Relationship chart between the various Min languages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Min_Chinese#Varieties
Essentially, the 'greater' minnan group are
1. Quanzhou
2. Zhangzhou
3. Amoy/Taiwan
4. Teochiu
5. Puxian (Hing hua)
6. Hainanese
7. Datian ?
Minnan relationship chart
Re: Minnan relationship chart
Thanks for this - a very nice article.
If one looks at the "View History"-tab, there have been quite a large number of contributors to this article from 2003 to now - more than 250 edits, which is more than 25 edits a year, which is more than 2 edits a month.
If one looks at the top 10 editors:
Kwamikagami - 17 edits
GnuDoyng - 11 edits
163.1.16.71 - 10 edits
Hongthay - 10 edits
ASDFGH - 9 edits
Kaihsu - 9 edits
109.246.20.218 - 6 edits
130.245.233.132 - 6 edits
71.172.56.67 - 6 edits
Tricia Takanawa - 5 edits
So, there is quite a large number of people who are interested in (and know a lot about) Min languages. What surprises me is why I don't see some of them here... (or maybe ah-bin, niuc, mark, and amhoanna do this stuff on Wikipedia under a different name
).
If one looks at the "View History"-tab, there have been quite a large number of contributors to this article from 2003 to now - more than 250 edits, which is more than 25 edits a year, which is more than 2 edits a month.
If one looks at the top 10 editors:
Kwamikagami - 17 edits
GnuDoyng - 11 edits
163.1.16.71 - 10 edits
Hongthay - 10 edits
ASDFGH - 9 edits
Kaihsu - 9 edits
109.246.20.218 - 6 edits
130.245.233.132 - 6 edits
71.172.56.67 - 6 edits
Tricia Takanawa - 5 edits
So, there is quite a large number of people who are interested in (and know a lot about) Min languages. What surprises me is why I don't see some of them here... (or maybe ah-bin, niuc, mark, and amhoanna do this stuff on Wikipedia under a different name
).Re: Minnan relationship chart
Reading related links on Wikipedia led me to this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Written_Hokkien, which has the following line in it:
"In 2007, the Ministry of Education of the Republic of China formulated and released a standard character set to overcome these difficulties. These standard Chinese characters for writing Taiwanese Hokkien are now taught in schools in Taiwan."
Does anyone know how to get hold of this list? If so, I'd be very happy to have it, either posted as an reply here, or mailed to me. Perhaps people who can actually read Chinese and google in Chinese might like to try, as a favour to me? I'd like to see this list, quite independently of my opinion of whether or not a particular character they've chosen is "suitable". As with Ah-bin adopting POJ rather than "modified POJ", I'd be willing to put aside my own personal preferences, if there is a standard which has some chance of success.
"In 2007, the Ministry of Education of the Republic of China formulated and released a standard character set to overcome these difficulties. These standard Chinese characters for writing Taiwanese Hokkien are now taught in schools in Taiwan."
Does anyone know how to get hold of this list? If so, I'd be very happy to have it, either posted as an reply here, or mailed to me. Perhaps people who can actually read Chinese and google in Chinese might like to try, as a favour to me? I'd like to see this list, quite independently of my opinion of whether or not a particular character they've chosen is "suitable". As with Ah-bin adopting POJ rather than "modified POJ", I'd be willing to put aside my own personal preferences, if there is a standard which has some chance of success.
Re: Minnan relationship chart
Hi, Sim,
I did a Google search using "臺灣閩南語推薦用字 site:www.edu.tw" as the search string, and these are the links that came up:
1. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第1批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 960523.pdf)
2. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第2批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 970501.pdf)
3. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第3批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/MANDR/ ... 990915.pdf)
4. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字 700 字 (http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/M0 ... D/D005.pdf)
I am very sure I have seen these lists before, but just cannot recall where (Ah-bin might have passed them to me at some stage). It will come back to me soon.
I did a Google search using "臺灣閩南語推薦用字 site:www.edu.tw" as the search string, and these are the links that came up:
1. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第1批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 960523.pdf)
2. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第2批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 970501.pdf)
3. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第3批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/MANDR/ ... 990915.pdf)
4. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字 700 字 (http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/M0 ... D/D005.pdf)
I am very sure I have seen these lists before, but just cannot recall where (Ah-bin might have passed them to me at some stage). It will come back to me soon.
Re: Minnan relationship chart
Yup, 163.1.16.71 -- that's me! Just kidding. 
For some reason, I find this article kind of annoying, although it's really not that bad compared to others we've all seen.
For some reason, I find this article kind of annoying, although it's really not that bad compared to others we've all seen.Re: Minnan relationship chart
Hi Mark,
>> 1. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第1批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 960523.pdf)
>> 2. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第2批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 970501.pdf)
>> 3. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第3批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/MANDR/ ... 990915.pdf)
>> 4. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字 700 字 (http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/M0 ... D/D005.pdf)
Many thanks for finding these. They look exciting, and I'll be able to use them in a possibly new project I'm working on.
Hi amhoanna,
>> For some reason, I find this article kind of annoying
Can you put your finger on what you found annoying about the article?
>> 1. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第1批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 960523.pdf)
>> 2. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第2批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 970501.pdf)
>> 3. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第3批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/MANDR/ ... 990915.pdf)
>> 4. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字 700 字 (http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/M0 ... D/D005.pdf)
Many thanks for finding these. They look exciting, and I'll be able to use them in a possibly new project I'm working on.
Hi amhoanna,
>> For some reason, I find this article kind of annoying
Can you put your finger on what you found annoying about the article?
Re: Minnan relationship chart
1. They use Mandarin names for everything. They wouldn't do this for an article about Korean or Vietnamese, so why for Hoklo and Teochew? They don't mind learning a "new system" of names for Korean and Vietnamese, so why not Hoklo and Teochew?Can you put your finger on what you found annoying about the article?
2. It regurgitates the "conventional", conservative line of scholarship, the guys who classify the "dialect / topolect" of each county based on the "readings" of kanji in the language of the county seat...
3. Wrong statements that come from the 3rd hand reproduction of knowledge. In what way is "Min Dong" considered a standard in "Fujian"?
4. Even the "history" section is just a regurgitation of the history of Han settlement in the "Min" area, written from a Yellow River POV. I guess this is the key phrase: YELLOW RIVER POINT OF VIEW.
Re: Minnan relationship chart
Hi amhoanna,
Yes, after I posed my question to you, I thought about it, and guessed that it might be connected to how "smug" the article was, as if the branching into the different sub-groups and sub-sub-groups was very clear and regular.
>> written from a Yellow River POV
Well, many years ago, for a period of a few months, we had a very enthusiastic poster here, who despised "The Northerners", and felt that the "real" Chinese were the Hokkiens. Mandarin was just some bastardized Mongol- and Manchu-invasion mish-mash. Sadly, the moderators removed most of his writings, which were very polemic and extreme. Of course, I'm not trying to imply that you are any way in that direction, but your statement did make me think back to the guy 
.
Yes, after I posed my question to you, I thought about it, and guessed that it might be connected to how "smug" the article was, as if the branching into the different sub-groups and sub-sub-groups was very clear and regular.
>> written from a Yellow River POV
Well, many years ago, for a period of a few months, we had a very enthusiastic poster here, who despised "The Northerners", and felt that the "real" Chinese were the Hokkiens. Mandarin was just some bastardized Mongol- and Manchu-invasion mish-mash
. Sadly, the moderators removed most of his writings, which were very polemic and extreme. Of course, I'm not trying to imply that you are any way in that direction, but your statement did make me think back to the guy .Re: Minnan relationship chart
Good point.and guessed that it might be connected to how "smug" the article was, as if the branching into the different sub-groups and sub-sub-groups was very clear and regular.
Sounds like he made an ass of himself. Mongols and Manchus are people too.a very enthusiastic poster here, who despised "The Northerners", and felt that the "real" Chinese were the Hokkiens. Mandarin was just some bastardized Mongol- and Manchu-invasion mish-mash
Re: Minnan relationship chart
Unfortunately, some are not benzi and some have even several different characters instead of the benzi.Mark Yong wrote:Hi, Sim,
I did a Google search using "臺灣閩南語推薦用字 site:www.edu.tw" as the search string, and these are the links that came up:
1. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第1批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 960523.pdf)
2. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第2批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/M0001/ ... 970501.pdf)
3. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字（第3批） (http://www.edu.tw/files/bulletin/MANDR/ ... 990915.pdf)
4. 臺灣閩南語推薦用字 700 字 (http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/M0 ... D/D005.pdf)
I am very sure I have seen these lists before, but just cannot recall where (Ah-bin might have passed them to me at some stage). It will come back to me soon.