Why not "Dagongbao" but "Takungpao"??

Discussions on the Cantonese language.
Nari

Why not "Dagongbao" but "Takungpao"??

Postby Nari » Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:05 am

Hi, all!

I have a question regarding "Takungpao", name of a famous
HK's newspaper.
As far as I know, the Mandarine reading of the its Chinese characters
is ''Da Gong Bao".
Is "Takungpao" cantonese reading? Or other dialects used in Hong Kong??

Thanks in advance.

Terence

Re: Why not "Dagongbao" but "Takungpao"?

Postby Terence » Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:03 pm

it's a sound translation from Mandarin to English using english habitual tones, not precise at all. jyutping should be daai6 gung1 bou3

Thomas Chan

Re: Why not "Dagongbao" but "Takungpao"??

Postby Thomas Chan » Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:13 pm

Nari wrote:

> I have a question regarding "Takungpao", name of a famous
> HK's newspaper.
> As far as I know, the Mandarine reading of the its Chinese
> characters
> is ''Da Gong Bao".
> Is "Takungpao" cantonese reading? Or other dialects used in
> Hong Kong??

"Takungpao" *is* Mandarin, but not romanized with the Hanyu Pinyin
system.


Thomas Chan

[%sig%]

Helmut
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 3:53 pm

Re: Why not "Dagongbao" but "Takungpao"?

Postby Helmut » Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:17 pm

There are old romanisation systems, that use only T, K and P, but no D, G and B.

This name looks very much like such a system applied. It is still Mandarin. Just not modern pinyin.

Example (this time in Cantonese): HK street and place names never start with D,G or B, for the same reason.

Nari

Re: Why not "Dagongbao" but "Taku

Postby Nari » Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:47 am

Thank you so much for all your kind replied.
Is it Mandarin pronunciation represented in "Wade-Jiles" romanization system?

Nari

Helmut
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 3:53 pm

Re: Why not "Dagongbao" but &a

Postby Helmut » Thu Oct 02, 2003 11:32 am

Wade-Giles would fit for "Takungpao".

Not so sure about "Singtao". Maybe a simplified Wade-Giles ?

There are websites with conversion lists.
E.g. http://www.library.ucla.edu/libraries/e ... table2.htm
or http://www.library.ucla.edu/libraries/eastasian/

mudhia
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:22 am

Re: Why not

Postby mudhia » Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:24 am

There are old romanisation systems, that use only T, K and P, but no D, G and B.

This name looks very much like such a system applied. It is still Mandarin. Just not modern pinyin.


Return to “Cantonese language forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests