#pacvachi

[tcchinese]

References

Here are a number of explanations (along with the glossary) for terms that will be reused a lot in this blog. (For the up-to-date version, check the one linked to at the top of the blog)

Basic TCC: The basic form of TCC that is specifically designed to harmonize with modern Chinese varieties and Sino-Xenic (Sino-Jp, Kr and Viet) pronunciations. Also includes a choice of vocabulary. Contrasts with other forms of TCC like Go’on-specific TCC, etc.

Modernized TCC: Specifically aimed at modern Chinese varieties.

Banlamized TCC: Targeted at Min Nan Chinese, though a lot of work still needs to be done.

Eitel Romanization: The original unmodified Romanization which the Hong Kong Government Romanization is based off of.

Pac-va-chi: A fictional Romanization that is based off of the original unmodified Portuguese-based Romanization used in Macau. Aims to be a full realistic Romanization that would have been made by the Portuguese rather than a “good” one.

Tangent Cantonese Romanization: A Cantonese Romanization made by me with the goal of being understandable to both HKers and Western tourists alike without prior learning. It should allow English speakers who know how Romanizations work to approximate the intended pronunciation.

Tangent Mandarin phonemic analysis: A simplified Mandarin phonemic analysis based off of Zhuyin Fuhao that analyses 8 monophthong phonemes: a ɔ ə ɛ i u y ɨ

TAMP: Tangent’s Annotations for Mandarin Pinyin to clarify the pronunciation of pinyin spelling. Meant to be used alongside pinyin, hence “annotations”.

Chao (Cantonese Romanization): 趙元任粵語羅馬字. The unmodified Romanization used in Cantonese Primer. Uses voiced consonants to denote the yeung tone.

List of Middle Chinese Transcriptions: Including Baxter’s and Polyhedron’s MC Transcriptions.

[tcchinese]

Shap Luk Kon Tseung Kwan, an ancient Chinese game of strategy

Online translations: “16 pursing the general”, 16 Rebels, Rebels, Chinese Rebels

Deduced characters and Eitel Romanization: 十六趕將軍 (Shap₎̠ Luk₎̠ ⁽Kon ₍Tséung ₍Kwan)

Tangent Canto Rom.: Sap Luk Gón Jòeng Gwàn Chao 粵語羅馬字: Zhaplok Koanx Tzeungkwan TCC: Zhip liuk Kân/ Dsiâng- kun Pac-va-chi (without tonal diacritics): Sâp Lôc Con Cheong Quân Penkyamp: Sàplòk Gõn Zeöngguänt Penkyamp-Eitel (without tonal diacritics): Sappluck Gon Jönggwann  or Sapplock Gon Jöngguann Magyar-GE (without tonal diacritics): Sapluk Kon Tsőngquan

[tcchinese]

Both Vietnamese orthography and Penkyamp, a Cantonese Romanization, use the coda, be it semivowel or consonant, to indicate vowel length (or vowel quality with implied vowel length). In this article, we will be using Chao's analysis for Cantonese: that [ɛ] and [e~ɪ], as well as [ɔ] and [o~ʊ~ɵ], are contrasting pairs.

Penkyamp relies on the coda to indicate vowel length, or for the case of Cantonese, the term "vowel quality" would be more accurate. While Vietnamese does so to an extent, and does not totally rely on the coda, although it does for a few cases: for instance, <ai> and <ay> represent [a:ɪ] and [aɪ] respectively. For some cases, there is no phonemic vowel length difference (possibly not even phonetically), but these are implied, like for <eo> and <êu>, which represent [ɛʊ] and [eʊ] respectively.

(Note that when I say "implied vowel length", for the case of French, I refer to /e/ being "long", the English /ɑ/ being "long", as well as the Cantonese /ɛ/ being "long". Some are analysed as phonetically long, while others aren't)

Back on track, Let us apply this convention of marking vowel quality with the coda onto the Pac-va-chi (the Cantonese Romanization). The basic form of the Pac-va-chi, abbreviated as "PVC", could be seen in the middle. Vietnamese orthography uses <y> and <u> to indicate "short" vowels, and <i> and <o> to indicate "long" ones. Penkyamp has a similar convention, though it uses the vowels <i> and <u> to indicate a "long" vowel and the consonants <y> and <w> to indicate "short" ones. So, for example:

Vietnamese: long: ai, ao; short: ay, au

Penkyamp: long: ai, au; short: ay, aw

Since the use of <y> and <w> has already been done to Cantonese, I have went with the Vietnamese convention, shown in the first table at the top. While diacritics would then be unneeded, the double asterisks indicate diphthongs that could carry diacritics for extra clarification, e.g. <ây> for "ay". This however, means that <eo> is used for /ɛ(:)u/, and thus /œ/ is written as <ơ> instead. This convention is based off of how the sound would appear to speakers of a language that lacks the sound, as well as a Romanization called Yựtyựt. But a bigger reason for this is that /œ/ is sometimes written as just <o> in the modern Romanization of Macau, hinting that it used to be a letter O with some form of diacritic. This is used in unison with "ư" to then indicate fronting, and speakers of languages that do not have the /y/ sound may perceive it as "something between [i] and [u]" or "[u]-like".

A note on Penkyamp: the "short" a, e and o, which are marked with an asterisk in the table at the bottom, always carry a final voiceless consonant (including <mp>, <nt> and <nk>) or semivowel <y>/<w>. Thus, they never [orthographically] conflict with the long vowels, which may be used alone in a rhyme.

[tcchinese]

Alternate Historical Timeline - Macau's Canto Romanization

After the Portuguese took over Macau (Macao), they started to force Portuguese-influence orthography. At the time, few locals were literate, and Handzi was deemed too difficult, as the reason, by the Portuguese. They then developed a writing system for the language spoken in Macau, while forcing them to learn Portuguese at the same time. They called the new form of Cantonese writing Pa̍c-vá-chị (白話字, Hokkien: peh-oe-ji, there should be a vertical stroke above the first a).

(The following Romanization is based off of the Macau Romanization, Vietnamese, Peh-oe-ji, older Cantonese Romanizations, and relationships between the tones of Canto and Viet, and heavily Portuguese/Vietnamese-based)

Sample

[Since many people mistaken this for a just a designed Portuguese/Vietnamese-based Romanization, I will state it clearly here: like Tangent-Eitel, this is meant/designed to be a plausible orthography done by the Portuguese to the actual Macau. It is exactly the Romanization used in Macau, but without the requested changes (like turning p into b and the English-based changes) and the possible original diacritics added back, suppose the original Romanization designed by the Portuguese had diacritics, which they most likely did. So in short, think of this as a reconstruction, rather than a personal design, of the Romanization used in Macau, but with the distinctions added back through the original diacritics, which have been lost through time, and not a personally-designed Cantonese Romanization that is biased on Cantonese, Vietnamese or the IPA. But as I mentioned, it is not purely a reconstruction as they might not use the hook above diacritic for Cantonese, but it is there for practicability issues.]