Asian languages

[Quest]

when i was younger, i used to think all asian languages are more or less related. now i know that that's not the case. The origin of the Korean language, though suspected to be of altaic origin, is still uncertain. Japanese, although very similar in grammar to korean, is considered unrelated to any other language. Both of these languages are unrelated to Chinese. Chinese, Tibetan, Burmese, together form another language family. Vietnamese, once believed to be related to Chinese, is now proved to be of austroasiatic origin. however, in europe, west and south asia, most of the languages belong to one single family.

since there have been so many misconceptions and mis-categorizations of asian languages before, it makes me wonder if there's any truth to the established "theories" about the origins of asian languages. it's hard for me to accept the idea that languages like vietnamese korean chinese and japanese, belonging to the same race, sharing national borders, and sharing more than 50% of each others' vocabularies, can be unrelated to each another.

[wix]

it's hard for me to accept the idea that languages like vietnamese korean chinese and japanese, belonging to the same race, sharing national borders, and sharing more than 50% of each others' vocabularies, can be unrelated to each another.

I am not an expert in linguistics, but geographical reasons alone can probably account for the linguistic differences. Japan is a group of islands, distant enough from China to have made made contact or immigration between the two countries fairly limited and therefore language in the countries could have evolved in effective isolation. Korea is a peninsula, which also causes isolation and a similar effect.

Even in China today there is still a great deal of linguistic diversity. A lot of this is related to the fact many areas of China are very mountainous and this limits people's movement and interaction. It also allows various ethnic groups to retain a distinct identity (and therefore language) rather than being assimilated into the larger and more dominant language/ethnic groups.

Interesting map of ethno-linguistic groups in China

[Guest Anonymous]

Koreans, according to an English version of a book I read while I was in Seoul, are a mix of Chinese who migrated from the modern day Shandong province, people who migrated from the modern day Northeast China (Manchurians?), and also the natives who lived in modern day North Korea.

The Japanese, as much as they like to deny, are not a "pure" people as well. Some say that the ancestors of modern day Japanese migrated from the Korean peninsula and when they arrived on the Japanese islands, they mixed with the native Ainu people.

The Vietnamese have also mixed with the Han, and other Southeast Asian people such as Thai, Cambodian, Laos... etc. This is why some Vietnamese people have very pale skin and look like Chinese while others have darker skin with more accented facial features and look closer to other Southeast Asian people.

I believe it's obvious that Chinese, particularly the Han ethnic, is also a mixture of many different peoples as well.

Just by looking at these maps of the boundary of each Chinese dynasty, one can assume when China made contacts with Japan, Korea and Vietnam.

http://emuseum.mnsu.edu/prehistory/china/map/map.html

During the Han Dynasty (206 B.C. - 220 A.D.), China nearly conquered all of Korea and part of modern day north Vietnam.

If I remember correctly, Japan first made contact with China during the Song Dynasty. However, it wasn't until the Tang Dynasty did Japan import a great deal of the Chinese language and culture into their own. This is why the Japanese kimono, among other things, look very similiar to the female outfits of the Tang Dynasty.

By the time China made contacts with these three nations, each of them have already have established languages of their own. Although much of the Chinese vocabulary were imported into their languages, the basic foundations (i.e. grammar) didn't change. It's like how Japanese and to a certain extend, Korean, have imported much of English vocabulary into their own languages but they are still cleary distinct languages.

[Tsunku]

Or, to put it in a different context, its kind of like how English is a germanic language, but has taken lots of words of Latin origin. It doesn't mean the languages are related linguistically just because some of the words have that origin. You have to look at basic underlying grammar, as well as certain "key" words which tend to remain linguistically "pure" in most languages.

I'm taking a class on Japan right now as part of my degree requirement, and my teacher mentioned that there is some new archeological evidence to suggest that the Japanese people are descended from Koreans. The Japanese, obviously, are not too keen on this idea, and the reseach is kind of controversial. It seems logical enough to me though.

[skylee]

If I remember correctly' date=' Japan first made contact with China during the Song Dynasty.[/quote']

Don't think so.

[Guest Anonymous]

If I remember correctly' date=' Japan first made contact with China during the Song Dynasty.[/quote']

Don't think so.

Well, since you're so sure that the Japanese didn't first make contact with China during the Song Dynasty then when?

[roddy]

According to http://www.heritageeast.com/history/timeline.htm the Japanese 'copied much of Tang culture and institutions'. Tang came before Song (or so http://www.mrdowling.com/613chinesehistory.html says) so that means Japan made contact with China before the Song dynasty. Isn't Google great.

Roddy

[Guest Anonymous]

According to http://www.heritageeast.com/history/timeline.htm the Japanese 'copied much of Tang culture and institutions'. Tang came before Song (or so http://www.mrdowling.com/613chinesehistory.html says) so that means Japan made contact with China before the Song dynasty. Isn't Google great.

Roddy

I got a little confused.

http://www-chaos.umd.edu/history/time_line.html

According to this site, there were two Song dynasties. The first existed around 420 - 478 A.D., which is before the Tang Dynasty (618 - 907 A.D.), and the second Song Dynasty existed around 960 - 1297 A.D.

[skylee]

I am not an argumentative kind of person. But since you have asked, Kulong, I have done a bit of search. According to this website, "King Na of Wa (Japan) sends tribute to Eastern Han dynasty and is bestowed gift of a gold seal" in 57 AD. And then "Queen Himiko of Yamatai in Wa sends emissaries to Wei in China" in 239 AD, that was the "Three Kingdoms" period. (I suppose "Wa" means "倭".) Actually some people even say that the author of the famous Chinese history book "Shangshu" (尚書) written before the Eastern Han Dynasty was a Japanese (although I find the arguments quite shaky).

There were more than one dynasty in China that was called "Song". The one in 420-478 AD was in the "Southern and Northern Dynasties" period (南北朝). Another one was of course the small country during the "Warring States" period. But usually "Song Dynasty" refers to the one set up by Zhao Kuangyin (趙匡胤) (960-1127 AD). If you mean the Song Dynasty during the "Southern and Northern Dynasties" Period, you should say so to avoid confusion.

If I don't start working now I will be fired.

[roddy]

So the first contact was before BOTH Song dynasties then?

I may split this into a new topic. I just love that little split button . . .

Roddy

[skylee]

And I forgot to mention that you can find a lot of information/exhibits etc about Japan's early contacts with other eastern asian countries in the National Museum inside Ueno Park in Tokyo. It is a lovely museum which seems to have very few visitors. You can figure out the meaning of the Japanese captions by just reading the kanji.

But this is quite off the topic now.