Re: Broca's region & speech, and Chinese

GRMorton@aol.com
Fri, 1 Dec 1995 22:18:34 -0500

Jim Foley wrote:
>> Even if they are correct, a more limited range of sound
production does not necessarily equate to a limited language capability.
(does Hawaiian use less sounds than most other languages?) <<

I don't know about Hawaiian, but I DO know about Chinese. Chinese uses only
about 500 word-sounds and that is all. And it is a very complex, very
difficult language to learn. And I might add that the Chinese people are
very, very intelligent, charming and freindly in spite of this deficiency in
their language. There is a poem in Chinese which is merely
ma-ma-ma-ma-ma-ma-ma-ma... I don't know it all, but it means mother scolds
the horse the horse kicks the hemp or something like that. The meaning is in
the inflection of each of the words. To an American it is all quite
confusing and funny.

In chinese, ma, can mean depending on the inflection, mother,, hemp, horse,
agate, numeral, morphine, leech, curse among others.

There are 44 different meanings for the sound shi (pronounced "sure")
There are 57 different basic meanings for the sound ji
etc.

The meaning is conveyed by context and the union of sounds. "Yao shi" is
key; "lao shi" is a teacher; "Da shi guan" is embassy; "shi wan" is
discouraged. Thus the problem I have when listening to chinese, is that I
hear a sound I am familiar with but it is not in with other easily
recognizable words, I get lost. While I am trying to go through the mental
list of occurrences of "shi" they are three sentences further along the
conversation.

This whole idea that a limited number of sounds means that we can't have
modern speech shows that those who make such claims have never tried to learn
Chinese. Thank you Jim for suggesting such an interesting approach to the
problem.

glenn