User talk:Kmcheung

Hakka
You have removed the word 'not' twice from the article on Hakka linguistics in relation to the sentence "Hakka is not mutually intelligible with Mandarin....". I think you don't understand the meaning of this sentence properly. The explanation of the revert is listed in the talk page for Hakka linguistics under the title of Changes 27 Jan 2007. For your benefit, I paste it here.

Wrong:  Hakka is mutually intelligible with Mandarin, Cantonese, Minnan and most of the significant spoken variants of the Chinese language.  Correct:  Hakka is not mutually intelligible with Mandarin, Cantonese, Minnan and most of the significant spoken variants of the Chinese language.  I have inserted 'not' back in again, because 'mutually intelligible' does not mean 'does not understand each other'. When one says X is not mutually intelligible with Y and Z, it means that X is different to Y and Z to the point where whatever X says, Y and Z may not understand, and vice versa.

Dylanwhs 11:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)