<p>Although Wade–Giles uses <em>-ien</em>, Zhuyin (1910) uses ㄧㄢ <em>-ian</em>, Gwoyeu Romatzyh (1926) has <em>-ian</em> for the basic form of first tone, Latinxua Sin Wenz (1931) has <em>-ian</em>, and Yale romanization (1943) uses <em>-yan</em>. Likewise, pinyin's usage of <em>-üan</em> instead of <em>-üen</em> for [yɛn] has precedence in Wade–Giles (1892) <em>-üan</em>, Zhuyin ㄩㄢ <em>-üan</em>, Latinxua Sin Wenz <em>yan</em>, and Yale <em>ywan</em>.</p>
<p>Yale romanization in particular was supposed to be designed to be intuitive for English speakers to pronounce, which suggests that its <em>yan</em> and <em>ywan</em> were not pronounced [iɛn] and [yɛn] at the time, but rather [ian] and [yan].</p>
<p>Alternatively, these could be a holdover from Zhuyin. In Zhuyin, pinyin <em>-ian</em> is represented as ㄧㄢ <em>-ian</em>, and couldn't be represented as ㄧㄣ <em>-ien</em>, because that's used for pinyin <em>-in</em>.</p>
<p>Pinyin also draws inspiration from Zhuyin in other ways, such as the tone accent marks and the spelling of bopomofo (rather than *buopuomoufuo).</p>
<p>Perhaps Zhuyin could have created a dedicated <em>-ên</em> symbol, but overall, Zhuyin is somewhat minimalist in its inventory of finals. For example, it could have made sense to have dedicated letters for <em>-in</em> and <em>-ing</em>, rather than representing those sounds with <em>-ien</em> ㄧㄣ and <em>-ieng</em> ㄧㄥ. In fact, the character ㄣ <em>-en</em> is derived from 乚 yǐn, even though <em>yin</em> and <em>en</em> are different syllables.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/qGZrV.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/qGZrV.png" alt="Bopomofo letters" /></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-24T17:15:27.507Z
ㄩㄥ (same as -iong, but written as -üeng) is also a weird peculiarity of Zhuyin.
gnucchi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-24T05:05:55.897Z
2020-09-24T05:38:46.950Z
2020-09-24T05:38:46.950Z
mic
<p>It seems /ian/ can be a valid <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonetic_transcription" rel="nofollow noreferrer">broad transcription</a> of (Pinyin) <strong>ian</strong>, but [iɛn] and [ian] can be allophones. Pinyin is best thought of as broad transcriptions.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-29T13:47:42.717Z
2019-07-29T13:47:42.717Z
Violapterin
<ol>
<li>Some Chinese Pinying scholars indeed say 盐 deflect to yien.</li>
<li>For most chinese, ju,qu,xu can not be pronouced out. Only xü,jü,qü can work. However, writing ü is more labored than u, so u replaces ü when confusion does not occur.</li>
</ol>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-28T17:31:05.540Z
What does "盐 deflect to yien" mean?
mic
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-29T00:54:31.670Z
The sound of 盐 in Putonghua is indeed close to yien, rather than yan. Some scholars have already stated this in published books
cauckf
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-28T00:38:18.447Z
2019-07-28T00:38:18.447Z
cauckf
<p>The the vowel in &quot;an&quot; is pronounced differently depending on the context it occurs in, but the realisations have been analysed differently by different linguists:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Like the mid vowel, the low vowel has several variants, and there is again some disagreement on their surface values. [...]</p>
<p>In (55) I compare four proposals (the underscore in the top row indicates
the location of the low vowel; [a] is front in all transcriptions).</p>
<p>(55)</p>
<div class="s-table-container">
<table class="s-table">
<thead>
<tr>
<th></th>
<th>[ j_n]</th>
<th>[ɥ _n]</th>
<th>[ _i]/[ _n]</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>S. Xu ( 1980)</td>
<td>[æ]</td>
<td>[ɐ]</td>
<td>[a]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>M. Fu ( 1956)</td>
<td>[ɛ]</td>
<td>[ɛ]</td>
<td>[a]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Chao ( 1968)</td>
<td>[ɛ]</td>
<td>[a]</td>
<td>[a]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Y. Lin ( 1989)</td>
<td>[ɛ]</td>
<td>[a]([ɛ])</td>
<td>[a]</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div></blockquote>
<ul>
<li><em>Phonology of Standard Chinese</em>, 2.10.3. <strong>The low vowel</strong></li>
</ul>
<p>While Chao and Xu make a distinction between &quot;-ian&quot; and &quot;-üan&quot; (as represented in Wade-Giles), Fu treats them as the same (as in Zhuyin and Pinyin). The latter treatment is consistent with Chinese rhyme harmony:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Similarly, since [an], [uan], [yan], and [iɛn] rhyme, they ought to have the same surface vowel. It is not necessary to distinguish the low vowels in [an], [uan], [yɐn], and [iæn], as S. Xu does, nor the low vowels in [yan] and [iɛn], as Chao does.</p>
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Ibid., 3.5.2 <strong>Rhyming groups</strong></li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-28T10:37:12.347Z
2021-04-28T10:37:12.347Z
大胳膊雅各布
<p>Putonghua is based on one typical Northern dialect. Maybe now southern and northern people read the same character differently, as in [jεn] vs [jan] [in IPA symbol], but the romanization is based on the northern pronunciation. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-28T11:20:10.700Z
2019-07-28T11:20:10.700Z
xbh
<p>Why are words like 天、面、先、盐 romanized in pinyin as tian, mian, xian, and yan, even though the ending is pronounced [iɛn], and would be better represented as -ien? Likewise, why are words like 卷、全、选、元 romanized as juan, quan, xuan, and yuan, when the final is pronounced [yɛn] and would be better represented as -uen? (at least the way northern Chinese people pronounce it – it seems that southern Chinese people pronounce it as [yan])</p>

<p>Is it that those words actually were pronounced with a [ian] and [yan] final in the past? That doesn't seem like a complete explanation, as Wade-Giles uses -ien, and Wade-Giles is from 1892 (although it does use -üan and not -üen).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-28T03:10:11.737Z
Simply different design, many writing system/language has more than one romanization/latin-based writing solution
炸鱼薯条德里克
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-28T12:35:28.007Z
This is not an answer, but please note that pinyin **-en** (本、恩、etc) corresponds to **/-ən/** and not **/-ɛn/**. Basically, whatever combinations of letters you try to use for that rime, you will run into inconsistencies with some other established rime.
dROOOze
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-28T23:24:54.143Z
Before you rail at pinyin, look up a poem called "The Chaos" from Gerard Nolst Trenité and rather rail at English!
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-29T13:54:00.583Z
@droooze Pinyin already has a rule that -iê /iɛ/ is written -ie, so it wouldn't add another inconsistency to have -iên /iɛn/ → -ien.
mic
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-29T14:04:33.593Z
@Pedroski aɪ noʊ, ɪf ˈoʊnli wi kʊd ɹid ænd ɹaɪt ˈɛvɹiθɪŋ ɪn IPA
mic
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-29T14:14:31.283Z
@MiCl I'm not concerned about *adding* an inconsistency with any proposal, rather does the proposal *remove* an inconsistency?
dROOOze
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-24T05:47:26.507Z
Instead of having two inconsistencies (1. -ian is pronounced [iɛn] instead of [ian]. 2. -ie is pronounced [iɛ] instead of [iə]), we could have just one inconsistency (1. -e following -i is pronounced [ɛ] instead of [ə].)
mic
<pinyin>
Why -ian instead of -ien and -üan instead of -üen?
# Why -ian instead of -ien and -üan instead of -üen?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-07-27)

Why are words like 天、面、先、盐 romanized in pinyin as tian, mian, xian, and yan, even though the ending is pronounced [iɛn], and would be better represented as -ien? Likewise, why are words like 卷、全、选、元 romanized as juan, quan, xuan, and yuan, when the final is pronounced [yɛn] and would be better represented as -uen? (at least the way northern Chinese people pronounce it – it seems that southern Chinese people pronounce it as [yan])

Is it that those words actually were pronounced with a [ian] and [yan] final in the past? That doesn't seem like a complete explanation, as Wade-Giles uses -ien, and Wade-Giles is from 1892 (although it does use -üan and not -üen).

**Tags:** pinyin

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Simply different design, many writing system/language has more than one romanization/latin-based writing solution  
> **username_2**: This is not an answer, but please note that pinyin **-en** (本、恩、etc) corresponds to **/-ən/** and not **/-ɛn/**. Basically, whatever combinations of letters you try to use for that rime, you will run into inconsistencies with some other established rime.  
> **username_3**: Before you rail at pinyin, look up a poem called "The Chaos" from Gerard Nolst Trenité and rather rail at English!  
> **username_0**: @username_2 Pinyin already has a rule that -iê /iɛ/ is written -ie, so it wouldn't add another inconsistency to have -iên /iɛn/ → -ien.  
> **username_0**: @username_3 aɪ noʊ, ɪf ˈoʊnli wi kʊd ɹid ænd ɹaɪt ˈɛvɹiθɪŋ ɪn IPA  
> **username_2**: @MiCl I'm not concerned about *adding* an inconsistency with any proposal, rather does the proposal *remove* an inconsistency?  
> **username_0**: Instead of having two inconsistencies (1. -ian is pronounced [iɛn] instead of [ian]. 2. -ie is pronounced [iɛ] instead of [iə]), we could have just one inconsistency (1. -e following -i is pronounced [ɛ] instead of [ə].)  

---

## 5 answers

### Answer by username_0 on 2020-09-24. Score: 3

Although Wade–Giles uses *-ien*, Zhuyin (1910) uses ㄧㄢ *-ian*, Gwoyeu Romatzyh (1926) has *-ian* for the basic form of first tone, Latinxua Sin Wenz (1931) has *-ian*, and Yale romanization (1943) uses *-yan*. Likewise, pinyin's usage of *-üan* instead of *-üen* for [yɛn] has precedence in Wade–Giles (1892) *-üan*, Zhuyin ㄩㄢ *-üan*, Latinxua Sin Wenz *yan*, and Yale *ywan*.

Yale romanization in particular was supposed to be designed to be intuitive for English speakers to pronounce, which suggests that its *yan* and *ywan* were not pronounced [iɛn] and [yɛn] at the time, but rather [ian] and [yan].

Alternatively, these could be a holdover from Zhuyin. In Zhuyin, pinyin *-ian* is represented as ㄧㄢ *-ian*, and couldn't be represented as ㄧㄣ *-ien*, because that's used for pinyin *-in*.

Pinyin also draws inspiration from Zhuyin in other ways, such as the tone accent marks and the spelling of bopomofo (rather than \*buopuomoufuo).

Perhaps Zhuyin could have created a dedicated *-ên* symbol, but overall, Zhuyin is somewhat minimalist in its inventory of finals. For example, it could have made sense to have dedicated letters for *-in* and *-ing*, rather than representing those sounds with *-ien* ㄧㄣ and *-ieng* ㄧㄥ. In fact, the character ㄣ *-en* is derived from 乚 yǐn, even though *yin* and *en* are different syllables.

[![Bopomofo letters](https://i.sstatic.net/qGZrV.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/qGZrV.png)

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: ㄩㄥ (same as -iong, but written as -üeng) is also a weird peculiarity of Zhuyin.  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2019-07-29. Score: 1

It seems /ian/ can be a valid [broad transcription](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonetic_transcription) of (Pinyin) **ian**, but [iɛn] and [ian] can be allophones. Pinyin is best thought of as broad transcriptions.


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2019-07-28. Score: 0

1. Some Chinese Pinying scholars indeed say 盐 deflect to yien.
2. For most chinese, ju,qu,xu can not be pronouced out. Only xü,jü,qü can work. However, writing ü is more labored than u, so u replaces ü when confusion does not occur.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: What does "盐 deflect to yien" mean?  
> **username_6**: The sound of 盐 in Putonghua is indeed close to yien, rather than yan. Some scholars have already stated this in published books  

---

### Answer by username_7 on 2021-04-28. Score: 0

The the vowel in "an" is pronounced differently depending on the context it occurs in, but the realisations have been analysed differently by different linguists:

> Like the mid vowel, the low vowel has several variants, and there is again some disagreement on their surface values. [...]
>
> In (55) I compare four proposals (the underscore in the top row indicates
> the location of the low vowel; [a] is front in all transcriptions).
>
> (55)
>
> |  | [ j\_n] | [ɥ \_n] | [ \_i]/[ \_n] |
> | --- | --- | --- | --- |
> | S. Xu ( 1980) | [æ] | [ɐ] | [a] |
> | M. Fu ( 1956) | [ɛ] | [ɛ] | [a] |
> | Chao ( 1968) | [ɛ] | [a] | [a] |
> | Y. Lin ( 1989) | [ɛ] | [a]([ɛ]) | [a] |

* *Phonology of Standard Chinese*, 2.10.3. **The low vowel**

While Chao and Xu make a distinction between "-ian" and "-üan" (as represented in Wade-Giles), Fu treats them as the same (as in Zhuyin and Pinyin). The latter treatment is consistent with Chinese rhyme harmony:

> Similarly, since [an], [uan], [yan], and [iɛn] rhyme, they ought to have the same surface vowel. It is not necessary to distinguish the low vowels in [an], [uan], [yɐn], and [iæn], as S. Xu does, nor the low vowels in [yan] and [iɛn], as Chao does.

* Ibid., 3.5.2 **Rhyming groups**


---

### Answer by username_8 on 2019-07-28. Score: 0

Putonghua is based on one typical Northern dialect. Maybe now southern and northern people read the same character differently, as in [jεn] vs [jan] [in IPA symbol], but the romanization is based on the northern pronunciation.


---

