<p>They should be the same. It is just differences in notation. [ər] is commonly used by Sinologists, while [ɚ] is actual IPA.</p>

<p>In the Beijing dialect (and standard Mandarin), 包儿 should be pronounced as something like [paʊɻ] (probably written by Sinologists as [paur]). It looks like you're looking at something like Sichuanese, where 包儿 is pronounced as [pɚ].</p>

<p>Take a look at the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erhua" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia article</a> on erhua for more details.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-24T03:02:51.110Z
What is the term of this commonly used notation by Sinologists?
Mou某
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-24T03:32:06.940Z
@user3306356 It's just a modified version of IPA used by many Chinese scholars. Books using this type of notation would just call this IPA (broad transcription).
justinrleung
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-22T21:18:02.333Z
2017-03-22T21:18:02.333Z
justinrleung
<p>NO, [ɚ][ər] are interchangeable in the case of (儿化) er-hua because 儿 comes first. In other case, when 儿 comes last, then they are interchangeable, for instance, 包儿，花儿。</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-18T14:46:09.670Z
2017-03-18T14:46:09.670Z
Atmega 328
<p>The first:
[ɚ]=[ər]=[ə^ɹ(as e^x )] [ər] for print convenience.
The second:
包儿 is [paur]</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-18T11:32:51.127Z
2017-03-18T11:32:51.127Z
Berkeley Jones
<p>I've got different resources doing different things for er-hua, e.g.:</p>

<p><strong>包儿</strong></p>

<p>resource material #1</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>[pər]</p>
</blockquote>

<p>resource material #2</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>[pɚ]</p>
</blockquote>

<p>is [ɚ] and [ər] interchangeable for (儿化) er-hua?</p>

<p>I would hazard to guess that [ər] is just a lazy [ɚ].</p>

<writing>
Are [ɚ] and [ər] interchangeable for (儿化) er-hua?
# Are [ɚ] and [ər] interchangeable for (儿化) er-hua?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-03-07)

I've got different resources doing different things for er-hua, e.g.:

**包儿**

resource material #1

> [pər]

resource material #2

> [pɚ]

is [ɚ] and [ər] interchangeable for (儿化) er-hua?

I would hazard to guess that [ər] is just a lazy [ɚ].

**Tags:** writing


---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-03-22. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

They should be the same. It is just differences in notation. [ər] is commonly used by Sinologists, while [ɚ] is actual IPA.

In the Beijing dialect (and standard Mandarin), 包儿 should be pronounced as something like [paʊɻ] (probably written by Sinologists as [paur]). It looks like you're looking at something like Sichuanese, where 包儿 is pronounced as [pɚ].

Take a look at the [Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erhua) on erhua for more details.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: What is the term of this commonly used notation by Sinologists?  
> **username_1**: @user3306356 It's just a modified version of IPA used by many Chinese scholars. Books using this type of notation would just call this IPA (broad transcription).  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2017-03-18. Score: 0

NO, [ɚ][ər] are interchangeable in the case of (儿化) er-hua because 儿 comes first. In other case, when 儿 comes last, then they are interchangeable, for instance, 包儿，花儿。


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2017-03-18. Score: -1

The first:
[ɚ]=[ər]=[ə^ɹ(as e^x )] [ər] for print convenience.
The second:
包儿 is [paur]


---

