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.
You're kidding right? Austro-Asiatic is a linguistic term it has nothing to do with genetics. It's the term for the language family that includes Khmer, Vietnamese and Mon, also known as 'Mon-Khmer'.
I'm sure I don't need to bring out the photos to show you how vastly different Cambodians and Vietnamese, the Viet Kinh, not those mixed with Khmer in Southern VN look.
I know what you means, that modern Viet/kinh in the north are hybird Chinese, while Viet/kinh in the south are hybird of Khmer/Cham.
But how about the real Viet/Kinh that didn't mix nethier Chinese or Khmer/Cham ??
I mean the one that originally from "Red river delta" even before the Chinese invaded the Namviet kingdom?
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutapong
I know that modern Viet/kinh in the north are hybird Chinese, while Viet/kinh in the south and on the middle are hybird of Khmer/Cham.
But how about the real Viet/Kinh that didn't mix nethier Chinese or Khmer/Cham ??
I mean the one that originally even before the Chinese invaded the Namviet kingdom?
The Viet civilisation is centered in the Red River delta, but most scholars believed they came from Southern China probably about 2,500 BC at the earliest. The ORIGINAL Vietnamese, as in the ethnic Viet Kinh, are most similar to Southern Chinese. Those Southern Vietnamese were mixed with Khmer and Cham who are non-Vietnamese people. They are not ethnically Viet, in the same way the Dai are not ethnically Han Chinese. So the 'original Vietnamese' you talk about are a people that probably came from Southern China, although you could say the natives of northern Vietnam were incorporated.
The Viet civilisation is centered in the Red River delta, but most scholars believed they came from Southern China probably about 2,500 BC at the earliest. The ORIGINAL Vietnamese, as in the ethnic Viet Kinh, are most similar to Southern Chinese. Those Southern Vietnamese were mixed with Khmer and Cham who are non-Vietnamese people. They are not ethnically Viet, in the same way the Dai are not ethnically Han Chinese. So the 'original Vietnamese' you talk about are a people that probably came from Southern China, although you could say the natives of northern Vietnam were incorporated.
Alright, I got you for theory of Vietnamese.
How about the Cambodian, are they also came from Southern of China or no, or they originally belong to the Southeast Asia?
If they came from China then how long ago?
Could it be about the same time as Vietnamese which is 4500 years ago?
because manila is the center of all things tagalog
dude I have always been using eastern and western visayans for my pictures....though I just use an umbrella term of visayans because even though cebuanos are slightly more malay looking and attracting non visayans to the city.....I still see them as fellow visayans
malay looking is from malay elements from indonesia and malaysia that is not bornean in origin
And Cebu is the center of all things Visayan. It's in the heart of the Visayas. Dont say that Manila has typical Tagalogs if you cant accept that Cebu has typical Visayans.
And why would Borneans somehow be more East Asian-looking? Do they have ancestry that's different from other Malaysians and Indonesians? And how would Cebu specifically attract those types of people? I think you make things up as you go.
And Cebu is the center of all things Visayan. It's in the heart of the Visayas. Dont say that Manila has typical Tagalogs if you cant accept that Cebu has typical Visayans.
And why would Borneans somehow be more East Asian-looking? Do they have ancestry that's different from other Malaysians and Indonesians? And how would Cebu specifically attract those types of people? I think you make things up as you go.
wrong there
western visayan center is Iloilo, Bacolod, Dumaguete
eastern visayan center is Tacloban
central visayan center is Bohol and Cebu
but all visayans see each other as brothers/sisters....wether one looks malay or east asian....the bond is strong
And Cebu is the center of all things Visayan. It's in the heart of the Visayas. Dont say that Manila has typical Tagalogs if you cant accept that Cebu has typical Visayans.
And why would Borneans somehow be more East Asian-looking? Do they have ancestry that's different from other Malaysians and Indonesians? And how would Cebu specifically attract those types of people? I think you make things up as you go.
Ejay said that I hated Cambodian, but he is nothing better than me at all.
Since he is also deeply hated Tagalog/Negrito and maybe whatever ethnic in the Philipine that he doesn't like the looks.
Ejay said that I hated Cambodian, but he is nothing better than me at all.
Since he is also deeply hated Tagalog/Negrito and maybe whatever ethnic in the Philipine that he doesn't like the looks.
lol you call cambodian slutty
anyways cambodian more attractive then thai...its impossible for those unattractive thai women to be cambodian...there are only 4 million cambodian in thailand...while there are 20 million lao in thailand...those bargirl most likely lao and not cambodian
the stereotype that all ilocanos are the darkest ethnic group is not true.....
and for the most part ilocanos seem to look SEAsian as well
I love your answer. You have no problem with them because of how they look. You have problems with ugly Tagalogs because they don't look how you want them too. You have a problem man. Get help before you commit a genocide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejay1
wrong there
western visayan center is Iloilo, Bacolod, Dumaguete
eastern visayan center is Tacloban
central visayan center is Bohol and Cebu
but all visayans see each other as brothers/sisters....wether one looks malay or east asian....the bond is strong
Lol, do you realize how stupid you just sounded. You just said that Cebu was the center of the Central Visayans. So how is it not the center of the Visayas??? That's like saying Nashville is the center of Central Tennessee but it's not the center of Tennessee.
Do you see Cebu? It's in the damn center of the region, and the largest city by far. So why are we not allowed to compare Manila to Cebu? You said Manila is center of the Tagalog region. So Cebu isn't the center of the Visayan region? You say that Manila has typical Tagalogs, but Cebu doesnt have typical Visayans. Why the hell not?
And answer me, why are Borneans supposedly different from "Malays" What makes them look more East Asian?
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.
