Chinese MAMA and Latin MATER

[miguel]

The Chinese word for 'mother' is 媽媽 (pronounced as MAMA). I wonder are there any relations between this 媽媽 and the Latin mater, which later derives as mother in English, madre in Italian, etc. Is there any reasons for the common MA-starting words, having the meaning of mother? What makes China and Rome both calling mother as MA? Or maybe Chinese 媽媽 is translated from Latin or English in the past centuries?

Edited July 16, 2007 by miguel

[ASCLEPIADES]

Salve, M! The followin quote comes from the "mother" article of en.wikipedia.org:

 

"In many other languages, similar pronunciations apply; maman in French, or mamma in Italian, or m

[miguel]

Salve, M! The followin quote comes from the "mother" article of en.wikipedia.org:

 

"In many other languages, similar pronunciations apply; maman in French, or mamma in Italian, or m

[docoflove1974]

Well, as far as the Indo-European languages, there is a common ancestor: *māt

[miguel]

Well, as far as the Indo-European languages, there is a common ancestor: *māt

[docoflove1974]

An [m] sound is a nasal...a bilabial nasal stop. But there tends to be a corollary for the first words to include bilabial sounds, since the tongue doesn't have to articulate. That is not an absolute given; there are always people and languages that will buck that trend.

[miguel]

An [m] sound is a nasal...a bilabial nasal stop. But there tends to be a corollary for the first words to include bilabial sounds, since the tongue doesn't have to articulate. That is not an absolute given; there are always people and languages that will buck that trend.

 

Can you give some examples? I thought that consonants with bilabial sounds include only b, p, m and f.

 

It is true that different languages have different ways of pronouncing words.

Anyway, can you recall what is the very first word you said when you were a baby?

[docoflove1974]

An [m] sound is a nasal...a bilabial nasal stop. But there tends to be a corollary for the first words to include bilabial sounds, since the tongue doesn't have to articulate. That is not an absolute given; there are always people and languages that will buck that trend.

 

Can you give some examples? I thought that consonants with bilabial sounds include only b, p, m and f.

 

It is true that different languages have different ways of pronouncing words.

Anyway, can you recall what is the very first word you said when you were a baby?

 

[b, p, m] are all bilabial stops; there are also bilabial fricatives--air can pass through the mouth only slightly impeded--both voiced and voiceless. Spanish 'v/b' is an example of the voiced bilabial fricative; I can't recall with confidence, but I believe that the Greek 'phi' is a voiceless bilabial fricative. That's pretty much it for bilabials. So the thought would be that the majority of babies would first say something like 'ma ma', 'ba ba', even before 'pa pa'; voiceless sounds takes control of the vocal chords, and that would develop later.

 

Labiodental sounds use both the lips and teeth; [f, v] are the two examples here, and there is a nasal sound, too.

 

As for myself, I supposedly said 'mama' as my first word; and supposedly the same with my brothers. I have no idea what my second word was...knowing me and my stomach, it was probably 'ba ba' (bottle)!

[Andrew Dalby]

An [m] sound is a nasal...a bilabial nasal stop. But there tends to be a corollary for the first words to include bilabial sounds, since the tongue doesn't have to articulate. That is not an absolute given; there are always people and languages that will buck that trend.

 

Can you give some examples? I thought that consonants with bilabial sounds include only b, p, m and f.

 

It is true that different languages have different ways of pronouncing words.

Anyway, can you recall what is the very first word you said when you were a baby?

 

[b, p, m] are all bilabial stops; there are also bilabial fricatives--air can pass through the mouth only slightly impeded--both voiced and voiceless. Spanish 'v/b' is an example of the voiced bilabial fricative; I can't recall with confidence, but I believe that the Greek 'phi' is a voiceless bilabial fricative. That's pretty much it for bilabials. So the thought would be that the majority of babies would first say something like 'ma ma', 'ba ba', even before 'pa pa'; voiceless sounds takes control of the vocal chords, and that would develop later.

 

Labiodental sounds use both the lips and teeth; [f, v] are the two examples here, and there is a nasal sound, too.

 

As for myself, I supposedly said 'mama' as my first word; and supposedly the same with my brothers. I have no idea what my second word was...knowing me and my stomach, it was probably 'ba ba' (bottle)!

 

M is maybe an easy sound to pronounce, and maybe also a sound that people are ready to recognise. Hence various different languages claim that a cat says "miao" although you won't ever see the cat pronouncing an "m" (at least, I don't think so!)

[docoflove1974]

M is maybe an easy sound to pronounce, and maybe also a sound that people are ready to recognise. Hence various different languages claim that a cat says "miao" although you won't ever see the cat pronouncing an "m" (at least, I don't think so!)

 

I don't know about other cats, but mine doesn't exactly produce an [m]! Perception...I didn't even think of that!

[miguel]

Me neither!!

 

Would it be different for cats from different areas?

 

I am thinking of the movement of the lips when pronouncing [m]. Is it similar to that of eating (or chewing or griding - I am not sure) food (say infants eating porridge)?

[The Augusta]

First words babies say? Hmm. Exceptions may or may not prove the rule. Is it not an accepted 'fact' in England that babies say 'Dada' before they say 'Mama'? Certainly most babies I've known have done so.

 

But as for our first words - my son spoke gobbledegook for months, without even attempting a word as such, although he believed he was speaking because he put different inflections and expressions into his gobbledegook and would go on and on to himself for ages. His first words were - and I kid you not - 'We Will Rock You' - as Queen was on the CD player at the time. He never once tried 'Mama'; his speech, when it came was in complete, coherent sentences - but I realise he was an exception.

 

So - any thoughts on that one, Doc? Or did I give birth to an alien? (It did feel like that when he was 2)

[Callaecus]

There is a theory among some linguists that all the family languages today come from a single one. Words like "mother" would therefore be common in different languages since it is a basic word. Other examples include Woman (Kuna); Child (Mako); Hole (K'olo)

[Pertinax]

First words babies say? Hmm. Exceptions may or may not prove the rule. Is it not an accepted 'fact' in England that babies say 'Dada' before they say 'Mama'? Certainly most babies I've known have done so.

 

But as for our first words - my son spoke gobbledegook for months, without even attempting a word as such, although he believed he was speaking because he put different inflections and expressions into his gobbledegook and would go on and on to himself for ages. His first words were - and I kid you not - 'We Will Rock You' - as Queen was on the CD player at the time. He never once tried 'Mama'; his speech, when it came was in complete, coherent sentences - but I realise he was an exception.

 

So - any thoughts on that one, Doc? Or did I give birth to an alien? (It did feel like that when he was 2)

Hmm . were you visited by Jupiter in the guise of a chicken or an aardvark? Divine desire can do odd things.

[docoflove1974]

There is a theory among some linguists that all the family languages today come from a single one. Words like "mother" would therefore be common in different languages since it is a basic word. Other examples include Woman (Kuna); Child (Mako); Hole (K'olo)

 

There are a couple of these theories, with Nostratic perhaps the most known. It's an idea that is fantasy, for me and my professors. The concept is easy enough to understand: if we all came from the same ancestor, then there must have been one language. And I think that, intuitively, this is true. However, the methods of reconstruction cannot accurately create the lexicon, let alone the morphosyntactic rules and semantic restrictions. It's hard enough to reconstruct 3,500-5000 years of language without controversy; just the controversy on Proto-Indo-European alone has filled volumes upon volumes of studies for more than 200 years. Beyond that time frame, there is much more controversy and little accepted 'truth'.