtze Mandarin

古清音voiceless initial

3 1234 1234 1 1 4 1 入

古次濁sonorantinitial

4 4 4 4 1 4 1 入

古全濁voiced obstruent

2 2 2 2 2 2 1 入


– Tonal merger (after 劉勛寧 1995: 448)

膠遼官話

Peninsular Mandarin

東北官話

Northeastern Mandarin

北京官話Beijing

Mandarin

冀魯官話

Northcentral Mandarin

中原官話Central Plains

Mandarin

籃銀官話

Northwestern Mandarin

西南官話

Southwestern Mandarin


古清音voiceless initial

3 1234 1234 1 1 4 1 入入入入

古次濁sonorantinitial

4 4 4 4 1 4 1 入入入入

古全濁voiced obstruent

2 2 2 2 2 2 1 入入入入

1. 北京話的過往• Loss of 入聲 – Process / Tonal merger

MIDDLE CHINESE (MC)

SYLLABLE INITIALCHARACTER MIDDLE CHINESE

(in IPA notation)

MODERN BEIJING(in pinyin notation)

TONE

MC Sonorant Initial

次濁次濁次濁次濁

納 nɑp nà 4

麥 mac mài 4

肉 ɲiuk ròu 4

烈 liat liè 4

MC Voiced Obstruent

全全全全濁濁濁濁

獨 duk dú 2

直 dʲiәk zhí 2

雜 dzɑp zá 2

盒 ɣɑp hé 2

MC Voiceless Obstruent

清清清清

接 tsiap jiē 1

踢 tʰiac tī 1

德 tәk dé 2

急 kiәp jí 2

鐵 tʰiat tiě 3

腳 kiak jiǎo 3

必 piәt bì 4

客 kʰac kè 4

2013-12-19

7


– Tonal merger

•陸志偉（1948）

–「嚴格的說，要問中古清入清入清入清入聲怎樣變成今音的，我們的回答還只可以是無規則、不知道不知道不知道不知道。」


• 如何解釋古清聲母入聲字在現代北京話的聲調分布？

–連讀變調 Sandhi theory (Hirayama 1990)

–四聲別義/詞性變調 Part-of-speech theory (Chen 1988;

Hirayama 1990)

–方言融合 Dialect mixture

–文讀影響 Intrusion of literary reading(s)

–歷史層次 Stratification

1. 北京話的過往• 如何解釋古清聲母入聲字在現代北京話的聲調分布？

– Sandhi theory (Hirayama 1990)

– T3 sandhi

• T3 + T3 � T2 + T3

• E.g., 老鼠、總統、洗澡

– 入聲入聲入聲入聲 sandhi (limited; historical fragment?)

•一 (1head, 2before T4, 4modifier (except T4))

•七 (1default, 2before T4)

•八 (1default, 2before T4)

•不 (2before T4, 4default)


– 四聲別義/詞性變調 Part-of-speech theory (Chen 1988; Hirayama 1990)

• 四聲別義/詞性變調 Part-of-speech sandhi (relic of Old Chinese)

–好 (adj=3; v=4)

–數 (adj=3; n=4)

–難 (adj=3; n=4)

–背 (v=1; n=4)

–擔 (v=1; n=4)

• Tonal distribution of 入聲 vs part-of-speech

(stand-alone)

VERB

MORPHEMES

搭 (dā)；擦 (cā)；拍 (pāi)；捉 (zhuō)；接 (jiē)；撥 (bō)；押 (yā)；掐 (qiā)；踢 (tī)；吸 (xī)；哭 (kū)；殺 (shā)

(stand-alone)

NOUN

MORPHEMES

腳 (jiǎo)；骨 (gǔ)；筆 (bǐ)；雪 (xuě)；鐵 (tiě)；尺 (chǐ)；塔 (tǎ)；百 (bǎi)；角 (jiǎo)；法 (fǎ)



–方言融合 Dialect mixture (《漢語方言地圖集》 2008)



–文讀影響 Intrusion of literary reading(s)• LAYER 1: Older literary tradition (Tone 2 & Tone 4)

– DISTRIBUTION:

» 陽平 Tone 2: Syllables with voiceless unaspirated stops and

affricates (e.g., 築、績、質)

» 去聲 Tone 4: syllables with voiceless aspirated or fricative initials

(e.g., 識、惜、戚)

– SOURCE (Jin 1991a: 11-12; Hsueh 1992; Li 1999: 25; Coblin 2006: 281-283; Gao 2009: 183):

» Luoyang / Central Plains + Nanjing (Hsueh 1992; Geng 2003: 60-61)

» Northeast (Coblin 2006)

» Northwest (Jin 1991a: 11-12)

• LAYER 2: Approximation of Nanjing (Yangtze Mandarin)– E.g., 築、績、質、識、惜、戚 (Tone 4 only)

2013-12-19

8


– 文讀影響 Intrusion of literary reading(s)

CHAR MIDDLE CHINESE PHONATION* 《中原音韻》(1324) 《合併字學集韻》(1602)

勒勒勒勒 lәk 次濁 +son 4 1, 4

辱辱辱辱 ɲiuk 次濁 +son 4 4

跌跌跌跌 diat 全濁+voice 2

擲擲擲擲 dʲiac 全濁+voice 2 2, 4

夕夕夕夕 ziac 全濁+voice 2 2, 4

寂寂寂寂 dziac 全濁+voice 2 2, 4

突突突突 duәt 全濁+voice 2 2, 4

髮髮髮髮 fyat 清母-voice 3 4

識識識識 ɕiәk 清母-voice 3 4

息息息息 siәk 清母-voice 3 4

熄熄熄熄 siәk 清母-voice 4

惜惜惜惜 siac 清母-voice 3 4

擊擊擊擊 kiac 清母-voice 3 4

戚戚戚戚 tsʰiac 清母-voice 3 4

績績績績 tsiac 清母-voice 3 4

質質質質 tɕiәt 清母-voice 3, 4 4

叔叔叔叔 ɕiuk 清母-voice 3 4

築築築築 tʲiuk 清母-voice 3 2, 4



–歷史層次 Stratification

• METHODOLOGY:

– Rank Curve Theory (階曲線判定法──王洪君 2006; 陳保亞、汪鋒 2006)

• RESULT

– T3: native (colloquial)

– T1: early contact dialect (low prestige, colloquial)

– T2 & T4: prestige dialect (high prestige, literary)

– T4: artificial reading pronunciation (high prestige, literary)

• DISCUSSION

– Associated locales / dialectal source?


– T3: native (colloquial) �• 膠遼官話、東北官話

– T1: early contact dialect (low prestige, colloquial) �• 冀魯官話

– T2 & T4: prestige dialect (high prestige, literary) �• 洛陽、南京(讀書音)

– T4: artificial reading pronunciation (high prestige, literary) �• 南京(仿口語音)

膠遼官話Peninsular

Mandarin

東北官話Northeastern Mandarin

北京官話Beijing

Mandarin

冀魯官話Northcentral Mandarin

中原官話Central

Plains Mandarin

籃銀官話Northwestern Mandarin

西南官話Southwestern Mandarin


古清音voiceless

initial3 1234 1234 1 1 4 1 入入入入

古次濁sonorant

initial4 4 4 4 1 4 1 入入入入

古全濁voiced

obstruent2 2 2 2 2 2 1 入入入入

1. 北京話的過往• 如何解釋古清聲母入聲字在現代北京話的聲調分布？ (c.f. Lin 1987b; Coblin 2006)

– T3 北京內城話 native (colloquial) : 源頭是遼金時期以燕京為中心的幽燕方言，一直和東北少數民族語言有密切接觸。(林焘

1987b: 167)

– T1 北京外城話 early contact dialect (low prestige, colloquial) : 土生土長的 [河北中部方言]，這種方言在元代以後一直和漢語各地方言有密切接觸。(c.f. 林焘 1987b: 167)

– T2 & T4: prestige dialect (high prestige, literary) �洛陽、南京(讀書音)

– T4: artificial reading pronunciation (high prestige, literary) �南京(仿口語音)

•到了清代，[T3+方言與T1+方言] 在北京匯合，相互之間差別本來就不大，在經過極為密切的長時期交流，就逐漸融為一體，成為現代的北京話。 (c.f. 林焘 1987b: 167)

1. 北京話的由來

• (analogy)

2. 北京話的現狀

• Core: 北京

– Ongoing changes

– Continuation of larger historical trend

• Periphery:北京話�普通話�普通話分支

– 地方化/本土化 indigenization

– 母語化/標準化 koineization/creolization

– pluricentricity

• Case study (dialect enclave): 台北國語 (北京話的方言孤島)

– Substratum influence:

– Dialect levelling (universal grammar; regularity; systematicity)

– Conservatism (archaic features)

– Impact upon donor

2013-12-19

9


• Core: 北京

– Northeastern (東北官話) intrusion into

Northcentral (冀魯官話) stronghold

• w > v

• T2, T3, T4 > T1 (入聲)


• Percentage of [v] realizations of /w/ (沈炯 1987: )

– (E.g., 文、完、忘、為、外)

•老 (60+): 33%

•中 (36-60): 52%

•青 (under 36): 64%

2. 北京話的現狀• Core: 北京 ──Northeastern (東北官話) intrusion into Northcentral

(冀魯官話) stronghold

• w > v (《漢語方言地圖集》 2008)• ●＝[v]; ○○○○=[w]


• Core: 北京 -- Northeastern (東北官話) intrusion into

Northcentral (冀魯官話) stronghold

• T2, T3, T4 > T1 (入聲)

突突突突疾疾疾疾惜惜惜惜擊擊擊擊夾夾夾夾叔叔叔叔古清濁濁濁清清清清

《中原音韻》(1324) 2 2 3 3 3 3

《合併字學集韻》 (1602) 2, 4 2, 4 4 4 4 4

《國音常用字彙》 (1932) 2 2 2 2 1, 2 2

《漢語方音字彙》 (1989) 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2

《現代漢語辭典》 (2005) 1 2 1 1 1, 2 1


• Periphery: 北京話 �普通話�普通話分支

– From interlanguage to koineoid (change in language attitude)

• Interlanguage (中介語, c.f., pidgin 涇濱語)

– Applies to current older speakers of regional Mandarin speakers (60+)

– Imperfect mastery of target language

– Limited range of vocabulary and functions

– Work in progress – looks to target language native speakers as model

• Koineoid (母語化/標準化涇濱語, c.f. creoloid, semi-creole)

– Applies to younger speakers of urban regional Mandarin (under 20)

– Originates in levelling of acrolect and related substrates

» traits common to all dialects are reinforced

» unique and marked differences gradually disappear

– Spoken as native language by new generation of speakers

– Complete range of vocabulary and functions

– Self-sufficient; does not look to source acrolect for model


• Periphery: 北京話 �普通話�普通話分支

– Pluricentricity and localization:

• American vs British English (et al)

– Windows operating system

– Versions of popular literature (e.g., Harry Potter series)

• Mainland vs Taiwan Mandarin

– Versions of translated literature (e.g., Harry Potter series)

– Dubbing of Japanese/Korean drama

– GPS language choice

2013-12-19

10



– Substratum influence:

– Dialect levelling (universal grammar; regularity; systematicity)





– Substratum influence

• Vocabulary (閩南語、日語)

– Southern Min 閩南語:

» 龜毛、白目、臭屁、好康、漏氣、嗆聲、A錢、鬱卒、走透透

– Japanese 日語:

» 便當：源自日語弁当（べんとう）

» 歐吉桑（男性長輩）：源自日語おじさん

» 歐巴桑（女性長輩）：源自日語おばさん

» 運將（司機）：源自日語俗稱「運ちゃん」




• Vocabulary (閩南語、日語)

漢字國語日語日語日語日語

音譯

漢字

閩南語閩南語閩南語閩南語

音譯




• Syntax: 有＋VP

» QUESTION: 「你有沒有告訴他？」

» NEGATIVE: 「我沒有告訴他。」

» AFFIRMATIVE: 「我有告訴他。」 (vs「我告訴他了。」)



– Dialect leveling (universal grammar; regularity; systematicity)

• Measure word 隻:

–一隻魚 vs (一條魚)

–一隻牛 vs (一頭牛)

–一隻馬 vs (一匹馬)

• Elimination of lexical weak stress

–地方 (local) vs 地方 (place)

–東西 (east-west) vs 東西 (thing)

– C.f. 桌子；椅子；爸爸；弟弟

北京話的現狀



• Immunity to changes in homeland / preservation of

features lost in homeland

– C.f. American English preservation of syllable-final /r/ vs non-rhotic British received pronunciation

– C.f. Iceland (enclave) vs Norway (homeland): Norwegian tradition of skaldic verse preserved only in Iceland, such that 10th C. Norwegian rulers employed mostly Icelandic poets.

2013-12-19

11

北京話的現狀


– Conservatism: Immunity to changes in homeland

• Taipei Mandarin:

» No w > v (E.g.,文、完、忘、為、外)

» No 入聲 shift to Tone 1

» Pronunciation of 和 (Hou 2010; Zhang 2010)

突突突突疾疾疾疾惜惜惜惜擊擊擊擊夾夾夾夾叔叔叔叔《國音常用字彙》 (1932) 2 2 2 2 1, 2 2

《現代漢語辭典》 (2005) 1 2 1 1 1, 2 1

2. 北京話的現狀• Case study (dialect enclave): 台北國語 (北京話的方言孤島)

– Impact upon donor (c.f. Am. English; Brazilian Portuguese)

• Lexicon 港台用語滲透 (姚穎 2005; esp. 藝文、媒體)

–八卦、藝人、作秀、主打歌、狗仔

隊、走紅、大哥大、炒魷魚、同志

、資訊、義工、上班族、電腦

• Impact on donor:

– Syntax ─－蔡瑱。2009。〈上海高校學生「有有有有+VP」句使用情況調查分析〉。《語言教學與研究》) (女圖女圖女圖女圖)

• Impact on donor:

– Syntax ─－蔡瑱。2009。〈上海高校學生「有有有有+VP」句使用情況調查分析〉。《語言教學與研究》) (男圖男圖男圖男圖)



– Impact upon donor──Cosmopolitan Mandarin used by Chinese yuppies working in foreign-owned corporations (Zhang 2005: 444-458)

• Phonology: avoidance of local Beijing features

–Rhotacization

»這兒、目標兒

– Lenition of syllables with retroflex initials to /r/

»不是、多少錢、不知道

– Lexical weak stress

»先生、學生、明白

2. 北京話的現狀• Case study (dialect enclave): 台北國語 (北京話的方言孤島)


• Phonology：Cosmopolitan Mandarin (Zhang 2005: 444-458)

– Dialect levelling: Mandarin used by Chinese yuppies in corporate settings in Beijing selectively incorporates features of Mandarin spoken in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore(Zhang 2005: 444-458)

– Use of “Cosmopolitan Mandarin” rather than “Beijing Mandarin” not for the purpose of communication, but for signal distinction in social status (Zhang 2005: 454-455)

– Speakers switch between regional Mandarin and “Cosmopolitan Mandarin” according to domain of language use – new type of Mandarin-based diglossia

2013-12-19

12

3. 北京話的未來 (老北京話 vs 普通話)

• Diglossia (雙語並存；雙語分工) ──

一個社會可否同時並存兩種語言？


• Disambiguation

– Diglossia—societal

– Bilingualism--individual

Diglossia: definition

• Classic diglossia (c.f. Ferguson 1959; Fishman 1967)

– “the existence in some speech communities of two or more

significantly discrepant but culturally legitimate speech varieties,

one of which is a universally available vernacular variety (L), and

the other a superposed variety (H)…[that] is acquired as an

additional variety only through exposure to specific formal channels

of language education” (Hudson 1991: 13, parentheses, underline and emphases added)

– Ferguson (1959): differentiation of function -- the high

language (H) tends to be used in formal situations such

as news broadcasts and university lectures; the low

language (L) tends to be used in informal situations such

as conversations with friends and colleagues…

– Fishman (1967: 30, emphases added): language vs dialect --

“diglossia exists not only in multilingual societies which

officially recognize several ‘languages’ but, also, in societies

which are multilingual in the sense that they employ

separate dialects, registers or functionally

differentiated language varieties of whatever kind”

Diglossia: narrow vs broad (after Fasold 1984)

Narrow diglossia Societal bilingualism (Broad diglossia)

Acquisition of H vs L H is nobody’s native language, whereas L is everybody’s native language

H is spoken natively by some, and L is spoken natively by some

Source of H language Archaic literary language (no restrictions)

Access to H language Small elite with access to literacy (no restrictions)

Differentiation of function Functions of H and L strictly compartmentalized (minimal overlap)

Some degree overlap between functions of H and L

Stability Typically stable (centuries or millenia) Typically unstable (3 generations)

Dissolution of diglossia Abrupt (revolution; breakdown of social order) Gradual

Direction of change H gives way to L L gives way to H

New prestige language L (with superstrate influence from H) H (with substrate influence from L)

Example H(Classical Chinese) vs L (vernacular Chinese) H(Mandarin)vs L (local dialect)

NARROW DIGLOSSIA: Classical vs vernacular Chinese

• Ferguson (1959) on Chinese

– “Chinese should be cited because it probably represents diglossia on the largest scale of any attested instance”(Ferguson 1959: 337-338)

– “Chinese, however, like modern Greek, seems to be developing away from diglossia toward a standard-with-dialects in that the standard L or a mixed variety is coming to be used in writing for more and more purposes, i.e., it is becoming a true standard.” (Ferguson 1959: 338)


Classic diglossia Classical Chinese

Dissolution of diglossia

Classic diglossia thrives in “preindustrial civil societies” with restricted literacy, and

“is most often removed at an early stage of

modernization” (Neustupny 1974: 40)

“the processes of modernization,

urbanization, mercantalism, and

industrialization ... create [demands] for a

literate labor force”, accompanied by “the

disestablishment of small ruling groups, the

breakdown of rigid class barriers and

increased fluidity of role relationships, and

the democratization of education, literacy, and knowledge that tend to

accompany these” (Hudson 2002:32)

“As China faced growing encroachment from

western countries and also from Japan in the

late 1800s and early 1900s, reformers

increasingly felt that China needed to

strengthen itself by promoting mass literacy

and education, and that Classical Chinese

was an unsuitable language to use for modern

mass education, partly because of its close

association with a traditional civilization that

did not offer China a way forward into

modernity and national power, and partly

because it was simply too difficult to teach” (Snow 2010: 161)

“decline of a classical variety is often

accompanied by catastrophic political events involving the breakdown of classical society itself” (Hudson 2002: 34)

The H-language “comes in with status and

elitism”, and “goes out under the pressures

of popular movements which we may call

nativist rebellions (Kahane 1986: 498)

The wholesale replacement of literary Chinese

with vernacular writing coincides largely with

the end of imperial rule in China,

culminating in the Vernacular Language

Movement (白話運動) of 1917 – this happening

within two short decades of the introduction of

western education in China, the abolition of

Confucian-style civil service examinations, and

the overthrow of the Qing dynasty. (Barnes 1982: 262)

2013-12-19

13


Classic diglossia Classical Chinese

Direction of change

“H ... tends to be displaced by L

through a process of structural

convergence resulting in the

emergence of a new standard

more closely related to certain

educated varieties of the

vernacular” (Hudson 2002: 30)

“the new socio-historical structure

creates a new literary

language out of the spoken

language then current” (Pulgram

1950: 461-462)

“Perhaps the most widely

publicized change in written

language habits from the traditional

period was marked by the decision,

reached in 1917, to write in such as

way as to approximate

contemporary vernacular

speech, discontinuing the centuries-

old practice among literate

individuals of writing in the classical

style, which had centuries earlier

ceased to function as a medium of

communication” (Barnes 1982: 262)

BROAD DIGLOSSIA: Mandarin vs local dialect

Broad diglossia

Acquisition of H vs L H is spoken natively by some, and L is spoken natively by some

Differentiation of function

Possible “leakage in function”, “mixing in form” (Fasold 1984: 54)

“[H and L] compete for realization in the same domains, situations, and role-

relations” (Fishman 1985: 45)

“Without separate though complementary norms and values to establish and

maintain functional separation of the speech varieties, that language or variety

which is fortunate enough to be associated with the predominant drift of social

forces tends to displace the other(s)” (Fishman 1967: 36)

Stability Will not survive beyond a three-generational span if H and L are unable to

carve out non-overlapping functional niches within the communicative ecology of

the community (Hudson 1001: 14)

Dissolution of diglossia “gradual hegemonic advance of the high variety and the displacement of

the low” (Hudson 1991: 7)

Direction of change “the language with stronger rewards sanctions associated with it wins out” (Fishman 1980: 8; 1985: 45)

“the general tendency appears to be for the higher-presige language

eventually to invade the domain of the home, ultimately displacing the language

of lesser prestige as a first language in the community” (Hudson 2002: 30)

New prestige language “over the long term, it is H that typically displaces L, often incorporating

certain substrate influences from L as it does so” (Hudson 1991: 10)

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS: Standard Mandarin vs Vernacular

(including Peking dialect)

• Taiwan

• Shanghai

• Guangzhou (Canton)

• Singapore

• Malaysia

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS:

•Taiwan– microcosm of linguistic developments in China

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS: Taiwan(microcosm of linguistic developments in China)

• Mandarin promotion (1945-1987)

– Success of Mandarin Movement

• Population is 90% Mandarin-speaking (C. Li 2009: 136-137)

• Population has shifted to using Mandarin in most domains (Chen 2010: 86)


• Dialect attrition (Too little too late?)

– General decline in language ability

• “The general complaint among most Southern Min and Hakka speakers with regard to language matters in the recent decade has been that their children (who very often can only speak Mandarin) can

no longer talk to their grandparents (who can only speak the

dialects)” (Tse 2000: 156)

• Use of dialect continues to decrease, use of Mandarin continues to increase (Huang 1988; Young 1989)

• “there is a good chance that the local languages will become obsolete as typewriters…Taiwanese has already started its decline towards inevitable extinction...the outlook for Taiwanese is very poor” (Beaser 2006: 16-17)

2013-12-19

14


• Dialect attrition

– General decline in language ability

• E.g., Hakka dialect attrition (Huang and Chen 2002: 57)

Full proficiency(listening+speaking)

No proficiency(listening+speaking)

19 & under 19.2 28.9

20-29 44.1 13.2

30-39 69.7 5.2

40-49 79.2 4.7

50-59 89.4 1.4

60+ 93.5 1.4

(Linear regression: no fully proficient Hakka speakers born after 2006)



– Neglect in education

– Failures of minority language media

– Changes in language attitude




• Instruction hours (elementary school) (Ma 2011)

–Mandarin (17-24 hrs/wk)

– English (12-16 hr/wk)

– Indigenous languages / dialect (1 hr/wk)

» grades do not count




• Parental attitudes

– “Mandarin is the common language of today, and English is the

language that will bring them to a prosperous future” (Beaser 2006: 11)

– Experts believe that dialects need to be taught to children while young,

because as they get older they will realize how useless these

languages are and lose all motivation to learn (Chiang and Ho 2008: 99).

• Lack of unified writing system (romanization)

– “local languages are widely used as a spoken form of communication,

but there has not been any significant move towards standardizing

them and making an official written orthography for Taiwanese

[dialects]” (Beaser 2006: 9)

• Lack of qualified instructors

– Even parents fluent in the dialects have trouble understanding what is

written in the textbooks, and few teachers really know how to teach

the dialects. Is it something that really needs to be taught? (Chiang & Ho 2008: 99)



– Failures of minority language media

• No audience

– Dialect media caters to an aging and uneducated audience; young

people rarely ever listen to dialect media (Chen and Lin 2004: 4)

• No advertising revenue

– Advertisers unwilling spend on programming that reaches only a small

audience (Chen and Lin 2004: 10)

• No competent broadcasters

– Hard to find broadcast professionals proficienty in all domains of dialect

use (frequent code-switching)

– Broadcasting often left to amateurs, resulting in low quality

programming (Chen and Lin 2004: 10)



– Changes in language attitude (J. Huang 2009: 8-10)

• Correlation with prestige:

– Mandarin as elegant;

– dialect as vulgar

• Correlation with age:

– Mandarin for speaking with young people;

– dialect for speaking with old people

• Correlation with class:

– Mandarin as white-collar;

– dialect as blue-collar

• Correlation with development:

– Mandarin as urban;

– dialect as rural

• Correlation with domain:

– Mandarin for all formal domains;

– dialect for informal domains only

2013-12-19

15



– Changes in language attitude

• “if a person is judged as speaking Mandarin with a more standard accent, he or she would be more likely to be considered as highly-educated, high-class, smart, having higher income...” (Liao 2008: 402)


•Shanghai– intergenerational dialect decline

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS: Shanghai(intergenerational dialect decline)

• Sun, Xiaoxian, Jiang, Bingbing, Wang, Yijia, Qiao, Lihua, 2007. Survey on the use of Standard Mandarin and Shanghainese dialect among students in the municipality of Shanghai. Yangtze River Academic 15, 1-10. (孫曉先、蔣冰冰、王頤嘉、喬麗華。2007。〈上海市學生普通話和上海話使用情況調查〉。《長江學術》15：1-10)

• Survey of 8,661 students in Shanghai area


• Language used in the home (Sun et al 2007: 3)

College freshmen 10th grade 7th grade 5th grade

(approximate age) 19 16 13 11

Shanghainese 71% 58% 45% 23%Mandarin 7% 11% 20% 23%


• Conversations with peers (Sun et al 2007: 5)





• Interpretation of data

– My interpretation (correlation with generation)

• Use of and attitude to Shanghainese dialect varies according to generation (c.f. Taiwan Hakka data)

– The younger the generation, the less speakers are willing to

speak Shanghainese, and the more willing they are to

speak Mandarin

– The younger the generation, the more important they regard

Mandarin and English, and the less important they regard

Shanghainese dialect

2013-12-19

16



– Linear regression

• Students born after 1999 will cease to speak Shanghainese dialect to their peers






– Linear regression

• Students born after 2032 will speak only Mandarin in the home





• Guangzhou– Summer 2010 language demonstrations

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS: Guangzhou(Summer 2010 language demonstrations)

• Background – perceived encroachment of Mandarin

upon Cantonese

– Media• Cancellation of Cantonese television broadcasts

– Education• Mandarin-only policies in elementary schools


• Background – perceived encroachment of Mandarin upon

Cantonese

– Media (Proposed policy change at Guangzhou Television (GVTV –

city’s only Cantonese language broadcaster)

• BACKDROP: 16th Asian Games, Guangzhou (November 11-27, 2010)

• Proposed change to broadcast policy (Chinese People‘s Political

Consultative Conference Guangzhou Committee 中國人民政治協商會廣州委員會)

– “In order to foster a positive linguistic environment, it is

recommended that Guangzhou Television change the broadcast

language of its news and variety channels to Mandarin, or

broadcast in Mandarin during prime time, so as to cater to

the linguistic needs of athletes and visitors to the city” (Hu 2010.07.07)



Cantonese

– Education: Yangcheng Evening News 羊城晚報 (2010.07.09)

• “Granny Unable to Converse with Grandchild” 同聲同氣祖孫倆竟變成「雞同鴨講」(Hu & Zi 2010)

– South Zhixin Road Primary School in Guangzhou (typical of other schools in the

region) requires pupils to speak Mandarin only both in and out of class

– Pupils risk point deductions if caught speaking Cantonese dialect

– As pupils become monolingual in Mandarin, they are unable to

converse with elderly relatives who understand only Cantonese,

creating communication barriers between generations

2013-12-19

17



Cantonese

– Education: Yangcheng Evening News 羊城晚報 (2010.07.09)

• Reverberations:

– Intergenerational rift: “Some Guangzhou parents complain their

children are now reluctant to speak Cantonese, even at home.” (Lai 2010)

– Decline of Cantonese-speaking population: “the Cantonese-

speaking community in the city has dwindled to less than half of the

total population” (Lai 2010)


• Result – series of demonstrations (Summer 2010)

– July 11: Small scale demonstrations (80+) in Guangzhou

– July 25: Large scale demonstrations (10,000+) in Guangzhou

– August 1: Mid scale demonstrations (1,000+) in Guangzhou and Hong Kong


• July 25 demonstration slogan

– The people of Canton speak Cantonese;

– Those who don’t should go back to the boonies!


• Implications

– The town that didn’t fight back (Nanning) (X. Chen 2010)

• “From the mid 1990s onwards, in the name of promoting Mandarin,

Cantonese dialect was gradually forced out of various spheres of life: first

Cantonese was banned from broadcast media, then from public

service announcements – for example, recorded announcements on

buses ceased to be bilingual and were given in Mandarin only. Finally,

Cantonese retreated from from the home: nowadays couples speak to

each other and to their children in Mandarin, and use Cantonese

only to speak to elderly relatives.”

• “Statistics show that less than 30% of the population of Nanning still

speak Cantonese dialect, most of which consist of the elderly. Of the

younger generation, those born in the 1970s are proficient still in both

listening and speaking, whereas those born in the 1980s can understand

Cantonese but have trouble speaking the dialect – contributing to the

perception that Mandarin is classy whereas Cantonese is uncouth”

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS: Singapore(former British colony, English widely promoted)

• Intervening factor -- government policy

– Shift to English

– Rise of Mandarin



– Shift to English

• Lee Kuan Yew (1978): “The way our economy has developed has made it necessary for those who want to reach executive or professional grades to master English, spoken and written. The earlier in life this is done the easier and better the

mastery” (Kwan-Terry 2010: 99)

• Economic utility -- English speakers command higher income (Composition of Singaporeans in the highest income group, after Kwan-Terry 2010: 100)

– Parents who didn’t speak English made sure that their children did (Kwan-Terry 2010: 100)

– Household language in the 1980s – Chinese with parents, but English

with siblings (Kwan-Terry 2010: 100-101)

English only 66.1%English and Chinese 20.5%Chinese only 2.0%Malay only 0%Tamil only 0%

2013-12-19

18



– Rise of Mandarin

• Government-launched “Speak Mandarin” campaign (1979)

• Dialects banned in radio and television

• (If not English), use of Mandarin encouraged in the home to assist in the development of literacy

• Chinese-medium schools teach only Mandarin – dialects seen as “low status” (Kwan-Terry 2000: 102)


• Language most frequently spoken at home for Primary

One Chinese pupils (Kwan-Terry 2000: 98; reference to Business Times survey of

October 4, 1989)

Dialect Mandarin English

1980 64.4% 25.9% 9.3%

1984 26.9% 58.7% 13.9%

1989 7.2% 69.1% 23.3%

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRSMalaysia

• Decline of the Chinese dialects

• Encroachment of Mandarin

• Two holdouts

– Hokkien (a.k.a. Southern Min, Taiwanese)

– Cantonese

CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS: Malaysia

• Decline of the Chinese dialects

– “The Chinese in Malaysia are fighting a losing battle in

trying to keep their colourful dialects alive.” (Ng 2010)

• Unfashionable: “Many among the younger generation view the use of dialects as outdated and unfashionable.” (Ng 2010)

• Generational Attrition: “Most of the younger generationnow could not speak dialects in their pure and uncorrupted form. They tend to use Malay, English or Mandarin words because they do not know the word in dialect for certain terms, especially modern and technological terms.” (Ng 2010)


• Encroachment of Mandarin

– “Listen in to conversations among Chinese in a shopping

mall or a restaurant, and chances are that most of them

would be speaking Mandarin or English or a mix of both

languages.” (Ng 2010)

• Economic utility: “The Chinese are practical. For a language to be relevant and important to them, it must have other values apart from the cultural aspect … Mandarin, unlike the dialects, has economic value, thanks largely to the growth of China as an economic powerhouse.” (Ng 2010)

• Education: “Today, a large number of Chinese children are in Chinese primary schools where Mandarin is the medium of

instruction.” (Ng 2010)


• Two holdouts

– However, two Chinese dialects, Hokkein and

Cantonese, are still widely used in the community and

there are several reasons for this.

• Cantonese – “thanks to the thousands upon thousands of Cantonese movies and popular TV series being produced [in Hong Kong], not to mention all those catchy Cantonese songs and gorgeous pop stars.” (Ng 2010)

• Hokkien (Taiwanese; Southern Min) – “Hokkein TV series produced in Taiwan are also popular among Chinese in the region, including Malaysia.” (Ng 2010)

– “Entertainment is keeping the two languages popular

among Malaysian Chinese. It is sad as our dialects have

to depend on entertainment and not the cultural value

or as an heritage”. (Ng 2010)

2013-12-19

19

FUTURE PROSPECTS: Dissolution of diglossia

• Direction of change


• Direction of change


• Pertinent factors

– Education (language of instruction)

– Media (broadcast news and entertainment)

– Intergenerational attrition• “as the [younger generation] starts to create their own

households and have children, what will the language of their home be? Base on this model, we would assume it would become Mandarin, the language they are most comfortable speaking” (Beaser 2006: 12-13)

• Turning point: when children who only speak the standard language can no longer communicate with grandparents who only speak dialect


• Role of parents (c.f. 3 generation rule)

– Generation 1: 1960s & earlier (very limited social mobility)

• Parents: native speakers of local L language

– L: local L language (locally available)

–H: Standard Mandarin (extremely limited access; taught second

generation as learned variety in schools)

FUTURE PROSPECTS: Dissolution of diglossia• Reasons for revision

– Generation 2: 1990s (greater social mobility, widespread access to Mandarin)

• Parents: bilingual (local L, Mandarin H)

• L1 of offspring (Generation 3): parents’ choice – intervening factors

– Availability (social mobility brings cross-dialect intermarriage; local L unavailable)

» “[Couples] may not understand each other’s dialect, and will end up speaking another language which is most likely to be English or Mandarin” (Ng 2010)

– Prestige + economic utility (Mandarin, English)

» “Even in Guangdong and Fujian, the strongholds of the Cantonese and Min dialects, more and more parents are abandoning their native dialects in favour of Putonghua, believing this will give their children better access to education and jobs.” (Yu 2010)

» "Children have to speak Putonghua at school anyway, so it's better for them to get used to it at home too," said a mother from Guangzhou, who speaks Putonghua to her son. (Yu 2010)

» "Many parents in my hometown feel the southern Min dialect is useless so they opt for Putonghua when speaking to their children," said Chen Weirong, a university student from Quanzhou, Fujian. (Yu 2010)

北京話的未來 (老北京話 vs 普通話)

• Application to Peking dialect

– L—Peking dialect 老北京話• Used in greater frequency by uneducated classes

• Used more often in informal situations

– H—Modern Standard Chinese 普通話• Used in greater frequency by educated classes

• Used more often in formal situations

• 北京话的纯度因受教育水平的提高而降低 (房豔紅 in 北京晚報 2012)

2013-12-19

20


• 老北京話(L) vs 普通話(H):

– Narrow or broad diglossia?

• Existence of 普通話 (H) native speakers in the midst of

老北京話 (L) speakers, enjoying higher social status

• Intrusion of 普通話 (H) into functional spheres

previously occupied by 老北京話 (L) speakers (leakage in

function)


• Decline of 老北京話 vs decline of other dialects:

– Language Attitude （北京晚報 2012.06.09）

• 詢問受訪者喜歡北京話還是普通話喜歡北京話還是普通話喜歡北京話還是普通話喜歡北京話還是普通話：

– 北京話（34%）

– 普通話（46%）

• 詢問受訪者希望孩子說什麼話希望孩子說什麼話希望孩子說什麼話希望孩子說什麼話：

– 北京話（37%）

– 普通話（49%）

•有些說很地道北京話的北京人都覺得北京話「土」。



– Language Attitude （北京晚報 2012.06.09）

•男女差異– 喜歡北京話（男42%；女24 % ）

– 喜歡普通話（男35%；女56 % ）

•世代交替– 年輕一代新移民（喜歡北京話6%；喜歡普通話85 % ）



– Similarity between low (L) and high (H) varieties （北京晚報

2012.06.09）

• Structural overlap / no clear boundaries

– 北京話與普通話本身太過相似，也是造成北京話衰落的原因

• Trojan horse phenomenon

– 有7%的人明確表示不確定自己說的是北京話還是普通話…有的人說著北京話，卻認為自己說的是普通話，有的人說著比較標

准的普通話卻認為自己的話還有北京味。



– Accerlerated decline （北京晚報 2012.06.09）

•跟普通話越接近的方言，會消失得越快

•北京聯合大學講師房艷紅：「我相信東北話再過幾百年都不會消亡，但北京話等不了那麼久了，北京方言已經瀕危了!」


• Dialect loss (c.f. 3 generation rule; faster than other dialects──

北京晚報 2012.06.09)

• Register variation (C.f. Zhang 2005)

• Generational differences

– C.f. Hakka example

– C.f. Shanghai example

• Reason for loss: changing language attitudes

2013-12-19

21

Outline• PAST:

– Hybrid origins (via 入聲演變)• Linguistic hybrid (Altaic + Chinese)

• Dialectal hybrid (河北、東北、中原、南京)

• PRESENT

– Ongoing changes (NE to Hebei pattern)• sound change (w to v)

• sound change (入聲漂移�T1)

– Spread through 普通話

• Regional variants

• Regional contributions

• FUTURE

– Dialect loss 語言滅絕 (infringement by 普通話）

• broad diglossia / societal bilingualism 雙語並存／雙語分工

• change in language attitudes

THANK YOU!

李文肇

CHRIS WEN-CHAO LIProfessor of Chinese Linguistics, San Francisco State University

1600 Holloway Avenue、San Francisco, CA 94132

[email protected]

beijing18.ppt - san francisco state universityuser · 2013-12-19 2 historical linguistics...

Documents