U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-06-2014, 04:13 PM
 
55 posts, read 99,045 times
Reputation: 24

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezio_Auditore View Post
It's seem they are only talking about aboriginal.

The aboriginal of most of the area of mainland SEA(Vietnam/Thailand/Laos) are Mon-Khmer race(pure Vietnamese/Khmer/Suy/Mon). Mon-Khmer people have dark skin.

The Lao/Thai(Tai/Dai) whom from Yunnan,South-western China mainly populated as majority of in Laos and Thailand today, but aren't seem to be count on this graph except Northern Laos and Northern Thailand.

What are you talking about? The graph clearly has the color for Thailand and Laos. It means that's their skin tone. If that is the majority of the population (like 70-80% of the population), you can be assured that they were not missed in a statistics like this unless you are in denial it is your skin tone

On the side note, Mon-Khmer is a linguist family, not a Race.

On another side note, Khmer, Lao, Thai, Vietnamese, Filipino, Indonesian, all most all Southeast Asians are all Austronesians and AustroAsiatics. The Tai/Dai, despite being said "coming from Southwest China", are also Austronesians and AustroAsiatics. Southern China used be populated by Southeast Asians until it was invaded by Han Chinese from the north. Saying "Tai/Dai came from Southwest China" doesn't prove you're any different from them. If you think the Tai, Northern Lao, Northern Thai are lighter-skinned, it means other Austronesians and AustroAsiatics were light skinned like that before. The reason they look darker now is because they mixed with Indians and aboriginals. Indians had enormous influence throughout Southeast Asia.

You sound like "coming from Southwest China" is a privilege or something and it makes you different or something lol

 
Old 04-06-2014, 05:25 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,781 posts, read 16,238,353 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezio_Auditore View Post
It's seem they are only talking about aboriginal.

The aboriginal of most of the area of mainland SEA(Vietnam/Thailand/Laos) are Mon-Khmer people(pure unmixed Vietnamese/Khmer/Suy/Mon). Mon-Khmer people have dark skin just like people of insular Southeast East such as Filipino/Indonesian/Malaysian(Austronesian). But both people have different facial construction.

The Tai/Dai ethnic(ture Lao/Thai) that migrate from South-western China(Do not call them Chinese, just call them Dai/Tai) in 13th century whom are mainly populated as majority of in Laos and Thailand population today doesn't seem to be count on this map except the area of Northern Laos,Northern Thailand and South-Western China(which seem like the Tai/Dai ethnic used to populated in those area at first place before the migrate to the South).

Kind of like the same case that they didn't account European-Australian(who are majority of Australian today) into the map, but instead they account Australian aboriginal instead.



Based on the map...
1.All Northeast Asian(Japanese/Northern Chinese/Middle Chinese/Korean/ other Northern east Asian) are all under 12-14.

2.Mainland Southeast Asian
1/2 of the area of Laos are under 15-17
1/3 of the area of Thailand are under 15-17
1/4 of the area of Vietnam(above Hainan island)are under 15-17.

3.Majority of Maritime Southeast Asian(Filipino/Indonesian/Malaysian) are under 18-20.

4.Cambodia,some people of maritime SEA, area of Vietnam/Thailand/Laos that close to Cambodia are under 21-23
Who are the 'pure' Vietnamese anyway? The Vietnamese people are a cultural/ethnic group, and like every such group, they are genetically heterogeneous. Just because they happen to have Chinese or Khmer or Cham blood doesn't mean they are any less Vietnamese. We don't know the exact genesis of the people of say the Dong Son civilisation, but it's pretty probably many of them had their origins in Yunnan, Guangxi, Guizhou and Guangdong province. Baiyue and Nanyue were states in Southeastern China but of course we don't know exactly how the people there looked, probably sort of Austronesian/'Austro-Asiatic.' Vietnam as a civilisation has always had links to Southern China, even one of their creation myths talks about them being the offspring of some Chinese emperor or whatnot...not that it's that important.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:31 PM
 
138 posts, read 643,564 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by eugene_allen View Post
What are you talking about? The graph clearly has the color for Thailand and Laos. It means that's their skin tone. If that is the majority of the population (like 70-80% of the population), you can be assured that they were not missed in a statistics like this unless you are in denial it is your skin tone

On the side note, Mon-Khmer is a linguist family, not a Race.

On another side note, Khmer, Lao, Thai, Vietnamese, Filipino, Indonesian, all most all Southeast Asians are all Austronesians and AustroAsiatics. The Tai/Dai, despite being said "coming from Southwest China", are also Austronesians and AustroAsiatics. Southern China used be populated by Southeast Asians until it was invaded by Han Chinese from the north. Saying "Tai/Dai came from Southwest China" doesn't prove you're any different from them. If you think the Tai, Northern Lao, Northern Thai are lighter-skinned, it means other Austronesians and AustroAsiatics were light skinned like that before. The reason they look darker now is because they mixed with Indians and aboriginals. Indians had enormous influence throughout Southeast Asia.

You sound like "coming from Southwest China" is a privilege or something and it makes you different or something lol
That also goes the same for the Vietnamese based on the same graph, only those Northern Vietnamese above Hainan island(like 1/4 out of whole Vietnam) are lighter skin and placed under 15-17, while another 3/4 of the area of Vietnam which is like 80-90% of population are either under 18-20 or 21-23.

Quote:
On the side note, Mon-Khmer is a linguist family, not a Race.

On another side note, Khmer, Lao, Thai, Vietnamese, Filipino, Indonesian, all most all Southeast Asians are all Austronesians and AustroAsiatics. The Tai/Dai, despite being said "coming from Southwest China", are also Austronesians and AustroAsiatics. Southern China used be populated by Southeast Asians until it was invaded by Han Chinese from the north. Saying "Tai/Dai came from Southwest China" doesn't prove you're any different from them. If you think the Tai, Northern Lao, Northern Thai are lighter-skinned, it means other Austronesians and AustroAsiatics were light skinned like that before. The reason they look darker now is because they mixed with Indians and aboriginals. Indians had enormous influence throughout Southeast Asia.
It's true that such term as Austronesian,Mon-Khmer,Tai-Kadai,Altaic,Sino-tibet are originally from linguist family. But then again when we look at those people who are considered to be under same linguist family majority(90%)of them will have very similar concept of physical appearance(facial construction, skin tone) to the other people in the same family.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:45 PM
 
55 posts, read 99,045 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezio_Auditore View Post
That also goes the same for the Vietnamese based on the same graph, only those Northern Vietnamese above Hainan island(like 1/4 out of whole Vietnam) are lighter skin and placed under 15-17, while another 3/4 of the area of Vietnam which is like 80-90% of population are either under 18-20 or 21-23.
So? What about it? Why do you pull Vietnam out like it is an argument when I said nothing about it?



Quote:
It's true that such term as Austronesian,Mon-Khmer,Tai-Kadai,Altaic,Sino-tibet are originally from linguist family. But then again when we look at those people who are considered to be under same linguist family majority(90%)of them will have very similar concept of physical appearance(facial construction, skin tone) to the other people in the same family.
I doubt it. The reason Mon-Khmer language speaking people and other Southeast Asians look darker today because they mixed with Indians and negrito aboriginals. Northern Vietnamese, Tai/Dai and other Austronesian, AustroAsiatic ethnic minorities in Southern China are still lighter because they didn't have a chance to mix with Indians and negrito aboriginals.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:49 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,781 posts, read 16,238,353 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
Who are the 'pure' Vietnamese anyway? The Vietnamese people are a cultural/ethnic group, and like every such group, they are genetically heterogeneous. Just because they happen to have Chinese or Khmer or Cham blood doesn't mean they are any less Vietnamese. We don't know the exact genesis of the people of say the Dong Son civilisation, but it's pretty probably many of them had their origins in Yunnan, Guangxi, Guizhou and Guangdong province. Baiyue and Nanyue were states in Southeastern China but of course we don't know exactly how the people there looked, probably sort of Austronesian/'Austro-Asiatic.' Vietnam as a civilisation has always had links to Southern China, even one of their creation myths talks about them being the offspring of some Chinese emperor or whatnot...not that it's that important.
Aren't you going to reply Ezio?
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:55 PM
 
55 posts, read 99,045 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
Who are the 'pure' Vietnamese anyway? The Vietnamese people are a cultural/ethnic group, and like every such group, they are genetically heterogeneous. Just because they happen to have Chinese or Khmer or Cham blood doesn't mean they are any less Vietnamese. We don't know the exact genesis of the people of say the Dong Son civilisation, but it's pretty probably many of them had their origins in Yunnan, Guangxi, Guizhou and Guangdong province. Baiyue and Nanyue were states in Southeastern China but of course we don't know exactly how the people there looked, probably sort of Austronesian/'Austro-Asiatic.' Vietnam as a civilisation has always had links to Southern China, even one of their creation myths talks about them being the offspring of some Chinese emperor or whatnot...not that it's that important.
Exactly. When mentioning names like Yunnan, Guangxi, Guizhou, Guangdong, Southern China, these are the Chinese names in the present time because this area has been colonized by Han Chinese, it did not represent that the ancient people who lived in this area were related to Han Chinese. This area was occupied by AustroAsiatics and Austronesians people aka Southeast Asians. Han Chinese mixed with these people. But many ethnic minorities in this area still remain. Some people tend to mistake when they hear "an ethnicity came from Southwestern China" , "from Guangdong" as being related to Han Chinese and thus, being East Asians.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,781 posts, read 16,238,353 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by eugene_allen View Post
Exactly. When mentioning names like Yunnan, Guangxi, Guizhou, Guangdong, Southern China, please these are the Chinese names in the present time because this area has been colonized by Han Chinese, it did not represent that the ancient people who lived in this area were related to Han Chinese. This area was occupied by AustroAsiatics and Austronesians people aka Southeast Asians. Han Chinese mixed with these people. But many ethnic minorities in this area still remain.
Yes, the story of both the Vietnamese and Chinese civilisations has many parallels. These are the boundaries of the Shang dynasty around 1000 BC:

http://www.chinatownconnection.com/i...dynastymap.gif


The original tribes that became Chinese and united under the name 'Huaxia' probably about 5000 years ago (the genesis of an identifiable Chinese civilisation) on the Wei tributary of the Huang He (yellow river) in Shaanxi, Gansu, Henan.etc probably looked more like Tibetans and Quang than a lot of central and southern Chinese who are mixed with the natives who lived there before. Most of the ethnic minorities are actually pretty genetically similar to the neighbouring Han anyway.

The Vietnamese civilisation was centered around the Red River delta, Khmers were centered around the lower reaches of the Mekong, Lake Tonle Sap. Vietnamese are probably more like the ethnic minorities of Southern China than Khmer. Later mixing with Khmer and Cham probably gave them those features.

Last edited by elnina; 04-07-2014 at 12:15 AM..
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:09 PM
 
138 posts, read 643,564 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
Who are the 'pure' Vietnamese anyway? The Vietnamese people are a cultural/ethnic group, and like every such group, they are genetically heterogeneous. Just because they happen to have Chinese or Khmer or Cham blood doesn't mean they are any less Vietnamese. We don't know the exact genesis of the people of say the Dong Son civilisation, but it's pretty probably many of them had their origins in Yunnan, Guangxi, Guizhou and Guangdong province. Baiyue and Nanyue were states in Southeastern China but of course we don't know exactly how the people there looked, probably sort of Austronesian/'Austro-Asiatic.' Vietnam as a civilisation has always had links to Southern China, even one of their creation myths talks about them being the offspring of some Chinese emperor or whatnot...not that it's that important.
There is no such migration evidence or even linguistic evidence to show that people of Dong Son civilisation(true Vietnamese) ever have origin from S.China(both South-western and South-eastern).

S.China(both South-western and South-eastern) obviously not the homeland of Mon-Khmer speaker, but a homeland of Tai-Kadai speaker. Because if S.China was the the homeland of Mon-Khmer people, there must be a pocket of Mon-Khmer people remain in the area. But no, today S.China has only very few of Mon-Khmer people in the area but full of Tai-Kadai people(over 23 millions).

Mon-Khmer speaker are most likely have a homeland in mainland SEA. For a few groups of Mon-Khmer minority whom currently living in S.China like Wa/Kinh/Blang/Deang are more likely those who migrated upward from mainland SEA into S.China.

By the way, this is the painting of the costume of Dong Son civilisation(true Vietnamese, before get invaded and brainwashed by Han-Chinese).

[Mod cut: copyrighted]

The costume of Dong Son civilisation(true Vietnamese, before get invaded and brainwashed by Han-Chinese) obviously very similar to the costume of "Wa"(Va) people who is the Mon-Khmer minority in S.China.

Wa(Va) people
[Mod cut: copyrighted]

Wa(Va) and Dong Son costume(true Vietnamese, before get invaded and brainwashed by Han-Chinese)
are very similar. Both people wear giant silver earring, the texture of the color of their skirt+shirt are extreamly similar. They also wear giant bracelet on both arms too.

So I will assume that true Kinh-Vietnamese(without Han-Chinese mixing) look the same as the Wa(Va) people who are Mon-Khmer speaker just like Vietnamese as well as living in S.China which is close to Northern Vietnam.

Even today Vietnamese(which already mixed with Han-Chinese during 1000 of occupation in large degree) still have same exact facial construction as those Wa(Va) people. The combo of flat broad face+strong squarish jawline+strong prominent cheekbone+flat broad nose.

Today Vietnamese from Hanoi(basically hybrid of true Vietnamese(Dong Son) and Han-Chinese invader)

[Mod cut: copyrighted]

Last edited by elnina; 04-07-2014 at 12:18 AM.. Reason: Please do not post copyrighted pictures
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:18 PM
 
55 posts, read 99,045 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
Yes, the story of both the Vietnamese and Chinese civilisations has many parallels. These are the boundaries of the Shang dynasty around 1000 BC:




The original tribes that became Chinese and united under the name 'Huaxia' probably about 5000 years ago (the genesis of an identifiable Chinese civilisation) on the Wei tributary of the Huang He (yellow river) in Shaanxi, Gansu, Henan.etc probably looked more like Tibetans and Quang than a lot of central and southern Chinese who are mixed with the natives who lived there before. Most of the ethnic minorities are actually pretty genetically similar to the neighbouring Han anyway.

The Vietnamese civilisation was centered around the Red River delta, Khmers were centered around the lower reaches of the Mekong, Lake Tonle Sap. Vietnamese are probably more like the ethnic minorities of Southern China than Khmer. Later mixing with Khmer and Cham probably gave them those features.

It's possible. There was no such division between Southeast Asia and China a few thousand years ago. People migrated back and forth. Southeast Asia and present time-Southern China were all occupied by AustroAsiatics and Austronesians aka Southeast Asians. I don't know why there are some close-minded people (you probably know whom ) look at the present division and say things like "They have lived in Southeast Asia for whatever thousand years" , "We have lived in Southwestern China for whatever thousand years" like it is a privilege! Well, they are only ethnic minority in Southern China
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:29 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,781 posts, read 16,238,353 times
Reputation: 2833
^ Well long enough ago negritos inhabited even southern China, and no doubt Vietnam. Even those people look like they have a more northerly origin (not talking about the probably first northward migration from SEA to China). You sound like a real Vietnamese nationalist, but face it, most of Vietnamese culture has always been strongly Chinese influenced. What came before wasn't really Vietnamese. It was Vietnamese in the same way the native culture of S.Chinese was Chinese before the Han.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top