Cantonese originally not Chinese???
-
joe
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
Well put Terrence. This is exactly the kind of analysis that is needed to put a close to this topic.
-
kp
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
Very well put Terrence.
However, you give the impression that many of these races conquered by the Han came willingly since the Han were so advanced compared to them. That is certainly not the case.
Regarding the language part.....
Many people in here claim that Cantonese is closest to ancient Chinese compared to any other Chinese dialect. What I don't understand is what happend to that language?
My lack of Chinese dialect knowledge may be the problem here, but it seems that those in the northern plains areas of ancient China speak dialects much more similar to Mandarin than Cantonese. Did the ancient "Cantonese-sounding" Chinese language die out due to Mongol and Manchu influences? Or was ancient Chinese nothing like Cantonese at all?
Regarding the superficial references....this has nothing to do with tv/movie stars. I live in San Francisco where theres a large Cantonese population and growing numbers of mainlanders. I dont deny that the lines are extremely blurry, but for the most part, its not very hard to tell the difference between Cantonese speakers and Mandarin speakers.
I dont have the luxury of actually comparing the features of people in China. I can only base my assumptions on those who migrate to my area. Those who speak Mandarin have a look much more similar to Koreans and Japanese compared to their Cantonese counterparts. Those in the North tend to have larger nose and noseridges, more of a "white" skin color, small slanted eyes and taller in height.
Of course, many of those Cantonese speakers I am referring to look just like the "Northerners." For the most part, there are a mixture of "pure" Chinese blood and tribes of South Asia or a more malayan look.
However, you give the impression that many of these races conquered by the Han came willingly since the Han were so advanced compared to them. That is certainly not the case.
Regarding the language part.....
Many people in here claim that Cantonese is closest to ancient Chinese compared to any other Chinese dialect. What I don't understand is what happend to that language?
My lack of Chinese dialect knowledge may be the problem here, but it seems that those in the northern plains areas of ancient China speak dialects much more similar to Mandarin than Cantonese. Did the ancient "Cantonese-sounding" Chinese language die out due to Mongol and Manchu influences? Or was ancient Chinese nothing like Cantonese at all?
Regarding the superficial references....this has nothing to do with tv/movie stars. I live in San Francisco where theres a large Cantonese population and growing numbers of mainlanders. I dont deny that the lines are extremely blurry, but for the most part, its not very hard to tell the difference between Cantonese speakers and Mandarin speakers.
I dont have the luxury of actually comparing the features of people in China. I can only base my assumptions on those who migrate to my area. Those who speak Mandarin have a look much more similar to Koreans and Japanese compared to their Cantonese counterparts. Those in the North tend to have larger nose and noseridges, more of a "white" skin color, small slanted eyes and taller in height.
Of course, many of those Cantonese speakers I am referring to look just like the "Northerners." For the most part, there are a mixture of "pure" Chinese blood and tribes of South Asia or a more malayan look.
-
Sum Won
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
I agree the comment KP made towards Terrence, on the assimilation process. However, on race issue, I acknowledge that we do have Chinese blood within us, if you would only scroll up and look at my previous postings, you'll find I have admitted that already. Also, that's why the topic is entitled "Cantonese originally not Chinese", and not "Cantonese not Chinese". As I have said in that same posting, that I believe it is still our obligation to learn more about the indigenous culture, rather than just blindly following one that took over, for the mere sake of "convenience".
Back to "Politicizing an issue" now: You can go ahead and ignore the issue of Cantonese independance. I would like to see the day the Cantonese get their independance from the Chinese, and if possible, to increase more studies of the indegenous culture, and even try to incorporate them into our modern-day society. For a written system, we can look towards the Koreans for example, who have come up with their own alphabet system. If we follow this example, we could come up with our own system of writing (not necessarily using an alphabet), for a means of communication, and to "record our history and culture". Now, what will we be using to talk to each other with? Obviously a system which will be the original Cantonese system, before the "hundred Yue Tribal" system was formed. This can be done with anthropological research. Once again, you may choose to ignore this view...
Now, in reference to the Native Americans, they're still battling out the territories with the US government, on sovereignty and representation. However, they can solve it either by violence or like Ghandi, and do things peacefully. Whichever path they choose, is their own. The same goes for the rest of the natives of any other country, whose sovereign rights and lands were taken away from them.
On to the disscussion of looks between the different races: "If you look back at all of my postings, I'm the only one who has ever refrained from using any such references for my arguements." This reason for this, is because I'm also Asian, and I can't ever tell the difference between most Asians myself."
Back to "Politicizing an issue" now: You can go ahead and ignore the issue of Cantonese independance. I would like to see the day the Cantonese get their independance from the Chinese, and if possible, to increase more studies of the indegenous culture, and even try to incorporate them into our modern-day society. For a written system, we can look towards the Koreans for example, who have come up with their own alphabet system. If we follow this example, we could come up with our own system of writing (not necessarily using an alphabet), for a means of communication, and to "record our history and culture". Now, what will we be using to talk to each other with? Obviously a system which will be the original Cantonese system, before the "hundred Yue Tribal" system was formed. This can be done with anthropological research. Once again, you may choose to ignore this view...
Now, in reference to the Native Americans, they're still battling out the territories with the US government, on sovereignty and representation. However, they can solve it either by violence or like Ghandi, and do things peacefully. Whichever path they choose, is their own. The same goes for the rest of the natives of any other country, whose sovereign rights and lands were taken away from them.
On to the disscussion of looks between the different races: "If you look back at all of my postings, I'm the only one who has ever refrained from using any such references for my arguements." This reason for this, is because I'm also Asian, and I can't ever tell the difference between most Asians myself."
-
Sum Won
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
KP:
I can understand how you can get confused about the Cantonese-Chinese issue. It is a fact that Cantonese does resemble the ancient Chinese language the most. This is most likely because they felt the need to "civilize" --in their sense-- the Cantonese tribes, and set up schools all over the Cantonese regions to teach them everything about Chinese. Whether the aborigines went of their own accord or were forced, still remains a mystery to me. Religion even played a role. They tried to use Buddhism as a tool, so that the Cantonese wouldn't pray to the "God of the South Sea" --Just like those bothersome missionaries that come to your house and try to convert you.
About the language, as I've speculated from the start, it was almost wiped out (except a few remnences of the original language).
Now, on the proposal for the "United Provinces of Orientals Taken Over by the Jung Guo", there would be some nice debate over what system should be used, as there was such a debate in the beginnings of the United States with the white-Americans.
I can understand how you can get confused about the Cantonese-Chinese issue. It is a fact that Cantonese does resemble the ancient Chinese language the most. This is most likely because they felt the need to "civilize" --in their sense-- the Cantonese tribes, and set up schools all over the Cantonese regions to teach them everything about Chinese. Whether the aborigines went of their own accord or were forced, still remains a mystery to me. Religion even played a role. They tried to use Buddhism as a tool, so that the Cantonese wouldn't pray to the "God of the South Sea" --Just like those bothersome missionaries that come to your house and try to convert you.
About the language, as I've speculated from the start, it was almost wiped out (except a few remnences of the original language).
Now, on the proposal for the "United Provinces of Orientals Taken Over by the Jung Guo", there would be some nice debate over what system should be used, as there was such a debate in the beginnings of the United States with the white-Americans.
-
Terence Lee
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
I am poor in English. Maybe my posting in English did not make you guys understand what I said. Or it is just like a Chinese proverb says “Playing Piano towards an Ox.” The origin of races and history of the sound-change of Chinese language are specialized subjects which are supposed not proper to publish here as it will be a book-sized essay. Also it will exhaust me if writing long essay in English. KP’s saying ‘My lack of Chinese dialect knowledge may be the problem here’ is definitely the factor causing so much confusion. For you guys understanding on this subject, I suggest you to read more Chinese cultural books (if you can read Chinese), not limited to dictionaries and textbook but also the dialectal books regarding Chinese races migration.
When I was in school, my teacher taught me to firstly make clear of the terms before making debates on it. So, what is Chinese, what is Cantonese should be made clear before hand (see my previous postings). If the topic had been changed to that aborigines of South China 2200 years ago were not Chinese, I think no one here would have argued on it. But when talking of Cantonese, it indicates the people of Canton province of China. China people are Chinese no matter where they are from. It is as clear as Hua race living in America called American. American can be of Indian races, German races, and Negro races.
I see that there is somebody taken natives of 2200 year- ago as an equivalent term calling Cantonese. However, this is wrong apply and consent. Natives were called Yue or Hundred Yue tribes 百越by Han (Han cultural people). Some scholars have said that Yue was a character derived from ‘ Hotness’ 熱, which was a name put by central people denoting the places where had no snow.
Yue themselves had no characters at that time, their history was recorded by Han scholars. As time went by, Han scholars got to know more of the native tribes so that within Yue, there were tribes named Eastern and Western Ou, Lao, Dai, Dong, Zhuang, Li etc. These were the aborigines in ancient Yue places. Geographically, Yue places broadly indicated provinces of Fujian, Canton, Taiwan, Guangxi, Hainan. These provinces are mainly separated from the northern provinces by Wu Ling (5 mountains). Cultural spreading to Canton from the common language blocks was always difficult and time consuming. But in history (800,000days, figure for those deem 2200 years not long enough to make those differences), cultural spreading never stopped. I have plenty of materials showing migration and change of sound more frequently happen in northern part of China but find it difficult to post them all here (please carefully read the book I referred last time). You guys should refer to Chinese history to check how many invasions and civil wars occurred in northern China, how many races in history have been assimilated into Han and how many migrations the northern people did to escape from wars, flood and famine.
Language did not die out but changed. In some areas, changes were more rapid while some were not. Assimilation could be easier here but stagnant there. Moreover, language changes varied from sound to expression, written to colloquial and it was not solely influenced by other races, but changed throughout practical uses due to departed geographical grounds, like that between British and American English (250 years?) and that between Guangzhou and Hong Kong Cantonese (150 years).
If facial difference is to be drawn to prove races differences, statistics should be scientifically conducted but I am quite sure about the result not against me. Skin color may be quite apparent but may be due to weather zones. It’s fun when describing northern people having small slanted eyes, then women in north must be from different races of men in north too. I think the description was made in a slanted stance as well. Mandarin speakers of today reflect no geographical boundaries of people as Putonghua has been forcibly promoted in Mainland China recent decades If you guys came to Canton, younger Cantonese can talk with you in Putonghua (precisely not Mandarin). Most of the illiterate older inland residents of China don’t speak Mandarin instead, they speak their own dialects which to some extent are deemed more closer to Putonghua in contrast with Cantonese. However, they are just geographically closer to ancient capitals and have not separated by Wu Ling. Some colloquial that Cantonese speaks are the same sound as that Sichuanese, Hunanese and Zhejiangese speak, such as啥. 渠, 窖and覅. Just go and visit China to check them out if have doubt.
As for the so-called indigenous culture of the native, what was that? Schools established in Canton for forcing natives to learn Han culture, where were them? Think if the modern terms and modes of society applicable to the ancient Canton. Mind you that there were still 0.2 billion illiterate people in China nowadays.
On the other hand, Li, Zhuang and Dong races were comparatively purer descendants of the aborigines in Canton 800,000 days ago. They kept their own customs and traditions and even language but they still don’t have their writing besides educated people writing in Han. They being a race of Chinese, mostly scattered in Hainan province and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and now they are still on their way to being assimilated by Han culture. If there is someone would ask for independence, I think Zhuang-Dong-Li people should be more likely to than those Hanian and Hanized漢化 Cantonese should. Furthermore, assimilation, in term of cultural history, means absorbing and mixing cultures depending on natural selection. Some cultures of minor races are also naturally selected to fuse into Han culture whilst not being totally eliminated.
I hope this is enough to draw back the attention of those young, innocent Chinese who might have fallen confused with this topic and thus save my words.
PS. A philosopher said truth is to be found through debates, but I think except for political belief.
When I was in school, my teacher taught me to firstly make clear of the terms before making debates on it. So, what is Chinese, what is Cantonese should be made clear before hand (see my previous postings). If the topic had been changed to that aborigines of South China 2200 years ago were not Chinese, I think no one here would have argued on it. But when talking of Cantonese, it indicates the people of Canton province of China. China people are Chinese no matter where they are from. It is as clear as Hua race living in America called American. American can be of Indian races, German races, and Negro races.
I see that there is somebody taken natives of 2200 year- ago as an equivalent term calling Cantonese. However, this is wrong apply and consent. Natives were called Yue or Hundred Yue tribes 百越by Han (Han cultural people). Some scholars have said that Yue was a character derived from ‘ Hotness’ 熱, which was a name put by central people denoting the places where had no snow.
Yue themselves had no characters at that time, their history was recorded by Han scholars. As time went by, Han scholars got to know more of the native tribes so that within Yue, there were tribes named Eastern and Western Ou, Lao, Dai, Dong, Zhuang, Li etc. These were the aborigines in ancient Yue places. Geographically, Yue places broadly indicated provinces of Fujian, Canton, Taiwan, Guangxi, Hainan. These provinces are mainly separated from the northern provinces by Wu Ling (5 mountains). Cultural spreading to Canton from the common language blocks was always difficult and time consuming. But in history (800,000days, figure for those deem 2200 years not long enough to make those differences), cultural spreading never stopped. I have plenty of materials showing migration and change of sound more frequently happen in northern part of China but find it difficult to post them all here (please carefully read the book I referred last time). You guys should refer to Chinese history to check how many invasions and civil wars occurred in northern China, how many races in history have been assimilated into Han and how many migrations the northern people did to escape from wars, flood and famine.
Language did not die out but changed. In some areas, changes were more rapid while some were not. Assimilation could be easier here but stagnant there. Moreover, language changes varied from sound to expression, written to colloquial and it was not solely influenced by other races, but changed throughout practical uses due to departed geographical grounds, like that between British and American English (250 years?) and that between Guangzhou and Hong Kong Cantonese (150 years).
If facial difference is to be drawn to prove races differences, statistics should be scientifically conducted but I am quite sure about the result not against me. Skin color may be quite apparent but may be due to weather zones. It’s fun when describing northern people having small slanted eyes, then women in north must be from different races of men in north too. I think the description was made in a slanted stance as well. Mandarin speakers of today reflect no geographical boundaries of people as Putonghua has been forcibly promoted in Mainland China recent decades If you guys came to Canton, younger Cantonese can talk with you in Putonghua (precisely not Mandarin). Most of the illiterate older inland residents of China don’t speak Mandarin instead, they speak their own dialects which to some extent are deemed more closer to Putonghua in contrast with Cantonese. However, they are just geographically closer to ancient capitals and have not separated by Wu Ling. Some colloquial that Cantonese speaks are the same sound as that Sichuanese, Hunanese and Zhejiangese speak, such as啥. 渠, 窖and覅. Just go and visit China to check them out if have doubt.
As for the so-called indigenous culture of the native, what was that? Schools established in Canton for forcing natives to learn Han culture, where were them? Think if the modern terms and modes of society applicable to the ancient Canton. Mind you that there were still 0.2 billion illiterate people in China nowadays.
On the other hand, Li, Zhuang and Dong races were comparatively purer descendants of the aborigines in Canton 800,000 days ago. They kept their own customs and traditions and even language but they still don’t have their writing besides educated people writing in Han. They being a race of Chinese, mostly scattered in Hainan province and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and now they are still on their way to being assimilated by Han culture. If there is someone would ask for independence, I think Zhuang-Dong-Li people should be more likely to than those Hanian and Hanized漢化 Cantonese should. Furthermore, assimilation, in term of cultural history, means absorbing and mixing cultures depending on natural selection. Some cultures of minor races are also naturally selected to fuse into Han culture whilst not being totally eliminated.
I hope this is enough to draw back the attention of those young, innocent Chinese who might have fallen confused with this topic and thus save my words.
PS. A philosopher said truth is to be found through debates, but I think except for political belief.
-
Lisa C
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
Dylan Sung's website is as follows: http://www.sungwh.freeserve.co.uk/chinese/index.html
It gives a comparison of the main language groups in China and some history of migrating/invading groups influence on language.
I don't know how many of you speak Cantonese (HK) as opposed to mainland, but there are differences and native speakers can usually tell the origin of the other person. Differences are dying out b/c everyone in China now seem to have a TV and get the HK programming, just like differences in the US accents/dialects are dying out. Except for some isolated regions or large populations groups most people in the US sound like they're from California.
It gives a comparison of the main language groups in China and some history of migrating/invading groups influence on language.
I don't know how many of you speak Cantonese (HK) as opposed to mainland, but there are differences and native speakers can usually tell the origin of the other person. Differences are dying out b/c everyone in China now seem to have a TV and get the HK programming, just like differences in the US accents/dialects are dying out. Except for some isolated regions or large populations groups most people in the US sound like they're from California.
-
Sum Won
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
Once again, you express your views, which I've taken careful consideration to, as always. You are correct that their history was recorded by the Han, but remember, that the Han were merely outsiders, and only recorded their interaction and experience with the Yue, and not the history of the Yue themselves. You keep telling me to read more Chinese history, and books on Chinese migration; I have read some. However, just because it's from a Chinese source, doesn't necessarily they include every aspect, or that they don't leave any details out for a certain reason. As I have recommended, you should read Edward Schafer's "The Vermilion Bird: T'ang Images of the South". Here, you'll see the setup of schools were they try to assimilate the Chinese... Mainly, these "schools" were set up as a religious center, and tried to teach Chinese Buddhism, or more rare, taoism. These religions generally counteracted the religion(s) of the aborigines.
Now, on the issue for Cantonese independance, you are correct that the Zhuang, and other tribes have more of a right to call for independance. However, a similar case was debated in the courts of America, where a group of people who have only one-sixteenth of Native blood, looking very similar to caucasians, tried to settle land disputes and set up their own casino. To make a long story short, they won the case, and are recognized as a sovereign people. Though their rights are still impeded upon, from time to time, this is a first step. These people have both caucasian and native blood in them. So why did they fight against who Terrence might consider, "their own people"? Because they had rights, which were "inalienable" to any person, or group of people. If these people, aren't a good example I don't know what is.
Now, on the issue for Cantonese independance, you are correct that the Zhuang, and other tribes have more of a right to call for independance. However, a similar case was debated in the courts of America, where a group of people who have only one-sixteenth of Native blood, looking very similar to caucasians, tried to settle land disputes and set up their own casino. To make a long story short, they won the case, and are recognized as a sovereign people. Though their rights are still impeded upon, from time to time, this is a first step. These people have both caucasian and native blood in them. So why did they fight against who Terrence might consider, "their own people"? Because they had rights, which were "inalienable" to any person, or group of people. If these people, aren't a good example I don't know what is.
-
Sum Won
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
Thank you for sending me the link.
Yes, I am aware of the many dialectal differences in Cantonese itself. I'm not sure if any of you can hear the differences between GuangXi and GuangFu Cantonese, but I can speak both, and recognize the differences in pronounciation and some different uses of words.
It's sad to see many Yue people "switching over" from their own dialect to what they consider "standard Cantonese". Many languages in the world are dieing out and some are lost already... Sure, we're communicating better by using one language, but it seems as if we lose a part of ourselves in the process. The study of anthropology, is labeled under the category of humanities. Anthropologists in essence, "study humans". language is a big part of human life. So whenever a language dies out, it seems like we're losing a part of our humanity.
Luckily, thanks to the many works of linguistics-anthropologists, we can trace, or sometimes even reconstruct many lost languages.
Yes, I am aware of the many dialectal differences in Cantonese itself. I'm not sure if any of you can hear the differences between GuangXi and GuangFu Cantonese, but I can speak both, and recognize the differences in pronounciation and some different uses of words.
It's sad to see many Yue people "switching over" from their own dialect to what they consider "standard Cantonese". Many languages in the world are dieing out and some are lost already... Sure, we're communicating better by using one language, but it seems as if we lose a part of ourselves in the process. The study of anthropology, is labeled under the category of humanities. Anthropologists in essence, "study humans". language is a big part of human life. So whenever a language dies out, it seems like we're losing a part of our humanity.
Luckily, thanks to the many works of linguistics-anthropologists, we can trace, or sometimes even reconstruct many lost languages.
-
Shanghai Noon
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
I agree with you Terence. Don’t play piano for ox again. Haahaa…
Now, readers can see how assimilation works. The author is apparently assimilated by Western culture. He takes Western (American) law as infallible law to judge the world. He takes western historian view on China as his view to comprehend China. He takes American standard to standardize the world. American do not set up schools to force other nations to learn American culture but set up the media net with money coverage to assimilate others and unify the world under her measure of value. Yes, American domination over the world should be resisted by other nations and aborigines.
Schools in Canton for Buddhism and Toaism? Wrong. Vermilian Bird meant southern direction in comparing to the position of Chinese central government. South of China is not Canton. Leaning culture through preaching religion was not likely happened in Canton. It sounds more likely in Thailand and Tibet, China. Matteo Ricci could have made wrong or inaccurate records on China even though he lived there for decades. How can western scholars make accurate criticism on China issues without accurate knowledge? Why there are so many conflicts between Western and Eastern is self-explanatory.
Now, readers can see how assimilation works. The author is apparently assimilated by Western culture. He takes Western (American) law as infallible law to judge the world. He takes western historian view on China as his view to comprehend China. He takes American standard to standardize the world. American do not set up schools to force other nations to learn American culture but set up the media net with money coverage to assimilate others and unify the world under her measure of value. Yes, American domination over the world should be resisted by other nations and aborigines.
Schools in Canton for Buddhism and Toaism? Wrong. Vermilian Bird meant southern direction in comparing to the position of Chinese central government. South of China is not Canton. Leaning culture through preaching religion was not likely happened in Canton. It sounds more likely in Thailand and Tibet, China. Matteo Ricci could have made wrong or inaccurate records on China even though he lived there for decades. How can western scholars make accurate criticism on China issues without accurate knowledge? Why there are so many conflicts between Western and Eastern is self-explanatory.
-
Sum Won
Re: Cantonese originally not Chinese???
Why many people in this forum who disagree with me, seem to be so ignorant in the truth is self-explanatory. The people who disagree with me in this forum seem to be merely cows that can't comprehend music of any sort, let alone the mere sounds made from a piano/guitar. Western scholars (at least the good ones --which means "better than any of you here") look at many sources, including foreign and domestic. Just because Matteo Ricci made mistakes, doesn't mean all non-Chinese who retrieve information are wrong also. Edward Schafer used many resources from Chinese and from archaelogical discoveries made. Correct, he could have some things wrong, but that's because there weren't any Western scholars allowed into China during his time. However, I would have to give you credit in being correct that "South China is not Canton", but that "The Cantonese Regions are contained within South China". Maybe you should read it again, since it seems that you don't understand it all too well.
You're accusing someone with a sense of individuality of using "American standards and values" to make decisions. Though I am an American, I still live with Asian culture surrounded all over me. I have looked at Chinese sources, such as Si Ma Qian's "Shi Ji", and maybe all of you should too. Remember, Zhao Tuo married an aborigine. You know what else? A person with aborigine descendant had control of the throne.
Funny how someone can manage to lump "Western" with "American", and somehow mention "law" when actually, the main issues here are ideology and history. Then, somehow you try to say I'm an outside towards Chinese culture, when in actuality, through the intensive research and personal experience with it, I probably know more about Chinese culture than any other person here.
You're accusing someone with a sense of individuality of using "American standards and values" to make decisions. Though I am an American, I still live with Asian culture surrounded all over me. I have looked at Chinese sources, such as Si Ma Qian's "Shi Ji", and maybe all of you should too. Remember, Zhao Tuo married an aborigine. You know what else? A person with aborigine descendant had control of the throne.
Funny how someone can manage to lump "Western" with "American", and somehow mention "law" when actually, the main issues here are ideology and history. Then, somehow you try to say I'm an outside towards Chinese culture, when in actuality, through the intensive research and personal experience with it, I probably know more about Chinese culture than any other person here.