CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Discussions on the Cantonese language.
kalvin
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 3:53 pm

CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby kalvin » Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:11 am

In the book "The Chinese Mosaic: The Peoples and Provinces of China",
it is quoted that the present Yue (Cantonese) people are 60% Zhuang
(which is a Tai group, not Sinitic) genetically from anthropological
studies. the tai speaking people were the original ethnic group that settled all along this area of southern china.(tai group is zhuang, thai, laos, and many others.) What they are saying is that we are not full blooded chinese. Our facial feature and language is a little different then chinese.

Bamboo Shoot

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Bamboo Shoot » Fri Mar 07, 2003 1:27 pm

I wouldn't worry about claims of being or not being a "full-blooded" Chinese as it is only a relative classification.

The Cantonese languages spoken today are probably around 700 years old since the Lingnan region of SE China (including Guangdong, Guangxi, Annam, Fujian, Hainan & Taiwan) had recieved a large influx of multi-ethnic (multi-tribal) refugees from an area around Xixia China in the 1200's-1300's who probably identified themselves politically and culturally as "Tangren" upon mixing with the native Lingnan people. (Incidentally, the modern people living in former boundaries of Xixia China never heard of the "Tangren" identity before and neither have the Mandarin speaking areas of northern China which too were a part of Tang China. This is based on my personal interviews.) Therefore, it is fair to argue that the Cantonese languages are a mixture of both Han & Tai [Bai Yue] in origin. I believe this case of language & genetic hybridization is also true for Kejia, Chaozhou, Hainanese. & Fujian people as there are many linguistic overlaps among these regional dialectic groups. (Disclaimer: there are some Chinese who believe in an ethnic/linquistic pedegree system who will dispute my prior arguement out of pride, ignorance, & stubborness...so if anyone happens to be one of them, don't expect a rebuttle from me).

To support this arguement of a language mixture, you will find that spoken Cantonese still uses words derived from classical Chinese (most likely introduced by the Song Dynasty Tangren refugees from Xixia-China) but sounds unnatural in spoken Beijing Mandarin (however makes perfect sense in the formal written communication). Words such as "jinoi" (zhinei) [within] & "jihau" (zhihou) [after] are examples of words used in spoken Cantonese but not spoken Mandarin (which prefers to use "yinei" and "yihou" instead).

Then there are words that need more etomological research such as <but> "danhai" which obviously is borrowed from the Classical Chinese word "dansee" (danshi) with "dan---" derived from the classical Han language and "---hai" most likely from the Tai/Bai Yue languages. (Spoken Beijing Mandarin prefers "keshi" instead of "danshi" which follows a linguistic trend that many classical Chinese words are absent in standard Mandarin suggesting that Mandarin is a younger language which debunks the myth that Mandarin is the "mother tongue" of Chinese languages).

And then there are words in Cantonese that just don't have a Mandarin Chinese equivolent such as "bihndo" (where), "guodo" (there), "nido" (here) which makes one to assume that these are native Tai/ Bai Yue words and not Han in origin.

My assumption is that at around the time of this mass exodus near Xixia China (Central China) during the Xixia-Song Dynasty, people from Yunnan China were also spreading out southward into Burma, Thailand, Laos. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that the motherland of the Tai languages originates from Yunnan Province and not from Thailand.

Since Yunnan is part of China, it is safe to consider yourself "full-blooded" Chinese. Whether we are discussing Yue, Tai, Han, Zhuang, Li, Miao, Yao, Hui etc. they all are all considered "full-blooded" Chinese if they can relatively trace any ancestry within the boarders of China.

Bamboo Shoot

Hung Dao Dai Vuong

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Hung Dao Dai Vuong » Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:45 pm

Numbers from 1 to 10 in Thai

neung 22 sawng 15 saam 15 sii 22 haa 51 hok 22 jet 22 paet 22 kao 51 sip 22

http://www.zompist.com/asia.htm#tai

IronMonkey

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby IronMonkey » Fri Mar 07, 2003 9:16 pm

The Cantonese consider themselves Chinese. Even if they may be partially descended from peoples who originally came from outside the borders of what is today considered China, the Cantonese have been part of "pure" China for many centuries, and consider themselves pure Chinese, and therefore one can't conclude that they are anything else.

Also, the borders of China retracted and expanded many, many times in the past, so I don't think it's completely reasonable to say that someone is "full Chinese" if their ancestry stretches back to outside the borders of present day China.

If anyone sees any mistakes in my post, please point them out. I don't pretend to be an all-knowing expert. Thanks.

IronMonkey ;)

Ramesh K.

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Ramesh K. » Sat Mar 08, 2003 1:27 am

"The Cantonese consider themselves Chinese. Even if they may be partially descended from peoples who originally came from outside the borders of what is today considered China, the Cantonese have been part of "pure" China for many centuries, and consider themselves pure Chinese, and therefore one can't conclude that they are anything else."

culturally speaking, of course. but what you consider yourself doesn't change your genetics - which has implications if you need, say, a bone marrow transplant, or want to figure out some genetic disease your kids are at risk for if you marry a certain girl.

For example, see here:
http://home.i1.net/~alchu/hakka/toihak01.htm
for an article regarding the problem of glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency among southern Chinese and SE Asians. Basically, there are many mutations in the gene which coding for g6pd, and these mutations are shared among southern Chinese (including Hakka!) and SE Asians, but highly uncommon in northern Chinese.

kalvin
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 3:53 pm

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby kalvin » Sun Mar 09, 2003 10:34 pm

yes i understand that we say we are pure chinese culturally, but deep down inside we are a mix of zhuang and others. thats it. just thought it would be nice info for those interested.

HKB

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby HKB » Mon Mar 10, 2003 2:10 am

Numbers from one to ten in cantonese:

yat (1) yi (2) saam (3) sei (4) mm (5) luk (6) chat (7) baat (8) gau (90) sap (10)

number from one to ten in Korean:

il (1) yi (2) sam (3) sa( 4) o (5) yuk (6) chil (7) bal (8) ku (9) sip (10)

I forgot what classical vietnamese sounded like but it's something similar.
the point is that Asia is not very different than Europe in that many cultures are either influenced or completely absorbed by one-the Han. I'm making a relation between the ancient Chinese (Han-ren) Empire (with its myiad dynasties) and the Roman Empire. the numbers from one to ten in different languages in Europe all bear similar forms to Latin (an extinct tongue) just as the languages in Asia all bear similarity to Classical Chinese (also an extinct tongue more or less) because at their prime, both empires controlled a large area of land (whether the people in those lands are of Han origin or not) and people all spoke a form of the offical languages of the time-Latin in europe and the language of the Han in Asia. an empire is never a single culture, it is a vast land of kingdoms won by a growing nation and at its centre is the central culture. Some empires permitted diversity of cultures, some wanted to implement its central culture on all others. China was once an empire that allowed different cultures (Xia and Shang dynasties are good examples-kind of like Greece in its prime). It was really at the time of Qin that a real single culture called the Han is born (many years later refered to as the Chinese by westerners, who know nothing of the mixed ancestries of the Chinese). Just like we call Romans Romans. I'm sure at that time many of them would claim to be Israelite, Greek, Germans, or Egyptians. The difference is that Rome broke apart. The empire of the Hans never did-well, it's starting to. Well, I don't really have a conclusion to this, just so that some you know that the so-called "Chinese" was a mixture of many different cultures so that some of you can stop distinquishing what is strictly "Chinese" and not, and thereby attacking all of the Chinese (there are 56 different ethnic groups in China today, so what is Chinese?) We all had a bunch of different ancestries. Even today in China, people in every different region have either slight or large different ways, not just in Canton and Beijing.

Sum Won

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Sum Won » Mon Mar 10, 2003 4:04 am

I'd like to thank Ramesh K. for the link. I've been looking for some information on this, when I discovered I had G6PD (found this out, when I was doing a medical examination). I didn't read all of the content within the link, but the pamphlets my doctor gave to me about G6PD say that it's more commonly found in areas of the world, where malaria is at large. The people living in these regions eventually evolved to adapt themselves to the malaria. This is done by taking out the enzyme that is attacked when the subject is caught with malaria. It also listed things (medicinces, foods, and drinks) that G6PD people should stay away from.

Thieu khau:
If you don't agree with the information used from the author that I've extracted the information from, that's a matter of individual preference. If you really want to prove it wrong, then back it up...

Bamboo shoot:
The XiXia people were the inhabitants of modern-day Tibet and SinJiang. I never recalled upon anything that said they ever settled in LingNam, but I'm open to any evidence you provide on that.
The different uses of zhi hou/yi hou and ji hau/yi hau, are both found in Cantonese AND Mandarin (indistinctively).

Bamboo Shoot

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Bamboo Shoot » Mon Mar 10, 2003 8:02 am

Bamboo shoot:
The XiXia people were the inhabitants of modern-day Tibet and SinJiang. I never recalled upon anything that said they ever settled in LingNam, but I'm open to any evidence you provide on that.
The different uses of zhi hou/yi hou and ji hau/yi hau, are both found in Cantonese AND Mandarin (indistinctively).

Sum Won,

The citizens of the XiXia empire were multi-ethnic including Han. The tribe that took control of what was left of the Tang Dynasty were a Tibetan tribe though the empire didn't last very long. For the Guangdong people (not just Hakka), it is common knowledge that their ancestors had come from central China between the Tang & Song Dynasties, I'm surprised you didn't know that unless perhaps you're not really a Guangdongren.

My ideas is comparable to planting seeds. I'm glad that some of these seeds are finding roots in your thoughts therefore I'm giving you issues to explore through your own efforts of research.

As for "zhihou" you may hear it among southern Chinese who speak Mandarin as well as their own Southern Chinese dialect (not necessarily Cantonese) which also retains words from classical Chinese. This Southern style of Mandarin, however, is not Standard Mandarin so do confirm your doubts with someone from Beijing.

Bamboo Shoot

Sum Won

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Sum Won » Tue Mar 11, 2003 12:49 am

Once again, you choose to ignore the other half of Cantonese ancestry... As I've said before in regards to the percentage of Chinese origins in modern-day Cantonese, the census counts from the past were inaccurrate, for certain reasons (http://safeproxy.org/cgi-bin/nph-proxy. ... 574&t=1350).
Actually, I have a few North Eastern [BeiJing, and ethnic Chinese from modern-day Manchuria] friends, and they do all use zhi hou, and yi hou indistinctively. Maybe, because they find TaiWanese and Singaporean shows more interesting to watch than things from CCTV (Most of it's, just bland, horribly-dubbed-for-no-reason shows.)
Thankyou for that little tidbit on XiXia. I see what you mean by your previous statement, but it was a little confusing.

Bamboo Shoot

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Bamboo Shoot » Tue Mar 11, 2003 6:47 am

To Sum Won,

> Once again, you choose to ignore the other half of Cantonese ancestry...

Actually, there is no evidence that I ignored the other half of Cantonese ancestry.

> As I've said before in regards to the percentage of Chinese origins in modern-day Cantonese, the census counts from the past were inaccurrate, for certain reasons (http://safeproxy.org/cgi-bin/nph-proxy. ... 574&t=1350).

Percentage origins is not an issue with me.

> Actually, I have a few North Eastern [BeiJing, and ethnic Chinese from modern-day Manchuria] friends, and they do all use zhi hou, and yi hou indistinctively. Maybe, because they find TaiWanese and Singaporean shows more interesting to watch than things from CCTV (Most of it's, just bland, horribly-dubbed-for-no-reason shows.)

Perhaps so, but I beg to differ on the "indistinctive" usage of "zhihou" vs. "yihou" in spoken Mandarin because personally, I originally always had used "zhihou" when speaking Mandarin but people from Beijing where always correcting me to use "yihou" instead. "Zhihou" carries an "attitude" whereas "yihou" doesn't in Mandarin but in Cantonese "jihau" has the same neutrality or "indistinctive usage" as "yihau" without the attitude.

> Thankyou for that little tidbit on XiXia. I see what you mean by your previous statement, but it was a little confusing.


Your welcome.

Bamboo Shoot

HKB

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby HKB » Tue Mar 11, 2003 9:19 pm

I have beijing friends who use "ran-hou" instead of either "zhihou" or "yihou."

Sum Won

Re: CANTONESE HAVE 60% ZHUANG ANCESTORY

Postby Sum Won » Wed Mar 12, 2003 1:00 am

"For the Guangdong people (not just Hakka), it is common knowledge that their ancestors had come from central China between the Tang & Song Dynasties..."
When you say their ancestors, you imply that the Cantonese origins are only Chinese. Hence, what I meant by "ignoring the other half (actually, 'portion', because the exact percentage is still obscured) of Cantonese ancestry".

Still not sure about the zhi hou/yi hou thing, because none of my friends ever corrected me in my use of either, nor did they ever change theirs. Maybe, it's just "a BeiJing thing", most of my friends from the northeast are from Manchuria. Only a two or three Mandarin-speakers I know are from BeiJing. Nor has my dad ever complained about his friends criticizing him for the use of zhi hou (If they did, he would DEFINATELY complain).

anti Sum Won

you are from NorthEast

Postby anti Sum Won » Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:46 pm

No wonder why you always promote the false statement the Cantonese are the Han Chinese.

Look into this website.

http://home.i1.net/~alchu/hakka/toihak0.htm

pay attention to this part:
Their study also suggested that Chinese originated from two distinct
populations, southern and northern.

No matter how convincing your words are, the DNA inside them tells us that they are not the original Han Chinese nor from the Han Chinese. Don't waste your time against the anthropologists on this part.

qrasy

Re: you are from NorthEast

Postby qrasy » Mon May 02, 2005 12:17 pm

anti Sum Won wrote:No wonder why you always promote the false statement the Cantonese are the Han Chinese.

Look into this website.

http://home.i1.net/~alchu/hakka/toihak0.htm

pay attention to this part:
Their study also suggested that Chinese originated from two distinct
populations, southern and northern.

No matter how convincing your words are, the DNA inside them tells us that they are not the original Han Chinese nor from the Han Chinese. Don't waste your time against the anthropologists on this part.


What are 'Han Chinese'? Does that term have real meanings?

Separation/differentiation could happen but mixing is also possible. Actually South Chinese are mix of BaiYue and norther people. The X gene could be different but the Y gene is nearly 100% of the Han population the same.


Return to “Cantonese language forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests