<ol>
<li><p>The obligate tone sandhi for consecutive third-tones are rendered as follows:</p>
<div class="s-table-container">
<table class="s-table">
<thead>
<tr>
<th style="text-align: center;">Phrase</th>
<th style="text-align: center;">Before</th>
<th style="text-align: center;">After</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>很有品味</code></td>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>3334</code></td>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>2234</code></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>很有才能</code></td>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>3322</code></td>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>2322</code></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>很有辦法</code></td>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>3343</code></td>
<td style="text-align: center;"><code>2343</code></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p>In particular, the <code>333 -&gt; 223</code> change in <code>很有品味</code> is explained <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43255/27428">here</a>.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Possible facultative tone sandhi in <code>很有</code> in quick speech include:</p>
<ul>
<li>For all <code>很有XX</code> examples: blurring of tones (<em>quasi</em>-neutral, as explained <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43256/27428">here</a>; to avoid confusion, let us not use the dotted tone letters normally reserved for real neutral tones, and let the one-lettered pitches reflect their brevity) in the presence of stress on <code>XX</code> out of contextual need (as explained <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43564/27428">here</a>).</li>
<li>For <code>很有品味</code>: a blurry rising trend for consecutive <em>de facto</em> second-tones, as explained in the <code>葡萄牙</code> example <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43290/27428">here</a> (perhaps something like <code>˦ ˥</code>).</li>
<li>For <code>很有才能</code> and <code>很有辦法</code>: a blurry dropping trend (perhaps something like <code>˧ ˩</code>).</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><p>What you seem to be implying is that the teacher pronounced <code>很有</code>, in quick speech, with a go-up-and-down pitch change, i.e. <code>˨ ˧˩</code>. Now, is this possible? If you are absolutely sure there is no mishearing or mislabelling on your part, then I think the teacher did not conform to standardised Putonghua well (i.e., this is a mispronunciation on their part). However, I am not entirely sure about your labelling <code>有</code> with two tone letters – is it worth that many, especially when it is expected to be blurred over? After all, we are treading on very thin ice here – it is very hard to capture every nuance of <em>facultative</em> tone sandhi. Unless I hear the teacher's audio, or an audio from an online source (e.g. YouTube) that you believe is close enough to the teacher's, I cannot provide a definite answer.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<hr />
<p><strong>Edit</strong></p>
<p>Now that we have made clear this was normal-paced, I am starting to suspect this is similar to the case of <code>比較</code>, where some people say it as <code>(bǐ jiǎo -&gt;) bí jiǎo</code> instead of the conventional <code>bǐ jiào</code> (see <a href="https://www.chinese-forums.com/forums/topic/20926-non-dictionary-pronunciations/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a> for more examples). The link contains examples of non-dictionary readings.</p>
<p>I also found evidence where <code>有</code> may be pronounced as <code>yòu</code>: see <a href="https://pedia.cloud.edu.tw/Entry/Detail/?title=%E6%9C%89" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. Its use is relatively limited, i.e., when acting as a loan word (通假) for <code>又</code> in classical Chinese*, or when denoting numerical remainders (e.g. <code>七十有七人</code>), both of which are not the applicable to <code>很有</code>. However, 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本 claims <code>yòu</code> and <code>yǒu</code> are interchangeable (I for one think this is rarely practised in real life). At any rate, the teacher's choice of pronunciation is not mainstream. I also believe this is caused more by the polyphony of <code>有</code> than facultative tone sandhi during quick speech.</p>
<p>* Also supported by 余培英（2012）《多音字學習手冊》。北京：商務。
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/R6KHd.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/R6KHd.jpg" alt="scan" /></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T15:52:44.513Z
It was normal-paced or perhaps slightly leisurely speech; neither especially fast nor especially slow. I think I heard ˨ ˧˩ (2 31) or ˨ ˦˩ (2 41), in several example sentences. The stress was on the second part, the 有; the first part, the 很, was short and unstressed. // I do not have any audio for this - it may just be one of life's mysteries... Thank you for your help.
goPlayerJuggler
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T15:59:15.050Z
Another possible explanation is dialectal influence - do you know the background of the teacher? I really cannot think of any justification why it should be pronounced like so in standard Putonghua. If that be the case, I am not too familiar with dialects, unfortunately.
L Parker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T16:08:29.667Z
I do not know the teacher's background. // I was not aware of the distinction between dotted tone letters (꜍꜎꜏꜐꜑) and the "linked" ones (˥ ˦ ˧ ˨ ˩). I was using the dotted tone letters as replacements for the undotted ones as I find the way the adjacent linked tone letters combine together on my PC confusing. It appears this was a mistake. I think I should perhaps edit my question to use linked tone letters; I can learn to read the adjacent "linked" tone letters.
goPlayerJuggler
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T16:41:25.480Z
I edited my answer which contains the suggestion that maybe this has nothing to do with tonal changes.
L Parker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T17:25:23.983Z
Could it be just a bit of overemphasis by the speaker on the slight drop that is inherent to the third tone? That is, as far as I can recall, the semi-third tone is not truly flat, but does drop slightly (21?). The speaker could have been just emphasizing the 有 in the example sentences or doing something that emphasizes/separates out the word right after 有 (equivalent to a slight pause in English). Could something like this make the semi-third tone come out with a stronger drop than normal?
2ndQuantized
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T17:34:16.463Z
@2ndQuantized that seems plausible to me.
goPlayerJuggler
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T22:09:38.763Z
@2ndQuantized that wouldn’t explain the case for 很有品味.
L Parker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-21T18:03:00.790Z
@LParker If there was a sufficient pause between 很有 and 品味 or sufficient emphasis on 很有, would native speakers tend to not transition such a third tone to a second tone because it naturally feels more like a break rather than being continuous (even though it is more so something in between)? I don't know the answer and it may be speaker- and situation-dependent, but I know that emphasis or listing examples can cause interesting sound changes in English and I am wondering if this is the underlying reason.
2ndQuantized
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-08-09T00:57:29.723Z
@2ndQuantized For 很有品味, both 2234 and 2334 are possible.
joehua
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T15:30:38.090Z
2021-04-16T16:46:23.803Z
2021-04-16T16:46:23.803Z
L Parker
<p>In an intermediate level class (B1 or B2 level perhaps / around HSK 5 or 6), several example sentences were used to illustrate some vocabulary. The teacher, a native speaker with fairly standard pronunciation as far as I can tell, was not concentrating on pronunciation or tones. I do not remember them exactly, but they all had a structure similar to:</p>
<p>这个人<strong>很有</strong>X</p>
<p>X could be 品味, or 才能, or 办法 or some other words.</p>
<p>In any case I was struck by hearing  很有 read in these sentences as if the 有 was like a fourth tone. Also I am pretty sure that 很 was quite low; nothing like the second tone that would be expected by consecutive third tones. Which surprised me a bit.</p>
<p>Using <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_letter#Numerical_values" rel="nofollow noreferrer">tone letter notation</a>, 很有 sounded like this:</p>
<ul>
<li>hen (꜐ or ꜑ / 2 or 1 ); short; rather like a neutral tone (轻声).</li>
<li>you (꜏꜑ / 31 or ꜎꜑ / 41); stressed perceptibly more than 很</li>
</ul>
<p>I do not think I have seen anything describing this intonation/pronunciation. I would like to know if it has been described anywhere / if it is a commonly observed phenomenon. For 很, perhaps it could be a case of &quot;Quasi-neutral tones in speech to contrast intonation.&quot; as mentioned in <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43256/2508">this answer</a>? But for 有 sounding like a fourth tone, I never saw that described anywhere.</p>
<p>So my question is: what is going on with the intonation/tones for 很有 in this sort of sentence?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-16T15:13:58.540Z
There are several pitches for neutral tone, depending on the tone before. Neutral tone can be rather high-sounding (e.g. 椅子 曲子 嫂子).
很有 is generally pronounced with rising tone (tone 2) and a low tone (tone 3) because of [tone sandhi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_sandhi).
Michaelyus
<pronunciation><tones><sandhi>
很有 pronounced rather like hěnyòu instead of hěnyǒu
# 很有 pronounced rather like hěnyòu instead of hěnyǒu

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-04-16)

In an intermediate level class (B1 or B2 level perhaps / around HSK 5 or 6), several example sentences were used to illustrate some vocabulary. The teacher, a native speaker with fairly standard pronunciation as far as I can tell, was not concentrating on pronunciation or tones. I do not remember them exactly, but they all had a structure similar to:

这个人**很有**X

X could be 品味, or 才能, or 办法 or some other words.

In any case I was struck by hearing 很有 read in these sentences as if the 有 was like a fourth tone. Also I am pretty sure that 很 was quite low; nothing like the second tone that would be expected by consecutive third tones. Which surprised me a bit.

Using [tone letter notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_letter#Numerical_values), 很有 sounded like this:

* hen (꜐ or ꜑ / 2 or 1 ); short; rather like a neutral tone (轻声).
* you (꜏꜑ / 31 or ꜎꜑ / 41); stressed perceptibly more than 很

I do not think I have seen anything describing this intonation/pronunciation. I would like to know if it has been described anywhere / if it is a commonly observed phenomenon. For 很, perhaps it could be a case of "Quasi-neutral tones in speech to contrast intonation." as mentioned in [this answer](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43256/2508)? But for 有 sounding like a fourth tone, I never saw that described anywhere.

So my question is: what is going on with the intonation/tones for 很有 in this sort of sentence?

**Tags:** pronunciation, tones, sandhi

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: There are several pitches for neutral tone, depending on the tone before. Neutral tone can be rather high-sounding (e.g. 椅子 曲子 嫂子). 很有 is generally pronounced with rising tone (tone 2) and a low tone (tone 3) because of [tone sandhi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_sandhi).  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-04-16. Score: 2

1. The obligate tone sandhi for consecutive third-tones are rendered as follows:

   | Phrase | Before | After |
   | --- | --- | --- |
   | `很有品味` | `3334` | `2234` |
   | `很有才能` | `3322` | `2322` |
   | `很有辦法` | `3343` | `2343` |

   In particular, the `333 -> 223` change in `很有品味` is explained [here](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43255/27428).
2. Possible facultative tone sandhi in `很有` in quick speech include:

   * For all `很有XX` examples: blurring of tones (*quasi*-neutral, as explained [here](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43256/27428); to avoid confusion, let us not use the dotted tone letters normally reserved for real neutral tones, and let the one-lettered pitches reflect their brevity) in the presence of stress on `XX` out of contextual need (as explained [here](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43564/27428)).
   * For `很有品味`: a blurry rising trend for consecutive *de facto* second-tones, as explained in the `葡萄牙` example [here](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/a/43290/27428) (perhaps something like `˦ ˥`).
   * For `很有才能` and `很有辦法`: a blurry dropping trend (perhaps something like `˧ ˩`).
3. What you seem to be implying is that the teacher pronounced `很有`, in quick speech, with a go-up-and-down pitch change, i.e. `˨ ˧˩`. Now, is this possible? If you are absolutely sure there is no mishearing or mislabelling on your part, then I think the teacher did not conform to standardised Putonghua well (i.e., this is a mispronunciation on their part). However, I am not entirely sure about your labelling `有` with two tone letters – is it worth that many, especially when it is expected to be blurred over? After all, we are treading on very thin ice here – it is very hard to capture every nuance of *facultative* tone sandhi. Unless I hear the teacher's audio, or an audio from an online source (e.g. YouTube) that you believe is close enough to the teacher's, I cannot provide a definite answer.

---

**Edit**

Now that we have made clear this was normal-paced, I am starting to suspect this is similar to the case of `比較`, where some people say it as `(bǐ jiǎo ->) bí jiǎo` instead of the conventional `bǐ jiào` (see [here](https://www.chinese-forums.com/forums/topic/20926-non-dictionary-pronunciations/) for more examples). The link contains examples of non-dictionary readings.

I also found evidence where `有` may be pronounced as `yòu`: see [here](https://pedia.cloud.edu.tw/Entry/Detail/?title=%E6%9C%89). Its use is relatively limited, i.e., when acting as a loan word (通假) for `又` in classical Chinese\*, or when denoting numerical remainders (e.g. `七十有七人`), both of which are not the applicable to `很有`. However, 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本 claims `yòu` and `yǒu` are interchangeable (I for one think this is rarely practised in real life). At any rate, the teacher's choice of pronunciation is not mainstream. I also believe this is caused more by the polyphony of `有` than facultative tone sandhi during quick speech.

\* Also supported by 余培英（2012）《多音字學習手冊》。北京：商務。
[![scan](https://i.sstatic.net/R6KHd.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/R6KHd.jpg)

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: It was normal-paced or perhaps slightly leisurely speech; neither especially fast nor especially slow. I think I heard ˨ ˧˩ (2 31) or ˨ ˦˩ (2 41), in several example sentences. The stress was on the second part, the 有; the first part, the 很, was short and unstressed. // I do not have any audio for this - it may just be one of life's mysteries... Thank you for your help.  
> **username_2**: Another possible explanation is dialectal influence - do you know the background of the teacher? I really cannot think of any justification why it should be pronounced like so in standard Putonghua. If that be the case, I am not too familiar with dialects, unfortunately.  
> **username_0**: I do not know the teacher's background. // I was not aware of the distinction between dotted tone letters (꜍꜎꜏꜐꜑) and the "linked" ones (˥ ˦ ˧ ˨ ˩). I was using the dotted tone letters as replacements for the undotted ones as I find the way the adjacent linked tone letters combine together on my PC confusing. It appears this was a mistake. I think I should perhaps edit my question to use linked tone letters; I can learn to read the adjacent "linked" tone letters.  
> **username_2**: I edited my answer which contains the suggestion that maybe this has nothing to do with tonal changes.  
> **username_3**: Could it be just a bit of overemphasis by the speaker on the slight drop that is inherent to the third tone? That is, as far as I can recall, the semi-third tone is not truly flat, but does drop slightly (21?). The speaker could have been just emphasizing the 有 in the example sentences or doing something that emphasizes/separates out the word right after 有 (equivalent to a slight pause in English). Could something like this make the semi-third tone come out with a stronger drop than normal?  
> **username_0**: @username_3 that seems plausible to me.  
> **username_2**: @username_3 that wouldn’t explain the case for 很有品味.  
> **username_3**: @username_2 If there was a sufficient pause between 很有 and 品味 or sufficient emphasis on 很有, would native speakers tend to not transition such a third tone to a second tone because it naturally feels more like a break rather than being continuous (even though it is more so something in between)? I don't know the answer and it may be speaker- and situation-dependent, but I know that emphasis or listing examples can cause interesting sound changes in English and I am wondering if this is the underlying reason.  
> **username_4**: @username_3 For 很有品味, both 2234 and 2334 are possible.  

---

