Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.

Talk:Cantonese phrasebook

From Wikitravel
Revision as of 12:09, 30 September 2007 by Ravikiran r (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

The phrase list here is terrible! Cantonese has 6 or 7 tones to go with the sounds. If you don't get the tones, you will not be understood. Why is this section so poor compared to the Chinese phrasebook? There they use standard pinyin and explanations of the tones.

There are standard systems for Cantonese as well. It's harder than Putonghua for sure, but worth doing right.

Please plunge forward and make it better then! Jpatokal 01:06, 10 Nov 2005 (EST)

Tones

I belive the tones from 1-6 would be very simple and effective, the Yale ones are screwed and ineficent Enlil Ninlil 23:44, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)

nobody really says 你好to say hello. they usually say 吃了反没. if u say 你好, u will sound like a foreigner.

Romanization

I think you should use Jyutping to write this article. Also, much of the romanization is incorrect. Several of the phrases have incorrect characters, also.

What's wrong with you Cantonese-speaking people? Plunge forward and fix it instead of whining here on this Talk page! Jpatokal 00:41, 1 March 2007 (EST)
I've gone through and fixed it all. I have a question though. Should all syllables really be separated? I find that horribly annoying, as many can be put together, such as the language's own name, Gwong2dong1 Wa2 (as opposed to Gwong2 Dong1). Anyway, I ask that this source be referenced: http://www.cantonese.sheik.co.uk/index.html#Contents
It tends to be extremely useful. 70.190.49.222 15:11, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

Romanization discussion moved

I moved this from the article page hereRavikiran 08:05, 30 September 2007 (EDT) Choose the best Romanization system in Cantonese!! Yale Cantonese is out of date and not compatible with Cantonese software. The best phonetic system is the LSHK developed in Hong Kong by the experts from the Linguistic Society of Hong Kong, not by some scholars in the West who are away from the majority of Cantonese people. Just watch out for the Yale system supporters such as the one below who probably knows only the old system of Cantonese Romanization.

Choose the best Romanisation system for Cantonese!! Yale Cantonese is current and used in the vast majority of existing texts. (Try finding LSHK material outside of Hong Kong.) The best phonetic system is Yale Cantonese, developed by experts in linguistics, and intended for native English speakers trying to learn Cantonese, not by some scholars in the East who are away from the majority of English speaking people. Just watch out for LSHK supporters such as the one above who probably is a native Cantonese speaker (just like the creators of LSHK) and therefore wouldn't have a clue what it's like trying to learn Cantonese without a native speaking background.

Yale Cantonese.

Just as the most predominant form of Mandarin romanisation is called Pinyin, the most modern, most accepted, and more importantly the most correct form of Cantonese romanisation is Yale Cantonese.

Special note to the person who previously edited this document. You must familiarise yourself with Yale Cantonese! Some of your notions such as the use of "J" for a "y" sound, the use of "c" to indicate "ch" sound, and in particular the use of "Z" (something from pinyin) are just horrifically unintuitive and least indicative of the closest english sounds for speaking Cantonese. To make matters worse, you were also incredibly inconsistent with your romanisation, and a number of your tones were just plain wrong. You are going to cause nothing but total confusion to the beginner. Please learn how to speak cantonese properly, and then learn how to romanise properly. Remember: Yale Cantonese.

Apologies if this is not the appropriate place for this notice, but I could see no other way of making this important point.

For the beginner interested in learning Cantonese, I'd strongly advise finding a text that utilises Yale Cantonese. Fortunately the majority do anyway, but there are a number of other (far inferior) systems out there.

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages