text:
Bernardo Bertolucci

Bernardo Bertolucci OMRI (16 March 1941 – 26 November 2018) was an Italian film director and screenwriter with a career that spanned 50 years. Considered one of the greatest directors in Italian cinema, Bertolucci's work achieved international acclaim. With The Last Emperor (1987) he became the first Italian filmmaker to win the Academy Award for Best Director, and he received many other accolades including a BAFTA Award, a César Award, two Golden Globes, a Golden Lion in 2007, and an Honorary Palme d'Or at Cannes in 2011.

A protégé of Pier Paolo Pasolini, Bertolucci made his directorial debut at 22. His second film, Before the Revolution (1964), earned strong international reviews and has since gained classic status, being called a "masterpiece of Italian cinema" by Film4. His 1970 film The Conformist, an adaptation of the Alberto Moravia novel, is considered a classic of international cinema, and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay and the prestigious Berlin Golden Bear. His 1972 erotic drama Last Tango in Paris was controversial due to its rape scene and comments made by actress Maria Schneider about her treatment on set. Bertolucci's later films such as the historical epic 1900 (1976), the family drama La Luna (1979), and the darkly comedic Tragedy of a Ridiculous Man (1981), were also controversial but acclaimed.

His 1987 film The Last Emperor, a biopic of Chinese monarch Puyi, was a critical and commercial success, earning rave reviews and sweeping the 60th Academy Awards (including Best Picture and Best Director). He followed its success with two more films in his "Oriental Trilogy" – The Sheltering Sky, an adaptation of the novel of the same name, and Little Buddha, a Buddhist religious epic. His 1996 film, Stealing Beauty, brought him his second of two Palme d'Or nominations. He continued directing well into the 21st century, releasing his final film, Me and You, in 2012.

Bertolucci's films often deal with themes of politics, sexuality, history, class conflict, and social taboos; and his style has influenced several filmmakers. Several of his films have appeared on lists of the greatest films of all time.

Early life
Bertolucci was born in the Italian city of Parma, in the region of Emilia-Romagna. He was the elder son of Ninetta (Giovanardi), a teacher, and Attilio Bertolucci, who was a poet, a reputed art historian, anthologist and film critic. His mother was born in Australia, to an Italian father and an Australian mother (of Irish and Scottish descent).

Having been raised in an artistic environment, Bertolucci began writing at the age of 15, and soon after received several prestigious literary prizes, including the Premio Viareggio for his first book. His father's background helped his career: the elder Bertolucci had helped the Italian filmmaker Pier Paolo Pasolini publish his first novel, and Pasolini reciprocated by hiring Bertolucci as his first assistant in Rome on Accattone (1961).

Bertolucci had one brother, the theatre director and playwright Giuseppe (27 February 1947 – 16 June 2012). His cousin was the film producer Giovanni Bertolucci (24 June 1940 – 17 February 2005), with whom he worked on a number of films.

Directorial breakthrough
Bertolucci initially wished to become a poet like his father. With this goal in mind, he attended the Faculty of Modern Literature of the University of Rome from 1958 to 1961, where his film career as an assistant director to Pasolini began. Shortly after, Bertolucci left the university without graduating. In 1962, at the age of 22, he directed his first feature film, produced by Tonino Cervi with a screenplay by Pasolini, called La commare secca (1962). The film is a murder mystery, following a prostitute's homicide. Bertolucci uses flashbacks to piece together the crime and the person who committed it. The film which shortly followed was his acclaimed Before the Revolution (Prima della rivoluzione, 1964).

The boom of Italian cinema, which gave Bertolucci his start, slowed in the 1970s as directors were forced to co-produce their films with several of the American, Swedish, French, and German companies and actors due to the effects of the global economic recession on the Italian film industry.

Bertolucci caused controversy in 1972 with the film Last Tango in Paris, starring Marlon Brando, Maria Schneider, Jean-Pierre Léaud and Massimo Girotti. The film presents Brando's character, Paul, as he copes with his wife's suicide by emotionally and physically dominating a young woman, Jeanne (Schneider). The depictions of Schneider, then 19 years old, have been criticized as exploitive. In one scene, Paul anally rapes Jeanne using butter as a lubricant. The use of butter was not in the script; Bertolucci and Brando had discussed it, but they did not tell Schneider. She said in 2007 that she had cried "real tears" during the scene and had felt humiliated and "a little raped". In 2013 Bertolucci said that he had withheld the information from Schneider to generate a real "reaction of frustration and rage". Brando alleged that Bertolucci had wanted the characters to have real sex, but Brando and Schneider both said it was simulated. In 2016 Bertolucci released a statement where he clarified that Schneider had known of the violence to be depicted in the scene, but had not been told about the use of butter.

Following the “media glare” and her fame after the film's release, Schneider became a drug addict and suicidal. Criminal proceedings were brought against Bertolucci in Italy for obscenity; the film was sequestered by the censorship commission and all copies were ordered destroyed. An Italian court revoked Bertolucci's civil rights for five years and gave him a four-month suspended prison sentence. In 1978 the Appeals Court of Bologna ordered three copies of the film to be preserved in the national film library with the stipulation that they could not be viewed, until Bertolucci was later able to re-submit it for general distribution with no cuts.

Bertolucci increased his fame with his next few films, from 1900 (1976), an epic depiction of the struggles of farmers in Emilia-Romagna from the beginning of the 20th century up to World War II with an international cast (Robert De Niro, Gérard Depardieu, Donald Sutherland, Sterling Hayden, Burt Lancaster, Dominique Sanda) to La Luna, set in Rome and in Emilia-Romagna, in which Bertolucci deals with the thorny issue of drugs and incest, and finally La tragedia di un uomo ridicolo (1981), with Ugo Tognazzi.

He then wrote two screenplays based on Dashiell Hammett's Red Harvest. He hoped this would be his first film set in America, but nothing came of it.

The Last Emperor and later career
In 1987, Bertolucci directed the epic The Last Emperor, a biographical film telling the life story of Aisin-Gioro Puyi, the last emperor of China. The film was independently produced by British producer Jeremy Thomas, with whom Bertolucci worked almost exclusively from then on. The film was independently financed and three years in the making. Bertolucci, who co-wrote the film with Mark Peploe, won the Academy Award for Best Director. The film uses Puyi's life as a mirror that reflects China's passage from feudalism through revolution to its current state.

At the 60th Academy Awards, The Last Emperor won all nine Oscars for which it was nominated: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing, Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Music, Original Score and Best Sound.

The Last Emperor was the first feature film ever authorized by the government of the People's Republic of China to film in the Forbidden City. Bertolucci had proposed the film to the Chinese government as one of two possible projects. The other film was La Condition Humaine by André Malraux. The Chinese government preferred The Last Emperor.

After The Last Emperor, The Sheltering Sky and Little Buddha, Bertolucci returned to Italy to film, and to revisit his old themes but with varying results from both critics and the public. He filmed Stealing Beauty in 1996, then The Dreamers in 2003, which describes the political passions and sexual revolutions of two siblings in Paris in 1968.

In 2007, Bertolucci received the Golden Lion Award at the Venice Film Festival for his life's work, and in 2011 he also received the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival.

In 2012, his final film, Me and You was screened out of competition at the 2012 Cannes Film Festival and was released early in 2013 in the UK. The film is an adaptation of Niccolò Ammaniti's young adult book Me and You. The screenplay for the movie was written by Bertolucci, Umberto Contarello and Niccolò Ammaniti. Bertolucci originally intended to shoot the film in 3D but was forced to abandon this plan due to cost.

Bertolucci appeared on the Radio Four programme Start the Week on 22 April 2013, and on Front Row on 29 April 2013, where he chose La Dolce Vita, a film directed by Federico Fellini, for the "Cultural Exchange".

In the spring of 2018, in an interview with the Italian edition of Vanity Fair, Bertolucci announced that he was preparing a new film. He stated, "The theme will be love, let's call it that. In reality, the theme is communication and therefore also incommunicability. The favorite subject of Michelangelo Antonioni and the condition I found myself facing when I moved on from my films for the few, those of the sixties, to a broader cinema ready to meet a large audience."

As a screenwriter, producer and actor
Bertolucci wrote many screenplays, both for his own films and for films directed by others, two of which he also produced.

He was an actor in the film Golem: The Spirit of Exile, directed by Amos Gitai in 1992.

Politics and personal beliefs
Bertolucci was an atheist.

Bertolucci's films are often very political. He was a professed Marxist and, like Luchino Visconti, who similarly employed many foreign artists during the late 1960s, Bertolucci used his films to express his political views. His political films were preceded by others re-evaluating history. The Conformist (1970) criticised fascism, touched upon the relationship between nationhood and nationalism, as well as issues of popular taste and collective memory, all amid an international plot by Benito Mussolini to assassinate a politically active leftist professor of philosophy in Paris. 1900 also analyses the struggle of Left and Right.

On 27 September 2009, Bertolucci was one of the signatories of the appeal to the Swiss government to release Roman Polanski, who was being held awaiting extradition to the United States.

On Twitter on 24 April 2015, Bertolucci participated in #whomademyclothes, Fashion Revolution's anti-sweatshop campaign commemorating the 2013 Savar building collapse, the deadliest accident in the history of the garment industry.

Bertolucci advocated the practice of Transcendental Meditation: "We want to evoke the present and it is difficult to do it all together, we can only meditate, as in transcendental meditation. One of the most powerful experiences. Either you meditate or watch a good movie, then the two things start to touch ... ".

Death
Bertolucci died of lung cancer in Rome on 26 November 2018, at the age of 77.

Feature film
Producer
 * Sconcerto Rock (1982)
 * Io con te non ci sto più (1983)
 * The Triumph of Love (2001)

Documentary works
Short film

Film

Television

Awards and nominations
Other awards
 * 1997: Honorable Mention at the Locarno International Film Festival
 * 1997: Award special visual sensitivity in directing at Camerimage
 * 1997: Award for collaborating director – director of photography (Vittorio Storaro) at Camerimage
 * 1998: Recognition for free expression by the National Board of Review
 * 1999: Life Time Achievement Award - 30th International Film Festival of India
 * 2007: Golden Lion for his career at the Venice Film Festival
 * 2011: Honorary Palme d'Or at Cannes Film Festival

Honours

 * Grand-Officer of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic of Italy (Rome, 2 June 1988), under proposal of the Council of Ministers.
 * Gold Medal of the Italian Medal of Merit for Culture and Art of Italy (Rome, 21 February 2001). For having been able to combine poetry and great cinema as in the history of Italian cinema. For having known how to make different cultures and worlds dialogue, remaining strongly rooted in the culture of your country. For having been able to represent with passion and courage the political, social and cultural history of the last hundred years.
 * Master's Degree Honoris Causa in History and Criticism of Arts and Performance of the University of Parma (Laurea Magistrale Honoris Causa in Storia e critica delle arti e dello spettacolo). Bernardo Bertolucci is one of the greatest and recognized filmmakers in the world. His cinema is a reference point for entire generations of directors, has thrilled millions of viewers, also arousing extensive cultural debates that have gone well beyond the film industry, and is the subject of significant historical and theoretical studies published in all of the major world languages.

title: Bernardo Bertolucci


text:
536 BC

The year 536 BC was a year of the pre-Julian Roman calendar. In the Roman Empire, it was known as year 218  Ab urbe condita. The denomination 536 BC for this year has been used since the early medieval period, when the Anno Domini calendar era became the prevalent method in Europe for naming years.

Events

 * Phrynaeus is appointed archon of Athens.

Births

 * Min Sun, disciple of Confucius

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: 536 BC


text:
Quantum Hall effect

The quantum Hall effect (or integer quantum Hall effect) is a quantized version of the Hall effect which is observed in two-dimensional electron systems subjected to low temperatures and strong magnetic fields, in which the Hall resistance $R_{xy}$ exhibits steps that take on the quantized values
 * $$ R_{xy} = \frac{V_\text{Hall}}{I_\text{channel}} = \frac{h}{e^2\nu}, $$

where $V_{Hall}$ is the Hall voltage, $I_{channel}$ is the channel current, $e$ is the elementary charge and $h$ is the Planck constant. The divisor $ν$ can take on either integer ($ν = 1, 2, 3,...$) or fractional ($ν = 1⁄3, 2⁄5, 3⁄7, 2⁄3, 3⁄5, 1⁄5, 2⁄9, 3⁄13, 5⁄2, 12⁄5,...$) values. Here, $ν$ is roughly but not exactly equal to the filling factor of Landau levels. The quantum Hall effect is referred to as the integer or fractional quantum Hall effect depending on whether $ν$ is an integer or fraction, respectively.

The striking feature of the integer quantum Hall effect is the persistence of the quantization (i.e. the Hall plateau) as the electron density is varied. Since the electron density remains constant when the Fermi level is in a clean spectral gap, this situation corresponds to one where the Fermi level is an energy with a finite density of states, though these states are localized (see Anderson localization).

The fractional quantum Hall effect is more complicated and still considered an open research problem. Its existence relies fundamentally on electron–electron interactions. In 1988, it was proposed that there was a quantum Hall effect without Landau levels. This quantum Hall effect is referred to as the quantum anomalous Hall (QAH) effect. There is also a new concept of the quantum spin Hall effect which is an analogue of the quantum Hall effect, where spin currents flow instead of charge currents.

Electrical resistance standards
The quantization of the Hall conductance ($$ G_{xy}= 1/R_{xy} $$) has the important property of being exceedingly precise. Actual measurements of the Hall conductance have been found to be integer or fractional multiples of $e^{2}⁄h$ to nearly one part in a billion. It has allowed for the definition of a new practical standard for electrical resistance, based on the resistance quantum given by the von Klitzing constant $R_{K}$. This is named after Klaus von Klitzing, the discoverer of exact quantization. The quantum Hall effect also provides an extremely precise independent determination of the fine-structure constant, a quantity of fundamental importance in quantum electrodynamics.

In 1990, a fixed conventional value $R_{K-90} =$ was defined for use in resistance calibrations worldwide. On 16 November 2018, the 26th meeting of the General Conference on Weights and Measures decided to fix exact values of $h$ (the Planck constant) and $e$ (the elementary charge), superseding the 1990 value with an exact permanent value $R_{K} = h⁄e^{2} =$.

Research status
The fractional quantum hall is considered part of exact quantization. Exact quantization in full generality is not completely understood but it has been explained as a very subtle manifestation of the combination of the principle of gauge invariance together with another symmetry (see Anomalies). The integer quantum hall instead is considered a solved research problem and understood in the scope of TKNN formula and Chern–Simons Lagrangians.

The fractional quantum Hall effect is still considered an open research problem. The fractional quantum Hall effect can be also understood as an integer quantum Hall effect, although not of electrons but of charge–flux composites known as composite fermions. Other models to explain the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect also exists. Currently it is considered an open research problem because no single, confirmed and agreed list of fractional quantum numbers exists, neither a single agreed model to explain all of them, although there are such claims in the scope of composite fermions and Non Abelian Chern–Simons Lagrangians.

History
The MOSFET (metal–oxide–semiconductor field-effect transistor), invented by Mohamed Atalla and Dawon Kahng at Bell Labs in 1959, enabled physicists to study electron behavior in a nearly ideal two-dimensional gas. In a MOSFET, conduction electrons travel in a thin surface layer, and a "gate" voltage controls the number of charge carriers in this layer. This allows researchers to explore quantum effects by operating high-purity MOSFETs at liquid helium temperatures.

The integer quantization of the Hall conductance was originally predicted by University of Tokyo researchers Tsuneya Ando, Yukio Matsumoto and Yasutada Uemura in 1975, on the basis of an approximate calculation which they themselves did not believe to be true. In 1978, the Gakushuin University researchers Jun-ichi Wakabayashi and Shinji Kawaji subsequently observed the effect in experiments carried out on the inversion layer of MOSFETs.

In 1980, Klaus von Klitzing, working at the high magnetic field laboratory in Grenoble with silicon-based MOSFET samples developed by Michael Pepper and Gerhard Dorda, made the unexpected discovery that the Hall resistance was exactly quantized. For this finding, von Klitzing was awarded the 1985 Nobel Prize in Physics. A link between exact quantization and gauge invariance was subsequently proposed by Robert Laughlin, who connected the quantized conductivity to the quantized charge transport in a Thouless charge pump. Most integer quantum Hall experiments are now performed on gallium arsenide heterostructures, although many other semiconductor materials can be used. In 2007, the integer quantum Hall effect was reported in graphene at temperatures as high as room temperature, and in the magnesium zinc oxide ZnO–MgxZn1−xO.

Landau levels
In two dimensions, when classical electrons are subjected to a magnetic field they follow circular cyclotron orbits. When the system is treated quantum mechanically, these orbits are quantized. To determine the values of the energy levels the Schrödinger equation must be solved.

Since the system is subjected to a magnetic field, it has to be introduced as an electromagnetic vector potential in the Schrödinger equation. The system considered is an electron gas that is free to move in the x and y directions, but is tightly confined in the z direction. Then, a magnetic field is applied in the z direction and according to the Landau gauge the electromagnetic vector potential is $$\mathbf{A} = (0, Bx, 0)$$ and the scalar potential is $$\phi=0$$. Thus the Schrödinger equation for a particle of charge $$q$$ and effective mass $$m^*$$ in this system is:
 * $$\left \{ \frac{1}{2m^*} \left [ \mathbf{p}-q\mathbf{A}\right ]^2 + V(z) \right \}\psi(x,y,z)=\varepsilon\psi(x,y,z)$$

where $$\mathbf{p}$$ is the canonical momentum, which is replaced by the operator $$-i\hbar\nabla$$ and $$\varepsilon$$ is the total energy.

To solve this equation it is possible to separate it into two equations since the magnetic field just affects the movement along x and y axes. The total energy becomes then, the sum of two contributions $$\varepsilon = \varepsilon_z + \varepsilon_{xy}$$. The corresponding equations in z axis is:
 * $$\left [- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m^*} {\partial^2\over\partial z^2} + V(z) \right ]u(z)=\varepsilon_zu(z)$$

To simplify things, the solution $$V(z)$$ is considered as an infinite well. Thus the solutions for the z direction are the energies $\varepsilon_z=\frac{n_z^2\pi^2\hbar^2}{2m^*L^2}$, $$n_z=1,2,3...$$ and the wavefunctions are sinusoidal. For the $$x$$ and $$y$$ directions, the solution of the Schrödinger equation can be chosen to be the product of a plane wave in $$y$$-direction with some unknown function of $$x$$, i.e., $$\psi_{xy}=u(x)e^{ik_yy}$$. This is because the vector potential does not depend on $$y$$ and the momentum operator $$\hat p_y$$ therefore commutes with the Hamiltonian. By substituting this Ansatz into the Schrödinger equation one gets the one-dimensional harmonic oscillator equation centered at $x_{k_y}=\frac{\hbar k_y}{eB}$.

 * $$\left [- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m^*} {\partial^2\over\partial x^2}+\frac{1}{2}m^*\omega_{\rm c}^2(x-l_B^2k_y)^2\right ]u(x)=\varepsilon_{xy}u(x)$$

where $\omega_{\rm c}=\frac{eB}{m^*}$ is defined as the cyclotron frequency and $l_B^2=\frac{\hbar}{eB}$  the magnetic length. The energies are:
 * $$\varepsilon_{xy}\equiv\varepsilon_{n_x}=\hbar \omega_{\rm c} \left ( n_x+\frac{1}{2} \right )$$,            $$n_x=1,2,3...$$

And the wavefunctions for the motion in the $$xy$$ plane are given by the product of a plane wave in $$y$$ and Hermite polynomials attenuated by the gaussian function in $$x$$, which are the wavefunctions of a harmonic oscillator.

From the expression for the Landau levels one notices that the energy depends only on $$n_x$$, not on $$k_y$$. States with the same $$n_x$$ but different $$k_y$$ are degenerate.

Density of states
At zero field, the density of states per unit surface for the two-dimensional electron gas taking into account degeneration due to spin is independent of the energy
 * $$n_{\rm 2D}=\frac{m^*}{\pi \hbar^2}$$.

As the field is turned on, the density of states collapses from the constant to a Dirac comb, a series of Dirac $$\delta$$ functions, corresponding to the Landau levels separated $$\Delta\varepsilon_{xy}=\hbar \omega_{\rm c}$$. At finite temperature, however, the Landau levels acquire a width $\Gamma=\frac{\hbar}{\tau_i}$  being $$\tau_i$$  the time between scattering events. Commonly it is assumed that the precise shape of Landau levels is a Gaussian or Lorentzian profile.

Another feature is that the wave functions form parallel strips in the $$y$$-direction spaced equally along the $$x$$-axis, along the lines of $$\mathbf{A}$$. Since there is nothing special about any direction in the $$xy$$-plane if the vector potential was differently chosen one should find circular symmetry.

Given a sample of dimensions $$L_x \times L_y$$ and applying the periodic boundary conditions in the $$y$$-direction $k=\frac{2\pi}{L_y}j$ being $$j$$ an integer, one gets that each parabolic potential is placed at a value $$x_k=l_B^2k$$. The number of states for each Landau Level and $$k$$ can be calculated from the ratio between the total magnetic flux that passes through the sample and the magnetic flux corresponding to a state.
 * $$N_B=\frac{\phi}{\phi_0}=\frac{BA}{BL_y\Delta x_k}=\frac{A}{2\pi l_B^2}\begin{array}{lcr}& l_B&\\&=&\\ &&\end{array}

\frac{AeB}{2\pi \hbar}\begin{array}{lcr}& \omega_{\rm c}&\\&=&\\ &&\end{array} \frac{m^*\omega_{\rm c}A}{2\pi \hbar}$$

Thus the density of states per unit surface is
 * $$n_B=\frac{m^*\omega_{\rm c}}{2\pi \hbar}$$.

Note the dependency of the density of states with the magnetic field. The larger the magnetic field is, the more states are in each Landau level. As a consequence, there is more confinement in the system since fewer energy levels are occupied.

Rewriting the last expression as $n_B=\frac{\hbar \omega_{\rm c}}{2} \frac{m^*}{\pi \hbar^2}$ it is clear that each Landau level contains as many states as in a 2DEG in a $$\Delta\varepsilon=\hbar \omega_{\rm c}$$.

Given the fact that electrons are fermions, for each state available in the Landau levels it corresponds to two electrons, one electron with each value for the spin $s=\pm\frac{1}{2}$. However, if a large magnetic field is applied, the energies split into two levels due to the magnetic moment associated with the alignment of the spin with the magnetic field. The difference in the energies is $\Delta E = \pm \frac{1}{2}g\mu_{\rm B}B$ being $$g$$  a factor which depends on the material ($$g=2$$ for free electrons) and $$\mu_{\rm B}$$ the Bohr magneton. The sign $$+$$ is taken when the spin is parallel to the field and $$-$$  when it is antiparallel. This fact called spin splitting implies that the density of states for each level is reduced by a half. Note that $$\Delta E$$ is proportional to the magnetic field so, the larger the magnetic field is, the more relevant is the split.

In order to get the number of occupied Landau levels, one defines the so-called filling factor $$\nu$$ as the ratio between the density of states in a 2DEG and the density of states in the Landau levels.

 * $$\nu=\frac{n_{\rm 2D}}{n_B}=\frac{hn_{\rm 2D}}{eB}$$

In general the filling factor $$\nu$$ is not an integer. It happens to be an integer when there is an exact number of filled Landau levels. Instead, it becomes a non-integer when the top level is not fully occupied. In actual experiments, one varies the magnetic field and fixes electron density (and not the Fermi energy!) or varies the electron density and fixes the magnetic field. Both cases correspond to a continuous variation of the filling factor $$\nu$$ and one cannot expect $$\nu$$ to be an integer. Since $$n_B\propto B$$, by increasing the magnetic field, the Landau levels move up in energy and the number of states in each level grow, so fewer electrons occupy the top level until it becomes empty. If the magnetic field keeps increasing, eventually, all electrons will be in the lowest Landau level ($$\nu<1$$) and this is called the magnetic quantum limit.

Longitudinal resistivity
It is possible to relate the filling factor to the resistivity and hence, to the conductivity of the system. When $$\nu$$ is an integer, the Fermi energy lies in between Landau levels where there are no states available for carriers, so the conductivity becomes zero (it is considered that the magnetic field is big enough so that there is no overlap between Landau levels, otherwise there would be few electrons and the conductivity would be approximately $$0$$). Consequently, the resistivity becomes zero too (At very high magnetic fields it is proven that longitudinal conductivity and resistivity are proportional).

With the conductivity $$\sigma=\rho^{-1} $$ one finds
 * $$\sigma=

\frac{1}{\det \rho} \begin{pmatrix} \rho_{yy}&-\rho_{xy}\\ -\rho_{yx}&\rho_{xx} \end{pmatrix} \; .$$

If the longitudinal resistivity is zero and transversal is finite, then $$ \det \rho \neq 0 $$. Thus both the longitudinal conductivity and resistivity become zero.

Instead, when $$\nu$$ is a half-integer, the Fermi energy is located at the peak of the density distribution of some Landau Level. This means that the conductivity will have a maximum.

This distribution of minimums and maximums corresponds to ¨quantum oscillations¨ called Shubnikov–de Haas oscillations which become more relevant as the magnetic field increases. Obviously, the height of the peaks are larger as the magnetic field increases since the density of states increases with the field, so there are more carriers which contribute to the resistivity. It is interesting to notice that if the magnetic field is very small, the longitudinal resistivity is a constant which means that the classical result is reached.

Transverse resistivity
From the classical relation of the transverse resistivity $\rho_{xy}=\frac{B}{en_{\rm 2D}}$ and substituting $n_{\rm 2D}=\nu \frac{eB}{h}$   one finds out the quantization of the transverse resistivity and conductivity:
 * $$\rho_{xy}=\frac{h}{\nu e^2}\Rightarrow \sigma=\nu \frac{e^2}{h}$$

One concludes then, that the transverse resistivity is a multiple of the inverse of the so-called conductance quantum $$e^2/h$$ if the filling factor is an integer. In experiments, however, plateaus are observed for whole plateaus of filling values $$\nu$$, which indicates that there are in fact electron states between the Landau levels. These states are localized in, for example, impurities of the material where they are trapped in orbits so they can not contribute to the conductivity. That is why the resistivity remains constant in between Landau levels. Again if the magnetic field decreases, one gets the classical result in which the resistivity is proportional to the magnetic field.

Photonic quantum Hall effect
The quantum Hall effect, in addition to being observed in two-dimensional electron systems, can be observed in photons. Photons do not possess inherent electric charge, but through the manipulation of discrete optical resonators and coupling phases or on-site phases, an artificial magnetic field can be created. This process can be expressed through a metaphor of photons bouncing between multiple mirrors. By shooting the light across multiple mirrors, the photons are routed and gain additional phase proportional to their angular momentum. This creates an effect like they are in a magnetic field.

Topological classification
The integers that appear in the Hall effect are examples of topological quantum numbers. They are known in mathematics as the first Chern numbers and are closely related to Berry's phase. A striking model of much interest in this context is the Azbel–Harper–Hofstadter model whose quantum phase diagram is the Hofstadter butterfly shown in the figure. The vertical axis is the strength of the magnetic field and the horizontal axis is the chemical potential, which fixes the electron density. The colors represent the integer Hall conductances. Warm colors represent positive integers and cold colors negative integers. Note, however, that the density of states in these regions of quantized Hall conductance is zero; hence, they cannot produce the plateaus observed in the experiments. The phase diagram is fractal and has structure on all scales. In the figure there is an obvious self-similarity. In the presence of disorder, which is the source of the plateaus seen in the experiments, this diagram is very different and the fractal structure is mostly washed away. Also, the experiments control the filling factor and not the Fermi energy. If this diagram is plotted as a function of filling factor, all the features are completely washed away, hence, it has very little to do with the actual Hall physics.

Concerning physical mechanisms, impurities and/or particular states (e.g., edge currents) are important for both the 'integer' and 'fractional' effects. In addition, Coulomb interaction is also essential in the fractional quantum Hall effect. The observed strong similarity between integer and fractional quantum Hall effects is explained by the tendency of electrons to form bound states with an even number of magnetic flux quanta, called composite fermions.

Bohr atom interpretation of the von Klitzing constant
The value of the von Klitzing constant may be obtained already on the level of a single atom within the Bohr model while looking at it as a single-electron Hall effect. While during the cyclotron motion on a circular orbit the centrifugal force is balanced by the Lorentz force responsible for the transverse induced voltage and the Hall effect, one may look at the Coulomb potential difference in the Bohr atom as the induced single atom Hall voltage and the periodic electron motion on a circle as a Hall current. Defining the single atom Hall current as a rate a single electron charge $$e$$ is making Kepler revolutions with angular frequency $$\omega$$
 * $$I = \frac{\omega e}{2\pi},$$

and the induced Hall voltage as a difference between the hydrogen nucleus Coulomb potential at the electron orbital point and at infinity:
 * $$U=V_\text{C}(\infty) - V_\text{C}(r) = 0 - V_\text{C}(r) = \frac{e}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}$$

One obtains the quantization of the defined Bohr orbit Hall resistance in steps of the von Klitzing constant as
 * $$R_\text{Bohr}(n) = \frac{U}{I} = n\frac{h}{e^2}$$

which for the Bohr atom is linear but not inverse in the integer n.

Relativistic analogs
Relativistic examples of the integer quantum Hall effect and quantum spin Hall effect arise in the context of lattice gauge theory.

title: Quantum Hall effect


text:
Talk:Form of government

Fundamentalism vs. Theocracy
I replaced "Fundamentalism" with "Theocracy". Fundamentalism as a common noun is the extreme literalist form of any religion, and as a proper noun is a particular movement in 20th-century Protestantism. In either case it is not a form of government.

The Taliban government in Afghanistan was an oligarchic Islamic theocracy. The government proposed by Christian Reconstructionism is a Christian theocratic republic. While the religious views of either movement may be called fundamentalist, their political views are theocratic.

Similar terms
Question: Is it accurate to refer to socialism and communism as forms of government? I would term them economic models (with capitalism, mercantilism, etc.) rather than government types. For the USSR and other Iron Curtain states, I would use the government type "People's Republic", a subclass of oligarchy noted for claiming to rule in the name of the common people.

More thoughts: The words "autocracy" and "despotism" seem pretty similar, and "absolute monarchy" a subclass thereof. "Dictatorship" is a related term. How about "empire"? Is "meritocracy" a form of government, or a political theory? (Was the Confucian bureaucracy in China meritocratic, or feudal?) Feudal? Oh yeah, "Feudalism" has been a popular form of government in various places.

 * While I agree that communism and socialism do appear more economic than political systems, a dispute using "People's Republic" to refer to the USSR etc. Most communist dictatorships do use "People's Republic" as part of their formal title, but this is usually only posturing.  Stalinist or Maoist governments have so few aspects of a republic, if any, that they may as well be "republics in name only", and being dictatorships, they don't exactly take to well to having ideas submitted by the common people.  I think the proper aim of this and related pages should be to categorize and describe the actual components of the various systems which exist in governments, not what the governments themselves claim to advocate.  Of course all (well, most) governments think they're doing good for the people, that's how they justify their existence.  But they can't all be right, or there'd be no need for categorization.

 * In addition, although communism is theoretically an economic system, in practice it tends toward specific political systems in order to be implemented on nation-scale. These are usually very authoritarian systems such as a Stalinist dictatorship.  There are very few governments, for instance, which are both truly communist and truly democratic at the same time for very long.  Socialism, however, is a different case, and may be more likely to be an economic system independent of political associations.  I'm not really sure how to incorporate any of these thoughts into the articles, though. MQinator (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

System of government
Would system of government be a better title?
 * I'm not sure that anarchism a form or system of government. Should there be a note saying that it is not? Maybe the title should avoid `government.' Perhaps `national organisation system' would be better. Tim Ivorson 17:08, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Europe trouble and social democracy
Hmm, while several EU nations are monarchies, they are also Democracies. Oddly, the combination of consensus and representation used in european democracies seems to somehow be missed? Or at least it's not clear where one should look. Maybe I can add in Social Democracy or so, that'll go some distance. 80.126.238.189 17:33, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, social democracy is more of a political movement than a form of state. I'll leave it in there for now, and see if someone replaces it with a more useful link. 80.126.238.189 17:37, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Futurology
I might add some stuff about possible future government types. The advent of computers would allow 'Thought Control' type 1984 governments, or Cybernetic Socities where the laws are made by computer intelligence. There are a few other interesting types too. Good idea? --ShaunMacPherson 19:14, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, they are very speculative, but with such a disclaimer, this section could be useful. We should add more classifications of existing types of governemtn (do see external links I added to White's Historical Atlas). Oh, I also added patriarchy and tripartite classification of authority links. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 11:49, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I would rather see possible future governments as a new article that links to this article. Giving the topic it's own page would allow for a lot more creative additions while allowing this article to focus on historical and current forms. The new article could start as a copy of this article that is modified to focus on why these forms of government failed and what it should be replaced with Cobra Control (talk) 15:51, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

List to be moved off
I propose that the list is moved to a separate article. Should it be entitled List of forms of government or List of political systems or something else? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:39, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What is a political systems and what is not
Some political systems (as in what this page is about) are often confused with economic systems. I think we need to go through the current system and weed some stuff out (social democracy is a good example, it is an ECONOMIC system, not a POLITICAL one - IMHO). Do you agree? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:38, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Republic and democracy
Putting republic as a type of democracy is a grevious error, IMHO. Setting aside the fact that Plato IIRC divided forms of government into democracy, republic and despotism, from our own Wiki definition of republic: ''The concept of democracy, however, is not implicit to that of a republic. The republican form of government may involve a limited democracy, where such rights are available only to a limited group of people. In some cases, a republic may be a dictatorial or totalitarian state.'' --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:55, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

On classification (Mihnea Tudoreanu, please read)
I don't want to revert your changes, but I don't agree with some of them. Let's have a little talk aboit them here, ok?
 * 1) Authoritarianism and Autocracy are very close together. While I agree that my previous hierarchical categorization of them was not very good, removing a link between them is not much better. Perhaps we should put them on the same vertical line (as in a... see also a...)?
 * "Authoritarianism" is a general term, while Autocracy is much more specific. Autocracy means "rule by one", whereas authoritarianism just means a rule by an authoritarian government. This authoritarian government does not have to be led by an autocrat, therefore authoritarianism is not a form of autocracy.
 * 2) Coordinatorism is an economic system, not political, I suggest removing it entirely from that list (it's place is on the List of economic systems, not here)
 * I agree. It was my mistake, and I'll correct it. Sorry for the trouble.
 * 3) Communist states should autocracy/dictatorship (this is even mentioned in the current lead of their own article). Why do you object to that? Please remember we are not talking about economic system here, only about the form of government - and the definition reads:  communist state is one ruled by a single political party which declares its allegiance to the principles of Marxism-Leninism. It is also called Marxist-Leninist state/government/dictatorship
 * I object to this because different communist states belong in different categories. Some are autocracies (Stalin's USSR), others are oligarchies (most of Eastern Europe, the post-Stalin USSR, Vietnam since the 70's, etc.), yet others are military dictatorships (Poland in the early 80's, North Korea). So where do you put "communist states" in general? They obviously need their own separate category.
 * 4) Same goes for facism. Why create a separate entry when in the political essence it was also a one-party dictatorship?

--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:38, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Was Nazi Germany an autocracy or an oligarchy? Was Franco's Spain an oligarchy or a military dictatorship? Fascist governments are difficult to classify in any of the other categories, so they should stay separate. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 09:31, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I see your point. That's the problem with ideology and economic system infecting political systems. One name can have so many meanings - and contradictory examples. Still, the facist examples you mention look like an autocracies to me (rule by one strong leader...Hitler, Franco, Mussolini). Perhpas what we need is to decide if what the main goverment types are before we start arguing about the subtypes...or perhaps we can include the 'mixed' ones into several main types, instead of making them a stand-alone type? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:21, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Form of government - confusion
I think that "form of government" is acceptable when referencing "democracy," "monarchy" and "republic." These labels are ancient and should not carry the modern baggage of being called a "system." "Systems" are those elements found within a government that make ruling possible, elements such as elections, budgets, and prisons. A "regime" strikes me as being an actual group of rulers over an actual state. Perhaps a way to approach this is to divide up the categories as "Traditional forms" (the Aristotelian monarchy, democracy, aristocracy, etc.) and "Modern forms" (parliamentary, presidential, semi-presidential). I agree with Arado that those are "forms," but they are still normally those forms that we identify with free states. I think you still need some broader categories for forms than just those normally associated with the label "democracy." Hague and Harrop's most recent text uses a "democratic" and "authoritarian" framework. This seems sensible and has some historical grounding. Bibowen 3:10 27 February 2006

I AGREE WITH YOU. Political regime is something else but there would be a lot of damage if we moved the article. I put a "subheading" to clarify it Astharoth1 (comments to astharoth1@yahoo.com). 17:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

This is a confusion!!!. The article actually refers to the concept of political regime (democracy, dictatorship and so on).

Form of government means something else. It is about the nature of the executive: divided (parliamentary or semi-presidential, and the functions of both the head of state and head of government) or monolithic (where the head of government is also the head of state)

'''Forms of government are:

 * Parliamentary: UK, Germany, Japan
 * Semi-presidential: France
 * Presidential: USA'''

'''See for example: Hague, Rod/Harrop, Martin (1998): Comparative Government and Politics, 4th edition. Houndmills: MacMillan.''' --Arado 11:06, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

I can see your point. Feel free to work on correct definitions and fix the confusion. An article on political regime would be a good start (it currently redirects to Political system, note that form of government redirects to this list, not a perfect soultion as well). See also: parliamentary system, semi-presidental system, presidental system and others. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:13, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

"Expert" (b.t.w. hate the word)
I gave the article a measure of "expertise", by rewriting the definition, by bringing up important scholarly debates and literature in comparative politics.

However, I refrained to mention epistemological, and other important normative and methodological, questions. I believe that the spirit of the reformed article is to have the text at the high scool-college level, so more people can read and use the broad category.

I was surprised that no other political scientist had reformed this page before. Astharoth1 P.S. I opened another subheading to put the previous text. 16:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)email me at astharoth1@yahoo.edu

Single-party system
A comment to the "single-party system" in socialist countries: the difference between the US dual-party system is not characteristic. However there was only one party in socialist counties, the elections were rather focused on persons, and there were usually more candidates in an elections. Ruthenian 10:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * By socialist, I think you mean communist. Note that there were in theory several facade parties, but in practice all were subordinate to one main party. The elections were also often rigged, with results predetermined and 'winning' candidates selected before anybody cast their vote.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

So...
Which of these governments are used today and which are outdated?
 * There is no such thing as an outdated government. ALL forms of government are viable if they are ruled by benevolent leaders.

-G

Origins of words
I've noticed that many of the greek origins of some of the forms of governments are inconsistant..

Aristocracy, Autocracy, Democracy, Monarchy, Oligarchy, Plutocracy and Theocracy all seem to stem from a similiar greek word namely κρατειν/kratein - to rule. But on most of the pages, the word is different. I have found kratôr, kratos, ἄρχων/archon, ἄρχω/arcgekho, and κρατειν/kratein..

If the meaning is the same (to rule) then shouldnt the greek word used to portray this be the same?

This could prove confusing to anyone trying to find the origins of the words.. Is it worth changing? Or are the words, in fact, of the right origins, and in reality DO vary this much. If so, i apologise for my ignorance..

Anacyclosis
Is it possible to include some information on anacyclosis in this article? Anacyclosis is a theory that the government will undergo a cycle of changing into various forms of government. It starts with monarchy, then goes to tyranny, then aristocracy, and so on until it leads back to monarchy. It seems related but I don't really know how to include it in this article. Thaurisil 14:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The Outdated "Dominion" of Canada
In the Canada Act (1982), under which the British Parliament finally abdicated the right to legislate for Canada, and the Canadian Constitution of the same year, the country is referred to as "Canada".

The term, "Dominion" was an alternative to "Kingdom" and comes from the British North America Act (1867), which used to provide Canada's Constitutional framework. "Dominion" is obsolete and is only used for historical purposes. Some see it as somewhat insulting to use this Imperialist term for the second-largest country in the World; a prosperous, long-established and stable democracy of 27 million people, which no longer has constitutional links to the United Kingdom.

British Citizens lost their special rights [to vote etc] in the 1980s and are now treated like anyone else. Even the symbolic "Crown" is, in legal terms, a number of separate entities in the countries, which retain Elizabeth II as nominal Head of State- hence the term "The Crown, in the right of _______". Canadians, most of whom are of British origin, love British people but Canada is an independent country, not a colony.

Anyone, who is pedantic enough to point out that one verse of "O, Canada" contains the line "Hold our dominion in thy loving care" will be tied to a tree near Craigellachie and forced to count the number of containers, which have travelled westwards, from Montreal. [That was a joke: it is also a very peaceful country, unlike some others in the Americas, ahem.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evieconrad (talk • contribs) 22:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Iran
Iran is a theocracy, not a presidential republic. Yes, it has a president, but ulimately the power rests in the Ayatollah and his priests.

Pantisocracy
I notice there is neither mention nor article for the utopian pantisocracy government. Anyone out there know enough to have some inclusion, or is it not article-worthy? -BaronGrackle 17:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

what would be?
what would be a govement that everyone votes but it is rated by current status (using for wiki) with it going Admin->Sysops->Normal users on what we call the security counsil->normal users->IP adressess and everyone gets a vote relative to ranking with everyone given the opritunity to make a suggestion. Djf2014 (talk) 16:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Other forms
Would a dewmocracy be considered a form of government? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.236.174 (talk) 23:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Link to Disambiguation Page "Union"
I'm fixing links to disambiguation pages as a part of Disambiguation pages with links, and I noticed that in the last bullet point of the intro, there is a link to the disambiguation page union. I would fix this, but I don't know what kind of union Burma is. If someone can please look through the links on the union disambiguation page and find the one that applies, that would be great. Thanks. Ensign beedrill (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

i look fore job wheth you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.176.224.216 (talk) 10:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Majority vs coalition in "Attributes of government" section
The Attributes of government section of this article includes the distinction between majority and coalition governments. That isn't related to a stable form of government like the other attributes, but to a temporal situation that may easily change at any time. Do you agree that it should be removed from the list? --NaBUru38 (talk) 01:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Peru
How can Peru be a "fully presidential republic" when it has both a President and a Prime Minister? Surely this would make it a semi-presidential or even parliamentary republic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.107.52.215 (talk) 10:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Form of government and Political System
What are the differences between Form of government and Political system ????--Adikhebat (talk) 18:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Could both article be merged? if not why? I still can't understand difference of them --Adikhebat (talk) 18:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Unifocracy
I have stumbled upon a new government theory or whatever you call it. It is called Unifocracy. The official site of it is here: http://unifocracy.multiply.com/ It seems thought out. I suggest we could consider it being added to the list. I know the person who came up with it so if you need more information of it ask me and ill give you the creators contact info. Legendman3 12:04, 20 July 2011 (CST)
 * Are there third-party sources which establish this person's idea as notable? -- Beland (talk) 01:47, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Socialist state?
I was taught by a very learned history teacher that "socialism" and "communism" are economic systems, NOT government types. For example, one could have a theocratic state that employs communism as the method of allocating resources. Communism need not involve atheism. Likewise, there are multiple nations around the world that employ socialism, but they have vastly different political systems. I just wanted to question the validity of including these as government types.

Bowlesdp (talk) 16:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Different people use different semantics, but arguably "socialism" is the centrally-planned economic system and "communism" is "government by workers" or "single-party rule by the Communist Party" which has historically been combined with both socialism (but with more aspects of capitalism in recent decades). -- Beland (talk) 01:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Observations
I just stumbled across this and there are many changes I would make. Remove either Patriarchy or Androcracy, they are both the same thing (male rulers) although Patriarchy is a better page Androcracy is the actual term for the rule of government (although matriarchy is used instead of Gynocracy). So either merge Androcracy into Patriarchy then remove Androcracy from the list or just remove one of them. Corporatism isn't a type of government. (The) Garrison state appears to actually be a book so shouldn't really be in this template. Green state is a type of democracy so should be a subsection of tha tpage. Kakistocracy doesn't have an entry, but it is locked. Confusing! Kratocracy isn't actually a type of government, it as a way of staging a coup. Kyriarchy, not sure what this is but it is not a type of government. Mediocracy is not a type of government. The page Nomocracy is crap, it seems to be some sort of term for an Islamic theocracy. Or is it an Autocracy? I'm not sure but it clearly isn't a type of government it is a sub-type of one of those other types. Noocracy is a self described 'Aristocracy' so should be merged. Panarchism is a subsection of Anarchism and not itself a type of government. Pantisocracy appears to be a type of Communism. Plantocracy is just a type of Plutocracy although that itself seems to be a type of Oligarchy. Sociocracy appears to be a type of Democracy. Squirearchy is not a type of government. Police state is not a type of government but is a type of Totalitarianism. Sultanism is a type of Monarchy. Superpower is not a type of government. Synarchism is not its own type of government. Finally, Welfare state is not a type of government. I do not know why all these redundant terms are in here. But this template is severly bloated and should probably be, at least, halved. I thought it best to come here first, as maybe there is some reason for having these excess terms here, and I didn't want to be rude by making vast changes to this template when I had not contributed to it before. Thanks. Adam4267 (talk) 18:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Due to a split and later merger, I think these comments now apply to List of forms of government. I made some edits there, feel free to discuss further on Talk:List of forms of government. -- Beland (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Form of government


text:
Colloquial Finnish

Colloquial or spoken Finnish (suomen puhekieli) is the unstandardized spoken variety of the Finnish language, in contrast with the standardized form of the language (yleiskieli). It is used primarily in personal communication and varies somewhat between the different dialects.

This article focuses on the variety of spoken Finnish that is predominant in the Helsinki metropolitan area and urbanized areas in the Tavastian and Central Finland dialectal areas, such as the cities of Tampere, Jyväskylä, Lahti, Hyvinkää, and Hämeenlinna – as well as in coastal cities such as Vaasa and Porvoo, which have been traditionally Swedish-speaking and have experienced an influx of Finnish speakers from a variety of dialectal areas.

The standard language takes most of its features from these dialects, i.e. most "dialectal" features are reductions with respect to this form of language. The combination of the common spoken Finnish and a dialect gives a regional variant (aluepuhekieli), which has some local idiosyncrasies but is essentially similar to the common spoken Finnish.

The basics of Finnish needed to fully understand this article can be found in pages about Finnish phonology and Finnish grammar.

Introduction
As in any language, the spoken version(s) of Finnish often vary from the written form. Some of the latter's constructs are either too arbitrary (e.g. "soft d", cf. Finnish phonology), or too dialectal, e.g. hän (see below), for use in the spoken language. Furthermore, some very common and "accentless" sound changes are not reflected in the standard language, particularly fusion, liaison and some diphthong reductions.

There is also the problem that purists want to avoid irregularity regardless of actual usage. This has left some sound changes common in spoken language out from the standard language. There is a tendency to favor "more logical" constructs over easily pronounceable ones. This ideal does reflect spoken Finnish usage to a degree, as Finnish is demonstrably a conservative language with few reduction processes, but it is not entirely accurate. The problem of avoiding "irregularity" is most evident in spelling, where internal sandhi is not transcribed, because there is the idea that morphemes should be immutable. For example, the "correct" spelling is syönpä ("I eat" with emphasis), even though the pronunciation is usually syömpä. The explanation is that -n- and -pä are in different morphemes just like the explanation that English boys is not spelled with a z is that they are in different morphemes.

There are also a number of grammatical forms which are used in written Finnish, but only very rarely in spoken. For example, there are a number of constructions using participles which are usually rendered analytically in speech. Some cases and moods are rarely constructive in spoken Finnish, e.g. the instructive and comitative cases and the potential mood. Some survive only in expressions.

On the other hand, spoken language has its own features rarely or never found in formal language. Most importantly, there is very common external sandhi, and some assimilatory sound changes. (On the contrary, there is no vowel reduction.) In some variants (e.g. Vaasa, Kymenlaakso) of spoken Finnish -n kanssa ("with [something]") is abbreviated into a clitic that is effectively a comitative case, e.g. -nkans or -nkaa.

Reflexes of dental fricatives
The most common reflexes for old Finnish dental fricatives are for, and  or  for. For example, metsä, metsän or mettä, metän ← meθθä, meθän "forest, of the forest" and meidän < meiðän "ours". Loss of also occurs, e.g. meiän. These are seen as "accent-free" pronunciations. Dialects generally have different reflexes — in fact, the different reflexes are used as a distinguishing feature between different dialects. For more details, see Finnish phonology.

Word-final n
One important sound change, which has gone to completion in Estonian but occurs idiosyncratically in Finnish, is mutation of word-final into a glottal stop, orthographically represented by an apostrophe. In some dialects, such as Savo, word-final is systematically replaced by, e.g. isä'iän ← isän ääni "father's voice". Both pronunciations can be heard in the Helsinki area. This means that the genitive/accusative form -n, which is very common in any form of Finnish, is simply noted by a glottal stop. However, this glottal stop undergoes sandhi whenever followed by consonant, or more often than not (see below).

Final vowels
Certain wordforms that end in in Standard Finnish occur without the word-final  in the spoken language. This includes the base form of certain word stems as well as inflectional endings. In nouns this affects the translative case ending -ksi and the 2nd person singular possessive suffix -si. In verbs, loss of i affects the conditional mood ending -isi and, in certain verb inflection classes where it is preceded by an s, the preterite ending -i. These endings occur word-finally in 3rd person forms.

In many dialects loss of final i is commonplace not only in these cases but also elsewhere.

Particularly in Helsinki, deletion of or, spelt «ä» and «a», respectively, in highly frequent words is common. This is a feature of Western Finnish dialects, found also in Savonian dialects and Estonian.
 * mutta — mut 'but'
 * kyllä — kyl 'yes'
 * -sta — -st elative case, 'out of / away from the inside of'

Vowel clusters and diphthongs
Word-final vowel clusters ending in or  have much variation in dialects of Finnish. Especially in Helsinki they assimilate, where only the resulting chroneme marks the partitive in many words.
 * puhun suomea — puhun suomee "I speak Finnish"
 * pitkiä — pitkii "(some) long (things)"; partitive plural of pitkä, long

An or  cluster also appears in many adjectives:
 * pimeä — pimee "dark"

In other areas of Finland, these clusters may have a different fate. Another common dialectal variant is the raising of to  in the adjectives: pimiä. (Partitives are unaffected by this.) Some rarer versions of this suffix include -jä / -ja, -ie, and even -ii.

Similar to the diphthongization of older to  (unchanged in standard Estonian), many eastern dialects of Finnish diphthongize also the long vowels  to. In Savonian dialects, these have shifted further on to.

can become when in contact with another vowel. In many cases this results from colloquial deletion of. For example:
 * tiiän for standard tiedän "I know"
 * viiä for standard viedä "to take away"
 * lyyä for standard lyödä "to hit"
 * tuua for standard tuoda "to bring"

Sandhi
A related phenomenon is the final consonant sandhi. When two words co-occur in the same prosodic unit, the consonant beginning the second word assimilates to the word-final consonant in the first word, creating a long consonant. This is not commonly written down, except in dialectal transcriptions. For example,
 * {| class="wikitable"

! !Writing !Pronunciation !Meaning
 * Standard
 * Nyt se tulee!
 * rowspan="2" |“It's coming now”
 * Casual
 * Ny se tulee!
 * }
 * Casual
 * Ny se tulee!
 * }
 * }

Personal pronouns
Some dialects have the full-length personal pronouns minä and sinä, but most people use shorter forms, like these found in the Helsinki metropolitan area region:
 * minä → mä
 * sinä → sä

Note: these do differ depending on where the speaker is from. For example minä can also be mie, miä, mää etc.

The root words are also shorter:

 * minu- → mu-, e.g. minun → mun "my"
 * sinu- → su-, e.g. sinun → sun "yours"

The third-person pronouns hän ('he', 'she', singular 'they') and he (plural 'they'), are rarely used in the spoken language outside of Southwestern Finland and are getting rare there, as well. Elsewhere, they are usually replaced by se and ne, which in the standard language do not refer to people.

 * hän → se
 * he → ne

For example, the sentence "Did he mistake me for you?" has these forms:
 * Luuliko hän minua sinuksi?
 * Luuliks se mua suks? or Luulikse mua suks?

Similarly, non-personal demonstrative pronouns are often used in place of hän or he, meaning people may be referred to as 'that' and 'those'. This also does not carry any pejorative meaning. The words are also changed from their written form.

 * hän → tuo → toi
 * he → nuo → noi

For example, when pointing out a culprit, the sentence "He broke it." has these forms:
 * Hän rikkoi sen.
 * Tuo rikko sen. or Toi rikko sen.

Numerals
Numerals 1–10 in colloquial spoken Finnish: Numbers 11-19 are formed by appending -toista, which can be shortened to -toist. Numbers 20-90 are formed by appending -kymmentä, which can be shortened to -kymment or even -kyt(ä). Kolme, neljä and seittemän can be abbreviated to kol-, nel- and seit- with -kytä, but not independently, as in kolkytäkolme "33" or seitkytäneljä "74".
 * 1) yks (yksi)
 * 2) kaks (kaksi)
 * 3) kolme (kolme)
 * 4) neljä (neljä)
 * 5) viis (viisi)
 * 6) kuus (kuusi)
 * 7) seittemä(n) (seitsemän)
 * 8) kaheksa(n) (kahdeksan)
 * 9) yheksä(n) (yhdeksän)
 * 10) kymmene(n) (kymmenen)

When counting out loud, even shorter forms are used, mostly one-syllable words with long vowels: -toista becomes -toi, -too or even -to. -kymmentä becomes -kyt, with 20-60 typically retaining their longer numeral forms (e.g. kakskyt rather than **kaakyt for 20). 70 is typically seitkyt or seiskyt, while 80 and 90 do with kasi- and ysi-.
 * yy
 * kaa
 * koo
 * nee
 * vii
 * kuu
 * 1) sei / see
 * 2) kas(i)
 * 3) ys(i)
 * 4) kymp(pi)

The numerals 1–9 have their own names, different from the cardinal numbers used in counting. Numbers that have longer names are often shortened in speech. This may be problematic for a foreigner to understand, if they have learnt words by book:

 * ykkönen (number one)
 * kakkonen (number two)
 * kolmonen (number three)
 * nelonen (number four)
 * viitonen (number five) → vitonen, femma (Helsinki slang)
 * kuutonen (number six) → kutonen
 * seitsemäinen (number seven) → seiska
 * kahdeksainen / kahdeksikko (number eight) → kasi / kaheksikko
 * yhdeksäinen / yhdeksikkö (number nine) → ysi / yheksikkö
 * kymmenen → kymppi, kybä (Helsinki slang)

The -kko suffix normally denotes a group of x people, but on 8 and 9, it doubles as a synonym for the numeral's name. Kahdeksikko is also used to describe a figure eight shape.

The regular -Onen / -inen forms can additionally be used of objects with an ID number. For example, bus 107 is called sataseiska, and a competition winner is an ykkönen (not *sataseittemän or *yks.)

Pronoun usage
Personal pronouns are used extensively in spoken Finnish whereas in formal forms the pronoun is often optional (indicated in brackets in this article). Furthermore, the pronouns themselves in spoken Finnish are different from those used in formal Finnish.

Personal pronouns mä and sä are used extensively in colloquial Finnish in place of minä and sinä ('I' and singular 'you'). The pronouns se and ne, which in the formal language are used only as non-human personal pronouns meaning ('it' and plural 'they'), are used in the spoken language as personal pronouns (which in the formal language would be hän ('he', 'she' and singular 'they') and he (plural 'they').

See the tables below for examples.

Verb forms
One striking difference between colloquial Finnish and formal Finnish is use of the passive form in the first person plural. Thus for example:

 * Olemme Helsingissä (formal language)
 * Me ollaan Helsingissä (colloquial Finnish)
 * We're in Helsinki

Another is that the third person plural suffix -vat or -vät is not used in the spoken language; instead, the third person singular form is used with plural meaning being conveyed by the pronoun ne (they)

Therefore, the full present-tense paradigm of puhua "to speak" in everyday speech is:

 * mä puhun (spoken) — (minä) puhun (standard)
 * sä puhut — (sinä) puhut
 * se puhuu — hän puhuu
 * me puhutaa(n) — (me) puhumme
 * te puhutte — (te) puhutte
 * ne puhuu — he puhuvat

Some e-stem verbs have abbreviated (irregular) oblique forms, where or  is elided. This class includes only four frequently used verbs. In Finnish, verbs have an infinitive form, marked with -ta and used in the infinitive, and an oblique form, which is used in personal forms. Consonant gradation and assimilation of the 't' in -ta may be applied. In the standard language, the correspondence between the two is always regular. In spoken language, some verbs have assimilated oblique forms, while retaining the regular infinitive:

For example, these forms, as such, are represented by the imperatives:
 * Mene tai tule, mutta pane se ovi kiinni ja ole hiljaa (standard)
 * Mee tai tuu, mut paa se ovi kii ja oo hiljaa. (word-by-word) "Go or come, but put the door closed and be quiet."

To demonstrate the use of the personal form, the reply is:
 * Meen tai tuun, paan oven kii ja oon hiljaa ("I go or come, (I) put the door closed and (I) am quiet").

The infinitives are unchanged, as in:
 * Mennä tai tulla, panna ovi kii ja olla hiljaa ("To go or to come, to put the door closed and to be quiet").

As are participles, despite their using the oblique stem:
 * menevä tai tuleva, oven kii paneva ja hiljaa oleva ("Going or coming, door closed-putting and quiet-being").

The 't' at the end of participles ending -nut, -rut, -lut, -sut (or -nyt etc.) is often dropped when no consonant follows, or replaced by gemination of the following consonant:

 * minä en puhunut (formal)
 * mä en puhunu (colloquial)
 * I didn't speak

but:

 * mä en puhunu kenellekään (colloquial)
 * I didn't speak to anyone

is actually pronounced as if it were:

 * mä en puhunuk kenellekkään (with examples of gemination)

In the formal language some pronouns are considered optional, but in spoken language the pronoun is usually enunciated but may be optional when answering questions (which puts the person in the proper context).

 * Menemme Ouluun or Me menemme Ouluun ("We are going to Oulu") (formal language)
 * Me mennään Ouluun ("We are off to Oulu") (informal language)

In the latter example, dropping me would change the meaning from a statement to a suggestion:

 * Mennään Ouluun ("Let's go to Oulu") (informal or spoken language suggestion)

Compare the conjugation of OLLA in the formal language (Table 1) and in the spoken or colloquial language (Table 2). Table 2 shows in highlights the areas where there are differences in the structures between formal and informal. Optional pronouns are in brackets. English equivalent is in Table 3.

Questions
In everyday speech, the -ko/kö suffix has the -s clitic added, becoming -kos/kös, which in turn reduces to -ks:

 * olenko minä hengissä? → oo(n)ks mä hengis? "am I alive?"
 * puhutko sinä englantia? → puhut sä enkkuu? or puhuks(ä) enkkuu? "do you (sg.) speak English?"
 * tuliko hän jo? → tulikse jo? (via tulikos se jo?) "did he/she come yet?"

The choice of morphemes -kos/kös or -ks is not always purely dialectal or accidental. Many Finns regularly use more than one variation in their speech. The choice might depend among others on the rhythm of the sentence or the (wished) tempo of the discussion. Sometimes it has other clearly communicational purposes e.g. the longer variation might be used to soften an intruding question.

The clitic -s is also found in imperatives, e.g. me(n)es "(I expect you to) go!" It can also be, that the -tkö elides not to -ks, but -t before a 's', e.g. menetkö sä ? me(n)et sä. Because this is identical to sä menet except for the word order, questions are indicated by word order.

Possessive suffix
Spoken language has a different grammar for the possessive suffix. In contrast, in the literary language, the pronoun is optional and typically omitted. Compare English in which, e.g., "The house to which this door belongs" would be the correct written form even though "the house whose door this is" would be the more common spoken version.

Here, the pronoun of the literary form is also shown.

Notice that Finnish has no possessive adjectives. The pronouns are regularly inflected, like if "I's house", "you's house", "we's house".

However, the suffixes -s, -nsa and -nne are used to avoid repeating a pronoun, e.g. "He took his hat and left" is Se otti lakki nsa ja lähti. (The translation from English *Se otti sen lakin ja lähti would mean "He took his/her hat and left" or "He took the (specific) hat and left").

Omission of the negative verb
When a negative sentence is formed, the main verb goes into the imperative mood and gives all of its inflections to the negative verb ei, e.g. tuemme → emme tue. Usually the word mitään ("anything") and an expletive is added to the sentence. This means that even if the negative verb ei is left out, the meaning is indicated by this context. For example:

 * Ei se mitään osaa. "He doesn't know anything."
 * Se mitään osaa. "He know anything." ("doesn't" omitted)

This omission of the negative verb ei is considered one of the most recent changes in Finnish. Usually this construction indicates mistrust or frustration. (A parody article by Jaakko Häkkinen calls this aggressiivi, see aggressive mood.) However, it can be a neutral negative statement: Tästä artikkelista mitään opi (From this article, you don't learn anything ).

Regional variation
Linguists such as Mielikäinen argue that the dialects of Finnish have been considerably homogenized by 20th century developments of urbanization and other internal population movements to the point that "pure" dialects have disappeared. "Local spoken languages" have developed from standard Finnish to give variety with essentially standard Finnish structure but with some local features. Considerable stigma has been associated with dialects (accurately or not) perceived as rural in the 20th century. People who have moved to the city have adopted a variety resembling standard Finnish, which has been imposed upon dialect speakers by the school, the military and the employers.

Breaking up some consonant clusters on syllable boundaries with an epenthetic vowel is a feature of several dialects, such as those of Ostrobothnia and Savonia: The neutral vowel is the same as the preceding vowel. For example, juhla → juhula "celebration", salmi → salami "strait", palvelu → palavelu "service", halpa → halapa "cheap", äffä → ähävä (via ähvä) "letter F". Pairs of dissimilar consonants with or  (in Savo, also ) as the first consonant are subject to epenthesis; other clusters or geminates are not. However, a strong epenthetic vowel is seen as dialectal, and in Helsinki and urbanized areas, indicates origins "in the countryside" (since for Helsinki people, everything but Helsinki is rural).

Tavastian dialects
Tavastian dialects are diverse because other, surrounding dialects have influenced them. The following features are all found in Finnish spoken in Helsinki, and many of them occur also in some other Tavastian dialects.
 * Word sillai "in that way", which is usually something else like silleen elsewhere.
 * Partitive plurals ending -ja/-jä in generic Finnish become -i, and likewise the partitive plural -ia/-iä simplifies to -ii: märkiä takkeja → märkii takkei "wet jackets". (also in Nurmijärvi, Kotka)
 * The first infinitive, e.g. juosta "to run", is replaced by the third-person form juoksee "runs" by some speakers. For example, standard Voisitko sinä juosta hakemaan sen becomes Voisitsä juoksee hakeen sen "Could you run to get it". This form is probably historically speaking not the third-person form, but the colloquial, shortened form juokseen of the third infinitive form juoksemaan, which exhibits a tendency to oust the first infinitive even in the formal language, cf. the old dispute, whether alkaa juoksemaan ("to start running") should be allowed in the formal language or not (the current norm is still alkaa juosta with the first infinitive). (also in Tuusula and Nurmijärvi)
 * Abbreviations are common in Finnish spoken in the Southern coast of Finland. Final syllables in frequently used words may erode, like sitten → sit, mutta → mut. Case endings might be abbreviated, usually by the loss of the final vowel, e.g. siltä → silt. (If a geminate would be "left dangling" at the end of the word, it becomes a single consonant, e.g. talossa → *taloss → talos.)
 * Helsinki also has a local slang, containing foreign loanwords which may be unintelligible to people from other parts of Finland. Some slang words have spread to the spoken language of youngsters elsewhere in Finland.
 * Tampere is also in the area of Tavastian dialects.
 * Occasional flapping or deletion of intervocalic "L"; the resulting sound is orthographically nil: kyllä siellä olisi → kyä siä ois. This is seen even in the accentless form oisko ← standard olisiko.

North and South Karelia

 * Personal pronouns: minä → mie, sinä → sie, hän → hää, me → myö, te → työ, he → hyö
 * Notice: se and ne don't change to syö or nyö respectively and hää and hyö are more commonly used than se and ne unlike in the standard colloquial language where hän and he are replaced with the non-personal equivalents
 * The declined forms also vary, for example minua can be minnuu, minuu or miuta depending on the regional dialect
 * Vowel epenthesis in North Karelia: kolme → kolome, selvä → selevä
 * In some Karelian dialects the end of participles ending -nut or -nyt and -lut drop the vowel instead of 't': puhunut → puhunt, käynyt → käynt, katsonut → katsont/kattont, mennyt → ment/mänt, ollut → olt, tullut → tult
 * Some Karelian (and Savonian) dialects also use the exessive case: kotoa → kotont(a), ulkoa → ulkont(a), siitä → siint(ä)
 * The North Karelian dialect is a subset of the Savonian dialects, while the South Karelian dialect is a unique Finnish dialect.

Southwestern dialects

 * Abbreviation occurs very often.
 * In Turku: minä → mää, sinä → sää
 * A unique characteristic of Turku dialect is the "S" imperfect tense, which has the ending -si instead of -i, e.g., sattusi for sattui.

Savonia

 * Some difference in pronouns, myö, työ for me, te. Notice that the Savo dialect has complicated differences in grammar, vowels and consonants compared to the standard language, e.g. öylen for eilen, mänj for meni, omaa rataansa → ommoo rattoosa. The Savo dialect is the largest single dialect, and as such, has variants that differ significantly.

Ostrobothnia

 * Consonant clusters with -j- are not allowed, so that a -i- is pronounced instead, e.g. kirja → kiria. The sound is completely replaced with a rhotic consonant r, either a trill, or a flap , which produces problems such as that there is no or almost no contrast between veden (of water) and veren (of blood). For speakers with the flap, there remains a small difference, not generally audible for outsiders. Usually context can be relied on to distinguish the word.
 * Minor vowel changes, for example, taloa → talua. In Southern Ostrobotnia, in unstressed syllables old diphthongs ending in i are reflected as long vowels, e.g. punainen → punaanen. In some words, where the diphthong has been lost from the standard language, this results in seemingly unmotivated long vowels, e.g. iso → isoo.
 * Vaasa, Ostrobothnia, to an extent generic Finnish, too: Many frequently used expressions become clitics - this is optional, though. E.g. pronouns become clitics for the negative verb ei and for the verb "to be". In this table, the apostrophe (') is something between a full J and no sound at all.

 * Additionally, in the Southwest, the interrogative pronoun kuka ("who") is replaced by its partitive form, ketä ("whom"), e.g. Ketä siellä oli? ("Who was there?") Other differences in case for interrogative words are mihinä (std. missä, "where") and mihkä (std. mihin, "into where").

Generic

 * 1) Aila Mielikäinen. (33.9 KiB)
 * 2) Heikki Paunonen. (547 KiB)

title: Colloquial Finnish