"Toneless final syllable variant"?

[aandrew_]

Hi all!

 

I started learning Chinese a few weeks ago, and I often come across strong vocabulary sources that only have the characters and the English, not the pinyin. My goal is to be conversational, so I search the characters on Wiktionary, which almost always has the definitions. Occasionally, I'll come across a definition like this (I'll use péngyou as an example):

 

Mandarin (Standard Chinese, Beijing) Pinyin

péngyǒu  →  péngyou (toneless final syllable variant)

 

It changes the last syllable from the third tone to no tone. Why does this happen? I did some research and couldn't find anything. It happens for a lot of words from what I can tell, and I haven't found a pattern or anything. Can anyone shed some light on this?

 

Thanks,

 

Andrew

[tooironic]

This is the term Wiktionary uses to refer to 輕聲, also known as neutral tone.

 

There is no real rule involved, you just have to remember which ones have neutral tones, and which don't. Also keep in mind that many words which are 輕聲 in mainland China are not in Taiwan.

 

You may also find my blog post about variant pronunciations useful.

[renzhe]

See also http://www.chinese-forums.com/index.php?/topic/44263-tone-shift-rule/

[li3wei1]

Why does this happen?

 

As you continue to study Chinese, you will learn not to ask this question.

[Sharon喵喵]

This is called 轻声. Why does this happen? Because:first~~~ the meaning is different. For example,   地方   "di(fourth tone)fang(first tone)“，means not located in the center, such as 地方政府. "di(fourth tone)fang(toneless)", means a place, such as 什么地方.                                                                                                   second~~~the part of speech is different. For example,   大意   "da(fourth tone)yi(fourth tone)", means main idea, it's a noun," da(fourth tone)yi(toneless)", means careless, it's an adjective.                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Some of them do have regular patterns, such as   "的，得，地（de）”     “吗（ma），吧（ba），啦（la）”    "们（men）" 我们wo（third tone）men（toneless）,and so on,if you wanna know more, I can tell you later. But some don't have regular patterns, so you have to remember them, such as   "衣服"(clothes) yi(first tone)fu(toneless)     "明白"(understand)  ming(second tone)bai(toneless), and so on.                                                                                                      

[OneEye]

As you continue to study Chinese, you will learn not to ask this question.

 

Not just Chinese, but any language, really. The important thing is not "why does this happen," but "how do I say/use it?"

[lechuan]

I don't mean to be flippant, but language "rules" document how people speak/spoke the language. People were probably making the final syllable neutral when they spoke, so that became the "rule".

[Demonic_Duck]

As you continue to study Chinese, you will learn not to ask this question.

There's nothing wrong with looking for patterns and rules in language learning. I'm assuming that's what the OP means by "why" (i.e. "under what circumstances does this happen?") People have already pretty much answered this already - there are some rules, but for the majority of cases (at least in mainland putonghua) it doesn't seem to follow much of a pattern.

 

As for the question as to what circumstances led to the Chinese language evolving that way, that's a fine question for a linguist to ask, and perhaps you're curious as a language-learner as well. Nothing wrong with that - there are a few linguists here on this forum who may even be able to answer. Of course, it may not be the most effective use of your learning time to focus on such questions, but if Chinese is a labour of love for you (as it is for many of us), you're free to choose the extent to which you allow yourself to pursue such idle curiosity.

 

I don't mean to be flippant, but language "rules" document how people speak/spoke the language. People were probably making the final syllable neutral when they spoke, so that became the "rule".

This statement almost seems tautological to me. I mean, isn't having reached its present form via that kind of evolution integral to the definition of "natural language"?

[lechuan]

 

 

This statement almost seems tautological to me. I mean, isn't having reached its present form via that kind of evolution integral to the definition of "natural language"?

 

Well, exactly. I could find no better answer to "why does this happen?" Unless the question is why did people make the final syllable neutral in the first place, in which case my answer is pretty useless