There is no consensus about the plosives [b], [d] and [g]. In the Hanyu pinyin transcription they are written like presented here (b p, d t, g k). Yet there were originally three different series of plosives, namely voiced (zhuoyin 濁音), voiceless (qingyin 清音) and semi-voiced (qingzhuoyin 清濁音). In some Mandarin dialects in the lower Yangtze area, the voiced plosives are still existing. Many linguists interprete the plosives of Mandarin as semi-voiced and as voiceless, and therefore write [p][pʰ], [t][tʰ] and [k][kʰ]. I think that although this might be correct it is yet misleading for most laypersons, and therefore I will consistently use the symbols indicated in the listing above.

In modern Chinese, the repetition of a verb (kankan 看看 "let's look", changchang ge 唱唱歌 "to sing along") or an adjective (jiejie baba 結結巴巴 "stammering, stuttering", qingqing chuchu 清清楚楚 "very clear, distinct") is a means to express intensification or attenuation (yanjiu yanjiu 研究研究 "go on investigating"). The repetition of disyllabic words can either be with the sequence AABB, or ABAB, or ABB (lü youyou 綠油油 "green and lush").
Traditionally, Tonghua occupied a railhub position in a region of China noted for trade in only three agricultural commodities. These were ginseng, marten furs and deer antler products. In the 1980s Tonghua had some success with a wine distillery producing sweet, sticky red wines that proved popular with local consumers. From 1987 onwards a bienniel wine festival was inaugurated, but this and the industry it promoted ultimately failed commercially owing to competition with joint-venture wine companies such as Dragon, who were able to produce a product that was marketable overseas. Following this failure, Tonghua industry was thrown back on its traditional agricultural products - and a few small but viable factories, including one specialising in artificial furs.

I visited some of their houses. They live in these very luxurious, kind of European-style villas. The furniture is all furnished collectively. It is all the same, along with the TVs and stereo systems. What they ate…it was basically salted fish and stuff like that. It’s not as if they are having very luxurious food or eating lobsters every night. For the cars, they buy the cars collectively. They might have upgraded the cars but I didn’t see people driving Lamborghinis or BMWs.
As can be seen from these examples, the four words are arranged in a parallel way. Learners of Chinese have to deal with a lot of chengyu. Even in normal speech, four-character expressions are favoured, like jinxing diaocha 進行調查 "to conduct research", jiayi zhengdun 加以整頓 "to improve consolidation", huxiang maiyuan 互相埋怨 "to settle differences" or gongtong shiyong 共同使用 "shared use".

Land disputes have become a major tension between officials and villagers (around China). It’s not the case in those three villages because villagers share the benefits. There are no middlemen. There are no real estate developers colluding with cadres to enrich their own pockets. There’s no such thing because villagers are shareholders in those cooperatives.
There are lots of personal pronouns in Chinese, some of them variants of one and the same word. In Classical Chinese, the first person is called wo 我, wu 吾, yu 予, yu 余, yi 台 (rare), yi 卬 (rare) or zhen 朕 (only to be used by the emperor). The second person is addressed as ru 汝 (sometimes simplified to 女), er 爾 or nai 乃. The third person is addressed as bi 彼, fu 夫, yi 伊 or qi 其. Much more common in Classical Chinese is the use of functions as personal pronoun. A minister is calling himself chen 臣 "[your] minister/servant", a wife herself qie 妾 "[your] wife", a friend is addressed as zi 子 "[you] prince", the emperor is addressed as bixia 陛下 "below the steps" (second person) or shang 上 "that above" (third person). Classical Chinese abstains from a regular use of subjects, and if the context is clear, the personal pronoun as a subject is often left out, especially that of the third person.
There were some voiced or "soft" consonants ([b], [d], [g], [dz]) not any longer used in Mandarin (correctly, [p], [t], [k] and [ts]), but in some local idioms and a lot of topolects. There might have been initial consonant clusters, like [kl-] or [pl-]. This theory has been derived from the fact that some phonetic elements have two different series, like 各 [gə] serving for the series 格 [gə], 恪 [kə], 閣 [gə] or 客 [kə] and the series 洛 [lωɔ], 路 [lu], 賂 [lu] and 略 [lyɛ]. It is quite probable that the initial cluster [kl-] served for words that later were simplified to [l-] or for [k-].
There’s coercion. It’s not a democratic system at all. Villagers are not consulted in a lot of decisions. But they do share economic benefits.  It’s institutionalized through an incentive system that combines collective and individual interests and makes disengagement costly. It’s very expensive for villagers to leave the community. It’s almost like they are married to the collective. You need to pay a breakup fee (to leave).