Favourite Traditional Asian Clothes

Dec 2011
3,492
Mountains and Jungles of Southern China
Chinese civilization started from the Yellow River, and assimilated the distant south only during the Tang and Song dynasties. All early Chinese sites are along the Yellow River.

Chinese culture is not an exact copy of the Shang from three thousand years ago, certainly not, but it derives from it, such that archaeologists and anthropologists regard the Shang as the first "practically Chinese" state, as earlier cultures such as the "Xia" or "Erlitou" are not demonstrably extant/Chinese.

The Shang language is widely believed to have been Sinitic, or at the minimum a language related to the SVO languages spoken by the peoples to China's south today, such as Hmong-Mien or Austro-Asiatic. This is agreed upon by virtually all linguists who have studied the Shang language via the oracle bone script. The structure of the Shang language is overwhelmingly - last count I've seen stated 96% - SVO in grammatical structure, and thus more akin to these "southern" languages than any languages to China's west, north, or east.

There is no way to determine whether it was "tonal", but as tones were not thought to have developed in Chinese until after the Old Chinese stage, it is hardly an indicator for linguistic affinity.
I largely agree with you. The ancient Chinese originated from the Yellow River valley in northern China. You don't need rocket science to prove this, just take a look at Qin and Han figurines, most of them look like Northeast Asians, and some of them look quite similar to Koreans and Mongols.

However, I don't think word order could determine language relationship. English and French are also SVO languages, does that mean they are also much more akin to these "southern" languages?

Tones are not really a good indicator either.
 
Feb 2011
1,018
However, I don't think word order could determine language relationship. English and French are also SVO languages, does that mean they are also much more akin to these "southern" languages?

Tones are not really a good indicator either.
Grammatical typology is certainly not sufficient for "proving" a genetic relationship, but they are useful supporting information with regards to areal linguistics. The fact that the Altaic sprachbund, for example, is SOV in its entirety is not a coincidence, regardless of whether the Altaic languages are related to each other genetically. These are the product of sustained historical interactions, much in the same way the tonality of southern languages are. The fact that the Shang language has been shown to be overwhelmingly SVO - and the fact that all Sinitic languages remained SVO - tells us that it belonged to a different interaction sphere than the SOV languages to its north and northeast. This was not an accident.

Of course, there are also phonological and lexical arguments for why the Shang language is directly ancestral to Chinese, but those tend to be harder to illustrate in just a few sentences.
 
Sep 2015
4
Ukraine
As for me, among female clothing sari is the best. Not only sari in India, but in Sri Lanka as well. If to talk about male attire, it's much harder to say which I like the most.
But if you're interested in different Asian clothing and want to learn more about it, you should visit Nationalclothing.org, section "Asia". There is some curious information there.
 

Sephiroth

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
2,986
It is a Top Secret
^Thx, sadly it's not covering a lot of nations, but nonetheless, it's good.
 
Feb 2015
266
Singapore
Some Korean traditional clothing:



I actually own 7 or 8 한복 (hanbok) sets myself. Women often dislike wearing their variant because they find it uncomfortable and physically limiting, but the male version is incredibly comfortable, often much cooler than equivalent western clothing would be, and I think it looks charming. Koreans often tell me that they think hanboks look better on westerners than they do on Koreans. Of course it's usually not the silken kind I'd wear in public (I only have two of those, and they're more for special occasion). Most of mine are 개량한복 ("improved" hanboks) with a slightly more modern look to them





I'd say that the Hanbok (韓服 / 한복) looks very similar to the Ming Dynasty Hanfu (明朝漢服). In the first photo as quoted, the male Hanbok for bridegrooms which is quite popular in Korea was in fact derived from Ming Dynasty court official wear.

Most distinctive difference between the Korean Hanbok and the Chinese Hanfu would be the Otgoreum (옷고름). The skirt (袄裙 / 치마) is also raised to the chest area and the jacket (저고리) is a lot shorter.

Under the Qing Dynasty (清朝), however, the ethnic Manchus who were a Tungusic-speaking ethnic group originally living in Manchuria (Northeastern China & parts of Russia) conquered the whole of China began to enforce laws on dress code - which also became to be known as 剔髮易服令; as time passed, the lines between traditional Manchu clothing and traditional Chinese clothing blurred out almost completely.

The ethnic Manchus themselves assimilated heavily into ethnic Han Chinese culture and despite the fact that there are still 10 million ethnic Manchus living in China today, the Manchu language is critically endangered with less than a few hundred speakers of the language left.

A few years back, anti-Japanese protesters in Chengdu (成都) mistook a Chinese woman for wearing the Japanese kimono, when she was in fact wearing the traditional Chinese Hanfu - she was forced to take it off there and then and the protesters had it burnt.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2015
266
Singapore
A set of inaccurate statements.

Chinese civilization started from the Yellow River, and assimilated the distant south only during the Tang and Song dynasties. All early Chinese sites are along the Yellow River.

Chinese culture is not an exact copy of the Shang from three thousand years ago, certainly not, but it derives from it, such that archaeologists and anthropologists regard the Shang as the first "practically Chinese" state, as earlier cultures such as the "Xia" or "Erlitou" are not demonstrably extant/Chinese.

The Shang language is widely believed to have been Sinitic, or at the minimum a language related to the SVO languages spoken by the peoples to China's south today, such as Hmong-Mien or Austro-Asiatic. This is agreed upon by virtually all linguists who have studied the Shang language via the oracle bone script. The structure of the Shang language is overwhelmingly - last count I've seen stated 96% - SVO in grammatical structure, and thus more akin to these "southern" languages than any languages to China's west, north, or east.

There is no way to determine whether it was "tonal", but as tones were not thought to have developed in Chinese until after the Old Chinese stage, it is hardly an indicator for linguistic affinity.

As to the "Southeast Asians" such as Thai, Vietnamese, etc... They are, in fact, related to Chinese. But then so are "Northeast Asians" such as Manchus, Koreans, etc. The ancient Chinese were more northern than they were southern in their geographical distribution when compared to the modern Chinese, but the same is the case for ancient Southeast Asians with regards to modern Southeast Asians. Thus, for example, it is believed by most historians/linguists/anthropologists that Austroasiatic and other "Southeast Asian" languages used to be spoken further in the north, eg along the Yangtze, where they were in early contact with the Sinitic speakers, who formed an intermediary between them and even further north peoples. To this end, I find the attempt at drawing a strict boundary between Southeast Asians and Northeast Asians a matter of comedy. Such boundaries were never strict and indeed the current understanding among geneticists place Northeast and Southeast Asians as branches of the same tree.

Lastly, while Scytho-Siberians may have deeply influenced early Korean clothing, not all aspects of Korean culture are traced to "northern" groups. Take, for example, the name of the Han River on which Seoul is situated... The Korean word is "&#54620;&#44053;" < "&#28450;&#27743;". Both words are from Chinese, but the latter character &#27743;, the word for "river" used in Korean to name the Han River, is etymologically Austro-Asiatic. But then that is obviously lost on you because you managed to get banned yet again.
As far as genetic relationship and/or language goes -- the Chinese are more so related to the people living to the west of the Central Plains (I.E Sino-Tibetan / Tibeto-Burman speakers). Thai is a Tai-Kadai language, Vietnamese is an Austro-Asiatic language and Filipino is an Austronesian language.

All other Austro-Asiatic languages with the notable exception of Vietnamese are non-tonal; and speakers of polysyllabic languages such as the Filipinos and other Austronesian groups couldn't have developed the Chinese characters which were obviously developed for a monosyllabic language.

Linguists who had originally placed the Sinitic languages together with Tibeto-Burman, Hmong-Mien and Tai-Kadai some 30 years ago soon regrouped and debunked the theory that Tai-Kadai and Hmong-Mien languages are related to Sinitic / Tibeto-Burman languages.

The early Sinitic speakers were "caught somewhere in the middle" much like how the Chinese were throughout most of their history - ultimately having came from the west where most Tibeto-Burman speakers reside.

As for languages such as Korean and Japanese - according to the United Nations Organization for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Korean is an isolate language and Japanese belongs to the Japonic family instead - both of whom are not Altaic.
 
Last edited:

Haakbus

Ad Honorem
Aug 2013
3,778
United States
A set of inaccurate statements.

Chinese civilization started from the Yellow River, and assimilated the distant south only during the Tang and Song dynasties. All early Chinese sites are along the Yellow River.

Chinese culture is not an exact copy of the Shang from three thousand years ago, certainly not, but it derives from it, such that archaeologists and anthropologists regard the Shang as the first "practically Chinese" state, as earlier cultures such as the "Xia" or "Erlitou" are not demonstrably extant/Chinese.

The Shang language is widely believed to have been Sinitic, or at the minimum a language related to the SVO languages spoken by the peoples to China's south today, such as Hmong-Mien or Austro-Asiatic. This is agreed upon by virtually all linguists who have studied the Shang language via the oracle bone script. The structure of the Shang language is overwhelmingly - last count I've seen stated 96% - SVO in grammatical structure, and thus more akin to these "southern" languages than any languages to China's west, north, or east.

There is no way to determine whether it was "tonal", but as tones were not thought to have developed in Chinese until after the Old Chinese stage, it is hardly an indicator for linguistic affinity.
There's a theory that the Zhou language, the first true Sinitic langauge, was a creole that arose with heavy mixing of Sino-Tibetan and Austroasiatic (or some other southern) peoples on the Yellow River.

Lastly, while Scytho-Siberians may have deeply influenced early Korean clothing, not all aspects of Korean culture are traced to "northern" groups. Take, for example, the name of the Han River on which Seoul is situated... The Korean word is "&#54620;&#44053;" < "&#28450;&#27743;". Both words are from Chinese, but the latter character &#27743;, the word for "river" used in Korean to name the Han River, is etymologically Austro-Asiatic. But then that is obviously lost on you because you managed to get banned yet again.
Who exactly were the Scytho-Siberians anyway? Does this refer to the north-central Asian nomadic culture sphere (which could be referred to as "Altaic")?

That's interesting about the river. I wonder if it has anything to do with the proto-Japonic people (according to one theory originating in what is now southern China) living there before the Koreans got there.
 
Feb 2015
266
Singapore
There's a theory that the Zhou language, the first true Sinitic langauge, was a creole that arose with heavy mixing of Sino-Tibetan and Austroasiatic (or some other southern) peoples on the Yellow River.

Who exactly were the Scytho-Siberians anyway? Does this refer to the north-central Asian nomadic culture sphere (which could be referred to as "Altaic")?

That's interesting about the river. I wonder if it has anything to do with the proto-Japonic people (according to one theory originating in what is now southern China) living there before the Koreans got there.


Many words coming from different language families got mixed into the Sinitic language during an early stage, both from the north and from the south.

The Chinese loanword for "river" (江; OC: *kˤroŋ; MC: kåŋ) is indeed Austro-Asiatic in etymology. However, l'd say that the Austro-Asiatic etymology for "river" in Chinese was adopted by Sino-Tibetan speaking people living in the southwest of China before the Sinitic people split off from the rest of the Tibeto-Burman speaking population. Observe the Burmese term for "river" မြစ်ကြောင်း (myitkaung). Alternatively, the native Chinese word for "river" (河; OC: *C.gˤaj) cognate to Tibetan "rgal-ba" can also be used.

In return, the Koreans themselves unknowingly adopted the term for "river" (강; KR: Gang) from the Austro-Asiatic speaking people via the Sino-Tibetan speaking people. Strangely, the Sino-Korean word "江 / 강" is far more popular than the other Sino-Korean word "河 / 하"

The word for "calf" (犢; OC: *lˤok; MC: duwk), on the other hand, was derived from Manchu "tukšan", Evenk "tukuč" and Mongol "tuyul".

Agricultural terms for the cultivation of grain and rice on the other hand are mostly derived from Hmong-Mien languages, as the Hmong-Mien speakers along the Yangtze River Basin were likely the first people to have cultivated rice.

To call the language of the Zhou a creole of Austro-Asiatic and Sinitic based simply on the word for "river" would be blasphemous. Austro-Asiatic speaking people first originated along the Ganges River in Northern India before they began to migrate towards the Andaman Islands, Southeastern Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, parts of Laos, Cambodia and Southwestern China. They never got as far north as the Yellow River (黃河), and if anything, the very fact that there were three buffer zones or belts of Tibeto-Burman, Hmong-Mien speakers and Tai-Kadai speakers separating the Sinitic and Austro-Asiatic speakers would give you some idea that the chances of such a creole forming would be close to zero.

There are also probably more cognates between Hmong-Mien, Tai-Kadai, Tibeto-Burman and Sinitic than there are between Sinitic and Austro-Asiatic, which was why linguists some 30 years ago had initially grouped the four subfamilies together , before further investigations have proven that Hmong-Mien and Tai-Kadai weren't part of the same family as Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman.

Counting in Old Chinese: *ʔjit, *njijs, *sum, *sjijs, *ŋaʔ, *C-rjuk, *tsʰjit, *pret, *kjuʔ, *gjəp
Counting in Mid Chinese: *ʔjit, nyijH, sam, sijH, nguX, ljuwk, tshit, peat, kjuwX, dzyip
Counting in Old Tibetan: gcig, gnyis, gsum, bzhi, lnga, drug, bdun, brgyad, dgu, bcu
Counting in Nuosu: cyp, nyip, suo, ly, nge, fut, shyp, hxit, ggu, ci
Burmese 1-10: tit, nhit, thoun, le, nga, chout, khunhit, shyit, ko, taseh

Vietnamese 1-5: mot, hai, ba, bon, nam
Khmer 1-5: moy, pee, bay, buan, pram
Mon 1-5: moa, ba, poe, pon, pesom

*Only 1-5 because numbers 6 and onwards are composites of 5 and other smaller numbers in Khmer.

"I/me" in Old Chinese: 吾 *ŋa
"I/me" in Old Tibetan: ṅa
"I/me" in Old Burmese: ṅā
"I/me" in Southern Min: gua
"I/me" in Cantonese: ngoh
"I/me" in Tibetan: nga
"I/me" in Burmese: nga

"Bitter" in Old Chinese: 苦 *kʰˁaʔ
"Bitter" in Tibetan: kha
"Bitter" in Burmese: khāḥ
"Bitter" in Tangut: khie

"Eye" in Old Chinese: 目 *C.muk
"Eye" in Middle Chinese: 目 mjuwk
"Eye" in Mandarin: 目 mu4
"Eye" in Classical Tibetan: myig
"Eye" in Classical Burmese: myak

"Onion" in Old Chinese: 蔥 *tsʰˤoŋ
"Onion" in Middle Chinese: 蔥 tsʰuŋ
"Onion" in Mandarin: 葱 cong1
"Onion" in Classical Tibetan: btsong
"Onion" in Tibetan (current): tsong

"Fish" in Proto-Sinitic: 魚 *ŋja
"Fish" in Old Chinese: 魚 *ŋa
"Fish" in Proto-Tibeto-Burman: *ŋyaɁ
"Fish" in Proto-Tibetan: *nya
"Fish" in Classical Burmese: na
"Fish" in Burmese: nga3
"Fish" in Old Tibetan: *na
"Fish" in Chepang: ŋaɁ

"Firewood" in Old Chinese: 薪 *syen
"Firewood" in Mid Chinese: 薪 sjen
"Firewood" in Mandarin: 薪 xin1
"Firewood" in Classical Tibetan: *sin
"Firewood" in Classical Burmese: sats

"Dog" in Old Chinese: 犬 *kʷʰˤenʔ
"Dog" in Middle Chinese: 犬 kʰuen
"Dog" in Southern Min: 犬 kʰian
"Dog" in Proto-Tibeto-Burman: *kwiɁ
"Dog" in Classical Tibetan: khyi
"Dog" in Burmese: khwei
"Dog" in Kanauri: *kui
"Dog" in Lahu: kwe

"Die" in Old Chinese: 死 *sijʔ
"Die" in Mandarin: 死 si
"Die" in Old Tibetan: tsi
"Die" in Proto-Burmese: *siy

"Moon" in Old Chinese: 月 *ŋʷat
"Moon" in Southern Min: 月 gwat
"Moon" in Tibeto-Burman: *s-ŋyat
"Moon" in Old Tibetan: zla
"Moon" in Old Burmese: la

"Kill" in Old Chinese: 殺 *srât
"Kill" in Old Tibetan: *sad
"Kill" in Old Burmese: sat

"Poison" in Old Chinese: 毒 *duk
"Poison" in Southern Min: 毒 dok
"Poison" in Old Tibetan: dug
"Poison" in Old Burmese: *tuk

"Stomach" in Old Chinese: *puk *tˤaʔ
"Stomach" in Southern Min: pah tor
”Stomach" in Burmese: bih'te

"Hurt" in Old Chinese: 殘 *dzˤan
"Hurt" in Written Tibetan: gzan-pa

"Slow" in Old Chinese: 緩 *ɢʷˤanʔ
"Slow" in Written Tibetan: 'gor-ba

"Is" in Old Chinese: 是 *deʔ
"Is" in Proto-Tibeto-Burman: *day
"Is" in Written Tibetan: 'da

"Divide / Distribute" in Old Chinese: 分 *pən
"Divide / Distribute" in Southern Min: 分 pun
"Divide / Sever" in Written Burmese: puiŋᴮ / *pun
“To cut / break" in Lushai: buŋᴴ

"Cover" in Old Chinese: 蓋 *kˤap-s
"Cover" in Written Tibetan: bkab

"Fresh" in Old Chinese: 鮮 *ser
"Fresh" in Written Tibetan: gsar
"New" in Lushai: tʰarᴴ

"To give way" in Old Chinese: 讓 *naŋh
"To give way" in Written Tibetan: gnaŋ

"To hold in mouth" in Old Chinese: 含 *gə̂ms
"To hold in mouth" in Southern Min: 含 gam
"To hold in mouth" in Written Tibetan: 'gam

"To cross over sth " in Old Chinese: 越 *ɢʷat
"To travel / to walk" in Written Tibetan: 'grod
 
Last edited: