Talk:Cantonese/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Macau, etc. dialects

This article will contain information about the dialect spoken in Guangzhou, Hong Kong, and Macau according to the current consensus. Please read Talk:Cantonese (linguistics). Discuss first if you have other plans. -- Felix Wan 22:53, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I heard that the Macao dialect was slightly different from Hong Kong dialect. Is that true? — Instantnood 06:22, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

It sounds about the same to me. Guangzhou dialect is probably more different from Hong Kong than Macau is. --Yuje 10:40, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I know there are now very much the same. But what I heard was that they used to be a little bit different. — Instantnood 12:02, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

I believe they are so mutually intelligible that we do not need seperate articles on the three dialects. We should explain the minor differences within the article if some users can explain them. -- Felix Wan 00:54, 2005 Apr 7 (UTC)

Most of the differences between Hong Kong and Guangzhou can be explained by the current phonological shift and the fact that some Hong Kongers are descended from Teochew, Hakka, or Shanghainese immigrants who didn't speak Cantonese natively or spoke it as a second language. But even so, the differences are still minor.--Yuje 02:01, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Exactly. And I read a passage that vocabularies of the Macau dialect are very slightly different from those of Hong Kong. — Instantnood 14:09, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

There is a discussion on the Macao dialect/accent at this forum (notably the comment by Johannes at 19:59, March 21). See also this book review, especially the paragraph starts with "Chapter 2 is..". — Instantnood 15:23, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

I think there are some major noticable differences between Guangzhou Cantonese and Hong Kong Cantonese, as well. In general, Hong Kong Cantonese is somewhat faster and tends to cut off, shorten, abbreviate, or merge many words. Thirty-three (saam sap saam/saa a saam), what(mat yeh a?/mei a?), is that so? (hai m hai ah?/hai mai a?)--Yuje 08:52, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps we can add these differences among the prestige variants to the article. — Instantnood 11:59, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

I believe this difference is part of Hong Kong's current phonological shift, isn't it? (I'm not a Hong Konger) If so, it could probably be included in that section. By the way, do you know if the merged sounds have their own characters or if they're still written as normal?--Yuje 21:26, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

It is not entirely current, nor a shift. Such differences exist for quite a long time, and the differences are not only phonological. On the shift, most people do not regard it as a real shift, but a lazy or wrong way of pronunciation. — Instantnood 10:49, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Just from the list in the article I see that most, if not all, loan words are used in HK Cantonese mostly and are not "Standard Cantonese" terms as defined in the article.

And what is the consensus? Is Hong Kong Cantonese a subset of Standard Cantonese or is Hong Kong Cantonese a "non-standard" dialect of Cantonese? I tend to go with the latter since by definition a "Standard" should not have all kinds of phonological shifts occuring. And if that is the case, why is the material regarding HK cantonese even included in this article? There should be a separate one.

And why is the most commonly known Chinese term for Cantonese: 廣東話 not included in this article nor the Cantonese (linguistic) article? Instead, 廣府話 is used here in the article which gives the impression that this article deals with Guangzhou speech only. --Kvasir 08:33, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that is because 廣東話 refers to all the understandable Cantonese spoken, which does not limit it to Standard Cantonese. Therefore it means that informally, 廣府話 is part of 廣東話. As a result, people in Hong Kong, Mainland China (excluding Guangdong and cantonese speaking areas in Guangxi)and overseas will call Cantonese 廣東話, while people in Guangzhou, for example, will call Standard Cantonese 廣府話 or 廣州話. This means that even though the term 廣東話 may bethe Chinese term commonly known for Cantonese in Hong Kong and overseas, it is not the general common term if we include Guangdong and Guangxi. Another teminology is 白話, which means Cantonese spoken by all Cantonese speakers even in Guangxi province. Which makes sense since certain Guangxi people speak Cantonese, and they are not from Guangdong. 白話 literally means "pure language", and the closer the way you speak is to Standard Cantonese, the more your Cantonese will be considered 白/pure. Last point to make is that Canton is the westernised version of Guangzhou, so strictly speaking, Cantonese is really 廣州話. --Guest 21:07,15 October 2006 (UTC)

Lingua franca

This comment "Cantonese, rather than Mandarin, is the lingua franca of the overseas Chinese community in the Western world." is false. Maybe it could have been true 30 years ago, but today, Mandarin is definitely the lingua franca for overseas Chinese. - 18.85.28.28 12:55, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think there would be any reliable statistical data to back this claim. It is based on observations of different people, and it depends on where do the people make the observations. — Instantnood 15:22, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

If there is no reliable statistic as you said, then the original comment should be deleted. We can think about this reasonably. People from Taiwan and Mainland abroad would most likely all speak Mandarin. But only people from Hong Kong, Macao, or Guandong would speak Cantonese. So I believe Mandarin is the lingua franca, or simply to delete that comment in the article for lack of evidence. - Quain 13:18, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Well, Taiwanese Mandarin (Guoyu) and Mainland Mandarin (Putonghua) are slightly different, aren't they? Taiwanese would pronounce, for example, "le se" as for 垃圾 whereas people from mainland China "la ji". Yes, you're right: people from Taiwan and Mainland abroad would most likely all speak Mandarin. It's also true the the population of Hong Kong, Macao, and Guandong is outnumbered by that of Taiwan plus the entire mainland China. But they don't imply the slightest linkage, do they? :-D Certainly it does not mean, in any sense, that the number of people from Taiwan and Mainland abroad is much greater than that of people from Cantonese-speaking areas. So your statement is not that logically valid, I suppose.

On the other hand, whether Cantonese is the lingua franca or not is downright beyond my ken. No comment to this. :)-- Jerry Crimson Mann 16:08, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Only recent emigrants from mainland China speak Mandarin. Not all earlier emigrants from the mainland speak good Mandarin, as Mandarin (Putonghua) was not as popular as in present time. They may speak their own languages. — Instantnood 19:44, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Most of the immigrants from the Chinese mainland come from Guangdong province, though there are increasing numbers from Fuzhou. So to say that there are large number of mainland immigrants and that Cantonese is the most widely spoken isn't a contradiction. Whether a language is a lingua franca depends on who's making the observations and where. In most Chinatowns it would probably be Cantonese, in Hawaii and among second or third generation people it'd likely be English, in some Taiwanese neighborhoods Mandarin, and in many other places especially with mixed populations many are multilingual and might communicate in any of the three languages. --Yuje 05:37, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

I think .. lingua franca is not necessarily the language that is actively spoken by the widest number of people in their normal day to day life. Rather, it is the common language that people can use to communicate when they otherwise do not share a common "native" language. In this sense, the lingua franca of Chinese today in the western hemisphere is Mandarin. I have met very few Chinese people on the East Coast that has zero comprehension of Mandarin. Even in Chinatowns where the background chatter is dominated by Cantonese, if you speak Mandarin to a shop keeper they'll almost always be able to respond in kind. --BenjaminTsai ^Talk 14:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

By that criteria, English would be the lingua franca in North America. Mandarin is spoken to non-Cantonese Chinese, but English is the language used to communicate with all non-Chinese, and even some Chinese. --Yuje 14:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, for better or worst English has become the de facto lingua franca of not just North America but also the world. --BenjaminTsai ^Talk 14:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[1] There was a recent paper article on this very subject, so I thought it would be relevent to append it to this discussion. --Yuje 07:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Cantonese language during Ming Dynasty

According to section on history Cantonese language was the official language of the Ming Dynasty. Is it more accurate to say that modern form of Cantonese came from the official language of Ming Dynasty? And is there any evidence to back this? To my understand many of the pronunciations of the Tang Dynasty are preserved in modern Cantonese. — Instantnood 19:47, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

The history section is totaly POV, and totaly inacurate. Cantonese was never EVER the official language of China. There was not such a thing as an official pronunciation of Chinese until the 1920s anyway. And the written official version of Chinese was classical Chinese until the 1920s. I wonder who wrote those insanities in the history section. It will have to be extensively rewritten. Hardouin 00:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

May you provide some suggestions as to what approach you might take to perform these amendments? Maybe we can help out! :) --HappyCamper 01:06, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Right. Let's see how we can amend and improve it. :-) — Instantnood 07:55, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

There's no official tongue of Chinese until the 1920s, but there was a certain common tongue among the people in the imperial courts in each of the different periods of history. — Instantnood 07:55, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

There was a lingua franca used by the imperial elites before 1911. This lingua franca varied along history, depending where the court was located. Cantonese was never one of these lingua franca. At the most we can say that Cantonese was perhaps the lingua franca of the Chinese kingdoms located in Guangdong province at the times of Chinese disunity, although the last time there was such a kingdom was in the 10th century, and I'm not sure we can talk of a "Cantonese language" as early as the 10th century. As for the claim that in the 1920s the leaders of China hesitated between Cantonese and Mandarin to choose as the official language of China, it is simply a falsehood. The real hesitation was between Mandarin and the Wu dialect of the rich business elites of Shanghai/Suzhou/Hangzhou. Also, the claim that "the Cantonese-speaking population was slightly larger than the Mandarin-speaking population" is totally and uterly insane. I really wonder who in their right mind could write all these insanities. For records, 67% of Chinese are speakers of Mandarin dialects today, and only 5% of Chinese people are speakers of Cantonese dialects. The proportion was approximately the same 100 years ago. In short, 90% of the history section needs to be removed, only 10% is credible info. I will do the changes this afternoon. Hardouin 12:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

What would perhaps be true is that Cantonese has preserved many of the aspects of the lingua franca of the earlier dynasties. There are many sources saying that the ROC founders voted to adopt the Peking dialect as the basis of pronunciation of Kuoyü, merely one vote more than Cantonese (probably the dialect of Canton city). The main reason was many revolution leaders were from the Canton province, or were Cantonese speakers. Some sources even say it was Dr Sun Yat Sen who advocated to adopt the Peking dialect to promote national unity. The comparison between the number of speakers of Cantonese and Mandarin is illogical, but we have to consider the differences among Mandarin dialects (see the article on the Tianjin dialect for instance), and acknowledge the fact that the option was Peking dialect, instead of Mandarin. The percentage of the present-day distribution of speakers of different languages is a result of decades of promotion of Putonghua, that many languages have been displaced. Few people actually spoke Putonghua when the PRC was founded. — Instantnood 15:41, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Cantonese has preserved many of the aspects of Middle Chinese, but so have other dialects. And although Cantonese has preserved some features, like final consonants, it has also developed pronunciations far away from Middle Chinese, so that Cantonese is no closer to Middle Chinese, no more authentic than other dialects. As for what you mention for ROC founders, the one vote more for Beijing dialect than Cantonese, I'd like to see hard proof. Again that seems to me like a popular myth from HK. From what I know of Chinese history, it was Beijing and Shanghai dialects that were in the balance. Remember that the Republic was dominated by rich industrialists from Shanghai area, and the Republicans were in Guangdong only until 1925, afterwards they were in Nanjing. As for the National Assembly of China, the one body competent over that linguistic matter, it was never located in Guangdong. It was in Beijing first, and then in Nanjing. And the Cantonese speaking representatives in that National Assembly were always a small minority. As for the percentage of the present-day distribution of speakers of different Chinese dialects, it is not very different from what it was 100 years ago. In the 1920s the Cantonese speakers were only 5% of Chinese people. It is the Wu dialects that have always had the largest number of speakers after the Mandarin dialects, not the Cantonese dialects. And if you're talking about just a city, it is Shanghai that had more inhabitants than Beijing, Canton, or HK, so if anything the most spoken local dialect was Shanghainese, not the dialect of Canton city. Hardouin 23:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm the original writer of those INSANITIES, as Hardouin will describe as according to my own understanding of my mother tongue. Yes, it's correct that China had never had a declared "de facto" until the 20th century (in my memory I wasn't the person who wrote down "de facto"), however Cantonese was the most widely-spoken Chinese tongue before the PRC declaration of Putonghua as the current de facto. Deryck C. 11:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

You see, that's precisely what I call insanities. Cantonese was NEVER the "most widely-spoken Chinese tongue before the PRC declaration of Putonghua as the current de facto". Maybe that's what you were told by your family when you were young, but that's simply not true. Double-check the facts before writing things like that. Hardouin 11:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

This is starting to get heated. Can please we refrain from using the word "insanities"? Now, to be more productive, we need to find a reference which supports or refutes this concept. Who's going to the library today then? It simply isn't good enough to state what one thinks are facts. State a reference. --HappyCamper 12:07, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Maybe Hardouin will be interested? Deryck C. 12:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure this Wikipedian would gladly volunteer :-) Ditto for me. Let's give this 2 weeks and see what happens? I'll be off... --HappyCamper 12:57, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm reading this article [2], but it's pretty long, and I'm not good at reading simplified Chinese characters. :-) Meanwhile, this [3] is a TV programme that in the beginning one of the hosts says the Canton dialect (i.e. what we call Standard Cantonese on Wikipedia) lost by one vote. — Instantnood 13:02, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Lost by one vote in what? Deryck C. 16:18, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

...in becoming the official language of China? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 17:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Exactly. I've sent RTHK an email and see if they can provide any source on that. :-) — Instantnood 20:15, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

You don't have to go look for far-fetched documents in Chinese if you want to set the records straight. Just check this webpage in English ([4]) and you will know most of things you ought to know on this matter. As you can see from the webpage, Cantonese was never in the balance. At the Conference on Unification of Pronunciation that met in 1913, the two large blocks that were opposed to each other were the Mandarin block against the Zhejiang-Jiangsu block (i.e. Shanghainese and Wu dialects), exactly like what I said above. And if you care to read the whole page, you'll find this paragraph that sums it all:
"The National Language Romanization was able to win considerably wider support for its other main feature, namely the writing of the Peking dialect as the standard language for the whole country. In contrast, toward the end of the Manchu period reformers like Lao Nai-hsüan had insisted on devising separate scripts for the southern coastal dialects. At the 1913 Conference on Unification of Pronunciation, too, there were reformers with somewhat similar views who had been defeated only by parliamentary maneuvers and threats of physical violence. But by the time that G.R. was created the idea of achieving national unity through uniformity in the script had made considerably more headway in the dominant intellectual circles of the day. Of the five men who created the National Language Romanization, not one was a native of Peking. Indeed, apart from Li Chin-hsi, who was a native of Hunan, the remaining four all came from the southern coastal area. Yet they found no difficulty in reaching agreement to promote the Peking dialect as the exclusive standard. Among educated Chinese generally this was becoming increasingly accepted also as the form of speech and writing which was to effect the unification of the country." Hardouin 23:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

More sources are never wrong. ;-) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 03:31, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I concur. Assuming what someone "ought to know" is a very dangerous thing...I'm in contact with a professor who specializes in East Asian studies at the moment. I'm looking for printed research and interpetation of the linguistic history of Cantonese at the moment from all perspectives. I doubt the answer to this question is as definitive as it may appear to be. This is very characteristic of some areas of the humanities, which is why it is such a worthwhile area of research. For myself, I want something more definitive than a website. A genuinely peer reviewed journal entry would make an excellent addition to this article! :-) --HappyCamper 03:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

The paragraph Hardouin had quoted can be true too. It mentioned what happened in 1913 to decide on a writing standard, possibly after the Peking dialect was chosen as the official national spoken variant. If we read carefully it is possible that there's actually no contradiction between the long article in Simplified Chinese ([5]) and the article Hardouin quoted ([6]). If we have some knowledge in history of that period we may expect what the proportion of Cantonese speakers would be among the revolution leaders. — Instantnood 07:38, August 26, 2005 (UTC) (modified 11:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC))

Sorry if I may come across as exasperated sometimes, but I feel like we are discussing the roundness of the earth here and somehow we are asked to bring references proving that the earth is round, just because one Wikipedian said it was flat. I studied in the best oriental schools in Europe and America, and I can assure all of you, there is absolutely no debate about Cantonese possibly having been chosen as the national language of China. If you don't trust the website I recommended, you can also check this excellent book: Modern Chinese : History and Sociolinguistics. Hardouin 11:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Hey there! I will indeed check that book - thanks! I don't know if this is the case, but perhaps a number of Wikipedians editing this page have a Cantonese background, it is probably awfully good to hear something even remotely suggesting that the language was once possibly really close to being the language of use in China - even if the statement might be false. I suspect that there is some reluctance to admit this, and probably some other cultural factors are coming into play here. On my part, I have no idea at all about this history, so I'm quite skeptical of anything until I've read it myself in a journal. Initially, I was a bit weary of your comments as I did find them somewhat overbearing - I mean, it's not often that one is told of insanities or whatnot! :-D However, I'm really glad to see that things have started to settle down now, and I'm sure the other Wikipedians would agree with me too. You're most welcome to edit the page - why not give it a try now, and take out all the references/suggestions in the article that you think should not be there? I think we're at a point where everyone is willing to listen and hear everyone out. I'll try and help out with the edits as well. At worst, we can revert :) - However, I really don't want an edit war to start here, so please everyone, be kind with your edits and edit summaries! Let's give these few edits about Cantonese a try, so don't be too quick to remove material that doesn't sound right - articles are always in construction! --HappyCamper 13:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

What's "Guoyue"???--Eternal 18:00, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

It means "Mandarin" pronounced in Mandarin. In Cantonese it is Gwok Yue (approximately). It is made of two Chinese words and literally means the "country's language". --HappyCamper 18:41, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

The essential problem is, how are we going to rewrite that section? Deryck C.

10:29:32, 2005-09-07 (UTC)

I empathise 100% with Hardouin here. Perhaps "insanities" is too strong a word, but it comes close to describing the history section of this article. We shouldn't be spending time arguing whether the world is round or flat if someone comes in and says that it is flat.

Let's see:

Cantonese culture and language became the official language again during the Ming Dynasty, and at that time modern Cantonese language took its form.

This is ridiculous. The court dialect during the Ming Dynasty was that of Nanjing. This dialect is well documented in the rime book Hongwu Zhengyun.

In the Qing Dynasty, the Manchus made the Manchu variation of Chinese, later developed into Mandarin (Qing official language) and Putonghua, the current official language.

What the hell? Mandarin is the "Manchu" version of Chinese? Early Mandarin is known from the Yuan Dynasty in the rime book Zhongyuan Yinyun, 300+ years before Manchu conquest. The Mandarin of that time already shows many of its most characteristic features: the split of the Ping but not the Shang and Qu tones; the disappearance of the Ru tone, etc.

Cantonese supporters argued that the history of the Cantonese language can be traced to Huang Di times, and cited the fact that Cantonese-speaking population was slightly larger than the Mandarin-speaking population at that time.

When did Guangdong province have a larger population than the rest of China? I think the writer here is confused about the concepts of "Middle Chinese" and "Cantonese". Middle Chinese (Sui Dynasty / Tang Dynasty) is the ancestor of all modern Chinese dialects, except Min, and it had many features we associate with Cantonese today, e.g. final plosives. But it also had features we associate with Wu, e.g. voiced consonants, and even features that we associate with Mandarin, e.g. retroflex ("rolled") consonants. It's the ancestor language, and it's ridiculous to equate it with modern Cantonese.

The general understanding is that after South China was repopulated by migration from the north during the Tang and Song Dynasties, the Late Middle Chinese spoken there evolved in isolation into the modern, heterogeneous, southern Chinese dialects: Gan, Hakka, Cantonese. (Min is also a southern Chinese group, but since it keeps archaic features from Old Chinese that not even Cantonese or Hakka have kept, it's really in a category of its own.) The northern Chinese dialects, which were exposed to more internal and external migration, changed at a faster rate while maintaining greater homogeneity, from Late Middle Chinese into the modern Mandarin dialects. The central Chinese dialects were between the two: those further south had more opportunities to diversity, becoming Xiang and Wu; others were exposed to more influence and migration from Mandarin, and evolved into the modern Southwestern (Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, Hubei) and Jianghuai (Jiangsu, Anhui) Mandarin dialects.

As for what to do with the current history section: I say it should be completely removed. It's better not to have it than to have it there advertising falsehoods and misconceptions about the fundamentals of the Chinese language(s). And that's exactly what I'm going to do.

-- ran (talk) 17:32, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

The original passage of words were created per request, but if the majority agrees to remove the passage, then just leave it done. Deryck C. 08:41, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Tone names in Pinyin or a Cantonese romanization

I reverted edits of 219.173.119.57 [7] which had changed the tone names in the article from Pinyin to a Cantonese romanization of that anonymous user's choice for these reasons:

1. The names in Pinyin are standardized labels in academia.
2. Standard labels are necessary for English readers in comparative studies of geographical and chronological dialects.
3. The pronunciation of those names in Standard Cantonese may be interesting information, but they are not as necessary. Omitting them makes the tables more compact.
4. If one argues that tones should be named in the dialect being discussed, then why should tones in Middle Chinese be pronounced in Cantonese then?
5. The user chose a personal romanization method that matched none of those listed in Wikipedia.
6. If the consensus is to add those pronunciations, I recommend using the IPA system being described in the article for consistency.

Please discuss. -- Felix Wan 00:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I recommend using Jyutping throughout the article wherever pronunciation guide for Chinese words are necessary, because Jyutping is currently the most widely-accepted, typist-friendly and reader-friendly scheme of Cantonese romanization and pronunciation guide. Deryck C. 07:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

It's easy to input, but I don't think it's the most widely accepted. :-D — Instantnood 20:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I was indeed also under the impression that it is the most widely accepted, since if someone chats with me about Cantonese in a somewhat technical way, that's what they'd use - though often they know it as "LSHK" rather than "Jyutping". -- KittySaturn 16:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Main Point: Jyutping is doubtlessly more writer- and reader-friendly than IPA. Deryck C. 09:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

To KittySaturn: of course, because that's the only usable version on a keyboard. Deryck C. 04:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Alternative view of finals analysis

Finally, I decided to add the alternative view, quote my sources here in the talk page, and ask other Wikipedians for help in finding more definitive reference materials. During a discussion, I learned the second view, which is verifiable by these:

• Hong Kong Dialect Phonology
• Guangzhou Dialect Phonology

We know that the two dialects should be very close to each other, yet the two pages use different approaches in phonological analysis. The "Hong Kong" approach is more well known as it is recorded in S. L. Wong, A Chinese Syllabary Pronounced According to the Dialect of Canton. The "Guangzhou" approach is actually using a method closer to the second one I mentioned in the article, and considered medials as part of the rime. Notice the presence of /oŋ/ and /eŋ/, and the absence of /uŋ/ [ʊŋ] and /iŋ/ [ɪŋ]. Unfortunately, I have lost my link to a clearer article that supports the second approach. If anyone can find a book or paper supporting it, please add it here in the talk page. -- Felix Wan 03:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Vowel chart

I noticed that this chart was unused. I'll leave it here for your consideration.

Peter ^Isotalo 21:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, this looks like a good chart, but it shows an [a] rather than [ɑ]. I'll ask the original creator whether he can change this. —Umofomia 22:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Now that I've cleared the mixup concerning [a] vs. [ɑ], I have added the chart to the page. —Umofomia 13:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Tone section does not make sense

I came here looking to find how the first tone should sound. I found a chart that does not explain what any of the tones sound like (for example: "low," "low rising," "high," "high rising," etc.). Can this be improved? It's important. Badagnani 02:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Unless I'm way off, the numbers indicate tone levels, so, for instance, "55" is "high level". I have attempted to deduce and add appropriate descriptions to the table. Some of them are the same as each other. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 07:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, this is very helpful. The numbers now make some sense; they are not well explained. It still doesn't make sense that some tones have the same numerical value. Badagnani 07:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Cultural role, (public transport announcements in Cantonese in Guangzhou)

Quote from Cultural role: Cantonese enjoys a standing slightly inferior to Mandarin but much superior to other varieties of Chinese in China. This is seen in Guangzhou where announcements in the public transport are made in both Mandarin Chinese and the local lingua franca Cantonese. Not even Shanghainese enjoys this privilege in Shanghai, the largest and arguably the wealthiest city in China. end quote.

Does Cantonese really have a higher standing in Guangzhou than Shanghainese in Shanghai? I think there should be more to back up this statement. The example given about public transport announcements is not very convincing as it is probably for the benefit of non-Mandarin speaking Hong Kong people. I think outside of the Cantonese speaking areas Cantonese is largely irrelevant, it's just another dialect from another part of China, nobody would expect a non-native to understand or speak it. Although amongst the non-Mandarin dialects, Cantonese has more exposure, due to the existence of Hong Kong. LDHan 17:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed the above quote from the article and my edit summary was Guangzhou public transport announcements in Cantonese are for benefit of non-Mandarin speaking HK people.

User:Yuje moved it back and wrote And Shanghainese public announcements aren't offered for non-Mandarin speakers in Shanghai.

The situation in Guangzhou and Shanghai are not really comparable. Are there large numbers of Shanghainese speaking people who don't understand putonghua in Shanghai and need announcements in Shanghainese? . Are there large numbers of Shanghainese speaking visiters to Shanghai who don't understand putonghua and need announcements in Shanghainese?

Perhaps Guangzhou public transport announcements in Cantonese are for benefit of HK people, who do not understand Mandarin would be more accurate. Although I do think there is an element of asserting local identity in making announcements in Cantonese, maybe it is tolerated because it can be justified on the grounds of the benefit to Guangzhou in making the announcements understandable to HK people. But this does not mean Cantonese has a higher standing in Guangzhou than Shanghainese in Shanghai, nor is it good evidence on which to make this claim. I think the paragraph in the article should be rewriiten to reflect this. LDHan 09:06, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Cantonese is tolerated to a far greater extent than many other dialects such as Shanghainese are. Shanghainese, for example, has been largely banned from television except in some limited contexts, while an entire mainland Cantonese tv channel. [8] is allowed. --Yuje 01:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Responding to LDHan, you said: "it is probably for the benefit of non-Mandarin speaking Hong Kong people". Well, what about the benefit for the locals? Your wording makes it sound like the transportation system is exclusively catered to outsiders, so it should only be in the languages of the outsiders. It just doesn't make sense. In a place where most people speak Cantonese, why "wouldn't" the announcements be made available in the local language? Just because they "can" understand Putonghua won't cut it, by no means does it imply that they "prefer" to speak it, or that it is used in their daily lives.

Yes, you are correct that the public transport announcements are for the benefit of locals as well as non-locals. The discussion here is why does Guangzhou have announcements in the local dialect/language and Shanghai doesn’t.

The point I was questioning was the fact that Guangzhou's public transport has announcements in the local dialect and that Shanghai doesn't was used to assert that either (wording of sentence was ambiguous) Guangzhou's local speech has a higher local standing compared with the local status of other cities' local speech, or that in the whole of China, Cantonese has a standing slightly inferior to Mandarin but much superior to other varieties of Chinese.

I was pointing out that the situations in Guangzhou and Shanghai are not really comparable. I’m not saying that that Guangzhou's local speech doesn’t have a higher local standing compared with the local status of other cities' local speech, but that whether or not public transport in Guangzhou and Shanghai include announcements in the local dialect is not a good argument to back up this claim.

The fact that Cantonese has a significant number of non-Mandarin speakers and has de-facto official status in HK makes socio-linguistic comparaison with other varieties of Chinese complicated. Unlike Cantonese speakers elsewhere, Cantonese speakers in Guangzhou and Guangdong generally recognise the need to and have have no issues with using Mandarin with non-Cantonese speaking people from other parts of China, who after all make up 95% of all Chinese speakers. LDHan 19:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

population of cantonese speakers

it's stated in previous edition that 5% of china population speak cantonese, but the figure is too vague. It means 5% of China pop. or only han population? does Cantonese, as shown by the figure, refer to all variations of Cantonese and cantonese spoken in Hong Kong and Guangzhou? Quite misleading. -- Yau 1 May 2006

I agree the figure needs to be more specific. OK let's do some sums:

If we take the Cantonese (Yue) group:

[[9]] gives a figure of 70 million.

Population of China: over 1,300 million, Han make up over 90%, so the Han population is at a least 1,170 million.

70 million from a total of 1,170 million gives 5.98%, if a more generous figure of 80 million speakers is used, the percentage is 6.8%. This is for all varities of Cantonese not just the Hong Kong/Guangzhou dialect. LDHan 23:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

the problem lays at the original figure---5% (70million). i tried to figure out the time and original source for this estimate but still can't be clear with this. Some suggest 70 million is a worldwide cantonese population, not only in China (and don't even know if it includes taiwan, hk and macao). --Yau, 1 May 2006

[10] actually gives a figure of 66 million worldwide, taken from the 13th Edition of the Ethnologue (1996)[11].

The sentence the figure refer to was Standard Cantonese has spread from Guangdong far out of proportion to its relatively small number of speakers in China. It seems to refer to speakers in Guangzhou and surrounding areas who speak the Guangzhou dialect, assuming Guangdong does not include HK and Macao. The percentage of Guangzhou dialect speakers out of all Chinese (Han) speakers in mainland China then would be significantly lower than 5%. If the figures for the Cantonese (Yue) group speakers worldwide (65-75 million?) and Chinese (Han) speakers worldwide (1,300 million?) are used, the percentage is the range of approx 5-6%.LDHan 16:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello, it said only 5 % of the chinese population and not 5% of the chinese han population so it would be a figure of 1.3 billion, that excludes all chinese immigrant people resident in other countries but would include Taiwan,Hong Kong and Macau, and most likely would include all varients of cantonese. Dont makee it to conplex than you make it more confusing. Enlil Ninlil 02:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Classification of Chinese languages/dialects

Sichuan dialect is mutually unintelligible with Mandarin(Beijing dialect). So why is Sichuan dialect classified as a Mandarin language dialect anyway? It should be belonged in a separate dialect group like Wu, Gan, Min, etc. Therefore if Sichuan dialect is classifed as a Mandarin dialect, we can also justify that Teochew dialect and Hainanese dialect can belong to the Yue dialect group.Sonic99 05:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The classification of Sichuanhua as a Mandarin dialect is not intended to imply thaht they are mutually intelligible. The terminology used to talk about Chinese language varieties is always contentious, but that is not implied by "dialect" in this case. As for why it is classed as a Mandarin dialect, this is not a decision to be made by Wikipedia editors by linguists; then we, Wikipedia editors, report what linguists say. Linguists apparently believe that Sichuanhua is close enough to the other Mandarin dialects so that they constitute a group together. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 05:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

How did the linguists come to the conclusion that Sichuanhua is a Mandarin dialect? Sichuan dialect as well as Wuhan dialect are mutually unintelligible with Beijing dialect. I would think these linguists are trying to promote Mandarin and classed more speakers into the Mandarin group. Teochew and Hainanese are similar to Cantonese in grammar and pronunications and, also the proximity of Canton and their continuous contact with each others, one can say that these dialects can be classified as Yue dialects. I think more linguists should research the Teochew and Hainanese dialects again. Sonic99 00:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

According to The Languages of China by R. Ramsey, what all the Mandarin dialects have in common, and the reason why Sichuanhua is grouped with Mandarin, is that they all lost the -p, -t, and -k endings, and they all use 他 for the third-person pronoun and 的 for the subordinative particle. All the other non-Mandarin dialects do not fit into at least one of the above criteria. —Umofomia 22:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[a] vs. [ɑ]

The article currently lists [ɑ] (open back unrounded vowel) as the long-a vowel for Cantonese. When I went to ask the creator of the vowel chart shown above to change his chart from [a] (open front unrounded vowel) to [ɑ], he said that it was [a] according to the source he reference from, The Handbook of the International Phonetic Association. He said he would change it to [ɑ] if I could show him some references that listed [ɑ]. However, when I actually tried to find these references, none could be found. All the ones that I found list [a]. This includes:

• Chinese University of Hong Kong Chinese Character Database Site
• Pronunciation guide at cantonese.ca
• Hutton, C. and Bolton, K., A Dictionary of Cantonese Slang
• Kwan, C., The Right Word in Cantonese
• Yang, M., A Concise Cantonese-English Dictionary

Not one source has listed [ɑ] for the value of the long-a vowel. I never thought anything of the fact that [ɑ] was in the article since phonology is not my strong suit and its hard for me to tell vowels apart, but it looks like [ɑ] is wrong by sheer number of sources alone. Should I go ahead and replace all instances of [ɑ] with [a]? —Umofomia 09:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC) [minor correction made 09:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)]

you sure have enough backing :) and as a speaker of cantonese myself, it definitely sounds more like an [a] than an [ɑ] (e.g. the word for mountain definitely doesn't sound like a person pronouncing "sarn" in received pronunciation) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.43.82 (talk) 03:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Userbox template?

Is there a userbox template that I can use to show that I speak cantonese? Thank you for understanding, that it is completely irrevelant to what this is about. Thank you. GamePlayer623 01:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BBL#zh-yue_-_.E7.B2.B5.E8.AA.9E.2F.E7.B2.A4.E8.AF.AD_.28Cantonese.29 The Cantonese is written strangely. 呢个用户能够用熟练嘅粤语进行交流。"进行交流" is not "so Cantonese". Would" 傾偈" be better?--Kfsung 08:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Again, I must say thanks. I learn something everyday, it seems. =). Sorry, I'm not familliar with the words. Can't read simplified chinese (ones computers use.). If it IS simplified chinese that is.

GamePlayer623 03:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Something not quite right, from a native Cantonese speaker's perspective:

1. Written cantonese is only written in traditional Chinese, not simplified Chinese.
2. Some words are formal written Chinese, which are not used in spoken cantonese. Basically written cantonese is writing down spoken cantonese, character by character.

AbelCheung 14:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, please forget about my 1st comment, I completely forgot about people in Canton province. AbelCheung 14:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

"Cantonese versus Mandarin in Hong Kong and Singapore" issues

Well that is fine then, but cantonese is still spoken by a majority of people and new commers who live there learn it. I've enever watched a ""dubbed"" cantonese TV show in Hong Kong. People can understand mandarine and english but most speak there mother toungue. Enlil Ninlil 06:21, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

That's because they're usually subtitled with written Chinese at the bottom, and people just read the subtitles if they don't understand the Mandarin. Besides, the TV shows on TVB and ATV are all in Cantonese. Usually the only time those two channels have Mandarin is on the news or in documentaries when a Mandarin speaker is being interviewed or something. Not everybody in HK understand Mandarin, although most in the corporate world have learnt it or want to learn it. The people that don't necessarily have to learn it for work, a lot of times they may not speak or understand much Mandarin. - Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Well the section needs to be more specific, maybe divided into countries or areas ect? Its confusing the way it is. Enlil Ninlil 06:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

By the way, "dialect" news broadcasts are still done in Singapore, for the sake of the older generation. So "dialects" broadcasts are not totally banned, but they are severely restricted.

I'm not sure what your point is here because the problem with this section is how it is representing the "Battle" not whether people understand the two languages or not. True, it has been accepted there is a bit of cultural dissonance and an effort to combat a language shift to Mandarin but to the point of how it is characterized? The section is currently sensationalized and original research, it needs to be redone to source articles that discuss the matter objectively (ie: Apple Daily a)..:DavuMaya:. 05:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Cellophane noodles question

Hello, there's some controversy about the origin of the name saifun to refer to cellophane noodles. It was earlier thought that this was a Japanese name (i.e. harusame saifun) but it now seems it might be from Chinese, maybe related to the Mandarin "fen si." Is it possible that "saifun" is a Min Nan pronunciation? It doesn't seem to be Cantonese. Thank you, Badagnani 22:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

"saifun" is definitely not Cantonese. The Cantonese pronunciation is "fun see" ("fun" rhymes with "gun"). The Min Nan pronunciation is "tang hoon". So "saifun" is not a Min Nan pronunciation either, it seems.

yeah, i second the minnan reply, in dioziu it's danghung. possibly of a similar origin to the korean naming but i don't think it's dang as in "tang dynasty" though

Chinese surnames categories up for deletion

A new editor has just added a number of categories for Chinese surnames, which I believe to be very useful, particularly for grouping individuals with the same hanzi surname but using different romanizations. As is usually the case at the Categories for Deletion area, the people who frequent that place generally try to delete every new category, regardless of whether they understand its use. In this case, they seem not to understand the utility of being able to have a category for everyone with the name "Liu," for example. Please voice your opinion here. Badagnani 03:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[a] vs. [ɑ] redux

I ended up being away from Wikipedia for quite a while since I posted my last topic on this talk page. Anyway, I didn't see anyone oppose the proposal I set 9 months ago, so if there are no objections, I will be making this change soon. —Umofomia 11:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm doing this change now in this article and other Cantonese related articles I can find that happen to use the incorrect [ɑ]. —Umofomia 10:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Why nine tones?

What motivates analyzing the tone system of Cantonese as comprising nine tones, instead of the simpler analysis of 6, whereby the last three would be conflated into tones 1, 3 and 6 respectively? —Trevor Caira 17:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking at 9 tones maintains a historical view of Standard Cantonese which is not wrong and accepted. I believe there is mention of why the 3 extra tones are based on what the linguist is analyzing. .:DavuMaya:. 05:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Not only that, counting chinese tones with the clipped 入 tones separate is how tones in all chinese dialects have been counted since at least the qieyun. Dioziu for example has exactly 8 tones, 6 non 入 tones and 2 entering tones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.43.82 (talk) 03:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

In classic Chinese, there are four tones including the entering tone. These tones are the basic how poems, prose and articles rhyme. Tones are the quality of pronunciation. Some are long and slow. Some is rising. Some remains high. And the entering tone is short and heavy. The quality is descriptive and it varies in different periods and areas. The losing of voiced consonants in Cantonese language is compensated by one more similar set of tones for differentiate characters meaning. That's why Cantonese can rhyme classic poems written more than a thousand year ago. --— HenryLi (Talk) 04:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

De facto official?

The statement "Standard Cantonese is the de facto official Chinese spoken language..." is self contradictory. If it has official (legal) status then it should be "de jure" and not "de facto". If it does not have official status in law then using the word "official" is nonsense. Roger 18:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

What theyre talking about is that Chinese is an official language of HK. But it's not explicit which dialect. In practice, both mandarin and cantonese are used. I think this qualifies as official, but again, it is not explicit. Either mandarin and cantonese are both officail or both de facto —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.77.167 (talk) 10:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Edits by user:ownedplant

I have reverted or modified these edits by user:ownedplant [[12]] for the followings reasons:

• [[13]] the edit summary of "grammar fix" does not explain this edit, also "widespread" is vague and open to interpretation.
• [[14]] has no edit summary, it is helpful to link to the wider spoken Chinese group that the subject of this article (Guangzhou speech) belongs to, as well as linking to the Chinese language article.
• [[15]] has no edit summary.
• [[16]] the edit summary of "to keep loanwords from being separated from phonology" does not explain this edit.
• [[17]] has no edit summary. Information about Cantonese language media from HK is already mentioned. What does "independent success of Hong Kong" mean? HK was a British colony until 1997 and is now a part of the PRC. LDHan (talk) 14:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Number of speakers

I have removed [[18]] from the article because it does state the source of its figure, and does not meet the requirements of Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources. The webpage has a link to another website with the following words: "Other source and map: The World Bank Group, data and statistics", meaning that the other website is another source and has a map, not that it is the source of the figures and facts on [[19]]. There is also potential confusion between the subject of this article, Guangzhouhua, and the wider group to which it belongs, Yue, when citing any references. LDHan (talk) 15:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Phonology

The phonology section needs attention. It is very confusing and needs copy editing for clarification. I do not understand the material well enough to attempt this myself. Please help improve the style and clarity if you can. Thanks Helikophis (talk) 16:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

AFAIK, there is no such thing as "Standard" Cantonese, as it is not officially controlled. Yuehai (Canton-Hong Kong) dialect is the prestige dialect, much like Beijing dialect within Mandarin, and as such is generally what people mean when they say "Cantonese". You can see this e.g. in the article on Taishanese, which compares "Taishanese" with "Cantonese". Also, much of the info at Cantonese is actually specific to Canton dialect. Therefore I propose moving this page to "Cantonese", merging much of that page into it, and moving the rest of that page (comparative Cantonese-Taishanese-Gaoyang-Guinan) to Yue Chinese. This is exactly parallel to Shanghainese vs Wu Chinese, which in older lit was subsumed under the dialect of Shanghai just as Yuet is commonly subsumed under the dialect of Canton. kwami (talk) 19:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

BTW, Ethnologue uses "Yue Chinese" for the name of the Yue branch of Chinese,[20] as do semi-academic works such as Ramsey's The Languages of China.[21] The latter uses "Yue dialects" for the branch and "Cantonese" for Yuehai.—kwami (talk) 06:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Since this article move is actually dependent on the requested article move for Cantonese, I suggest we concentrate our discussion at one place. For interested parties that have not been there yet, please go to Talk:Cantonese. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that page is already set up to redirect here, since the incorrect use of the word "standard" is more severe objection than choosing the less common usage of "Cantonese". kwami (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I restored most of your reversals, since they were good edits regardless of whether we make the move. kwami (talk) 18:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

For instance, the sections on writing and learning "Standard Cantonese" were at "Cantonese". I moved them here, where they belong. By reverting my changes at "Cantonese", you're duplicating those sections and creating an article fork. Please restrict your reversions to the things you feel need reverting. kwami (talk) 18:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Cantonese is often spoken of as a "regional standard". However, I believe this is closer to the meaning of a prestige dialect than to an officially controlled standard like Standard Mandarin, Standard German, etc. kwami (talk) 18:45, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

On the one hand, Britannica uses both "Yue" and "Standard Cantonese": "The most important representative of the Yue languages is Standard Cantonese of Canton". (Though of course we shouldn't use other encyclopedias as refs, since they are generally no more accurate than we are.)

On the other hand, a Google search of "Standard Cantonese" turns up mainly mirrors of Wikipedia, suggesting that the phrase is not in common usage.

I missed a point above. Both the narrow (Yuehai) and broad (Yue) uses of the word "Cantonese" are of course correct. However, it appears that without a disambiguating context, the word "Cantonese" in English has the narrow sense. kwami (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

If we decide to keep "Standard Cantonese", then I suggest we follow EB and use "Cantonese" as a dab to "Yue Chinese" and "Standard Cantonese". (The Ethnologue phrasing, which matches our MOS, is betting than Ramsey's, because of the hostile reaction we'll get if we put the word "dialect" in the title.) This may be overly precise, but I feel it's better to avoid using ambiguous terms like "Cantonese" with their less common meanings as the default. kwami (talk) 19:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Can we focus the discussion in 1 place please? Benjwong (talk) 02:06, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that what we're doing? kwami (talk) 08:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see. You were commenting on the Move Request page.

If I'm reading you correctly, you're saying we should move Standard Cantonese → Cantonese Yue while moving Cantonese → Yue Chinese, with "Cantonese" presumably becoming a dab? That would work, but I've never heard anyone use the expression "Cantonese Yue". It would be like saying "Shanghainese Wu"—technically correct, but not colloquial. kwami (talk) 08:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, it's been over five days, so I'll move the pages. Benj, your comment that "Yue Cantonese" would be a more appropriate title than "Yue Chinese" makes no logical sense that I can see and doesn't follow our naming conventions, but of course go ahead bring it up again if you wish. kwami (talk) 00:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Now that I see your complete move, I am ok with it enough to stop debating it any further. It isn't my preference, but I can live with it. I still prefer Cantonese to be the "people" instead of the language. Lets see if anyone else has any complaints from here on. Anyways this has gone on for too long. It would be good to stop bringing this same topic up every week. Benjwong (talk) 05:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I certainly understand not wanting an ambiguous word like "Cantonese" to be a specific article, but that's true for the people too. Also, Cantonese people follows our normal naming conventions of "X language" vs. "X people". It's only "Cantonese language/Cantonese dialect" that's a problem, because of the unity of Chinese. I'd support a move to Canton dialect, if people would agree to it. Then we could have Cantonese as the dab. But it might be a hard sell. kwami (talk) 06:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

We've just had an undiscussed cut&paste to Guangzhou dialect. I would support such a move (or to Canton dialect) if there were discussion and people liked it. Since the person making the move was Cantonese, perhaps this move would not spark much opposition. kwami (talk) 18:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I still insist in moving Cantonese language/dialect article to language-about topic Cantonese language, and former Standard Cantonese to Guangzhou Dialect, no matter whether Cantonese is an independent language or a dialect of single Chinese language. Cantonese should be a disambiguation page. I am native Cantonese. In my opinion, Cantonese equas to the "Yue" concept, as we use Cantonese people, Cantonese opera, Cantonese cuisine to refer things associated with "粵", not only with "廣州". In other words, the English word "Cantonese" do not only mean things and people of Guangzhou, but also mean things and people of the whole "Sub-nationality" of Yue. Please pay respect to this fact. DO NOT use the Mandarin romanization "Yue" to cover commonly used English word "Cantonese" intentionally. --Newzebras (talk) 07:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Your "insistence" is irrelevant. "Cantonese language" is not an acceptable option, so you're out of luck there. Your opinion is good for the Chinese side of things, but for English speakers, "Cantonese" is not in general the same as Yue. English usage is not defined by Chinese usage. We will use the Mandarin spelling Yue, because that is English convention; the same is true of Wu Chinese and Min Nan (not Bân Lâm), for example. On the other hand, I agree that Cantonese would make a good dab (as has recently happened with Taiwanese), and that Guangzhou dialect would be an acceptable name for this article. If others agree to it. kwami (talk) 07:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Can not agree. Common English usage of "Cantonese" is to refer things associated with the entire Cantonese(Yue,粵)-about concept, such as Cantonese opera, Cantonese language, Cantonese cuisine, etc. You can not say that Cantonese opera (粵劇) is "廣州劇(Guangzhou opera)". That is absolutely wrong. From these commonly used English phrases we can corroborate the meaning of the English word "Cantonese": it exactly equals to the Mandarin romanization "Yue". In English the word "Cantonese" is commonly used as a broad sense. --Newzebras (talk) 09:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

That's completely irrelevant. Chinese usage does not determine English usage. Cantonese contrasts with Taishanese, but both are Yue. Food & music are not language, so how do they matter? That makes about as much sense as saying that since the Manchu are Chinese citizens, the Manchu language "must be" a dialect of the Chinese language. Anyway, in most of your examples, such as written Cantonese, Cantonese means Guangzhouhua; in only a quarter of them does it mean Yueyu. Besides, I thought you wanted to use Cantonese as a dab? You can't have it as a dab and also be used for Yue. kwami (talk) 16:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, you say we shouldn't use the Mandarin word "Yue". Yet you are proposing that we use the Mandarin spelling "Guangzhou". If Mandarin is good enough for one, it's good enough for the other. kwami (talk) 16:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, you said "Chinese usage does not determine English usage", then how would you like to explain "Cantonese xxx"? What is the translation of "Cantonese opera" in Chinese? "Guangzhou opera"? (If "Cantonese" equas to things only associated with Guangzhou, then "Cantonese" do mean "Guangzhou people" and "Guangzhou dialect", and "Cantonese opera" do mean "Guangzhou opera", but that is ABSOLUTELY WRONG! In fact "Cantonese xxx" do mean xxx associated with the whole Cantonese("Yue") concept, not only with Guangzhou. This is the real meaning and real common usage of "Cantonese" in English language.) You must pay respect to the FACT. What you had said above is obvious chicanery, and you seemed not understand the relationship between Cantonese and Taishanese. The relationship between Cantonese and Taishanese is not parallel, but like that between Chinese and Cantonese. Most native Taishanese speakers regard their local dialect as one kind of merely differently accented Cantonese. If you doubt about this, you can go to Taishan to do any kinds of survey you wish. --Newzebras (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I can't have Cantonese as a dab? Wow, you can do something and I can not do anything. It seems that you are god, all you said are right, ok? --Newzebras (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I proposed that we use "Guangzhou dialect" or "Canton dialect". "Guangzhou" is a Mandarin spelling, but it is the officially designated new name for the city of Canton, not my personal proposal. Personally speaking, I prefer Canton rather than Guangzhou. But you must understand that "Canton dialect" do not equal to "Cantonese". "Canton dialect" is only one part of "Cantonese". "Cantonese" includes many kinds of dialects, such as Canton dialect (mainstream Cantonese), Taishanese, Gaoyang dialect, Goulou dialect, Pinghua dialect, Danzhou dialect, etc. --Newzebras (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Manchu are Chinese citizens, right. But Manchu are not regarded as narrow-sensed Chinese (Han, Huaxia), like Tibetan, Uyghur and Mongolian. So your gainsay example ("since the Manchu are Chinese citizens, the Manchu language "must be" a dialect of the Chinese language") is absurd. Every body know that when referring to language concept, the English word "Chinese" do only mean language or languages of narrow-sensed Chinese (Han, Huaxia). By the way, I think it's necessary to let you know that written Cantonese do not only mean written Guangzhou dialect, but also mean other written dialect of Cantonese, including Taishanese. --Newzebras (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

You're contradicting yourself. And I never said Cantonese couldn't be a dab: I said you can't have two articles both named "Cantonese". kwami (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Please tell me how I am contradicting myself. I propose "Guangzhou dialect" or "Canton dialect" because "Guangzhou" is an officially designated name by Chinese government for Canton city, althouth it's Mandarin spelling. But Mandarin pinyin spelling "Yue" is neither officially designated name by Chinese government nor habitually used word in English for Cantonese. "Yue" is not familiar to normal English speakers while "Cantonese" is a common English word that has been being used for hundreds of years and, it is familiar enough to English speakers. That is why I object "Yue" but do not object "Guangzhou". I don't think this contradicts.

Certainly Cantonese should be made a dab. The language topic should add an adjunct to "Cantonese" so as to differ from Cantonese, like "Cantonese language", "Cantonese (linguistic)", "Cantonese (language about)", "Cantonese (language topic)". "Yue Chinese" is not acceptalbe and meanwhile it can also refer to people-about topic. --Newzebras (talk) 08:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Benj and Qi Gong, would you accept a move to Guangzhou dialect? kwami (talk) 07:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Parallel Cantonese-associated phrases comparison between Chinese and English:

zh:粵語 (廣東話，白話)	Cantonese language (broad sense)
zh:广州话 (廣府話,省城話）	Canton dialect (narrow sense)
zh:粤剧	Cantonese opera (broad sense)
zh:粤菜	Cantonese cuisine (broad sense)
zh:粤语流行音乐	Cantopop (narrow sense)
zh:粤字	Cantonese character (broad sense)
zh:粵語方言	Cantonese dialects (broad sense)
zh:粤语白话文	Written Cantonese (broad sense)
zh:粵語語法	Cantonese grammar (narrow sense)
zh:香港政府粵語拼音（港府拼法）	Hong Kong Government Cantonese Romanisation (narrow sense)
zh:粵語拼音方案	Jyutping (narrow sense)
zh:广州话拼音方案	Guangdong Romanization#Cantonese (narrow sense)
zh:劉氏拼法	Sidney Lau romanisation (narrow sense)
zh:耶魯拼法 (粵語)	Yale_Romanization#Cantonese (narrow sense)
zh:教院式拼音	Standard Cantonese Pinyin (narrow sense)
zh:標準羅馬拼音 (粵語)	Standard Romanization (Cantonese) (narrow sense)

See if there are any supplements? --Newzebras (talk) 09:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Guangzhou dialect (Canton dialect) is de facto standard-by-use of Cantonese due to it's prestige. Most nonmainstream Cantonese speakers, including Taishanese speakers, speak Canton dialect customarily when they meet people who speak different dialect of Cantonese. And, most Cantonese romanization schemes and Cantonese dictionaries take Canton dialect as standard and representation of the whole Cantonese language. --Newzebras (talk) 12:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you need a RFC to resolve this? I cannot follow your debate. Honestly I don't see what is the problem as Cantonese has always been a disambig page. A friendly reminder Kwamikagami, you do not need to post a timestamp signature on every post you make in succession. Please combine your paragraphs. Each timestamp and indent usually represents a new speaker. davumaya 17:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I feel like we are back to starting point. The original discussion started by Kwami said don't use "Language" or "Dialect"?? Now we are ok with dialect again?? Benjwong (talk) 19:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

"Dialect" is fine where Chinese tradition and linguistics agree that it is a dialect, for example Beijing dialect or Amoy dialect. The edit wars were not fought over these, but over the primary branches of Chinese where there is debate over whether they are dialects or languages: Mandarin Chinese, Min Nan, etc. (This isn't my decision, but one that had been made long before I got here.) Guangzhou dialect and Taishan dialect are dialects in either approach, so these names are not a problem. However, we wouldn't want to use Cantonese language or Yue dialect for the primary branch of Chinese that includes Guangzhou dialect, as either would revive the edit wars. kwami (talk) 20:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

If you want to keep absolute neutrality, Cantonese(linguistic) is the best choice. Neither Cantonese language(or Yue language) nor Cantonese dialects(or Yue dialects) is better than Cantonese(linguistic). The new debate was caused by you. Now it seems your request on removing "linguistic" tag is impropriety. It certainly will reignite the debate. --Newzebras (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Why are you still debating this, the pages are at their correct locations see Cantonese (disambiguation). davumaya 20:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Huh? What does that have to do with anything? We redirect dabs as the pages move.

One of our editors wanted to move this page. I don't have any problem with it, as it's in concordance with our naming policy (as is the current location), but I wanted to get the input of the rest of us. kwami (talk) 21:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

If the word dialect is not a problem, then "Yue = Cantonese = Guangdonghua". The smaller subset is the "Guangzhou dialect = Canton dialect" page. Just like on the map Guangdong/Canton is the bigger piece, while Guangzhou is a smaller piece. The page Yue Chinese should be where it is, except linked to Cantonese. And the current Cantonese page moved to Guangdong dialect. That should do it. Benjwong (talk) 04:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that's three of us supporting that part of Newzebras' request. Let's give Qigong a chance to answer. He hasn't been online for a few days. kwami (talk) 04:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Since you seem to be an admin of Wikipedia, you can do whatever you like to. You can protect pages from being edited; you can move protected pages, but I can not. And, although our opinion conflicts, I do not have so much time to join any edit war with you. So the result is, you win. You can continue making wikipedia to reflect your bias.

By the way, if you agree with one part of my suggestion of moving former standard Cantonese to Guangzhou dialect or Canton dialect, and at the same time you want to forbid me having Cantonese as a dab, then how will you treat Cantonese? Forbid this word? hum? --Newzebras (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. I support making Cantonese a dab. I've said that several times. And the whole point of this discussion is that we come to an agreement rather than just one of us (such as me) trying to override everyone else. I don't always get my way, but you won't always get yours either. kwami (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Benjwong's suggestion except one point: "The page Yue Chinese should be where it is, except linked to Cantonese". Yue Chinese is not an proper name. Personally, I would rather prefer former neutral topic name Cantonese (linguistic). Although there is no diction of "language" or "dialect" in the form of "Yue Chinese", but it do give people some kind of hint that Cantonese is a dialect of single Chinese language, and "Cantonese" is a smaller subset of "Yue" (main divarication between me and kwami). "Yue = Cantonese = Guangdonghua", this is the fact. Why we abandon a commonly used and has-been-being-used-for-hundreds-of-years word "Cantonese", replace it with a Mandarin romanization form "Yue" which is not familiar to normal English speakers? --Newzebras (talk) 13:40, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to give up Yue if you can come up with something better. So far you have not. BTW, Yue Chinese is a proper name; it is used for example in Ethnologue, and parallels Wu Chinese, Mandarin Chinese, etc. kwami (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Although being used in Ethnologue, Yue Chinese is still not a proper name, it may refer to Cantonese people. --Newzebras (talk) 08:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell I support the proposed moves. davumaya 17:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll go forward with Benj's suggestion. (Benj, I assume you meant moving to Guangzhou dialect, as Newzebras had proposed and as you'd also said earlier? After all, Taishanese is also a Guangdong dialect.) This should take care of two of Newzebras' concerns; Benj and I are happy with Ethnologue's "Yue Chinese", though Newzebras, you are of course welcome to continue to argue for other possibilities. kwami (talk) 18:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't "Yue Chinese" also refer to the Cantonese people? 71.200.39.246 (talk) 00:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but the same is true of all the Chinese language articles, so that's something that should be brought up at Chinese naming conventions. kwami (talk) 01:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Other Chinese-branche articles, like Hakka, Hokkien, Wu, etc, do have the same problem. Because there do exist several sub-nationalities (次民族、民系、民族内部的分支族群) within the narrow-sensed Chinese nationality (Han people), each sub-nationality has it's own Chinese branche-language. "Hakka Chinese" may also mean "Hakka people", because Hakka is a typical sub-nationality of Chinese, with very strong self-identity that differs from other Han Chinese. In other words, "xxx Chinese" may have different meanings, so it is not the proper name. But on the other hand, some commonly used phrase, like "Mandarin Chinese", usually means Mandarin branche of Chinese language(s), has no such kind of problem (unlike Cantonese, Hakka, Wu and Minnan, Mandarin people do not have strong sub-nationality self-identity, they often call themself "xxx province people" instead of "Mandarin people").

So, my suggestions are: let's leave Mandarin Chinese where it is; add adjuncts or tags to "Cantonese", "Hakka", "Minnan", etc. to differ from people-about topic. --Newzebras (talk) 08:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

That is a question. I've said "Yue Chinese" is not a proper name before. "Yue Chinese" can also refer to people-about topic. It's not acceptable. I strongly recommend "Cantonese language". Here "language" makes the topic name very clear: it's an article describing language phenomenon, not people, no matter whether it is independent langage or just a dialect of single Chinese language ("dialect" is also a kind of language phenomenon). If somebody can not accept it, then there are no other names better than adding tag such as "(linguistic)", "(language about)", "(language topic)" or other to "Cantonese", like former Cantonese (linguistic) (in fact I think tag is not bad at all). --Newzebras (talk) 08:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

"Cantonese language" will create more arguments because of the dialect/language debate. Maybe we can try Yue (Sinitic language) or Yue (idiom) or Yue (Chinese linguistic). — ■~∀SÐFﾑｻ~■ =] ^{Babashi? antenna?} 01:26, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Nope. "Yue (Sinitic language)" is no different. "Yue (idiom)" means it's a saying, not a language. "Yue (Chinese linguistic)" is meaningless. kwami (talk) 02:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Think about "Cantonese (language topic)", "Cantonese (linguistic topic)" or "Cantonese (language/dialects)". Forget "Yue". "Cantonese == Yue == Guangdong associated things". English word "Cantonese" is much better than Mandarin pinyin "Yue". I think I do not need to repeat the reasons. Those who do not agree with this point, please list your reasons why Mandarin spelling "Yue" is better than English word "Cantonese".--Newzebras (talk) 08:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

IMO, none of your suggestions will work. I'm tired of going in circles. Until you address the issues that others have raised so many times, I'm not going to respond any more. kwami (talk) 09:19, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Yue is a mandarin-centric term. It is definitely NOT better than cantonese, the more common term. I would have only agreed on Yue to avoid two pages of the same cantonese name. Benjwong (talk) 05:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. We use Hakka rather than Kejia, and Hokkien rather than Fujianese. But, as you say, Cantonese is ambiguous, and out of context it means Guangzhouhua. kwami (talk) 06:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move II

Newzebra has re-requested the move we rejected at Talk:Yue Chinese. kwami (talk) 16:50, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Due to the terrible name of "Yue Chinese", certainly it should be moved to a proper place using a proper name with commonly used English word "Cantonese" by adding a tag or an adjunct to it, so as to make it clear, familiar to normal English speakers, rather than the confused and seldom-used term "Yue" or "Yue Chinese", which may also refer to Cantonese people. --Newzebras (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

It is a move request of Yue Chinese to a proper name. The request has nothing to do with this article. So let's discuss on the discussion page of Yue Chinese. kwami's adding "Requested move II" here is irrelevant. We should discuss one problem in one place, isn't that right?--Newzebras (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Wording

Sorry, NZ, but the default reading of Cantonese in English is Guangzhouhua. I know you want it to mean Yueyu and only Yueyu, but it is at best ambiguous, and rewording the article as if it meant Yueyu is misleading. It would be better if you deleted the word altogether. At the least, there should be a discussion as to what "Cantonese" should mean in the article.

The OED defines "Cantonese" as "of or pertaining to Canton or its inhabitants", as "an inhabitant of Canton", and as "the dialect of Canton", and "Canton" as "The name of the city in southern China ..."

Random house defines "Cantonese" as "pertaining to Canton, China, its inhabitants, or their language", as "a Chinese language spoken in Canton, the surrounding area of southern China, and Hong Kong" and as "a native or inhabitant of Canton, China." It defines "Canton" as, "Also called Kwangchow, Guangzhou, Kuangchou. Older Spelling. a seaport in and the capital of Guangdong province, in SE China, on the Zhu Jiang."

Merriam Webster defines "Cantonese" as "an inhabitant of Canton, China" or "the dialect of Chinese spoken in and around Canton" and for "Canton" refers the reader to "Guangzhou".

Of course, there is a difference between English usage in Hong Kong, where local differences are notable, and American usage in San Francisco, where they are much less so. However, it's reasonably clear that the default meaning of "Cantonese" in English is "of Guangzhou", not "of Guangdong". kwami (talk) 08:30, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

So you are happy to find these "evidences" to prove your opinion of "Cantonese=Guangzhou dialect"? I am sorry to say that you are imprudent again. Different English dictionaries give different explanations. You should look up more dictionaries. For example, I find these explanations:

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (ISBN 0-395-09066-0):

Cantonese: n. pl. Cantonese. 1. Abbr. Cant. Chinese Yüeh (yōō-ā'). The Chinese dialect spoken in Kwangtung Province and in the Kwangsi-Chuang Autonomous Region in southern China. 2. A native or inhabitant of Kwangtung Province in southern China. --Can'ton·ese' adj.

The Illustrated Heritage Dictionary and Information Book (ISBN 0-395-25441-8): SAME AS ABOVE

Collins Dictionary of the English Language (ISBN 0-00-433078-1):

Cantonese: n. 1. the Chinese language spoken in Canton, Kwangtung and Kwangsi provinces, Hong Kong, and elsewhere outside China. 2.(pl.+ese) a native or inhabitant of Canton or Kwangtung province, or the Chinese language spoken there.

The Collins COBUILD English Dictionary (ISBN 0 00 370941-9) gives some very detail and clear explanations:

Cantonese: Cantonese is both the singular and plural form.

1. Cantonese means belonging or relating to the Chinese province of Guangdong, or to its people or culture, or to the language spoken there. He settled in Hong Kong and married a Cantonese girl...authentic Cantonese food.

2. The Cantonese are the people who live in or originate from the Chinese province of Guangdong, the Cantonese, by contrast, enjoy all of life, including work.

3.Cantonese is the language spoken in the Chinese province of Guangdong, Guangxi, and China's special area of Hong Kong, as well as in other parts of the world. Hena grew up speaking Cantonese.

Besides English dictionaries, some English-Chinese dictionaries also give similar definitions:

New Age English-Chinese Dictionary (ISBN 7-100-0308-x/H·838):

Cantonese: I. n. 1. [单复同]广州人（或居民）；广东人（或居民） 2. [U]广州话；广东话；粤语 III. adj.[无比较级] 1. 广州的；广东的；广州或广东人的；广州话的；粤语的 2.【烹】广东（菜系）的；广东风味的；粤菜（系）的.

The English-Chinese Dictionary (UNABRIDGED) (ISBN 7-5327-0799-7/z·052):

Cantonese: I. n. 1. [单复同]广州人；广州居民；广东人；广东居民 2. 粤语；广州话； II. a. 广州的；广东的；广州人或广东人的；广州方言的；粤语的

So, the default reading of Cantonese in English is not only Guangzhouhua, but also Guangdonghua (Yueyu or Yue). Now Guangzhouhua is in the right place, Guangzhou dialect, and we referred to Cantonese at the section of "Names", it won't cause ambiguous. But the bigger language set, which includes all Cantonese dialects such as Guangzhou dialect and Taishanese, should use a common English name rather than the uncommon and odd Mandarin romanization Yue. The best choice is to add a tag or adjunct to the word "Cantonese", like former "Cantonese (linguistics)", "Cantonese (language)", etc. --Newzebras (talk) 14:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your sources. They show that "Cantonese" is ambiguous in English, and therefore we cannot use it as if it meant either Yueyu or Guangzhouhua. Such a choice would be OR. Your edits to the article are non-NPOV, because you are defining the word according to your whim. That is not our job. We cannot contrast Guangzhou dialect with Cantonese when Cantonese can mean Guangzhou dialect. I mean, if I edited the Chinese languages article to say that some Chinese people speak Han, and others speak Chinese, because in my definition Tibetan and Mongol were "Chinese", wouldn't you object that's inappropriate? kwami (talk) 19:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Guangzhou dialect is a dialect of the Cantonese language; any kind of Cantonese dialects (including Guangzhou dialect) can be called Cantonese directly, isn't that right? Think about the English language. Scottish English, American English, English English, Australian English..., all can be called English directly, isn't that right? So "English" "is ambiguous in English; we should not use it". "We cannot contrast Australian English with English when English can mean Australian English", is that right? You said in your definition Tibetan and Mongol were "Chinese", but in fact their languages do not belong to the Chinese languages family, so you can not say "some Chinese people speak Han, and others speak Chinese" (when reffering to language,Han=Chinese). This example has nothing to do with the situation of Cantonese and Guangzhou dialect. My edits to the article are NPOV, because I am editing according to the real meaning of the English word "Cantonese", not defining the word according to my whim as you said.

How would you like to deal with "Cantonese"? Abandon it, do not use it, ban it, so that you can replace it with your preferred Mandarin romanization "Yue"?

Now we have a good name for Guangzhouhua, "Guangzhou dialect", and we refer to "Cantonese" in the section of "Names". Guangzhouhua do not confuse with "Cantonese" any more. For the name of the bigger language set which includes all Cantonese dialects, we should use a common English name. "Cantonese language" is the best choice. For the language/dialect debate, refer to it in the content of that article, that is OK, the best solution. --Newzebras (talk) 10:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

No-one uses "English" to mean specifically "Australian English", at least not in other countries. However, the most common use of "Cantonese" is specifically Guangzhou Yue. Your comparison is a straw man.

No, I would not ban "Cantonese", but I would only use it when it's perfectly clear what it means, as in Written Cantonese, or when it makes no difference what it means, as in many many other articles which mention the term in passing. However, since these two articles contrast Yue and Guangzhou, the word "Cantonese" is insufficiently precise for our purposes. For me (a native English speaker), "Cantonese" without disambiguation means Guangzhouhua. So I would say that Cantonese is the prestige dialect of Yue. You, on the other hand, would say that Guangzhou is the prestige dialect of Cantonese. Neither can be said to be "correct". Since your "best" solution (with "language") has been rejected many times over the years, and you keep pushing it regardless, there is evidently little point in continuing this discussion, and I won't bother to continue unless you come up with a serious solution. We need a title that is (a) unambiguous, and (b) does not contain 'language' or 'dialect'. The current title, Yue Chinese, is technically correct, is the most common term used in English when a distinction is being made (which is seldom), and is relatively unambiguous (AFAIK no-one speaks of the "Yue Chinese people" in English). You keep saying that you are using "real" English and the rest of us are ignorant, which is rather arrogant of you, since your command of English is far from perfect. kwami (talk) 11:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

You misunderstood me. "You keep saying that you are using 'real' English and the rest of us are ignorant"--I am sorry if I said that, but I don't think I had said anything like that before. I said "I am editing according to the real meaning of the English word 'Cantonese'...". This is because I want to emphasize that I am not editing according to my own whim as you said but I do have bases. Some native English speakers, like you, may regard "Cantonese" specifically as Guangzhouhua, however, some other native English speakers may not agree with this point of view. That is why "Cantonese" has different explanations in different dictionaries.

Why the word "Cantonese" cause ambiguity in English? I think it is mainly because 1) Guangzhou dialect is the prestige dialect of Cantonese; 2) Guangzhou dialect is the social standard and representative dialect of Cantonese. 3) to many westerners, the most familiar Cantonese form is Guangzhou dialect (Hong Kong played an important role, where there people usually call Guangzhou dialect "Cantonese" (廣東話,Gwongdung waa) directly); 4) the English word-building makes people think that "Cantonese" means things relating only to the Canton city very easily.

Different people have different understanding of the word. You are right, we need a title that is (a) unambiguous. but (b) "does not contain 'language' or 'dialect'" needs more discussion. If with either single "language" or "dialect" is considered non-NPOV, then what about with both "language" and "dialect"? "Cantonese (language/dialects)" should be acceptable and it is unambiguous, because here we use "language/dialects", meaning a bigger linguistic set (plural "dialects"), contrasting from "Guangzhou dialect" which is only a single dialect. Besides, it's NPOV; it's English name; it's common name.

Grammatically, "Yue Chinese" is a modification of the noun Chinese by the attributive Yue — in other words, a Chinese (language? people?) branch called Yue. Yue Chinese IS ambiguous, since here Yue is homonymous with Cantonese (in broad sence). It can be used to refer Cantonese people or other Cantonese associated things. In other words, Yue Chinese has the same meaning with Cantonese Chinese or Cantonese (see [22], "Yue Chinese Restaurant", "Yue Chinese x", the same as "Cantonese Restaurants", "Cantonese x"). So, the current title, Yue Chinese, is technically irrelevant.

"Hakka Chinese" also has the same problem. Although nearly no people use the term "Hakka Chinese people", but it real that "Hakka Chinese" can mean "Hakka people" or other things (see [23]).

Deliberate on "Cantonese (language/dialects)". It is much better than current name. --Newzebras (talk) 08:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I suggested "Cantonese dialects" myself at one time. It was rejected because it contains the word "dialect". "Cantonese (language/dialects)" is also quite awkward. I would oppose it just for that.

In English, Yue is not used for anything but the language, so no, it is not ambiguous. (I'm excluding such trivial counter-examples as a restaurant run by a man named Yue—you could argue that we should change the name of California if that's your argument, because there are restaurants named "California Grill". That would be completely unencyclopedic.) In addition, "Yue Chinese" is the term preferred by Ethnologue. While I don't always agree with Ethnologue, I think that they got it right this time.

Hakka is a different problem. It is truly ambiguous, because people commonly speak of the Hakka people, whereas no-one speaks of the Yue people—except in the sense of the ancient Yue, but that's an obscure historical connection that can be handled by a dab and is largely irrelevant to us. kwami (talk) 10:09, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Split discussion. See discussion page of Cantonese. Answered there. --Newzebras (talk) 14:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Ridiculous

The naming of this article completely ignores the common usage rule. But whatever. As always, the editors that "yell" the loudest and sticks around an argument longest gets their way, regardless of policy. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Criticism is a waste of time if you don't suggest an improvement. What would you prefer the article to be called? kwami (talk) 18:40, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

One article should be called "Cantonese" and the other "Yue", maybe with parentheses for disambig purposes. Whoever heard of anybody using the term "Guangzhou dialect" in English? But this entire discussion is a waste of time, because this article will be stuck with this ridiculous name as long as someone keeps preferring it out of whatever reason not grounded in policy. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not adverse to changing it to Cantonese dialect. The problem is that 'Cantonese' and even 'Cantonese dialect' are somewhat ambiguous, as some people use them to refer to Yueyu. But you're right: We can simply dab it at the top to say This article discusses the dialect of Guangzhou and Hong Kong. For other Cantonese dialects, see Yue Chinese. Unless, of course, that ends up getting moved to Cantonese dialects—but that's another matter. Since this does not affect the Chinese articles as a set, we can discuss it here. kwami (talk) 19:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Agree that some people do use the term Cantonese dialect to refer to what is more generally called the Cantonese language. But let's look deeper: Who does this, and why? Answer: Those who wish to promote the view that Chinese is a single language. Now, that doesn't mean we shouldn't follow their lead (sorry about the double negative, it's important), rather we must try to avoid taking sides either way. So question two: Are they succeeding? Answer: No, as of yet they are only succeeding in clouding the issue. The vast majority of English speakers continue to call this high-level division of Chinese the Cantonese language, or just Cantonese but we can't use that unqualified name for anything as it is seriously ambiguous. The alleged ambiguity of Cantonese dialect, however, is a contrived minority view, and we should avoid supporting it. Andrewa (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I have never in my life heard the phrase "Cantonese language". The only places I'm even aware of having read it is here on Wikipedia, or when Googling info for these discussions.

Even in the lit, the term 'Cantonese' is seriously ambiguous. Take a look at the intro to Modern Cantonese Phonology:[24]

"Introduction, the Cantonese language: Cantonese is the name of just one of many "dialects" of the Chinese language spoken in China; it belongs to the Yue group (or family) of dialects ..."

In other words, they use the term "Cantonese language" for what you want to call "Cantonese dialect", and then say that "language" is one of several "dialects" of Yue. Although "Cantonese language" and "Cantonese dialect" may be good titles for the articles, I don't think you can justify them based on common English usage, because common English usage does not distinguish them. kwami (talk) 21:38, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but in terms of the official policy at Wikipedia:Naming conventions this is irrelevant... as has been said many, many times.

Disagree that common English usage does not distinguish them. Of course, people who are unaware that there's even such a thing as the Cantonese dialect won't use the term, just as people who unaware that Thulium exists won't use that term either (and yes, there are many such, as I found out when I first performed Tom Lehrer's song The Elements and found that many who heard the line Iodine and Thorium and Thulium and Thallium thought I'd made the name up). But those who are aware that both exist will generally call them language and dialect. Andrewa (talk) 02:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You need some source to support your claim that this is normal English usage. I know of no-one who contrasts 'Cantonese language' with 'Cantonese dialect'. AFAIK, they will generally refer to the same thing. And as far as quoting policy 'many many times', I guess I've failed to understand many many times. I still have no idea what you're talking about. kwami (talk) 04:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

A considerable overstatement, I think. You know of at least one person... Me! And there are others of course. Just read the dialogue at Talk:Yue Chinese (to which you have been a frequent contributor) and you'll find some of them.

But I'm not all that fussed about the name of this particular article. Until joining this discussion, I didn't even know there was a dialect that anyone called Cantonese. But other contributors to the various discussions, and to the article itself, have made and supported this claim, and I find their arguments persuasive. Cantonese language is another discussion, as you yourself have recently pointed out. I certainly knew that existed; Many of my friends speak it.

So far, there appears no dissent from the claim that this article is about a dialect, and should be so named, the only question seems to be what this particular dialect is called. Andrewa (talk) 23:53, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Oftentimes, distinguishing between a "language" from a "dialect" is like distinguishing between what's considered a human "race" versus "ethnicity" - you'll likely get a different answer depending on which linguist you ask. Hell, there doesn't even seem to be uniform agreement on how many tones are in Cantonese. If this "language vs. dialect" issue continues to be a problem (dissenting editors may join the discussion), I suggest we name the article as XXX (linguistics). Obviously from the way I voted below, I would prefer Cantonese (linguistics). Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Agree that the experts disagree on this. This often happens, and is one reason that the fundamental policy is to ignore the experts! It's supposed to reduce the amount of unproductive time spent trying to arbitrate issues such as this that the experts themselves can't decide. Unfortunately, if people ignore the policy, it obviously can't help much. Andrewa (talk) 20:38, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand why user HongQiGong is so upset? 廣州話 literally is the name of this article. That is "guangzhou dialect" transliterated. Benjwong (talk) 04:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

When there is a common English name, that is preferred over a name that is a translation. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I guess they're frustrated by the points being raised that seem completely irrelevant in terms of Wikipedia:naming conventions. The matter of transliteration is a case in point. So what if the current article name is or isn't an accurate transliteration? Andrewa (talk) 20:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

As further indication of the ridiculousness of the current name, the first sentence of the article begins with: "The Guangzhou dialect, commonly known as Cantonese..." Well, if it is commonly known as Cantonese, then maybe we should follow what WP:COMMONNAME says! Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

At the very least, there seems a prima facie case for Cantonese dialect. Cantonese is the common name for it, and there's no dispute that it's a dialect of something, and there's no dispute that some sort of disambiguation is required as Cantonese alone is ambiguous.

The only problem seems to be that, if we adopt this name, there's a fear that we may then also adopt Cantonese language as the name for the article on the top-level division of Chinese that also goes by the name Cantonese.

So my feeling is that the question of what that other article is called would be better answered first. The two issues are not closely related in terms of Wikipedia policy, but I think we need to acknowledge that when a politically controversial issue such as this goes around in circles as this has, probably not all of the arguments are logical rather than rhetorical. Even if we assume good faith on the part of the contributors, probably some of those whom they trust are politically motivated. Andrewa (talk) 20:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Who supports the following names for this article?

Cantonese dialect

• Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
• Andrewa (talk) 21:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
• Trachtemacht —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC).
• kwami (talk) 19:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC) —"Guangzhou" is not as widely understood in English as "Canton". Also, this is not a standard language.
• Caspian blue 00:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Guangzhou dialect

• Newzebras
• ASDFGH
• Benjwong if the other page is called Cantonese, then this should be called Guangzhou dialect

Standard Cantonese

• Second choice. Acceptable. Andrewa (talk) 20:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
• This was originally the title of this page, and it should remain the title of this page. Badagnani (talk) 23:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
• Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
• Benjwong if the other page is called Yue, then this should be called Standard Cantonese.

Comment

• The name 'Standard Cantonese' was rejected at an discussion at Chinese naming conventions for giving the incorrect impression that it is the standard form of Cantonese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwamikagami (talk • contribs)
  • I think if you look back, you'll see that all possible names have been rejected at some stage! Andrewa (talk) 00:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

From the poll above: this is not a standard language. It's not a language at all. (Sigh) I thought that much was agreed at least! Andrewa (talk) 00:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The phrase "Standard language" is always used for standardized registers. "Standard English", "Standard French", "Standard Russian", "Standard German", "Standard Japanese", and "Standard Mandarin" are not "languages"; they're registers of specific dialects. The phrase "Standard Cantonese" implies that Cantonese is standardized the way Russian, French, Mandarin, etc. are, which it is not. I guess we could use "Standard X" for unstandardized prestige dialects, but that strikes me as sloppy. Or is being reduced to writing sufficient to be considered a standard language? Would it be acceptable to call Amoy dialect "Standard Hokkien"?

Hmmmm... But the proposal is not to call the article Cantonese (standard language) or anything like that. Standard Cantonese would only be mistaken for a technical term by those with enough linguistics to know that it wasn't... that is to say, nobody would be confused by it. Andrewa (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Per wikipedia, a standard language is "a particular variety of a language that has been given either legal or quasi-legal status". However, "a standard written language is sometimes termed by the German word Schriftsprache." Would Cantonese dialect be considered a Schriftsprache? Can we even say it has quasi-legal status? (I don't believe Hong Kong govt documents are written in Cantonese, nor is the written educational system (text books, exams, etc.) in Cantonese, but correct me if I'm wrong. Lots of unofficial & unstandardized languages are spoken in govt. and schools, but that's unrelated to standardization.)

It looks like we have a clear preference for a name with "Cantonese" in it, but split between 'dialect' and 'standard'. Hong Qi Gong, Badagnani, would Cantonese dialect be acceptable to you, or do you have further arguments in favor of Standard Cantonese? kwami (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand why "Standard Cantonese" should be in the poll selection? There is NO official Cantonese.--Caspian blue 00:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Horrible, horrible page move

This page should not have been moved to "Guangzhou dialect." This is not the most commonly used term. Please move it back and engage in substantive discussion first. Thank you. Badagnani (talk) 19:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Move it back to where? You can join the poll above if you like. kwami (talk) 20:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Yer bad move, not many English speakers will know this term, it is like moving the German Language to Hochdeutsch which is what is used to distinguish it from the various dialect of languages in German or to refer to High German. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 01:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Native name

I wanted to bring this into discussion before there are any more reversions.[25] The first sentence of this article states: The Guangzhou dialect, commonly known as Cantonese.... And accordingly I have provided a reference to the Chinese translation of "Cantonese" as a ref to the native name in the template at the top of this article - [26]. This is my justification for adding the ref. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

But your ref does not support Guangdonghua as the name for Guangzhou dialect, which is the name of the article. Cantonese can also mean Yue, and I suspect that Guangdonghua may have the latter meaning. kwami (talk) 00:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

According to Chinese wiki, you got it reversed. They say 粵語，又叫廣東話, and 廣府話又叫廣州話、省城話、白話等. kwami (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

粵語 (yueyu) is an academic term. 廣東話 (guangdonghua) is a generic term, but it may also refer to all languages of Guangdong, or refer to Chaozhou speech (a dialect of Min) and thus this term is ambiguous. Both 府 and 省城 mean capital city, so 廣府 means the capital of Guangdong and thus equal to Guangzhou. Cantonese is an English term; it is similar to 粵語 or 廣府話 or 廣東話, but the English term does not exactly equal to any one of them. The reason is that a century ago most people did not differentiate the concepts too much. Many studies of Chinese dialects only started after WWII. --✉ Hello World! 04:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion and Poll

All of Cantonese dialect, Cantonese language, Standard Cantonese, Cantonese (linguistics) are preferable to me for this article over the current name of "Guangzhou dialect". But in the interest of all editors involved in discussion both here and at Yue Chinese, I suggest we move both articles back to their original long-standing names before we engage in further discussion to provide possibly better names. Both of the previous names stood for a long time without much of any dispute. As soon as the recent page moves were made, long discussions sprung up. Obviously a longer time to seek concensus was necessary. Which means, this article gets moved back to Standard Cantonese, and Yue Chinese gets moved back to Cantonese for now.

Support

• Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
• Badagnani (talk) 19:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
• As long as we make it clear in the first lines of the articles that "Standard Cantonese" is not a standard form of Cantonese, and that our "Cantonese" is what linguists refer to as "Yue" and not what most lay people mean by "Cantonese". kwami (talk) 21:08, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - Of course it's standardized; if it weren't it wouldn't be called "Standard Cantonese." It's the form of Cantonese that's used on TV, in schools, etc. Badagnani (talk) 21:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

:-) That's like saying a starfish must be a fish, because if it weren't, it wouldn't be called a "starfish". The status of the dialect does not depend on what we call it. Cantonese Yue is like Beijing Mandarin or Taiwanese Minnan: it's a prestige dialect. There are lots of prestige dialects used on TV and in schools. Read the article on standard language and tell me how Cantonese fits. Another example: Urdu and Standard Hindi are both standard languages, but they are the same dialect, Khariboli. Khariboli itself is a prestige dialect, and the basis of the two standards. Unless you can demonstrate its legal status, I will insist on being explicit that Cantonese is not a standard language, regardless of what we call the article. kwami (talk) 23:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I believe the issue of whether or not it is "standardised" was the original cause of the page move. It looks like we're actually fast approaching concensus, or at the very least, a super majority. This can be the first point of discussion after the page move (back). Personally I don't care whether or not we say it's standardised, or even that we have "standardised" in the article name. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:02, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

• I don't like these names much either; however, I support the move, as the former titles are better than the current ones, and a change will free up the deadlocked conversation.The Fiddly Leprechaun (talk) 23:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Not that we should use the EB as a source, but it says, "The most important representative of the Yue languages is Standard Cantonese of Canton" kwami (talk)

• Benjwong - I support moving this article back to Standard Cantonese, and Yue Chinese back to Cantonese for now. There are too many people with legitimate concerns.
• minghong (talk) 02:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
• AlbertYau (talk) 02:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC) — AlbertYau (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• (+) Cantonese is a well-established name (used even in Bruce Lee's movies). yue chinese is an artificially created term. Google:Cantonese gives millions of entries; google:"Yue Chinese" gives a few thousand, where most of the top entries are irrelevant. Hillgentleman (talk) 04:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
• hkdennis2k - If any one persist in the word "yue", he should use "yue-ese" or "yue-ish". However, that term is not even exist and not an option. Cantonese is a well-known name of it. "Yue Chinese" is the most terrible name I have ever read on wikipedia. 61.238.79.153 (talk) 09:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Looks like support is universal. (Even if a couple aren't editors and don't understand the points of dispute.) I've made the move. I think however that we should be careful about reverting the wording of the articles, since we often distinguish Yueyu from Yuehai, and "Cantonese" is ambiguous in such situations. kwami (talk) 10:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the real thing that we should be careful is -- preventing somebody who lives in his/her world of illusion, continue to contort the world, contort the language, like the "maxim" he/she said.--Syaoranli☞李小狼 13:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

If there is anything ambiguous, it is easily identified by adding descriptions with "Cantonese" (e.g. XX Cantonese / Cantonese(XX)). There is no need to use the "Yue" that unfamiliar to the public. All should bear in mind that Wikipedia is set up for the public. "Yue" could be used inside the article (as it is used in some special fields), but not the title of the article.--Fongyun (talk) 04:43, 26 November 2008 (UTC)