Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 25th, 2015, 06:25 PM   #61
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Mountains and Jungles of Southern China
Posts: 3,492

Quote:
Originally Posted by AltaicKorean View Post
Korean also do not believe Hwangdangogi. Could you stop your's fake opinion on Korean nationism and Korean history?
You have no right to tell me to stop having opinions. Everyone is allowed to have an opinion.

I simply follow my observations.

Last edited by purakjelia; February 25th, 2015 at 06:30 PM.
purakjelia is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 25th, 2015, 06:48 PM   #62
Not a Korean
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: 'Maircuh
Posts: 3,247
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by purakjelia View Post
You have no right to tell me to stop having opinions. Everyone is allowed to have an opinion.

I simply follow my observations.
But you have a right to be strongly biased against Koreans?

He is asking you to stop repeating what he believes are lies. That is not telling you to stop having opinions.
Haakbus is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 07:01 PM   #63
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Mountains and Jungles of Southern China
Posts: 3,492

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakbus View Post
But you have a right to be strongly biased against Koreans?

He is asking you to stop repeating what he believes are lies. That is not telling you to stop having opinions.
I repeat, I'm not biased against Koreans, but I dislike those pan-altaic Korean nationalists.

How am I biased against Koreans? Did I make any far-fetched claims? I don't think so.

I don't really care about Korean history. My main focus is on Chinese history, especially southern Chinese history.
purakjelia is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 09:52 PM   #64
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2015
From: Singapore
Posts: 266

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakbus View Post
While that is true for many Chinese netizens, it's not true for all. Many can. RollingWave, HackneyedScribe, and YouLoveMeYouKnowIt come to mind.
While ultranationalism is true for many Korean netizens, it's not true for all. Many can. Hansaram, Haakbus, AltaicKorean, SNK_1408, Consoleman, Gaema Musa, Kobukson, Cheon1Son and VANK PrKorea come to mind.

Japanese are clearly aware of the many ridiculous claims Korea has been making all these while. China & Japan are too busy fighting over WWII History to talk about ancient East Asian history but the general idea is that in all reality, most Japanese people treated Korea as "China's Little Brother".
Takoyaki is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 10:44 PM   #65
Not a Korean
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: 'Maircuh
Posts: 3,247
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Takoyaki View Post
While ultranationalism is true for many Korean netizens, it's not true for all. Many can. Hansaram, Haakbus, AltaicKorean, SNK_1408, Consoleman, Gaema Musa, Kobukson, Cheon1Son and VANK PrKorea come to mind.

Japanese are clearly aware of the many ridiculous claims Korea has been making all these while. China & Japan are too busy fighting over WWII History to talk about ancient East Asian history but the general idea is that in all reality, most Japanese people treated Korea as "China's Little Brother".
I am not Korean, nor am I ultranationalist.
Haakbus is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 10:49 PM   #66
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: Northern City
Posts: 433

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerberus View Post
The argument about Shang being related to Hongshan has nothing to do with Jizi. Rather, it came from a group of Chinese archaeologists. See, for example, Guo Da-shun's "Hongshan and Related Cultures" paper, in which he suggests that Hongshan was the "dawn of Chinese civilization." The cultural genealogy given by Guo Da-shun is as follows:

Hongshan -> Lower Xiajiadian
Lower Xiajiadian -> Upper Xiajiadian
-> Old Yan
-> Shang

Thus, in Guo's schema, Hongshan culture gave birth to Lower Xiajiadian culture, which in turn gave birth to Old Yan culture and Shang culture, as well as Upper Xiajiadian though Upper Xiajiadian was taken over by "nomads". Guo specifically suggests, based on shared archaeological motifs, that the Shang culture migrated south from Lower Xiajiadian into China, while those who remained in Lower Xiajiadian became the Old Yan culture, which explains why Shang and Yan were close allies, and also explains why a segment of the Shang fled into Yan after the fall of Shang.
While the Shang dynasty may have called itself Shang, it was more often referred to as Yin. It's a very strange coincidence that the "Yin" are closely related to the Yan state. It's worth exploring whether Yin and Yan are transliterations of the same words. Perhaps we can even add Yuan of Tuoba-Yuan to the list.

Yes, it all makes sense now. I think we can dive into this one. Let me just suggest that the Shang, Yan, and Joseonites (Hongshanites) were Mongolic-Sinitic hybrids who spoke Mandarin and Mongolic.

We can extend the present theories for the Mongolic influences of Mandarin and apply it to the language of the Shang. That is assuming I am right about old Mandarin being used since the time of Shang, which I am almost certain of.

As a bonus, now we know why all southern Chinese have a small percentage of Mongolic in them.

It would also explain why Mongolics have an appearance that is closer to Chinese than Native American.

Last edited by Yeongsang; February 25th, 2015 at 11:07 PM.
Yeongsang is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 11:14 PM   #67
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Mountains and Jungles of Southern China
Posts: 3,492

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeongsang View Post
While the Shang dynasty may have called itself Shang, it was more often referred to as Yin. It's a very strange coincidence that the "Yin" are closely related to the Yan state. It's worth exploring whether Yin and Yan are transliterations of the same words. Perhaps we can even add Yuan of Tuoba-Yuan to the list.

Yes, it all makes sense now. I think we can dive into this one. Let me just suggest that the Shang, Yan, and Joseonites (Hongshanites) were Mongolic-Sinitic hybrids who spoke Mandarin and Mongolic.

We can extend the present theories for the Mongolic influences of Mandarin and apply it to the language of the Shang. That is assuming I am right about old Mandarin being used since the time of Shang, which I am almost certain of.

As a bonus, now we know why all southern Chinese have a small percentage of Mongolic in them.

It would also explain why Mongolics have an appearance that is closer to Chinese than Native American.
Yan and Yin are very different characters. Yan is “燕”, while Yin is "殷". You really should learn some Chinese. Obviously you have very little knowledge of Chinese. And also, just because their pronunciation is similar in modern Mandarin doesn't mean that this was also the case in ancient Chinese.

Would you please stop making these absurd and far-fetched claims? It's annoying.
purakjelia is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 11:42 PM   #68
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: Northern City
Posts: 433

Quote:
Originally Posted by purakjelia View Post
Yan and Yin are very different characters. Yan is “燕”, while Yin is "殷". You really should learn some Chinese. Obviously you have very little knowledge of Chinese. And also, just because their pronunciation is similar in modern Mandarin doesn't mean that this was also the case in ancient Chinese.

Would you please stop making these absurd and far-fetched claims? It's annoying.
Every Min, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, Wu or any Chinese group that believes they escaped the historic Mongolic invasions still has some Mongolic in them. You can't possibly deny that the ancient Chinese were partly Mongolic to begin with.

Last edited by Yeongsang; February 25th, 2015 at 11:44 PM.
Yeongsang is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 11:49 PM   #69
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Mountains and Jungles of Southern China
Posts: 3,492

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeongsang View Post
Every Min, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, Wu or any Chinese group that believes they escaped the historic Mongolic invasions still has some Mongolic in them. You can't possibly deny that the ancient Chinese were partly Mongolic to begin with.
LOL, what are you talking about? Do you speak any of those southern Chinese dialects? How do you know that there are Mongolic terms in those dialects? How do you know that the ancient Chinese were partly Mongolic to begin with? Where are your evidences? You are making so many claims at once but without any supporting evidence.

I suggest that you mind your own business, my korean fellow. Stop making absurd claims about Chinese language and history, you have no clues about what you are saying.

Last edited by purakjelia; February 25th, 2015 at 11:52 PM.
purakjelia is offline  
Old February 25th, 2015, 11:50 PM   #70
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 231

Yeongsang, I just have a guestion. May I ask that you are Korean or Korean American? If not, Do you have any degree of Korean language or Korean?
AltaicKorean is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
chinese, civilization, foundations, theory



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proof Chinese civilization was founded in Liangzhu wingerman Asian History 29 June 7th, 2014 09:30 PM
Was 'six limb theory' of Chinese painting borrowed from India? vikas Asian History 8 March 21st, 2013 10:45 PM
Continuity of civilization and Chinese identity deke Asian History 0 September 19th, 2012 02:36 PM
Should the Chinese just admit that Western civilization and hisory is better? TruthSeeker1 Asian History 9 February 14th, 2012 11:50 AM
Chinese civilization: yellow river vs Yangtze tomar Ancient History 4 February 22nd, 2011 05:12 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.