written cantonese is almost the same as written mandarin.
the problem is that spoken cantonese is not much like written cantonese. it's a combination of pronunciation, accent, idioms, and sentence structures. best advice is for speakers of mandarin or cantonese to learn the other language like a new one. (there's also the written form of spoken cantonese, written spoken cantonese, if you will, that is the written representation of spoken cantonese using a set of special characters of sinitic origin).
if you are from guangdong you will learn all systems of language - written mandarin, spoken mandarin, written cantonese, and spoken cantonese. some hongkongers don't ever learn spoken mandarin correctly, getting them to speak mandarin in front of a camera is always a source of good laughs.
those who argue that cantonese are mutually intelligible with mandarin will typically use cantonese newspapers and official documents as evidence. those who argue that they aren't will point to spoken and colloquial cantonese as evidence. the objective point of view is to accept that cantonese as we know it exists as two separate languages used for two different purposes.
the problem is that spoken cantonese is not much like written cantonese. it's a combination of pronunciation, accent, idioms, and sentence structures. best advice is for speakers of mandarin or cantonese to learn the other language like a new one. (there's also the written form of spoken cantonese, written spoken cantonese, if you will, that is the written representation of spoken cantonese using a set of special characters of sinitic origin).
if you are from guangdong you will learn all systems of language - written mandarin, spoken mandarin, written cantonese, and spoken cantonese. some hongkongers don't ever learn spoken mandarin correctly, getting them to speak mandarin in front of a camera is always a source of good laughs.
those who argue that cantonese are mutually intelligible with mandarin will typically use cantonese newspapers and official documents as evidence. those who argue that they aren't will point to spoken and colloquial cantonese as evidence. the objective point of view is to accept that cantonese as we know it exists as two separate languages used for two different purposes.