Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry I'm just going off the sources you provided. They dont say anything about Thais coming before 1,000 years ago. In fact, they only mention that Thais started coming at the end of the Song Dynasty (around 1,000 AD) and kept coming til 100 years ago. The Han Dynasty article says that Hans started ruling Yunnan starting in 200 BC. So the Chinese influence goes way back. Those are your sources. How about provide sources that actually prove your point, not mine. Dont call me a dumbass when your own sources support what I'm saying.
the last wave of Austronesians arrived 700 years ago, from Borneans, who were Austronesians descended from Taiwan Aborigines (and a little Austro-Asiatic). It was just a back-migration to where they originally came from. Austronesians came through the Philippines, went to Borneo, mixed a little with some Austro-Asiatics, and some came back to the Philippines. How does that make Visayans special? And besides, like I said, Visayans didnt completely or mostly come from Borneo. Linguistics and genetics goes against that. All you have is legends that you interpret to fit your agenda.
That's why your article says they came 100 to 200 years ago Like I said, provide sources that back you up, not me. Thanks for the help though
wa people of southern china....still to this day lives in southern china...is not sinid
more useless drivel from you
again provide your sources....or its just small talk from you
Quote:
In a paper published in 2004, Linguist Laurent Sagart hypothesized that the proto-Tai–Kadai language originated as an Austronesian languages that migrants carried from Taiwan to mainland China. Afterwards, the language was then heavily influenced by local languages from Sino-Tibetan, Hmong–Mien, or other families, borrowing much vocabulary and converging typologically.[1][2] Much closer to the present, some peoples speaking Tai languages migrated southward over the mountains into Southeast Asia, perhaps prompted by the coming of the Han Chinese to south China.
there....
all you have is nothing but nitpicking certain paragraphs to make it seem something that is not
I have already shown that han encroachment into southern china has cause a continuous migration of tai people from southern china....it did not start just 200 years ago like you claim...considering thai kingdom have already been set up for 1000 years...meaning thai have been in thailand much longer then 1000 years
I have legends, phenotype prood and 40 other DNA studies...you have nothing
visayans dont have that big a difference between many northern luzon and central luzon ethnic groups
but please stop trying to make a connection that everyone in the Philipppines is a southern luzon negrito hybrid like your people...when thats clearly not the case
wa people of southern china....still to this day lives in southern china...is not sinid
more useless drivel from you
again provide your sources....or its just small talk from you
there....
all you have is nothing but nitpicking certain paragraphs to make it seem something that is not
I have already shown that han encroachment into southern china has cause a continuous migration of tai people from southern china....it did not start just 200 years ago like you claim...considering thai kingdom have already been set up for 1000 years...meaning thai have been in thailand much longer then 1000 years
I have legends, phenotype prood and 40 other DNA studies...you have nothing
visayans dont have that big a difference between many northern luzon and central luzon ethnic groups
but please stop trying to make a connection that everyone in the Philipppines is a southern luzon negrito hybrid like your people...when thats clearly not the case
You have trouble reading. I didn't say that the Han came to Southern China 200 years ago. I clearly said that they started coming in 200 BC, which is backed up by your source. The Dais stayed there til the end of the Song Dynasty, around 1,000 AD and then many left for SE Asia, also backed up by your source. It also said that Thais came down form China even as recently as 100 years ago. So they were under Chinese influence starting in 200 BC, left China around 1,000 AD, and kept leaving China until 100 years ago. All that is backed by your articles. How is that hard to understand?
And the fact that they may have come from Austronesians doesn't matter. The point I was making is that they came from East Asia starting 1,000 years ago, whereas Filipinos came from East Asia starting 5,000 years ago. Sorry they didn't come later so they could look a little closer to Koreans.
And I'm not talking about the Wa people. The Thai came from Dai, not Wa. And why post pics of modern Wa. If I posted pics of modern Dai, you would say that modern Dai dont look like older Dai, as if you know.
And besides Wa people are Austro-Asiatic. So they're related to the ancient inhabitants of SE Asian. Thais and Dais are Tai-Kadai so they're probably originally from further North in China.
Quote:
I have legends, phenotype prood and 40 other DNA studies...you have nothing
Yeah right, you have random facebook pictures and screen shots. Thats credible. And show me the DNA studies please
Out of curiosity, I went to read the Malay language section of Wikipedia on the Bisaya group of Borneo (since it's one of the Malaysian ethnics, the section has a more comprehensive writeup about the group).
This is what I found,
Quote:
Suku kaum ini walaupun dikatakan berkait dengan suku Bisaya di Filipina namun suku kaum Bisaya ini hanya terdapat di Borneo iaitu Sabah dan Sarawak,Malaysia sahaja. Bisaya yang terdapat di Filipina dikatakan berasal dari Borneo dan penghijrahan beramai-ramai mereka ke sana adalah disebabkan oleh faktor politik yang tidak menentu.
which is loosely translated as, "Although this group (Bisayas) are related to the Visayans in the Philippines, the Bisayas of Malaysia are only found in the Malaysian Bornean states of Sabah and Sarawak. The Philippine Visayans are alleged to have been originated from Borneo, and their mass migration to the Philippines might be caused by uncertain political factors."
#side question: Can you Tagalog and Visayan language speakers recognize words in the Malay-language quote above? I'm wondering how much percentage of similarity between these languages with Malay since they are all Austronesian languages with historical linguistic influences from Malay (and therefore Sanskrit).
Out of curiosity, I went to read the Malay language section of Wikipedia on the Bisaya group of Borneo (since it's one of the Malaysian ethnics, the section has a more comprehensive writeup about the group).
This is what I found,
which is loosely translated as, "Although this group (Bisayas) are related to the Visayans in the Philippines, the Bisayas of Malaysia are only found in the Malaysian Bornean states of Sabah and Sarawak. The Philippine Visayans are alleged to have been originated from Borneo, and their mass migration to the Philippines might be caused by uncertain political factors."
thankyou....a malaysian would know more about this
Out of curiosity, I went to read the Malay language section of Wikipedia on the Bisaya group of Borneo (since it's one of the Malaysian ethnics, the section has a more comprehensive writeup about the group).
This is what I found,
which is loosely translated as, "Although this group (Bisayas) are related to the Visayans in the Philippines, the Bisayas of Malaysia are only found in the Malaysian Bornean states of Sabah and Sarawak. The Philippine Visayans are alleged to have been originated from Borneo, and their mass migration to the Philippines might be caused by uncertain political factors."
alleged. But the language they speak and their genetics are more tied to other Filipinos than to Borneans. Although, they're all related overall because they're all Austronesian people. It's just that the Borneans are a little more distantly related.
Visaya in the Philippines is just a name of the island group. It doesn't refer to a specific ethnic group, as if the Bisayas from Malaysia moved to the Philippines and became Visayas there. There's no evidence for that. We only know that some Borneans came to Philippines and some empires overlapped from Malaysia into the Philippines
#side question: Can you Tagalog and Visayan language speakers recognize words in the Malay-language quote above? I'm wondering how much percentage of similarity between these languages with Malay since they are all Austronesian languages with historical linguistic influences from Malay (and therefore Sanskrit).
You have trouble reading. I didn't say that the Han came to Southern China 200 years ago. I clearly said that they started coming in 200 BC, which is backed up by your source. The Dais stayed there til the end of the Song Dynasty, around 1,000 AD and then many left for SE Asia, also backed up by your source. It also said that Thais came down form China even as recently as 100 years ago. So they were under Chinese influence starting in 200 BC, left China around 1,000 AD, and kept leaving China until 100 years ago. All that is backed by your articles. How is that hard to understand?
And the fact that they may have come from Austronesians doesn't matter. The point I was making is that they came from East Asia starting 1,000 years ago, whereas Filipinos came from East Asia starting 5,000 years ago. Sorry they didn't come later so they could look a little closer to Koreans.
And I'm not talking about the Wa people. The Thai came from Dai, not Wa. And why post pics of modern Wa. If I posted pics of modern Dai, you would say that modern Dai dont look like older Dai, as if you know.
And besides Wa people are Austro-Asiatic. So they're related to the ancient inhabitants of SE Asian. Thais and Dais are Tai-Kadai so they're probably originally from further North in China.
Yeah right, you have random facebook pictures and screen shots. Thats credible. And show me the DNA studies please
your not making any sense at alll.....wa who live in southern china have not left ..and by virture are more EA according to your logic....but dont look sinsid at all
amd stop talking about filipinos like its a collective group....
the first austronesians left for taiwan 4000 years ago...later continuous migrations happened after the 1st group left...many of those later groups settled in Malaysia and borneo...and later on visayas
thai did not arrive 100 years ago.....it said tai-lue groups....who migrated to thai empire migrated 200 -100 years ago....not the orignal siam-thai who migrated much earlier....
migrations arent so simple...one group did not move to another location and that was it....
alleged. But the language they speak and their genetics are more tied to other Filipinos than to Borneans. Although, they're all related overall because they're all Austronesian people. It's just that the Borneans are a little more distantly related.
Visaya in the Philippines is just a name of the island group. It doesn't refer to a specific ethnic group, as if the Bisayas from Malaysia moved to the Philippines and became Visayas there. There's no evidence for that. We only know that some Borneans came to Philippines and some empires overlapped from Malaysia into the Philippines
lol you still deny even though both groups aknowledge
no....visayans are an ethnic group....compared to you negritos from manila...we would be a group based on race....
Quote:
In the 12th century, Hindu-Animist descendants from the late empire of the Sri-Vijayan, Majapahit and Brunei,[2] By the 14th century, Arab traders and their followers venturing into the Malay Archipelago, converted some of these tribal groups into Muslims. These tribes practiced a mixture of Islam, Hinduism and native Animist beliefs. There is also some evidence of trade and immigration between other Asian people in the area as early as the 9th century. The Tumandok people of the mountainous region of Panay island are the only Visayan group to maintain pre-Hispanic Visayan culture and beliefs, due to their geographic isolation from lowland Visayan groups.
Although still a matter of speculation, a highly-celebrated epic on the origins of the present-day Visayan people is about the Ten Datus of Borneo. It was said that they originated from an area occupied by the thalassocratic empire of Sri Vijaya during the early 13th century. In an attempt to escape the despotic rule of a Rajah Makatunaw and the subsequent fall of the empire, the chieftains, led by Datu Puti, fled eastwards to what is now the island of Panay. The island at that time was ruled by an Ati chief Marikudo who was later given a golden sadok and a necklace for his wife, Maniwantiwan, in purchase of the Borneans of Panay for new settlement.[3] It was said that the name for the inhabitants, Bisaya, was derived from their original land, Sri Vijaya.[4]
your not making any sense at alll.....wa who live in southern china have not left ..and by virture are more EA according to your logic....but dont look sinsid at all
amd stop talking about filipinos like its a collective group....
the first austronesians left for taiwan 4000 years ago...later continuous migrations happened after the 1st group left...many of those later groups settled in Malaysia and borneo...and later on visayas
thai did not arrive 100 years ago.....it said tai-lue groups....who migrated to thai empire migrated 200 -100 years ago....not the orignal siam-thai who migrated much earlier....
migrations arent so simple...one group did not move to another location and that was it....
But isn't it funny that you'll use pics of modern Wa, even though we're not even talking about them? Why not use pics of modern Dai, since we know that Thais came from Dai. Because they look too East Asian? Sorry bout it... And like I said, Wa are Austro-Asiatic.
Yeah, Austronesians left East Asia 5,000 years ago and kept coming. Thais left East Asia 1,000 years ago and kept coming. Which one is more recent? You yourself said that the last wave of of Austronesian was 700 years ago (and not even from East Asia, but from Borneo, long way off) So the last wave of Austronesian was only 300 years after the first wave of Thais. Again, tell me which migration is more recent...
Austronesians are a much older group in SE Asia, accept it.
#side question: Can you Tagalog and Visayan language speakers recognize words in the Malay-language quote above? I'm wondering how much percentage of similarity between these languages with Malay since they are all Austronesian languages with historical linguistic influences from Malay (and therefore Sanskrit).
visayan nobles used to be able to speak malay
I dont know about tagalogs....I think they used to speak a negrito dialect until austronesians from the north came and mixed with them....and the hybrids later were introduced to more civilized customs by malay muslims from the south
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Like I said, provide sources that back you up, not me. Thanks for the help though 
