From: David Choj Mortensen  (by way of Pao Saykao )
Subject: Hmong Daw anf Hmong Leng dialect...for ?FAQ
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
content-length: 6507

"What differences are there between Hmong Daw and Mong Leng dialects?"



Dear Hmong-LG members,

I agree with Ying that I writing system which could impartially express
both Mong Leng and Hmong Daw would be valuable.  After all, Hmong are
not such a large group that they can afford to support two written
languages (even if they are based upon the same principles).  It will be
a miracle (I believe) if the Hmong written language survives at all for
more than a generation, especially in the west where the pressures of
assimilation are so great.

I disagree with Ying, however, in that I think that R.P.A. could be
modified slightly and could serve as this "universal Hmong."  What
differences are there between Hmong Daw and Mong Leng dialects?

I. Lexical differences

Hmong Daw and Mong Leng sometimes refer to the same thing by completely
different names.  This would not prevent the creation of a universal
writing system.

II. Predictable Phonetic differences

Hmong Daw pronounce some things differently than Mong Leng.  Those which
are predictable from one side are easy to fix:

A. Regular Consonant Changes

1. Nasals
ML	HD
m	m
m	hm
n	n
n	hn
ny	ny
ny	hny
ml	ml
ml	hml

In this change, it is obvious that Hmong Daw/Der has preserved greater
phonetic complexity that Mong Leng.  A unified orthography would include
 as well as .  Mong Leng students would learn
that , for example, is pronounced the same as , but that some
words are spelled with  and some with .  This would make writing,
but not reading, slightly more difficult for Mong Leng, but it would not
be a major barrier.  In all major languages, people have to write
phonetic contrasts which don't exist in their dialect.  For example, in
my dialect of English  and  are pronounced the same, but I have
to (and am capable of) remembering where to write which one.  It makes
it better for all of us. 

2. Plosives
ML	HD
dl	d
dlh	dh
ndl	nt
nt	nt
ndlh	nth?
nth	nth

This is a similar situation, except that Mong Leng preserves a contrast
that was lost in Mong Leng.  ML /dl/ and HD /d/ could be represented by
 (according to the original R.P.A. plan, which has been followed to
this day by many Catholic Hmong).  The orthography would have to include
 as well as .  Hmong Daw would have to learn when to
use  and when to use , but this is possible as we discussed
earlier.

B. Regular Vowel Changes

ML	HD
aa	a
a	ia

These are quite regular so they would be no problem.  Just decide on a
symbol to represent ML /aa/ and HD /a/, one to represent ML /a/ and HD
/ia/ and possible one to use in those few words that have /a/ in both ML
and HD.  For example

UH	ML	HD
a	a	a	as in 'mas'/'mas' the "pause word"
ia	a	ia	as in 'nyiaj'/'nyaj'
aa	aa	a	as in 'paab'/'pab'

This would not make the alphabet much harder to learn, though it would
keep it from looking like it sounds.  But good luck writing Hmong with a
Latin alphabet in a way that looks like it sounds!

II. Unpredictable but Systematic Phonetic Differences

These are bigger problem, particularly for those Hmong Daw who think
that Mong Leng say "nuj muv" for "noj mov" etc.,

A. Semi regular Vowel Change

We all know that in some words:

ML	HD
u	o

This situation seems to have arisen because proto-Western Hmong had more
vowels than ML and HD.  I believe TxoovTuam has pointed this out.  The
vowel to blame here was lost in both dialects:  in ML it became /u/; in
HD it became /o/.  The solution would be to replace it with a ghost
vowel that HD would pronounce /o/ and ML would pronounce as /u/.  Again,
this would make Hmong a little more difficult to write, but would not
significantly change it's readability.  This symbol could be anything. 
 might work.  TxoovTuam had a different idea.  Whatever suits the
reformers fancy would work, actually.

B. Semi regular Tone Changes

ML	HD
-g	-s

The same situation exists with a lost tone.  This tone is still present
in many Chinese dialects of Hmong, and they write it as <-l>.  Why not?

III. Irregular Phonetic Differences

There are a few other differences in the sounds of ML and HD which are
not (as far as I can tell) systematic.  The problem is, these
differences occur in words that are very common: tsi/tsis, mus/moog,
miv/me, nyuas/nyuam, and so on ad naseum.  Not only are these words the
biggest problem in creating a unified writing system, they are the only
_real_ problem.  You could either pick one arbitrarily, or recognize
both, or mix the two ad hoc.

In any case, I am convinced that R.P.A. could be reformed so that a
single set of spellings could be used by Hmong Daw, Mong Leng, and the
other closely related Hmong dialects of China etc.,

I have no real right to write on these matters.  After all, it isn't my
language.  I hope I didn't offend anyone by butting into to this
subject.  If so, please forgive me.  Also, I commend you on getting to
the end of this incredibly boring posting.  Kuv cov lug taag le nuav.

David "Choj" Mortensen
SLQTN@cc.usu.edu

yvang wrote:
> 
> Nyob zoo txog sawv-daws,
> 
> CaLiForNia DreAmS Yang had nicely listed many books pertaining to the
> Mong RPA writing system of our H'Mong language, I wonder if there are any
> books about the H'Mong language which have both Hmong Daw and Mong Njua in
> them.  If there are such books, can anyone share them with us, at least
> with me?
> 
> Having asked you that, I also wonder why some H'Mong keep writing books
> about our language separately instead of writing them to cover both
> Hmong Daw and Mong Njua.
> 
> I think it would be better, if possible, for all H'Mong groups to have
> only one writing system or script.  The H'Mong RPA writing system would
> not be possible for this because it's a "sib txis" system.  Since it's a
> "sib txis" writing system, Hmong Daw and Mong Njua would "txis" their
> words accordingly to their dialects.  I think any writing system that
> would be usable to all Hmong Daw, Mong Njua, and other H'Mong groups would
> be one that does not fall in the method of "sib txis", like most (if not
> all) scripts around the world.  So far, I only see the H'Mong writing
> system created to use all its alphabets and "cov cim" to "sib txis".  But
> I think it's doable to develop a writing system similar to the H'Mong RPA
> writing system, but not "txis" its alphabets, vowels, consonants, and
> "cim" to form complete words.  Using other H'Mong scripts can be doable,
> too.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> Ying Vang