<p>Generally, first tone means it is related to air/sky/vaccuum/or stressing its emptiness.</p>

<p>空调-air conditioner，空气-air,天空-sky 航空-aviation 真空-vaccuum，空虚-emptiness</p>

<p>Fourth tone usually means something related to blank/room or space/emptiness, and stressing that it can be used or filled</p>

<p>空格-space 空当-free time or space，填空-fill in the blank 
空白-blank/空缺-vacancy/空隙-slot/空出时间
(may not be appropriate translation,sorry)</p>

<p>Another interesting example:</p>

<p>这个房间是空的。 This room is empty.(first tone)</p>

<p>哪个房间空出来？ Which room is available(so that I can use)?(fourth tone)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-31T09:10:58.280Z
fourth tone uses for interval/capacity/volume (its usage is 'verb'). first tone used for emptiness (its usage is noun).
Daniel Yang
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-02T08:40:49.550Z
It doesn't have to be verb or noun...I mean, fourth tone words 空白 空缺 are actually adjective. And first tone can also be a verb...e.p. 不要空想。 Don't daydream. or 他还空着肚子。 He is still hungry. I am not a language teacher, so sorry I can't tell you a theory or rule. But  it's actually not that strict in Chinese to distinguish between verb and noun and adj and whatever...So this can't be a shortcut.
Ran
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-02T08:50:32.150Z
emmm after think twice, I am not so sure about this examples are noun or verb or adverb...See, I am a Chinese and I am still not sure about that. So please, don't use this as a shortcut...
Ran
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-12T07:34:47.513Z
kong4 means making a space, an interval, kong2 means nothing.
Daniel Yang
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-17T14:43:21.343Z
There's no second tone for 空...I think you mean the first tone. kong1 also means sky, or something related to the sky.
Ran
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-27T12:08:37.200Z
2018-01-30T23:51:45.953Z
2018-01-30T23:51:45.953Z
Ran
<p>Sure, there is.</p>

<p>Tone and stress in some languages can change the meaning of words in the way that phoneme contrasts do.</p>

<p>In ancient Chinese, some adjectives and nouns would be taken as verb, then their tone ought to fall down.</p>

<p>空气-air its originals is 气. 空 is the adjective component means “empty” which extended in meaning of “sky/under the sky”. It pronounced at the first tone, kōng. 空 in 空调 is the abbreviation of 空气.</p>

<p>空格 its originals is 格-space/room/cell/vacancy/blank. The adjective component ought to fall tone down to be the fourth kòng. It means “to make a space/room/vacancy/blank” (you should take 空 first as a verb to fall down then think about it turns to be a verb-as-adjective without rising up) .</p>

<p>Today, there are also other words with falling-tone-down-rule and all of them carried on as ancient Chinese. Like,</p>

<p>衣, yī, cloth ->衣, yì, wear   </p>

<p>解衣(yī)衣(yì)我 put off his cloth to wear on me</p>

<p>衣(yì)锦还乡 wearing one’s brocade and return one’s native place (with honor)</p>

<p>We often say 有个空(kòng, there is a space/ an empty seat/a vacancy/a blank, and 有空 also means “be free at some moment”) for short in oral. But rarely say 衣(yì) today, some people says 衣(yī)锦还乡.</p>

<p>Tone in ancient Chinese and dialects are variety in contrast with in Mandarin, the standard one of the modern Chinese languages. And this falling-tone-down-rule is the pattern you seek.</p>

<p>It would be familiar with that “abuse(/s/) is to abuse(/z/)”.</p>

<p>(The comments below showed the discussion between me and @XL_at_China who had offered some good advises, of cause, critically. Makes I have to revise some inaccuracy above.)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T01:41:10.510Z
“Tone in ancient Chinese and dialects are more complex than in Mandarin”, what do you mean? actually, Tones of Mandarin are more complex than Wu dialects, Xiang, even Min and Yue, let alone some dialects in northern China.
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T02:11:08.120Z
@XL_at_China I mean they all had deviation of tone (and pronunciation) if we assumed the Mandarin as a standard one of the modern Chinese languages. 入聲 (checked tone) has gone in Mandarin but still in Cantonese. One untrained on checked tone could not hear judging it. So it is correct that I write “complex than in Mandarin”. Your opinion is just another case to prove me right—not only more complex but also easier in some dialects.
Hao FU
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T02:30:57.703Z
入声 is not tone, they all terminated with a stop，and Mandarin and dialects are all equal. What you say about 入声， is totally wrong, and your opinion on complexity is strange.
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T02:55:55.650Z
中国语言学界99%的人是糊涂的，读那些人的书，可得小心。
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:07:40.167Z
@XL_at_ChinaX I don't understand what definition of tone that you have. Would you please tell me how do you translate "四声调类"? I'm sure that we have a divergence focused on it. Check tone is a single syllable ended with stop or plosive, deal? I think you want to say "plosive is not a tone", right? Then tell me how to definite or translate 入声 in English, please?
Hao FU
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:13:17.693Z
You may read the definition by Yuen Ren Chao 赵元任，the pattern of fundamental frequency of a syllable is tone. Don't mix undamental frequency with STOPs which are phoneme
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:14:57.333Z
@XL_at_China I don't understand why do you say " Mandarin and dialects are all equal", either. Don't mind, I mean, two things are equal iff (=if and only if) each part of them are equivalent. What parts of Mandarin and dialects that you think so?
Hao FU
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:20:20.477Z
Have you read works by Edward Sapir, and  done any fieldwork of language? If you have not, my suggestion is try to do some, and  you will know much more about language and linguistics
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:21:40.910Z
Ok, let's stop here, otherwise someone will remind us that it is not a chatting room.
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:23:30.213Z
@XL_at_China Is there any phenomenon that the pattern was changed which of fundamental frequency of a varied syllable with varied phoneme?
Hao FU
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:26:31.047Z
@XL_at_China You offered some good advises upon the comments, I don't think the administrator would minded~
Hao FU
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T03:26:42.200Z
Stop, please. you have not understand the definition of tone and have no enough common knowledge of linguistics, okay, thanks
XL _At_Here_There
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-23T22:29:09.203Z
2018-02-03T06:08:44.877Z
2018-02-03T06:08:44.877Z
Hao FU
<p>And, more broadly, is there a pattern when words like 空 have the same pronunciation but different tones, depending on the word?</p>

<pronunciation><tones>
Why does 空 have a fourth tone reading in 空格, but a first tone reading in 空调, 空气 etc
# Why does 空 have a fourth tone reading in 空格, but a first tone reading in 空调, 空气 etc

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-01-23)

And, more broadly, is there a pattern when words like 空 have the same pronunciation but different tones, depending on the word?

**Tags:** pronunciation, tones


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2018-01-27. Score: 4

Generally, first tone means it is related to air/sky/vaccuum/or stressing its emptiness.

空调-air conditioner，空气-air,天空-sky 航空-aviation 真空-vaccuum，空虚-emptiness

Fourth tone usually means something related to blank/room or space/emptiness, and stressing that it can be used or filled

空格-space 空当-free time or space，填空-fill in the blank
空白-blank/空缺-vacancy/空隙-slot/空出时间
(may not be appropriate translation,sorry)

Another interesting example:

这个房间是空的。 This room is empty.(first tone)

哪个房间空出来？ Which room is available(so that I can use)?(fourth tone)

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: fourth tone uses for interval/capacity/volume (its usage is 'verb'). first tone used for emptiness (its usage is noun).  
> **username_1**: It doesn't have to be verb or noun...I mean, fourth tone words 空白 空缺 are actually adjective. And first tone can also be a verb...e.p. 不要空想。 Don't daydream. or 他还空着肚子。 He is still hungry. I am not a language teacher, so sorry I can't tell you a theory or rule. But  it's actually not that strict in Chinese to distinguish between verb and noun and adj and whatever...So this can't be a shortcut.  
> **username_1**: emmm after think twice, I am not so sure about this examples are noun or verb or adverb...See, I am a Chinese and I am still not sure about that. So please, don't use this as a shortcut...  
> **username_2**: kong4 means making a space, an interval, kong2 means nothing.  
> **username_1**: There's no second tone for 空...I think you mean the first tone. kong1 also means sky, or something related to the sky.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-01-23. Score: 3

Sure, there is.

Tone and stress in some languages can change the meaning of words in the way that phoneme contrasts do.

In ancient Chinese, some adjectives and nouns would be taken as verb, then their tone ought to fall down.

空气-air its originals is 气. 空 is the adjective component means “empty” which extended in meaning of “sky/under the sky”. It pronounced at the first tone, kōng. 空 in 空调 is the abbreviation of 空气.

空格 its originals is 格-space/room/cell/vacancy/blank. The adjective component ought to fall tone down to be the fourth kòng. It means “to make a space/room/vacancy/blank” (you should take 空 first as a verb to fall down then think about it turns to be a verb-as-adjective without rising up) .

Today, there are also other words with falling-tone-down-rule and all of them carried on as ancient Chinese. Like,

衣, yī, cloth ->衣, yì, wear

解衣(yī)衣(yì)我 put off his cloth to wear on me

衣(yì)锦还乡 wearing one’s brocade and return one’s native place (with honor)

We often say 有个空(kòng, there is a space/ an empty seat/a vacancy/a blank, and 有空 also means “be free at some moment”) for short in oral. But rarely say 衣(yì) today, some people says 衣(yī)锦还乡.

Tone in ancient Chinese and dialects are variety in contrast with in Mandarin, the standard one of the modern Chinese languages. And this falling-tone-down-rule is the pattern you seek.

It would be familiar with that “abuse(/s/) is to abuse(/z/)”.

(The comments below showed the discussion between me and @XL\_at\_China who had offered some good advises, of cause, critically. Makes I have to revise some inaccuracy above.)

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: “Tone in ancient Chinese and dialects are more complex than in Mandarin”, what do you mean? actually, Tones of Mandarin are more complex than Wu dialects, Xiang, even Min and Yue, let alone some dialects in northern China.  
> **username_3**: @XL_at_China I mean they all had deviation of tone (and pronunciation) if we assumed the Mandarin as a standard one of the modern Chinese languages. 入聲 (checked tone) has gone in Mandarin but still in Cantonese. One untrained on checked tone could not hear judging it. So it is correct that I write “complex than in Mandarin”. Your opinion is just another case to prove me right—not only more complex but also easier in some dialects.  
> **username_4**: 入声 is not tone, they all terminated with a stop，and Mandarin and dialects are all equal. What you say about 入声， is totally wrong, and your opinion on complexity is strange.  
> **username_4**: 中国语言学界99%的人是糊涂的，读那些人的书，可得小心。  
> **username_3**: @XL_at_ChinaX I don't understand what definition of tone that you have. Would you please tell me how do you translate "四声调类"? I'm sure that we have a divergence focused on it. Check tone is a single syllable ended with stop or plosive, deal? I think you want to say "plosive is not a tone", right? Then tell me how to definite or translate 入声 in English, please?  
> **username_4**: You may read the definition by Yuen Ren Chao 赵元任，the pattern of fundamental frequency of a syllable is tone. Don't mix undamental frequency with STOPs which are phoneme  
> **username_3**: @XL_at_China I don't understand why do you say " Mandarin and dialects are all equal", either. Don't mind, I mean, two things are equal iff (=if and only if) each part of them are equivalent. What parts of Mandarin and dialects that you think so?  
> **username_4**: Have you read works by Edward Sapir, and  done any fieldwork of language? If you have not, my suggestion is try to do some, and  you will know much more about language and linguistics  
> **username_4**: Ok, let's stop here, otherwise someone will remind us that it is not a chatting room.  
> **username_3**: @XL_at_China Is there any phenomenon that the pattern was changed which of fundamental frequency of a varied syllable with varied phoneme?  
> **username_3**: @XL_at_China You offered some good advises upon the comments, I don't think the administrator would minded~  
> **username_4**: Stop, please. you have not understand the definition of tone and have no enough common knowledge of linguistics, okay, thanks  

---

