Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:57, 27 September 2008

Hong Kong Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Hong Kong To-do: edit history watch purge Attention needed (60) ...needing expert attention (4) • ...without infoboxes (33) Collaboration needed Recommend topic Improvement needed GA-Class articles (60) • B-Class articles (298) Cleanup needed C-Class articles (1,077) Image needed (348) Destub needed Start-Class articles (5,546) • Stub-Class articles (6,671) Deorphan needed ...orphans Page creation needed Requested articles Miscellaneous tasks ...maintain popularity • ...assess the un-Class (378) • ...assess the un-Importance (1,343)

China Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ethnic groups Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Cantonese with Hakka Ancestry

Some Cantonese people have Hakka ancestry. Hakka have been in Guangdong Province for a long time. Therefore some Hakka have mixed with the local Cantonese population and have lost their Hakka language. Some Hakka didn't intermingled with the Cantonese and lived in isolation. However some Hakka have assimilated, and this further increases more Cantonese-speaking chinese.KingL 04:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

The Hakkas in Guangdong are Cantonese (meaning the people of Guandong). The language people loosely refer to as Cantonese is in fact Guangzhouese. Canton is the (incorrect) English transliteration for Guangdong Province as well as Guangzhou (Canton City). The 'Canton' in Cantonese referred to Guangzhou and not Guangdong. There is no one single Guangdongese language. Some of the Cantopop stars in the article are in fact Hakkas. Hakkas, unlike the Punti Cantonese are generally multi-lingual, and speak fluent Punti Cantonese. Many Hakkas use Punti Cantonese amongst themselves as they fear discrimination by the Puntis. Immigrants from Guangdong to Europe and the Americas were not generally the Punti Cantonese, even though they almost all spoke some Punti Cantonese, as it was more convenient to do so since local officials spoke Guangzhouese. The emigrants to North America were generally Toishanese (Taishanese)and Hakka. The emigrants to the West Indies, Latin and South America were generally Hakkas, and no Toishanese. The emigrants to Europe were generally Hakkas. The Punti Cantonese had no inclination to travel overseas for work, as they were not as entrepreneurial, preferring to believe that as they were the aboriginals (pun-ti), the land owed them a living. Although Toishanese would refer to themselves as 'Punti' (as Punti means aboriginal) in Toishan, their spoken language is very different from Punti Cantonese (Guangzhouese). 81.159.86.60 19:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The Hakka Cantonese have always interacted with the Punti Cantonese, and Punti genes have always gone into Hakka families. As the Puntis favoured sons to daughters, it was a Hakka tradition to buy the daughters Puntis want to discard when they were babies. These 'Punti Moys' then made wives for the sons of the Hakka families. There did not appear to be the flow of Hakka daughters to Punti families in this way. And you are talking of times when many men had more than one wife in their life-time. 77.44.49.36 12:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Cantonese people and Hakka people are the same race. We are both originally from the Northern China Proper. Sonic99 (talk) 06:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The Cantonese people's relationship with Han Chinese people

I think a section should be added to this page, explaining and clarifying whether the Cantonese people are a sub-group of the Han Chinese or whether they are a distinct ethnic group. As this is a point that I myself have often wondered about. 195.112.33.25 19:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Cantonese are considered a subgroup of Han Chinese. --Yuje 20:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The Cantonese are now of the Han nationality, although the Yues (Viets) prior to becoming Sinicized were a different nationality. (Deleted content that amounts to little more than overgeneralisation). 81.159.86.60 19:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Guangdongren/ Guangzhouren

InfernoXV, please stop your POV edits. It is clear that this article is about the Guangdongren and not Guangzhouren (see the Chinese written characters in the article). Both Guangdongren and Guangzhouren are translated as Cantonese in English, but the Chinese writing in the article clearly stated that the article refers to Guangdongren and not Guangzhouren. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.44.49.36 (talk) 13:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It refers not to 'Guangzhouren', but those Cantonese-speaking peoples. By your definition, those who originate from outside Canton city are therefore not Cantonese (if 'Cantonese' refers to those of Canton city). Hakka and Teochew people do not identify themselves as 廣東人/Cantonese, so please stop trying to push badly written, unsourced POV material into this article. InfernoXV (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

No InfernoXV, please do not talk out of your backside. Guangzhouese people are Guangdongren, as Guangzhou is in Guangdong.

'Hakka and Teochew people do not identify themselves as 廣東人/Cantonese'- says who? InfernoXv have you talked to any Hakka or Teowchiu people in Guangdong and ask whether they consider themselves Guangdongren. You don't know what you are talking about. Please do not ruin and vandalise the article any further by displaying your lack of knowledge about Guangdongren (Cantonese People). 81.154.205.12 (talk) 18:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

And you aren't proving what you've been adding. Sources or stop adding it, and, no, "personal experience" is an illegitimate cite. -Jéské 01:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

No Jeske, this is no 'personal experience', but is common knowledge among the Cantonese (Guangdongren) of China. Please note none of what was previously written was of reputable quality, but was still allowed, so according to you the article should be deleted. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 23:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Common knowledge amongst a people obviously has to have a source. However, you haven't been adding it. Find a source before you add it again, or I will keep reverting it as unsourced. -Jéské 23:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

You are in no position to edit this article because of your ignorance of the Cantonese people. Revert it and I shall continue to add the true and correct information back to the article. The source is the common knowledge within all the Cantonese people, which you clearly have no respect for. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 23:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

As a mediator, any unsourced and unverified materials will be removed without notice, given that you have been hostile in editing in the past. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 23:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

And where are the sources for these racists and incorrect edits? 81.159.81.146 (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

The title of this article in Chinese is 'Guangdongren', ie the People of Guangdong. The title in English is 'Cantonese People'. Canton is the English transliteration for both Guangzhou (the city) and Guangdong (the province). Some of the people here are taking the English meaning of 'Cantonese' to be limited to 'Guangzhouese',ie people or language of Guangzhou, which clearly does not correpond to the Chinese title of this article, which covers all peoples of Guangdong. There is nothing in the title to suggest that Guangdongren who do not speak Guangzhouhua are not Guangdongren. The definition of 'Guangdongren' include both speakers of Guangzhouhua (Guangzhouese) and speakers of other languages found in Guangdong. Please do not incorporate any racist views into this article. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 19:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Seicer why are the unsourced material put back into the article. Are you going to remove them or not? 81.159.81.146 (talk) 02:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Brown, Keith (2005). Encyclopedia of Language And Linguistics

This is claimed to be the the source in this article of the population of Cantonese people and number of Cantonese speakers, however the page numbers and author(s) are not given. I have reverted to the "fact" tags until such information is provided. LDHan (talk) 13:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there a way that we can get official numbers for this? It's not as if there is a Cantonese country... enochlau (talk) 13:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Cantonese_(linguistics)#Checking_a_reference:_Brown.2C_Keith__.282005.29._Encyclopedia_of_Language_and_Linguistics.LDHan (talk) 03:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

There may well be 110 million Guangzhouhua (Cantonese) speakers ,ie a number larger than the entire population of Guangdong, as many of them will speak Guangzhouhua as a joint first language or as a second or third language. This is tantamount to saying that there are more English speakers than the population of England. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 19:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Surprise, surprise. There *are* more English speakers than the population of England. Incidentally, 'Cantonese' is Guangdonghua, not Guangzhouhua. InfernoXV (talk) 08:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The discussion here is about whether or not this book states that the number of Cantonese speakers is 110 million. When a number is given for the number of speakers of any particular language, it means the number of first language and native language speakers. Please also note discussion/talk pages are for discussion on ways to improve an article, not for general discussions on the subject. LDHan (talk) 10:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

"Incidentally, 'Cantonese' is Guangdonghua, not Guangzhouhua." No InfernoXV, please do not display your ignorance any further. The 'Cantonese' you refer to is known officially in the PRC as 'Guangzhouhua'. Only outside mainland PRC, such as Hong Kong and Singapore is it (incorrectly) referred to as Guangdonghua. I am using the official nomenclature of the PRC. The Fujian people of SE Asia, including Singapore refer to their language as Hokkien, ie Fujian, which sounds as though it is the most important language or even the sole language of Fujian, when clearly this is not the case in terms of number of its speakers in the whole of Fujian. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 02:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright, let's put it this way. In English-language contexts, 'Cantonese people' refers to those whose identity grouping centres around use of the Cantonese tongue, not merely all those who live in Canton province. 'Cantonese people' in English, excludes Teochews, Hakkas and Hainanese, and therefore is a narrower term than 'People of Canton Province' which would include them. If you think that's racist, tough. Words have different meanings in various languages. InfernoXV (talk) 04:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

So InfernoXV, are you saying yo are a racist? Or even an auto-racist? 81.155.96.175 (talk) 11:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The 'Canton' in the English word 'Cantonese' refers to Canton City, ie Guangzhou, and not Guangdong province. When the term 'Cantonese' was coined, Europeans were not allowed anywhere outside of a small area in Guangzhou, so 'Cantonese' simply referred to the speech of Guangzhou. 81.155.96.175 (talk) 11:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Cantonese people' in English, excludes Teochews, Hakkas and Hainanese, and therefore is a narrower term than 'People of Canton Province'". Says who? Where is an authoritative reference for your claim? Of course Hainanese are not Cantonese, Hainan is now not a part of Guangdong. The PRC Government says all peoples in Guangdong are Guangdongren. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 00:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Cantonese Independence Movements

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

This discussion is closed. Misplaced Pages is NOT a SOAPBOX. nat.utoronto 14:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is there nothing in the article that discusses the concept of Cantonese nationalism and associated movements? Given that Cantonese nationalism is slowly gaining momentum, would it not be appropriate to include discussion of such ideas in the article? After all, the ancestors of today's Cantonese peoples were the victims of one of the worst (and prolonged) series of genocides in world history at the hands of the Han Chinese (the first such genocide occurring not long after the founding of Imperial China). Once subjugated, the existence of distinct ethnic identities in the Canton area (and other subjugated areas) were conveniently forgotten by most people in the world (and tragically to this day). Many 'native' languages and cultures were wiped out within the following millennium and the label of Han Chinese ethnicity became a brutal imposition upon the Cantonese peoples. After more than a millennium of subjugation, it is, therefore, hardly surprising that few people today (in the entire world) would openly dare suggest that the Cantonese peoples are NOT Han Chinese and, therefore, that a sovereign nation-state free from Chinese rule of any kind be established to honour the rights of these peoples to self-determination as set out under international law.

For brief information about the genocides against the Cantonese and other Viet peoples, refer to the article Nam Viet.122.105.148.161 (talk) 05:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

You cannot be serious, most of Cantonese people consider they are Han Chinese.

You should notice that most of ancestors of Chinese Malaysian caomes from South China (mostly in Guangdong and Fujian), they must consider they are ethnic Chinese NOT ethnic Vietnamese!

218.188.90.194 (talk) 02:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear, user 218.188.90.194 has completely missed the point. Since when has anyone suggested anything about the relationship between the Cantonese and Vietnamese peoples in this section? I thought this section was supposed to be about the notion of Cantonese independence, not the concept of the Cantonese identity being closely related to the Vietnamese identity. Besides, why is the user talking about Malaysian Chinese here anyway?

Perhaps user 218.188.90.194's comments should be deleted altogether as they seem totally out of place and contravene WP:SOAP. David873 (talk) 11:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that you are a Vietnamese ultra-nationalist! I tell you that No relationship between Cantonese people and Vietnamese. 203.218.20.63 (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Did Nat even have the right to 'terminate' the above discussion in the way that he has done? I was under the impression that comments that contravene Misplaced Pages guidelines are supposed to be deleted or summarised as appropriate (such as the defamatory paragraph at the end). I see why Nat may find the notion of 'Cantonese independence' offensive; his user page says it all. Still, one has to act impartially regardless of their background. David873 (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

(Suppressed defamatory comments by IP editor)

I don't find it offensive, however, this discussion was beginning to move in the direction of becoming a forum thread. nat.utoronto 05:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It is genealogically impossible for large numbers of Vietnamese to be of the same ancestors as Cantonese people. Maybe a family here or there intermarriaged, but that is probably as far as it goes. Benjwong (talk) 01:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Really? I thought that the Vietnamese are very closely related to the Cantonese people. Or at least this is what the article Vietnamese people tells us. 122.105.148.204 (talk) 03:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

My understanding is this. And you are welcome to correct me if I am wrong. Nanyue and Guangdong/Canton are geographically close. The problem is that they were split long ago, where Guangdong has been Han-enough for an extremely long time. If you follow some Cantonese people's family trees, a regular Chinese person's name with 3 characters would have 1 character from the Chinese 堂號 (this is missing english article & reference but is accurate), another character from the emperor, and a 3rd character of your choice. When Cantonese people followed this format, they were already considered Han. People stopped doing this ages ago, which shows just how far back it was plugged into Han culture. Unless vietnamese groups also follow the same naming format, it would be difficult to prove. Benjwong (talk) 01:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Early history

The "History" section should discuss what languages the ancestors of the Cantonese people spoke before they were Sinicized. Badagnani (talk) 05:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

badagani, your living in lala land if you think cantonese are the descendants of the oiginal inhabitants of the region, even vietnamese people have more chinese DNA than their own!

look at this

According to a research study done by the Hopital Saint-Louis in Paris, France: "the comparison of the Vietnamese with other East Asian populations showed a close genetic relationship of the population under investigation with other Orientals," with the exception of seven unique markers. These results, along with remnants of Thai enzyme morphs, indicate a dual ethnic origin of the Vietnamese population from Chinese and Thai-Indonesian populations. According to another research by the Mackay Memorial Hospital in Taipei, Taiwan, the Vietnamese people are classified in the same genetic cluster as the Miao, Southern Han (Southern Chinese), Buyi and Thai, with a divergent family consisting of Singaporean and Thai Chinese, Minnan (Hoklo) and Hakka. ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

1. Ivanova R, Astrinidis A, Lepage V; et al. (1999). "Mitochondrial DNA polymorphism in the Vietnamese population". Eur. J. Immunogenet. 26 (6): 417–22. PMID 10583463. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
2. Lin M, Chu CC, Chang SL; et al. (2001). "The origin of Minnan and Hakka, the so-called "Taiwanese", inferred by HLA study". Tissue Antigens. 57 (3): 192–9. PMID 11285126. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

• Start-Class Hong Kong articles
• Unknown-importance Hong Kong articles
• WikiProject Hong Kong articles
• Start-Class China-related articles
• High-importance China-related articles
• Start-Class China-related articles of High-importance
• WikiProject China articles
• Start-Class Ethnic groups articles
• High-importance Ethnic groups articles
• WikiProject Ethnic groups articles