# Pinyin pronunciation: telling q from ch without vowels



## cheshire

Can one distinguish successfully a Chinese retroflex affricate -ch- from an alveo-palatal affricate -q- without hearing their following vowels? I'm yet unable to identify -ch- when I hear it without recognizing the schwa-ed vowel immediately after -ch-.
Can native Chinese speakers recognize them without vowels?

http://www.answers.com/pinyin


----------



## bR0123

cheshire said:


> Can one distinguish successfully a Chinese retroflex affricate -ch- from an alveo-palatal affricate -q- without hearing their following vowels? I'm yet unable to identify -ch- when I hear it without recognizing the schwa-ed vowel immediately after -ch-.
> Can native Chinese speakers recognize them without vowels?


 
Yes.

The -q- sound is clearer than the -ch- sound.

A -q- sounds like /*ts*/, but the -ch- sounds as in English "*ch*ance".

Hope this will help.


----------



## cheshire

好像我要練習a!
多謝nin的指教.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

In my impression, *q *was softer, closer to "t" and, as far as I remember, you had to pronounce it with your tongue flat inside your mouth and with the corners of the mouth like in saying  "cheese" in front of the camera.


----------



## gao_yixing

We can distinguish them. The mouth is open bigger when you read q.


----------



## Lugubert

It's as easy as distinguishing the Swedish retroflexes, spelled rd, rt, rn, from the plain d, t, n. If you've got those sounds in your language, there is no way of confusing them.


----------



## Qcumber

It is difficult to utter consonants without vowels, i.e. outside a syllable. I wonder what Cheshire's question actually meant.


----------



## cheshire

I am able to distinguish "ch" with the help of (1) tones (from 1 to 4), (2) context, and (3) the adjacent vowel.

The vowel "i" in chi飯 is not an "ordinary" "i" but schwa-ed "i." It's almost like the vowel sound of "curd."


----------



## gao_yixing

cheshire said:


> I am able to distinguish "ch" with the help of (1) tones (from 1 to 4), (2) context, and (3) the adjacent vowel.
> 
> The vowel "i" in chi飯 is not an "ordinary" "i" but schwa-ed "i." It's almost like the vowel sound of "curd."


 
You may practise "j,q,x" and "zh,ch,sh" more and you will find the difference.


----------



## modus.irrealis

cheshire said:


> I am able to distinguish "ch" with the help of (1) tones (from 1 to 4), (2) context, and (3) the adjacent vowel.



Could you describe how you use the tone? I know about using the vowel, and that's basically what I have to do since I'm such a beginner (plus the difference between vowels like u and ü is much easier for me to make out than that between ch and q), but I've never come across using tones.


----------



## cheshire

For instance when you distinguish 吃　(as in 吃飯) from 鶏 (ji), you can't distinguish them only from (1), as they are both the first tone (just like mama <mother>). 
But if I have to distinguish 吃 from 去 (qi), I have to rely on the context (2), the tone (1), and the adjacent vowel.


----------



## gao_yixing

cheshire said:


> For instance when you distinguish 吃　(as in 吃飯) from 鶏 (ji), you can't distinguish them only from (1), as they are both the first tone (just like mama <mother>).
> But if I have to distinguish 吃 from 去 (qi), I have to rely on the context (2), the tone (1), and the adjacent vowel.


去（qu）， not （qi）
Actually, ch and q is not difficult to differ from. Maybe you will get used to them if you practise more.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Well, I was taught that *j q x* are the sounds of the same type which require a flat tongue and a large "smile" as in the camera "cheese".
*ch*, *zh*, *sh* are the sounds which require the tongue to be rolled loosely inside your mouth and they are closer to their English equivalents too.


----------



## gao_yixing

Setwale_Charm said:


> Well, I was taught that *j q x* are the sounds of the same type which require a flat tongue and a large "smile" as in camera "cheese".
> *ch*, *zh*, *sh* are the sounds which require the tongue to be rolled loosely inside your mouth and they are closer to their English equivalents too.


 
I think so, except that there isn't zh in English.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

plea*su*re, lei*su*re? Or is it closer to *j*elly?


----------



## gao_yixing

Setwale_Charm said:


> lea*su*re, lei*su*re? Or is it closer to *j*elly?


Neither of them. Just between them.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Tricky. I think, cheshire, one needs to be able to hear these sounds spoken by native speakers a lot of the time in order to be able to recognise the difference. The trouble for beginners is: one needs to hear some special tape where this word is present and where one is able to recognise it. Listening to the radio simply just won`t do.


----------



## gao_yixing

Setwale_Charm said:


> Tricky. I think, cheshire, one needs to be able to hear these sounds spoken by native speakers a lot of the time in order to be able to recognise the difference. The trouble for beginners is: one needs to hear some special tape where this word is present and where one is able to recognise it. Listening to the radio simply just won`t do.


 
Yeah, I think so. Zhang is one of the three biggest surnames. But in English, it's Chang because of the lack of the counterpart. e.g. Michael Chang, a tennis player.


----------



## modus.irrealis

cheshire said:


> For instance when you distinguish 吃　(as in 吃飯) from 鶏 (ji), you can't distinguish them only from (1), as they are both the first tone (just like mama <mother>).
> But if I have to distinguish 吃 from 去 (qi), I have to rely on the context (2), the tone (1), and the adjacent vowel.


Thanks for the explanation -- I see what you mean now.


----------

