|
|
|
|
|
by SeanLuke
2071 days ago
|
|
Take Cantonese (or heck, Teochew or Hakka). You really think this language is reasonably mutually intelligible with Mandarin? Or Shanghainese? I'm a (non-native, formerly fluent but now pretty poor) Cantonese speaker and I'd describe the difference between Cantonese and Mandarin as roughly the difference between Portuguese and Romanian. Sure, they're both romance languages, and maybe with a lot of work and hand-waving and drawing characters on your hands with your fingers you can get your point across to someone who speaks the other language, but in no way would I call them mutually intelligible, even by talking "slower". Cantonese and Mandarin have very different pronunciation, vocabulary, and even grammar for common cases. In fact there are extremely common words in Cantonese for which there is no modern chinese character: instead roman words or even single letters (like "D") are substituted in comic strips etc. So you can't even write them down in Chinese for a Mandarin speaker to puzzle through with a dictionary. I'd say that your perception of these things as "western centric" -- they are not at all -- strikes me as very "northern Chinese centric" view of China. :-) |
|
See e.g. this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps7_NnkL-oM where for almost the entire video a couple is explaining words in their respective dialects (Sichuanese and Hunanese) to one another in their own dialect (i.e. not using Standard Mandarin at all in their explanations). The first half of the entire exchange is fluent and understandable by both people and also a Standard Mandarin audience. Only in the second half when they intentionally start quizzing each other on words they know will be tough for the other person and without additional context do they run into trouble (and occasionally resort to Mandarin).
Also, comparing it to Romance languages masks some complexities of the relationship. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16844074