Ok. I found the link to a better chart that list the dynasties as well.
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index. ... wtopic=835
There is another chart which states that min language diverge from ancient chinese. I will put in URL later.
Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
-
AlexNg
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Ok. Found the link to the last chart that MIN branched off from ancient chinese instead of middle chinese.
http://www.glossika.com/en/dict/faq.htm
http://www.glossika.com/en/dict/faq.htm
-
hong
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Do you think that I haven't read these web sites?I also believed it two years ago it but I find that it is wrong theory after some studies.There are no way people in western han speak like min languages.They speak chang an language as the standard even until Tang dysnaty.In chang an dict I have,the words for that period seldom have anything to do with min languages.
What the web supposed to say are minnan and cantonese retain the ru sound in china languges.Every chinese language has ru sound and no f consonat 2000 years ago.
many chinese languages changed but min langugese did not change a lot for those ru sound and p sound .The wen du sound is steated from Tang period where min people found that thet have to find a sound to chant those literature from the north.Although they normally don't have to use those northen languages in daily life .Just like some putonghua words cannot be used at all in minnan phrase but we can chant it in tang poetry.
What the web supposed to say are minnan and cantonese retain the ru sound in china languges.Every chinese language has ru sound and no f consonat 2000 years ago.
many chinese languages changed but min langugese did not change a lot for those ru sound and p sound .The wen du sound is steated from Tang period where min people found that thet have to find a sound to chant those literature from the north.Although they normally don't have to use those northen languages in daily life .Just like some putonghua words cannot be used at all in minnan phrase but we can chant it in tang poetry.
-
hong
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Alex,we must buy books on history of chinese langugaes like those mention here.
http://www.modernchinese.com online material just not good enough.
http://www.modernchinese.com online material just not good enough.
-
casey
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Quote:
"The people from chin, han dynasty spoke a language similar to hokkien.
The people from tang dynasty spoke a language similar to cantonese."
If this is true, how come the Japanese Kanji pronunciation is closer to Minnan dialect than Cantonese? We all know that Japan invented their "kana" or alpabet after adopting the Chinese culture during the Tang dynasty.
"The people from chin, han dynasty spoke a language similar to hokkien.
The people from tang dynasty spoke a language similar to cantonese."
If this is true, how come the Japanese Kanji pronunciation is closer to Minnan dialect than Cantonese? We all know that Japan invented their "kana" or alpabet after adopting the Chinese culture during the Tang dynasty.
-
Niuc
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
I am not an expert on this but once I read that Japanese borrowed Chinese reading (On) gradually， particularly during Wu Kingdom (Go On)and Tang dynasty (Tou On). May be those Go On are closer to Minnan and Tou On to Cantonese. Overall Japanese On are closer to Minnan, but Japanese word for tea is 茶 "cha" (closer to Cantonese/Mandarin), though 郑 (a surname) is "tei" ("a minnan pronunciation"). Was "cha" borrowed during Tang and "tei" during Wu?
[%sig%]
[%sig%]
-
casey
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Niuc
Thanks for your input. Could it be the other way round, i.e., while "cha" is Go On and "tei" is Tou On? In this case "cha" is from the Wu dialect instead and it has nothing to do with Cantonese.
I remember somewhere in this forum during the early days, some one had mentioned about Qinshihuang sending troops of 50 thousand people to Nan Yue and that influenced the Guangdong dialect.
From the East Han onwards the official language was the language spoken in the He-Luo region and this was similar to Minnan and Mindong dialects because the people who fled from northern China during the Jin period and the troops sent to stop the rebels during the Tang period brought their languages to the present Fujian area.
However, I am not a historian nor a linguistic expert. I just cast my doubts over those statements mentioned in this thread.
Thanks for your input. Could it be the other way round, i.e., while "cha" is Go On and "tei" is Tou On? In this case "cha" is from the Wu dialect instead and it has nothing to do with Cantonese.
I remember somewhere in this forum during the early days, some one had mentioned about Qinshihuang sending troops of 50 thousand people to Nan Yue and that influenced the Guangdong dialect.
From the East Han onwards the official language was the language spoken in the He-Luo region and this was similar to Minnan and Mindong dialects because the people who fled from northern China during the Jin period and the troops sent to stop the rebels during the Tang period brought their languages to the present Fujian area.
However, I am not a historian nor a linguistic expert. I just cast my doubts over those statements mentioned in this thread.
-
Niuc
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Hi Casey
From what I read, Hokkien preserves older features than Cantonese, such as: 't' initial for what is 'c'/'zh' in Cantonese/Mandarin (e.g. 中，长，宙 etc)and absence of 'f' initial. 误 Ngo5 or Wu Kingdom during 三国 Sam1-Kok4 (Three Kingdoms) was before 唐朝 Tong5-Tiau5 / Tang Dynasty, so it's more likely that Go On is closer to Hokkien.
Although modern Wu language (including Shanghainese) is a direct descendant of Wu language during Wu Kingdom, it has undergone a lot of changes and heavily influenced by Mandarin. This is also true for Northern Chinese (including Mandarin), a direct descendant of Old & Middle Chinese but it has lost a lot of OC & MC features. Some say that there were several regional Chinese languages since long time ago, though not as many as now.
May be the language of people who settled down in Minnan area during 晋 Jin period or earlier became Colloquial Hokkien and the one during Tang and after became Literary Hokkien. Due to hilly terrain that more or less isolated Fujian province, Hokkien underwent less changes and influences so it can preserve many of OC & MC features.
I am also not an expert
. If any friends here know better, please share with us!
[%sig%]
From what I read, Hokkien preserves older features than Cantonese, such as: 't' initial for what is 'c'/'zh' in Cantonese/Mandarin (e.g. 中，长，宙 etc)and absence of 'f' initial. 误 Ngo5 or Wu Kingdom during 三国 Sam1-Kok4 (Three Kingdoms) was before 唐朝 Tong5-Tiau5 / Tang Dynasty, so it's more likely that Go On is closer to Hokkien.
Although modern Wu language (including Shanghainese) is a direct descendant of Wu language during Wu Kingdom, it has undergone a lot of changes and heavily influenced by Mandarin. This is also true for Northern Chinese (including Mandarin), a direct descendant of Old & Middle Chinese but it has lost a lot of OC & MC features. Some say that there were several regional Chinese languages since long time ago, though not as many as now.
May be the language of people who settled down in Minnan area during 晋 Jin period or earlier became Colloquial Hokkien and the one during Tang and after became Literary Hokkien. Due to hilly terrain that more or less isolated Fujian province, Hokkien underwent less changes and influences so it can preserve many of OC & MC features.
I am also not an expert
. If any friends here know better, please share with us![%sig%]
-
hong
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
Niu,You can become expert if you have 10000 pounds which includes money for travelling to library in China and Taiwan for phtocopying.If you just send the money to order as soon as possible,I can see great improvement now.I know a lot people who spent four years of zhongwenxi in university but still their knowledge of zhongguhanyu and shanguhanyu are like hell.I know a friend who even doesn't know how to say light tone in mandarin but can still get a job in TV station.He spent 4 years in Taiwan.He never learnt anything about Guangyun,etc.Taiwan 's Prof do teach light tones in mandarin.
As long as we buy books and do really spend time studying,we are improving a lot day by day.
As long as we buy books and do really spend time studying,we are improving a lot day by day.
-
qrasy
Re: Hokkiens Also Originally Not Chinese???
(Hokkien Lang)
>Historically it was claimed that Hokkiens originated from tribal groups inhabiting the Central Yangtze Valley who were pushed south-east towards the Fujian Province by the Northerners who subsequently subdued them and imposed their culture and character-writing on them as well as considered them as part of Han Chinese. But the fact that the Hokkien language differs vastly from Mandarin indicates that Hokkiens were originally not Chinese!!! What do you have to say?
<Okay, by the way, if you look at www.uglychinese.org it says that these "Central Yangtze Valley" people was also the brothers of Chinese, they are as close as ancient Chinese-ancient Tibetan. Moreover, Mandarin was not a good standard for Chinese, since it has been too much affected by Altaic Languages.
<boh2->Wu2 "Not Have" (Notice that this had something like "V-" in Middle Chinese)
(Na Ren)
>I agree that Chinese refers to cultural and not necessarily racial factors. But even if it was based off of racial factors, I would still say that Hokkiens and the other southern Chinese are still in fact Chinese. The area has been directly controlled by the various Chinese dynasties for a long time, so who is to say that intermarriage between the northerners and southerners has not taken place? Based on Y-chromosome testings, it seems that all the people of the Chinese mainland are descended from two waves of human migration that left from what is now in Kazakhstan, one settling in the north and one in the south. With no barriers dividing the two populations, but mountains and desert isolating the two from others, the mutations characteristic of the south appear in the north and vice versa. And culturally, we are Chinese, how many of the Hokkiens and Teochews in this site actually practise Dai or Austronesian customs? If there are any, let me know.
< You are wrong to say that Baiyue had Austronesian in their blood. "Austronesian" blood would make people not similar at all to Chinese, even as low as 2%. This 2% gene would make 80% difference. I think BaiYue contained "Viet", "Tai" and "Miao-Yao", and not "Austronesian"
(A-hiong)
>We are all Chinese regardless if we are Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, Mongolian, etc...
<Since when does "Mongolian" be a part of Chinese?
(bright)
>Are hokkien from mongolia ?. people these days use this
term : sinicized.
<Don't misuse the term Sinicized. This means that this is non-Chinese tribe, becoming under and under Chinese domination. Hokkienese are not Sinicized Mongolians, but rather "Viets"
>Historically it was claimed that Hokkiens originated from tribal groups inhabiting the Central Yangtze Valley who were pushed south-east towards the Fujian Province by the Northerners who subsequently subdued them and imposed their culture and character-writing on them as well as considered them as part of Han Chinese. But the fact that the Hokkien language differs vastly from Mandarin indicates that Hokkiens were originally not Chinese!!! What do you have to say?
<Okay, by the way, if you look at www.uglychinese.org it says that these "Central Yangtze Valley" people was also the brothers of Chinese, they are as close as ancient Chinese-ancient Tibetan. Moreover, Mandarin was not a good standard for Chinese, since it has been too much affected by Altaic Languages.
<boh2->Wu2 "Not Have" (Notice that this had something like "V-" in Middle Chinese)
(Na Ren)
>I agree that Chinese refers to cultural and not necessarily racial factors. But even if it was based off of racial factors, I would still say that Hokkiens and the other southern Chinese are still in fact Chinese. The area has been directly controlled by the various Chinese dynasties for a long time, so who is to say that intermarriage between the northerners and southerners has not taken place? Based on Y-chromosome testings, it seems that all the people of the Chinese mainland are descended from two waves of human migration that left from what is now in Kazakhstan, one settling in the north and one in the south. With no barriers dividing the two populations, but mountains and desert isolating the two from others, the mutations characteristic of the south appear in the north and vice versa. And culturally, we are Chinese, how many of the Hokkiens and Teochews in this site actually practise Dai or Austronesian customs? If there are any, let me know.
< You are wrong to say that Baiyue had Austronesian in their blood. "Austronesian" blood would make people not similar at all to Chinese, even as low as 2%. This 2% gene would make 80% difference. I think BaiYue contained "Viet", "Tai" and "Miao-Yao", and not "Austronesian"
(A-hiong)
>We are all Chinese regardless if we are Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, Mongolian, etc...
<Since when does "Mongolian" be a part of Chinese?
(bright)
>Are hokkien from mongolia ?. people these days use this
term : sinicized.
<Don't misuse the term Sinicized. This means that this is non-Chinese tribe, becoming under and under Chinese domination. Hokkienese are not Sinicized Mongolians, but rather "Viets"