Re: Tonal Languages vs. Perfect Pitch

Hi Folks,

I just read the article about perfect pitch that Jon Szanto mentioned which is at:

http://www.uniontribune.com/news/utarchives/cgi/idoc.cgi?516028+unix++www.uniontrib.com..80+Union-Tribune+Union-Tribune+Library+Library++%28pitch%29

The premise of the article seems to me to be that speakers of Chinese
must have perfect pitch because they speak a tonal language. This is
silly. The tones in Chinese are relative. The ability of a Chinese
listener to understand a Chinese speaker relies on the pitch *changes*
(or lack thereof) within each syllable, *not* on the absolute pitch of
the syllables. There are four basic pitch *inflections*: flat, up,
down-up, and down. There are *not* absolute tones that one is expected
to recognize.

Cheers,
Christopher

In a message dated 12/14/1999 07:36:12 PM, christopher.chapman@conexant.com
wrote:

>The premise of the article seems to me to be that speakers of Chinese
>must have perfect pitch because they speak a tonal language. This is
>silly. The tones in Chinese are relative. The ability of a Chinese
>listener to understand a Chinese speaker relies on the pitch *changes*
>(or lack thereof) within each syllable, *not* on the absolute pitch of
>the syllables. There are four basic pitch *inflections*: flat, up,
>down-up, and down. There are *not* absolute tones that one is expected
>to recognize.

Yes... this is true. Also regional dialects influence a lotta of the
"inflections."
This is how a knowledgable person from Beijing can tell where another
Mandarin speaker hails from - whether they are from Wuhan, Taiwan, Singapore
or from America (or even Germany) . . . whether they are a native speaker or
a non-native speaker.

zHANg, Han Qwa'i/Jung G'war Ren