Talk:Hakka people

Origin of Hakka and Hakkanese: a genetics analysis

An Abstract of Original Article in Chinese

Li H, Pan WY, Wen B, Yang NN, Jin JZ, Jin L, Lu DR. Center for Anthropological Studies at Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China. LH@cableplus.com.cn

Hakka is a distinctive Han Chinese population in Southern China speaking Hakkanese. The origin of Hakka has been controversial. In this report, we analyzed Y chromosomal markers in 148 Hakka males. Principle component analysis of Y-SNP haplotype distribution shows Hakka is clusteed strongly with the Han in Northern China, and is also close to She, a Hmong-Mien-speaking population, while the general Southern Han is fairly close to Daic populations. Admixture analysis revealed that the relative genetic contribution 80.2% (Han), 13% (She) and 6.8% (Kam) in Hakka. The network of Y-STR haplotype of M7 individuals in all concerned populations suggested two possible origins of Hmong-Mien contribution in Hakka: One is from Hubei and the other is from Canton. The Kam contribution in Hakka is likely from Kan-Yue, the ancient aborigine of Kiangsi (Jiangxi). The frequency of 9bp-deletion in Region V of mitochondrial DNA of Hakka is 19.7%, which is quite close to She but far from Han. We therefore concluded that genetically the majority of Hakka gene pool shall come from North Han with She contributing the most among all non-Han groups. Regarding the Hmong-Mien character of Hakkanese, the genetic structure of Hakka shows their core may be Kim-man, the ancient Hmong-Mien. We hypothesized that a great number of Han people from North China join this population in succession. Southern Chinese dialects, such as Hakkanese may also be those languages of Southern aborigines at first, and turn to extant appearance under the continuance effect of Northern Chinese.

My comments : This is an interesting finding based on a fairly small sample size. It shows that the Hakka lineage is predominantly North Chinese with a surprising admixture of She (a subgroup of Miao-Hmong) DNA. There must have been some intermarriage with Miao people along the centuries. The hypothesis that the original core of Hakka is She is rather weird though, given the predominantly North Chinese genetic characteristic of Hakka. There is also a comment that the general southern Chinese population has a high admixture of Daic genes (i.e. those related to the Thai, Lao, Shan and Zhuang peoples). Regarding this abstract, I'm not sure also if it is well translated. The Romanization used is not Pinyin. Wayne Leigh 05:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This study is consistent with the perception that Hakka males came from a northern Chinese stock (the Y chromosome studies), some of whom who took local non-Han Punti wives (the mDNA studies). This is what the Hakkas have been saying all along, so the genetic results aren't at all surprising. It may also confirm that the Guangdong Puntis (Yues) are descended from the Yues/Viets with Han genetics added after the Hans conquered the Yues. 86.155.215.165 21:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Discussion - who are Hakka?

I think the first line "Hakka is also another name for the Hani people, a Nationality of China." is inaccurate. As the article states later down the page, Hakka are considered part of the Han, while the Hani are not. I think the confusion arose because there is a dialect of Hani called "Ahka". See Ethnologue. --Franchin 10:22, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

---

How many of those what so called prominent Hokka people are from the Hokka region, speak Hokka, identify themselves as Hokka people in public or even know that there are people call them as Hokka people? If somebody's ancestor moved once in the last five thousand years, it does not make him a Hokka people.

I'm not certain how accurate this is, but there is some additional information here. It'll be best if an explicit reference can be provided for each person on the list. http://www.asiawind.com/hakka/people.htm --BenjaminTsai 16:00, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I tried to NPOV-fy this. It didn't really get -fied, did it? :-{ --Menchi 23:00 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

---

Rumor has it that Hakka people has double toe nail on their pinky toes. Is there any statistic to support this genetic trait?

That is indeed the folklore -- not really a double toenail inasmuch as a "split" toenail, and I have met some Hakka who have it, some who don't. But it might be nice folklore to include in Wikipedia, since the story is quite widespread. - Fuzheado 01:09, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Aren't their toenails split (sometimes more than once) simply due to doing labours standing up (or walking) as a youth, and a lack of pedicure (a luxury that seemed meaningless to many)? Namely, the split is not genetic and cannot be passed onto their children, unless they work in the same condition as the parents did. --Menchi 01:12, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)

My grandma is a Hakka, and she's a farmer to boot; but she doesn't own a double-nail pinky toe. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 21:20, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am Hakka and I have the split toenail on the pinky... interesting enough I've never worked in the fields one day. So I doubt it is an infection. I've been told it is a sign of "true Han." So I think we can assume that it is some sort of ethnic characteristics that is cross-cutting and not genuinely linked to anything in particular.02:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Im Japanese and I have a split toe nail on my pinky which I got from my Mum and my brothers both have it so im pretty sure it can be genetic. (Edit by User:82.24.143.138)

I'm Hakka, and I don't set any store by who has or hasn't got a split toenail. It is likely due to a fungal infection which you may have gotten as a child but being benign it isn't hurting or harming you in any way. Dylanwhs 19:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Hakka here, none of my relatives have got split toenails.. except for my grandparents.. maybe the trait is diminishing or what? or because they ve done farming and the newer generations dont? JoTp 03:44, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

---

Some Hakka fled to Hong Kong while some to Taiwan during the Chinese Civil War. Is that true? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 21:20, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hakka were already in Hong Kong and Taiwan before the civil war. I am not sure if there was another influx during and after the civil war. — Instantnood 21:34, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

---

Goodness, so many many questions. I'm Hakka, and don't have a split or double pinky toe nail. Farmers in the past often worked in wet soil cultivation. It is likely that farmers, of whatever linguistic background, may have had infections on their feet due to the conditions they worked in. Discolouration and other effects on toenails are likely fungal in nature.

Hakka people have been in Hong Kong for at least 200 years. During the Qing KangXi era, the coastal area of Guangdong was evacuated because of piracy. I think it lasted for a number of years. When the original inhabitants were ordered to move, there was no provisions made for the refugees. Many of these evacuees ended up without anywhere to live, and many are said to have died of hunger. The coastal areas were repopulated but many of the original people had died, and so the Qing government decided to give a monetary incentuve for people to move and reopen the land. The five major clans who were resident in Hong Kong since the Song Dynasty and before, came back to their richer and more fertile land around the flat river basin areas, hence you see many of these clans occupying Yuen Long, Sheung Shui, Taipo, Shatin and the like. The Hakka who came to Hong Kong during the early Qing then had to settle in the less fertile areas, the hillier terrain, often in small valleys such as the areas surrounding the clan areas, and the fjord like areas my family come from. They've been there for at least 10 generations. Dylanwhs 20:44, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

why is Chen ShuiBien listed as a Hakka? He is not and doesn't claim to be. But no evidence is cited by those who say he is. And one cannot prove a negative.16:02, 4 October 2005 (UTC)~

It is rumoured that he is Japanese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems in general more prudent to lay the burden of proof for affirmation. Otherwise people can go around picking the most influential people and claim them to be Hakka based on circumstantial evidence. --BenjaminTsai 15:51, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Exactly - I've edited it off in the past but people keep putting it back without real proof. There NO CLAIM - NONE at all in Taiwan or anywhere, from the President himself, his office, Party, opponents, etc etc that he's Hakka. He doesn't speak Hakka, he identifies himself as "Taiwanese" ethnicity. BlindingCranium 19:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I've been trying to do a bit more digging into this.. it seems (second hand information) that Chen Shuibian has claimed to have Hakka ancestry some time or another in the past, however the person I spoke with felt it was most likely motivated by politics (Hakka being the largest "minority" in Taiwan). Furthermore, having Hakka ancestry is different from actively identifying oneself as a Hakka. The number of people with some Hakka ancestry is undoubtably significantly larger than the number of people who actively claim to be a Hakka. What this means is a person looking for Hakka connection will find it in larger numbers than expected based on the number of people who actively claim to be Hakka. --BenjaminTsai 20:58, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Chen Shuibian has said many times that he is Hakka. His relatives in China still speak Hakka. http://www.zaobao.com.sg/special/china/taiwan/pages4/taiwan181101a.html http://www.people.com.cn/GB/tupian/70/20020815/800221.html http://news.sohu.com/16/96/news147549616.shtml http://www.zaobao.com/special/china/taiwan/pages4/taiwan030702.html

How about Li Peng? He's Hakka by blood, although he was adopted later by Zhou En-Lai & wife. It seems Hakkas only want to claim the more positive members of Chinese society, hehe. Here's a CNN article mentioning his heritage. http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/china.50/inside.china/profiles/li.peng/

---

In this area (Toronto) there are a number of Indian-style Chinese restaurants. All that I've asked seem to be Hakka. A google search suggests that this is not just a local phenomenon. What is the connection between the Hakka and India? Nothing is mentioned in the article. DHR 21:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

East Timorese Hakka Girl Picture

The picture that shows the East Timorese Hakka girl doesnt' look like a hakka chinese girl, she must be a mix!?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.199.178.24 (talk • contribs)

I meet a lot of pure blooded Hakka who do not look like Chinese. Is it a good proof that they are not the original Chinese as they try to convince themselves? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.137.4.69 (talk • contribs)

Many scholars, Hakka and non-Hakka or Chinese, agree with Luo Xianglin that the Hakka are Han Chinese, despite the suggestions by Bendi/Punti Chinese that they are not Han. These suggestions are rooted in Punti racism and the Hakka's marginal social status. Many Han Chinese -- including Punti -- do not match the typical image of "Han" and have diverse facial characteristics. I myself (a Hakka-Punti mixture) have been mistaken at many times for Korean and Japanese, even though both of my parents are from Guangdong province. LuoYanshan 19:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Puntis do not match the Han facial characteristics because their ancestors were not Han but Yue (or Viet of Vietnam). The Yues (Viets) have darker skin, smaller stature, small and flat noses and thicker lips, smaller faces with protruding upper and lower sets of teeth, features which are still prominent in modern Vietnamese people. The Puntis of Guangdong are Hans by naturalisation and not be blood. The Hakkas by contrast are true Hans, having descended from Hans from what's today's Central China around the Yellow River. 81.159.86.60 21:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Myths, myths and more myths. If anything, the modern Chinese Han are more likely a result of intermixing between many ethnic groups along its long cultural history. By now, hundreds of generations of breeding later, "pureblood" is meaningless. It is an emotive word and utterly pointless description bourne more out of wishful thinking, elitism, and prejudices than can be credible. Language and ethnicity are two different thing, intertwined by use, but language does not indicate what ethnic group you are. For instance the black americans of America whose roots lie in Africa, but what ethnic group are they from? You can't tell unless you test their DNA, and over the last few centuries, interbreeding would obscure what ethncicity or pureblood as a concept would mean. The fact is, puntis and Hakka, and other minorities interbred. There is no basis for pureblood, as it is ultimately meaningless. Dylanwhs 08:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

As with all Han culture, which group one belongs to is transmitted from the paternal line. Thus in Han culture, half-siblings sharing the same father are full blooded siblings (in cultural terms and not genetics term). On the other hand half-siblings sharing the same mother are not accepted as full siblings in Han culture. 'Hakkaness' is transmitted through the paternal line. If your father is a Hakka then you are automatically a Hakka; rather like if your mother is Jewish, then in Hebrew culture, you are automatically a Jew. If your mother is Hakka whereas your father is not, then you follow whichever group your father belong to. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 00:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

How do you know if they are pure blooded Hakka? Have you trace through their ancestry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.199.178.24 (talk • contribs)

What is a "pure blooded" Kejia? Kejia simply refers to the group of people who chose to resettle in the coastal regions of China with relocation money from the Qing government. --BenjaminTsai ^Talk 04:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

With apologies to Fernanda Correia (the subject of the photograph), I feel the picture should go. It's not a particularly good picture (thought bubbles?) nor a good representative picture of what a Kejia person looks like. --BenjaminTsai ^Talk 07:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I have a great-uncle who is half-Jamaican (black). The Chinese half in him is Hakka, so he's a Hakka, he speaks Hakka perfectly, and identifies himself as Hakka. If anyone wants to be a Hakka, they are most welcome to join us whatever their skin colour is. By the way, Mao Ze Dong's distant ancestors were also Hakka, so did that make him and his descendants Hakka? 21 Sept 06

There's no such thing as "pure blooded" Hakka, Punti, etc. LDHan 21:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

'Pure blooded' means 3/4 or higher (I think from US definition of native American), or descended from your mother if you are Jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent Changes 21 April 2006

I have edited several of the paragraphs so they read better in English. The previous editor referenced Han_Chinese#Internal_diversity but I felt it was not explained in terms of what we already knew about Hakka. Though the study was not about Hakka per se, it does throw some light on the intermixing and of past Hakka ancestors with indigenous local aborigines, such as the Jing Vietnamese. Further, census data showing a depopulated north after the Mongol invasion, also shows up as tp why the modern northern Han population has closer blood ties towards that end of the ethnic mix.

In 1998, a discussion on the Hakka Forum at asiawind.com yielded this insight into Hakka genetics and the bond with Cantonese speakers : both had close genetic ties [1]. Evidence of the north south divide in Han genetics was observed in the study Lau quotes, and further more, Mark Elvin's table of population in Fujian during the Northern and Southern Song was given in another message [2]. Dylanwhs 21:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that explained fairly enough, the study (by Prof Yuan Yida) was about all southern Chinese per se, including Hakka who lived in Guangdong. The migration of Chinese thoughout the age from north to south are not necessarily due to the "invasion" of northern non-Han tribes (north Mongoloid though). I don't see any census data from primary sources showing a depopulated of the north after the Mongol Yuan invasion, however they did have increasedly population of the south during this era, let alone whether or not they were entirely from the north. 01:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the present day terminology is 'Internally Displaced People'. The Hakkas moved as they did not wish to be executed for 'crimes of treason' which their 9-times removed cousins were supposed to have committed. They did not tell their new neighbours where they from from for obvious reasons. 81.159.80.99 18:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a fascinating hypotheis, but is there a reference for this? Quite so many Hakkas can't all be descended from these people fleeing imperial punishment, surely? InfernoXV (talk) 06:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. The Hakkas are not necessarily one people; indeed they are a combination of peoples, and this is reflected in the number of Hakka languages. Hong Kong television ran documentaries of the Hakka people, which are occasionally repeated and updated for the past 30 years or so. CCTV also showed documentaries of the Hakka. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 13:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes 23 April 2006

"The Hakka ancestors are one of among all groups who migrated southwards and developed a dialect tongue of Meizhou in Guangdong. Even though they might be different from the Hakkas cheifly in Guangdong, Hakka people according to more recent perspective from the early 1920s are now considered to be found in the southern Chinese provinces..."

Unfortunately, the wording makes it ambiguous as to why they "may be different" especially since the former editor chose to highlight the Meizhou dialect in Guangdong. The part of the sentence "Hakka people according to more recent perspective from the early 1920s are now considered to be found in the southern Chinese provinces..." makes no sense, when it has been known since 1920 that Hakka do indeed reside in the southern Chinese provinces listed. Rather than introducing the dialect of Meizhou/Meixian at the beginning, it would be better to leave it grouped near the end about dialects, rather than regions where Hakka people reside at the beginning of the paragraph. With reference to the 1920 study of Luo Xianglin, in my last edit, I moved that to be included in the context of Han diversity further down the article as it does not seem appropriate here. I am reverting this section back to my earlier edit with one difference, the change of Tingzhou to ChangTing.

"The Hakka ancestors are thus just one group who amongst many migrated southwards. Hakka people are now found in the southern Chinese provinces, cheifly in Guangdong, south western Fujian, southern Jiangxi, southern Hunan, Guangxi, southern Guizhou, south eastern Sichuan, Hainan and Taiwan islands. The Hakka dialects across these various provinces differ, but the Meixian (Traditional Chinese 梅縣, Simplified Chinese 梅县) or Moiyan/Moiyen dialect of Hakka is considered as the paradigm example of Hakka dialects. An example of the difference includes that of the ChangTing (長汀) Hakka dialect found in South Western Fujian Province. "

Dylanwhs 09:56, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

That's because prior to the linguistical study in 1920s, nobody would know that Hakka reside in those areas. Furthermore, Hakka in some part of Guangxi and Sichuan don't actually call themsleves Hakka, but instead an alternant name (涯、麻介、新民 etc), it makes prefectly sense, and please take note that Meixian is no longer called Meixian but Meizhou. 11:32, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The different self identifiers like Ngai, Mak-Gai, Sin-Min, Tu-Gwong-Dung Va etc, are discussed in the Hakka_(Linguistics) entry elsewhere. WRT the extent of the Hakka dialects before the 1920's re: D. MacIver, A Chinese-English Dictionary Hakka Dialect, (1905), see the introduction to the first edition:

The present distribution of Hakkas is as follows - Many districts of Kwangtung (see below), parts of Kwong-si; the south-west corner of Fu-nam; the Ting-chow prefecture (and part of Changchow) in Fukien.

Stills, the author does not implied any others distribution around Jiangxi, Hunan, Guizhou, Sichuan, Hainan nor Taiwan islands based on his linguistical study, but Luo did, at least some part of it, so I think we should just change the edition back as its still makes prefectly sense. 00:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

This accounts for the majority of Hakka speaking areas. After reading through my notes from Hashimoto's The Hakka Dialect, A Linguistic Study of its Phonology, Syntax and Lexicon, Cambridge University Press (1973), Luo Xianglin's influential work was not produced until the 1930's, however, prior to that, many Hakka writers began discribing their dialects, and there are earlier pre-20th century but localised accounts of local Hakka dialects, such as Huiyang, Meixian and XingNing dialects.

In the Hakka linguistic literature, the name Meixian holds more currency than the geo-political modern renaming of the district to Meizhou. The work on Chinese dialects, Xiandai Hanyu Fangyan Da Cidian, edited by Li Rong, has the volume called "Meixian Fangyan Cidian". Lists of Chinese dialects words and phrases, such as Hanyu Fangyan Cihui, and readings of characters in Chinese dialects like Hanyu Fangyan Zihui, dictionaries of Hakka refer to the Hakka dialect of Meixian, as do general books on Chinese language discussion like Jerry Norman's "Chinese". As the name of the dialect in all these and many other sources list Meixian as the name, I think this holds much more currency, therefore I am reverting the change.

As an aside, I do know of people who wish to call the Hakka found in eastern Guangdong centred around Meizhou as Jiaying Hakka, as the old Jiaying prefecture covered just about all the smaller counties surrounding it.

Dylanwhs 19:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

It may holds more currency, but Meixian todays refer to Meizhou, naming it Meixian on the article are not suitable for the condition now, I will place an alt name besides Meixian on the edits. 00:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

With respect to Meixian, this is an actual town/city in Guangdong, but Meizhou is a prefectural district according to my map reference Zhongguo Dituce. Using Meizhou soley for Meixian may would lead to the impression that the whole Meizhou prefecture spoke exactly the same dialect as Meixian city, which, from a pedantic linguistics point of view cannot hold true as the outer fringes of Meizhou prefecture would I assume have phonological differences with the Meixian paradigm, as geographically, the area is quite large. In fact, modern Meizhou prefecture contains Wuhua, Xingning, Fengshun, Pingyuan, Jiaoling, Dabu, and other counties whose dialects are phonologically different from the Meixian dialect. The current status quote Meixian (Meizhou) can stand as it is, because it is sufficiently not explicit to indicate that they are interchangeable, but may in fact mean that Meixian is in Meizhou prefecture.

In comparison, Changting on the otherhand is the new name for Tingzhou and is a town, yet it has not been referred to as "Longyan Shi", but it resides in LongYan prefecture, Fujian. The other towns such as Rongding and WuPing also reside in the same prefecture, but they have phonological differences too with the Changting dialect. One does not propose replace Changting with Longyan, which may be precedent set out if Meizhou became the preferred name for Meixian.

Dylanwhs 09:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Mao a Hakka?

You've got him listed, but it's not mentioned in any biography I've read. Likewise for Zhu De, please give a source. --GwydionM 17:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I have seen somewhere that Zhu De was a Hakka which is quite believable; but for Mao, that he was descended from Hakkas, which could mean anything. 81.157.100.44 00:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Do Hakka in Taiwan consider themselves Taiwanese?

I'm trying to write the ethnic group section for Demographics of Taiwan. I want to ask any Hakka from Taiwan whether Hakka people there consider themselves to be Taiwanese or do they consider themselves Hakka-ngin? "Mainlanders" (recent Chinese immigrants) tend to say they are Chinese, not Taiwanese because they strongly support the KMT/ROC as being the true China. That leaves the Hoklo people from which "Taiwanese" as a language and people tend to refer to Hoklo people. So, does Taiwanese mean Hoklo people ("Tâi-oân-lâng") or do Hakka-ngin also identify themselves as Taiwanese? — Nrtm81 09:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hakkas in Malaysia

I am surprised to see that there is a no section on Hakkas in Malaysia when it is aubstantial majority of the Chinese population in Malaysia

What about Hakkas in the Philippines and Brunei? No section on them.

map misleading

I believe is somewhat wrong, or at least confusing. The text says JiangSu province, while the map shows up JiangXi province. The two provinces are totally different.

Corazon Aquino

(1933-; Zhangzhou (漳州) 龍海, born in Philippines), President of the Philippines from 1986 to 1992

- should be a Hokkien, not Hakka

Recent Changes - March 7, 2007

User:Exnosome seems to have removed a fair amount of XRef'd articles. I'm not knowledgable about the subject of this article at all, but do question the removal of such large amounts of information. This is posted here in hopes somebody can review this to see whether the information removed was actualy topical. Please be sure to check the user's edit history as well, as it is limited and mostly has the effect of removing information from this article.

Henan and Hainan

There appears to be some error in the map not detailing the presence of Hakka residence in the island of Hainan. Could there be some confusion between the names of these two provinces?

No error here. Hakka make up an important part of Chinese immigration to offshore islands (Hainan, Taiwan) and overseas territories. 125.225.83.83 03:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

hakka romanisation?

is there a direct link to the page where it explains about the hakka romanisation? there's an example here: hag₂ ga₂₄.

so how do i read this WITH the appropriate intonation? is there any audio files related to this? im pretty sure there is a need to hakka people to trace back the more correct use of the language communication.

mr_xmlv 18:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 16:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Sun Yatsen

Both People's Republic of China and Republic of China governments recognize Sun Yatsen as Hakka. But someone keep removing his name from here.

Dr Sun Yat Sen was Cantonese. Considering he was born in Canton, and spoke Cantonese at home, if any wish to insist he was Hakka, the onus of proof is on them. InfernoXV 12:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The area in which Dr. Sun YatSen was born is a mixed area and there are Hakka folks there and thus he can't conclusively be said to be Cantonese. So, the onus of proof would also fall on the supporters of his 'Cantoneseness' also. As I see it, he was a Chinese nationalist from Southern China. Whatever his background, if he wanted to identify with whichever group he hailed from, he would have done so in his lifetime. Dylanwhs 18:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

As I see it, the original starter of this thread asserted that "Both People's Republic of China and Republic of China governments recognize Sun Yatsen as Hakka" - which is untrue, hence my reply. InfernoXV 01:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. But, it still doesn't make Dr. Sun "Cantonese" by virtue of his being born in Guangdong province. Many Hakka people speak Cantonese at home. Doesn't make them Cantonese though. "Cantonese" was the name used by some Japanese linguists to refer to Hakka at one time. See Hashimoto's The Hakka Dialect, Cambridge, 1973.Dylanwhs 08:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Sun Yatsen acknowledged that he is of Hakka descent when he was alive. And today, this is acknowledged by his granddaughter who attend the World Hakka Conferences.

References please. InfernoXV 15:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Sun Yatsen's granddaughter's book - "My grandfather, Sun Yatsen" traces the Sun family ancestry to ZhiJin County, a pure Hakka county in Guangdong Province.

http://www.chinanews.com.cn/n/2003-12-04/26/376869.html (Chinese) - Reference

浓浓乡情系中原—访孙中山先生孙女孙穗芳博士

2003年12月04日 09:32 　　中新社郑州十二月三日电题：浓浓乡情系中原 　　——访孙中山先生孙女孙穗芳博士 　　作者:门杰丹 http://www.wapdm.com/Events/CNnews/CNnews.htm http://www.wapdm.com/Events/CNnews/CNnews.htm 　　“我的祖父是客家人，唯唯客家，系出中原。世界客属文化中心在郑东经济开发区奠基、建造，我将在文化中心内为祖父立一座铜像，宣扬客家精神。”孙中山先生孙女孙穗芳博士，在接受记者采访时动情地说。 　　今年已六十八岁的孙穗芳博士，现任美国孙中山和平教育基金会主席、夏威夷中国妇女慈善总会会长、夏威夷太平洋大学校董等职。十月份，世界客属第十八届恳亲大会在河南郑州召开期间，孙穗芳博士因为有事未能及时参加。十一月二十三日，应河南省客家联谊会会长林雪梅的邀请，她专程携慈善界、企业界人士等一行八人前到中原祖根地寻根拜祖，考察访问。 　　作为客家人的后裔，孙博士在对祖根地进行为期十天的考察访问期间，浓浓乡情溢于言表。此间，孙博士到祖上出生地开封陈留追祖探源，到河洛口、黄河探寻源远流长的中原文化，参观了巩义“神堤”、登封少林寺、洛阳关林庙，并到新郑皇帝故里寻根拜祖、缅怀始祖功德。 　　在洛阳华侨中学等参观地，孙博士还慷慨解囊，捐资助学。以孙博士为首的考察团一行已与河南有关部门达成协议，将洛阳华侨学校更名为中山华侨学校，在开封陈留建立一座孙中山纪念堂，在洛阳建立客家始祖地公园。孙博士将在这两地和世界客属第十八届恳亲大会期间奠基的世界客属文化中心分别为祖父孙中山立三座铜像，激励中原儿女发扬以孙中山等为优秀代表的客家先民们“开拓进取，爱国爱乡”的精神，为“振兴中华”而贡献力量。 　　“中原是中华民族文化的发源地，也是客家人的祖根地，到祖根地、孕育华夏文明的黄河岸边、到轩辕皇帝故里，寻根拜祖，内心很激动。中原儿女都很重视文化，也很积极地追忆历史，给我留下了深刻的印象。”一直致力于研究、宏扬孙中山思想,满腔热情在世界各地演讲、讲学，在华人华侨界颇具影响的孙穗芳博士欣慰地对记者说。 　　孙穗芳博士表示，她将广泛宣传中原悠久灿烂的文化和经济社会发展所取得的成就，介绍更多的海外华侨华人到中原故里寻根拜祖、投资兴业。 　　在即将结束考察访问离开中原之际，孙穗芳博士欣然提笔，饱蘸深情写下了“中原情，客家根”、“锦绣中华”十个大字。

编辑:赵莉

Again, there is the unclear meaning of 'Cantonese' in English. Canton is the inaccurate English transliteration for Guangdong (the Province) and Guangzhou (the provincial capital of Guangdong). When Canton is made into the English adjective Cantonese, it can refer to Guangdongese or Guangzhouese. The language commonly referred to as 'Cantonese' by many people is in fact Guangzhouese, but there are many Guangdongese languages used side-by-side in Guangdong Province with Guangzhouese. This language diversity is common throughout the whole of China, and is found in every single Chinese Province. Dr Sun is a Cantonese meaning he was a Guangdongese; he was never a Guangzhouese, and in all original Chinese records he was referred to as a Guangdongese. Now to his familial language, Dr Sun's familiy are Hakkas, so Dr Sun could be correctly classified as a Hakka. As like most Hakkas, he was multi-lingual and a polyglot. Thus as a Hakka person he spoke Guangdong Hakkaese, Taishanese as well as Guangzhouese. There was generally no incentive or opportunity for non-Hakka people to learn to speak Hakka. Therefore yes, Dr Sun was a Cantonese meaning a Guangdongese but not a Guangzhouese. He was from a Hakka family, so was a Hakka. 86.155.215.165 13:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.215.165 (talk) 13:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Jews of China

Who is referring the Hakkas as the 'Jews of China'? The majority of the Chinese then and now did not know who a Jew is. The 'compliment' was most likely dreamt up by a Westerner. Perhaps we should call the Jews the 'Hakka of Europe'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Aren't Chinese "Jews of SE Asia"?--69.234.204.194 02:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

No. The Han Chinese in SE Asia are Chinese and not Jews. 77.44.49.36 11:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I did not mean it in an ethnic sense because the two groups are not genetically related unless you trace all the way back to Noah's familiy. But in a sense that both are the descendants of people who lived in a great ancient civilization that accomplished so much and both have a tendency to make lots of money.69.234.214.69 17:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC):):):):)

No. You are just poking fun at the Chinese and the Jews. Bill Gates is not Jewish, but he's made loadsa money. 86.155.215.165 21:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not poking fun at the Chinese and the Jews. I'm part Chinese and believe that whoever curses Jews is cursed so why would I do that? And I didn't say Chinese and Jews were the only people who make lots of money. There are successful entrepreneurs in all races. Although the Chinese and the Jews aren't the world's top ten richest people, they accomplished a lot and were model minorities wherever they were, and a some of them managed to make it into the upper classes, the Jews during the industrial age in Europe, when discrimination was less intense toward them, and the Chinese now in Southeast Asia. I didn't mean to offend pure-bred Chinese and Jewish people in saying they were similair to each other, and I apologize if I did.--69.234.214.69 04:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

What on earth are you talking about? 86.155.215.165 22:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

If what I am saying makes no sense because you aren't aware of the history of the Chinese and the Jews and you are too lazy to use the Wiktionary or a regular dictionary for the high-vocabulary words you couldn't comprehend, let me simplify it for you: I didn't mean to offend or poke fun at the Chinese and the Jews by saying that they were similair. I would never make fun of the Chinese because I'm part Chinese, and never make fun of the Jews because whoever curses the Jews is cursed and because of JTF. And if you're saying "What on earth are you talking about?" because you were too lazy to read my response, then that's too bad. At least it's not my fault, as I never knew you.--69.234.206.91 17:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

69.234.206.91, if it's any consolation, I konw exactly what you're talking about, and 'Jews of China' is quite well known in scholarly circles and among those of a sufficient educational level to understand the analogy. There's nothing racist about it, and it simply refers to a non-native scattered people with a strong sense of identity, living in uneasy occasional tension with their native neighbours, slightly socially outcast, hardworking and oeconomically successful. The Chinese in general are also called the 'Jews of SE Asia', for the same tension. InfernoXV (talk) 01:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much it is very much a consolation.--69.234.212.85 (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Buddy, why don't you ask a Jew whether he/she is Chinese, and see what response you'll get? There are about a billion (that is 1000 million) Han Chinese around the world, and probably less than 10 million Jews around the world. Jews are Jews and Han Chinese are Han Chinese. The label you quoted was I suspect given by what would be considered today as a racist explorer in Asia. It should not be allowed to stick. If you know your history, then you'll know that probably all people at some point in their history had gone through what the Jews and Chinese went through in their respective history (true and folk-lore). The Anglo-Saxons were massacred by the Vikings. The descendants of these Anglo-Saxons then went and massacred a few other people. So what? It doesn't make the English Jewish or Chinese. I hope you'll unmuddle your thinking. 81.157.100.12 (talk) 23:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but my views do not stem from racism. Since I am part Chinese and actually find Jews such as Solomon and Einstein rather good role models for people of all races living today, I find these accuasations most troubling. By saying Chinese are Jews of SE Asia, I am not saying Chinese ARE Jews but are LIKE Jews. Besides, there is another similarity I did not mention: the left hates Jews (at least, that is what the right-wing Jews say, and they are convincing) and Chinese and, judging by all the sterotyping liberals do in the media, Asians in general. See the Wikipedia article on sterotypes of East and Southeast Asians for if you would like to know what I mean. In addition, several Eurasian analogies can be made, not just Jews and Chinese. The Dutch and the Filipinos are similair because both have issues with flooding and the Dutch had religious freedom when their neighbors didn't, as the Filipinos do now. The British and Japanese both had periods of monarchial restoration and are currently rich and powerful. In other words, there are lots of similarities between whites and asians.

InfernoXV: "it simply refers to a non-native scattered people with a strong sense of identity, living in uneasy occasional tension with their native neighbours, slightly socially outcast, hardworking and oeconomically successful." If your opinion is correct, then the Anglo-Saxon race must be the 'Jews of the World'. The term 'Jews of SE Asia' was the term despatched back to Europe by the first European diplomats. At the time it was made, it was intended to be racist, as Jews were not a well liked people in Europe. 21:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but I never meant to be racist, I only meant to say that they were similar. Since I am part Chinese and actually find Jews such as Solomon and Einstein rather good role models for people of all races living today, I find these accusations most troubling. Besides, there is another similarity I did not mention: the left hates Jews (at least, the right-wing Jews say so) and Chinese and, judging by all the stereotyping liberals do in the media, Asians in general. See the Wikipedia article on stereotypes of East and Southeast Asians for if you would like to know what I mean. In addition, several Eurasian analogies can be made, not just Jews and Chinese. The Dutch and the Filipinos are similar because both have issues with flooding and the Dutch had religious freedom when their neighbors didn't, as the Filipinos do now. In addition, the Dutch were tolerant towards Jews even when their neighbors weren't just as the Filipinos are tolerant towards Chinese. The British and Japanese both had periods of monarchial restoration and are currently rich and powerful. In other words, there are lots of similarities between whites and Asians. And by the way, you are correct, the Anglo-Saxons are the Jews of the world, along with Dutch people, but that is only clearly demonstrated in South Africa when the British lost power and if the Brit-Am are right, kin of the Jewish people. There is, in fact, a possibility all Europeans are descended from the lost tribes of Israel and therefore kin of the Jews and obligated to take their side in the Jewish-Arab conflict.--69.234.210.205 (talk) 16:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Your question was: Aren't Chinese "Jews of SE Asia"?, and I have given you the correct answer which is 'no'. There may well be some very ignorant and out of date scholars who may agree with you, but I dare say if you took a poll from Chinese and Jews, you will find that they will not agree with you. You may then say that you only meant it as a figure of speech, in which case I say to you, a Jew is still a Jew and a Han Chinese still a Han Chinese, go and find a better figure of speech. I didn't know Solomon of the Bible and Einstein were Chinese. If you want to take them as role models then please do, but I don't think you'll be able to have 1000 wives nowadays, but of course you can always try. Modern scholarship requires logical and critical thinking, and not simply following what someone else has said like a sheep. If people here want to follow like sheep, then Shanghai boys like InfernoXV may like to know that amongst some of his scholarly circle, Shanghai is the whore of the Orient. Would this then make the Shanghaiese whores, and Shanghai boys all sons of a whore? If you find this offensive, then you'll understand that I find calling a Chinese a Jew, and a Jew a Chinese offensive.81.157.100.12 (talk) 23:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Once again, I didn't mean to say that Chinese ARE Jews, I just meant that they have analogical similarities. And I didn't mean to have 1000 wives; I just meant to have good advice for people. And you are right to say that we can not follow like sheep. However, that was not exactly what I was doing. I did think through my ideas, although I may have been slightly biased towards this viewpoint because I am a Eurasian mixture (hapa). Although Solomon was a good role model in general, he made a mistake when he had 1000 wives. Besides, I merely contrasted the situations of the Jews in Medieval Europe with the situations of Chinese in SE Asia. And yes, I find your remarks about Shanghais very offensive. Although the Chinese branch of my family has been in SE Asia for generations before my mother came to America, and we do not know if it came from Shanghai originally, I find all the remarks about Shanghais people quite offensive. They sound almost like personal attacks against InfernoXV. I really think that you should stop hating Chinese people. Once again, I am not calling Chinese Jews; I am just saying that there are allegorical similarities, just like British and Japanese, Dutch and Filipinos, and the Civil War and the Iraq War. Not that I support the Iraq War; I am undecided. I did not mean ANYTHING offensive, and I apologize to those who were offended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.212.85 (talk) 04:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Buddy, I only answered the question you asked. I am not interested in your philosophy or attitude. You have accused me of being lazy and hating Chinese people, neither of which is true. I did not accused you of being a racist; I said you were poking fun at the Jews and Chinese. The first Europeans reported back that the Chinese people were the Jews of SE Asia because they saw them as merchants and usurers, that is they saw that the Chinese filled the same niche in the market there as the Jews did in Europe. It was not a complimentary term, and was certainly not made because they saw the Chinese as hard working or economically successful as someone here claimed. Shakespeare's 'Merchant of Venice' captured the European attitude towards Jewry superbly for his time, and it certainly was not a complimentary one.

The Jews and Han Chinese are very different. I have not met a Han Chinese who did not love pork (vegetarians excepted). I am loathed to find a pork-eating Jew. The Chinese have a giant country. The Jews were an enslaved people and did not have a country of their own. The Chinese have many monumental buildings, the Jews have no monumental buildings, except perhaps the pyramids they were said to have built for the Egyptians. Their temple was destroyed by the Romans. Jews are Jews, and Han Chinese are Han Chinese, they are a different people. 81.157.100.12 (talk) 21:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, well what did you expect me to think when you said that Shanghaiese are all whores? I was not aware the term "Jews of SE Asia" was coined at a time when the Jews were very unpopular. I thought that the term was rather complimentary, really, as the Chinese have many great achievements and the Jews have a rather interesting saga, from the time they left Egypt to the time they returned to Israel. I would never mean to poke fun at them. I was not comparing their cultures (which are very different, as you have pointed out), just the roles the Chinese filled in SE Asia and the Jews filled in medieval Europe. It's not a perfect anology, I'll admit, for reasons that you have mentioned and the fact that while it has been debated that Europeans are the lost tribes of Israel, there is not a real controversy whether the SE Asians are the lost tribes of China. When I said that they were both from a great civilization, I did not say they were from similair civilizations. And the Jews did have a country of their own before Roman conquest and after they were removed from the British mandate. I'm sorry I made a mistake in understanding what you meant when you said the Shanghaiese were all what you said they were and hope that our inability to understand each other won't put us in Wikipedia: lamest edit wars if we're not there already. And by the way, I didn't mean to accuse you of being lazy. I said "If you were being lazy" not "you were being lazy."--69.234.216.30 (talk) 23:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Most certainly the comment about Shanghai was a personal attack at me, your perception was not mistaken in the least. On the other hand, I'm now used to being called names by 81.157.100.12, so I'm not hugely bothered anymore. 'Jews of SE Asia' is a useful metaphor, but like all similes and metaphors, only goes so far. 81.157.100.12 doesn't seem to understand the value of a metaphor, and insists on pressing the differences as far as possible, which he is, of course, entitled to do. Metaphors and similes require a certain amount of creative and abstract thinking and intelligence, and if one encounters an editor who lacks these, what can one do but try to write in simpler English and move on? If you look at his comments on this talk page, he has a tendency to twist what other people say, attribute extravagant motives to their comments, insinuate various things and then make irrelevant personal attacks, then turn around and deny all this when confronted. He is clearly incapable of logical discourse and prefers ranting and nitpicking. He also appears ignorant of the convention that one needs to indent comments on talk pages. InfernoXV (talk) 03:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

That explains a lot. Thank you. You have kept me from overreacting to 81.157.100.12.--69.234.214.225 (talk) 19:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hakka / Punti

From what I can translate ' Punti ' means ' Local ', people or products from the same area. Is it true.? Hakka also after some many thousand of years have changed with different areas pronounced differently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.52.2.90 (talk) 03:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Punti (small p) means 'local' and can refer to people and products. It means 'of this (local) land'. So when given the English capital 'P', 'Punti' means 'The Original' or Aboriginal or Native. Hakka is a Romanisation of the Chinese term, which in Chinese is spoken and pronounced differently depending on which language you speak. If you are asking whether Hakka is a single language, then the answer is no. Hakka is a family of languages. 81.157.100.12 (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The Hakkas have lived in Guangdong so long that they must be a Punti by now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The heroic Hakka had a tradition that they bought the baby daughters that the Puntis wanted to kill, as Puntis favoured sons to daughters, as future brides for their sons. These 'brides-in-waiting' were called Punti Moy. Of course, the Puntis say that the Hakkas were wicked as Hakkas killed their own baby daughters, which was not true. There was no corresponding term of 'Hakka Mui' to refer to 'brides-in-waiting' in Punti, thus it would seem that the Hakkas did not sell their daughters to Puntis. The Hakkas certainly valued their daughters.

It is also not true that the Hakka peasants were poorer than the Punti. Hakkas would say the reverse was true. The reason being the Hakkas worked the land harder, and were apparently more thrifty. 81.157.100.44 22:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. How do you know this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.222.211 (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It is true that amongst the Chinese, Hakkas are most patriotic. Hakkas regard themselves as the true sons and descendants of the Yellow Earth. They do not claim to be people of any particular province, such as the Cantonese, Fujianese, etc, but of the whole of China; thus it is no wonder that Hakkas feature disproportionately in the leadership of China and Chinese people, past and present. 81.157.100.44 22:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Most Chinese Restaurants in Britain Owned by Hakkas?

This is the first time I've heard of such a suggestion, but it might explain why Chinese food in Britain is generally so awful. InfernoXV 01:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This is not a suggestion, but a fact. It clearly shows that you have very unfounded concepts of the Hakka population. 77.44.49.36 07:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I've lived in Britain for over a decade and never ever heard of the suggestion. However, that Chinese food in Britain is generally of an abominable quality is not merely a suggestion but a verifiable fact. I make no 'concept' of the Hakka population at large, but rather comment on the fact that Chinese food in Britain is BAAAADDD. InfernoXV 10:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

In which case you must be blind or deaf or both. 77.44.49.36 12:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Just to let InfernoXV know, I've been in the UK for 4 decades, and so by his argument, I probably would know about 3 times as much as him/her about these matters. If you want superb food, then you have to pay a lot more than that charged in the typical Chinese restaurant in the UK, which generally cater for the budget end of the market. I had an Indian friend who said that he found the Chinese meals bland and almost tasted raw. Looking into the reason, I discovered that he ate unbearably (for me) hot spicy food every day. I suspect his taste-buds have almost been completely destroyed, and could not taste the subtle flavours of Hakka cooking, which is done in a Confucian way of balancing Yin and Yang, and to bring out the proteinous flavour (Umami taste) in food. Looking at InfernoXV's profile on this site, if he ate a lot of Singaporean Hokkien food, I suspect his taste-buds could also be damaged like my suspicion of my Indian friend's taste-buds. 86.155.215.165 19:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't eat Hokkien food. I generally eat Cantonese and Shanghainese food. I also happen to be a regular at the Royal China in Bayswater and suchlike, so I don't eat at cheap and nasty places. I've been to Hakkasan and Alan Yau's places and they've been awful. I'm not going to dispute the point about ownership of restaurants, merely to ask for a reference on that, but I will say that owning Chinese restaurants in Britain, with the quality of food in them, is hardly a point of pride for anyone. Incidentally, your Indian friend might want to try Sichuanese food, I have a Ceylonese friend who adores it. InfernoXV 10:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if anyone's done a survey on the detailed background of Chinese Restaurant owners in Britain, nevertheless a large proportion of the Chinese in the UK are Hakkas originating from HK's New Territories. You would not know they were Hakka unless you knew them well, being fluent in both Hakka and HK Cantonese. They would only speak Hakka if you spoke Hakka. 213.122.32.36 23:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

InfernoXV, as you ate regularly in The Royal China, did you like its food then? Is there any other type of food you do like? Perhaps you'll let us know what sort of 'Cantonese' and Shanghaiese dishes that you do like. 77.44.49.36 12:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Royal China was just about passable. What sort of Cantonese and Shanghainese dishes I like aren't relevant to the article - I recall you're the one who tried to claim (without sources, I might add) that charsiu, as well as Cantonese roast duck and goose were Hakka inventions. I'm not about to have you start claiming the most common Shanghainese dishes are Hakka inventions too. InfernoXV 16:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

It just shows you must be blind. Nobody said Charsiu and so on are Hakka inventions, it is stated that they are Hakka foods, nowhere was it stated that they are not the food of any other Chinese people. Many of the daipaidons in HK where these foods are served are owned and operated by the Hakkas. What dishes you like or not like are totally relevant in this discussion, we need to establish what food you do and do not like to rule out any personal POVs, or whether as you claim the food is actually BAAAAD. Clearly you stated you don't eat Hokkien food, so is Hokkien food BAAAAD as well? Given in your profile that you are a student/scholar, are we to believe that you frequent top class restaurants regularly? Or are you just someone who discriminate against the Hakkas for no apparent reasons? 86.155.215.165 19:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, InfernoXV, could we have your reply, or have you been caught telling porky pies? 86.155.215.165 18:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The edit I objected to claimed these as 'Hakka foods', and that other Chinese ate them without realising they were 'Hakka foods'. Simply because any number of establishments that cook and serve these foods may nor may not be run/owned by Hakkas doesn't make them 'Hakka foods' - these are simply common dishes of Canton province. The way the editor phrased it made it seem as if these were particularly Hakka foods, which strongly implies a sort of origin.

Next, being a student and scholar does not preclude eating at places I like and can afford to eat at. Not all students and scholars live on shoestring budgets. As it happens, I'm a regular at Simpson's, Wilton's, Rules and Nobu. This line of questioning into my budget and tastes in food is getting beyond silly.

Incidentally, I said Chinese food in Britain was generally BAAAADDD, not BAAAAD. Please don't misquote me.

My standard for Chinese food is what is found in China and Hongkong. The 'Cantonese' food served in most of Britain is generally of a much lower standard than what may be found in Canton province or Hongkong, for a start. The new generation of Chinese restaurants which have opened in the last 4 or so years, serving food from North and West China don't seem to be run by either Cantonese, Hakkas, or any other Southern group, being instead run by people from the appropriate provinces of China, are quite decent. I said nothing about Hakka cuisine - all I implied was that the cooking of one language group's cuisine by cooks of another language group might explain the quality difference. After all, I generally wouldn't trust a Northerner trying to cook Cantonese food, just as you might not trust a non-Hakka to produce good Hakka food.

As for your comment re porky pies, I apologise for not having been able to reply to your first comment within the space of three hours. Some of us wiki editors attempt to do too much, editing multiple articles, and should endeavour, like you, to edit only ONE ARTICLE. While we're at it, you claim to have been in the UK for some four decades. With the spelling, grammar and general quality of English in your edits, are you sure you're not the one telling porkies? I certainly hope you contribute to more than one article in the wikis of languages in which you are fluent. InfernoXV 19:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

That's disingenuos, since your began the section saying "Most Chinese Restaurants in Britain Owned by Hakkas? " to which you you concluded that "but it might explain why Chinese food in Britain is generally so awful." That's a direct attack on Hakka restaurants owned by Hakkas in Britain. It's your own POV, and you're entitled to it, but in doing so, you've created this unnecessary flame war. Had you wanted to edit as a wikipedian, you would have discussed the matter without bringing in an unsupportable POV (to quote you, "but it might explain why Chinese food in Britain is generally so awful.") You could have made the observation that statistically the original assertion that 'most Chinese restaurants...' was a false one, since there are Chinese restaurants from many other Chinese groups other than the Hakka. Maybe you should ban yourself from editing. Daikon 13:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

"I apologise for not having been able to reply to your first comment within the space of three hours". 3 hours? How many hours are there between 9th Nov and 11 Nov 07? All these London restaurants must be filled with students like you- and I did not say students survive on a shoe-string, you did. No doubt people like you just keep on returning when they think the food is just passable. Any more porkies mate? 81.157.100.12 21:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

InfernoXV could certainly say that, however he would be wrong, as statistically the assertion is true. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 22:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Provide a reference then. InfernoXV (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

This is common knowledge amongst all settled Chinese in the UK, perhaps not amongst transient Singaporean students. If you want a reference, then look in any of the Chinese Community year books published by the settled UK Chinese community (who are mostly Hakkas), as opposed to the transient Chinese community. Come on InfernoXV, why don't you cite your references? 81.154.205.12 (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Find us one then. InfernoXV (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you find a reference to say that they are not? 81.154.205.12 (talk) 18:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

And talking of statistics, it is statistically unlikely that InfernoXV regularly ate at all the restaurants, as he claimed when he was at school in London. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 22:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Stranger things have happened. InfernoXV (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Anything is possible as far as InfernoXV is concerned. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 18:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

"are quite decent": Come on InfernoXV, its 'passable' in one comment and 'quite decent' in another. Why don't you just own up to your porkies? Have you actually stayed in HK or Guangdong for any significant periods? And InfernoXV, according to you, you eat Cantonese and Shanghaiese, but not Hokkienese, so how would you know what food from the 'appropriate provinces' are like or that they are from the 'appropriate provinces', or that the cooks are, as you say, from the 'appropriate provinces'? If you must know, many of the cooks in these restaurant are Fujianese asylum seekers. Please do not leave on this site your garbage POV and your general insulting demeanour towards the Chinese people in the UK and elsewhere, such as that they are Jews, when to call someone a Jew in all European civilisations has always been derogatory. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 21:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I said the Cantonese food in London was passable, but that the Northern and Western Chinese food was quite decent, look carefully. 'Jew' has not always been a term of abuse. Europe has always had a love-hate relationship with Jewish culture and heritage. InfernoXV (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

InfernoXV, we all know Europe had a hate relationship with the Jews, but when did Europe have a love relationship with the Jews, as you claim? Can you provide a reliable source to what you claim? 81.154.205.12 (talk) 13:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Although I as an American can't exactly speak for the people over in Europe, we are taught in American schools that the Dutch were very tolerant toward Jews, the British allowed Jewish immigration into Palestine, which has allowed the creation of the modern Jewish state (so long as non-Jews were respected), and Greece and Israel are the birthplaces of Western Civilization. I've heard about how Jewish lenders helped build Venice. There are even Europeans who like to believe they are related to Jews (Brit-Am, Tomorrow's World (http://www.lcg.org/cgi-bin/tw/booklets/tw-bk.cgi?category=Booklets1&item=1104094367) and Anglo-Israelists, for example). Besides, you do get the fact that you see a lot of both European and Jewish men intermarrying with Asian women, but it isn't so common the other way around. (Here in the US, anyway.) It's like they're in the same location historically. Besides, isn't Santa Claus (known in England as Father Christmas) portrayed as someone with the beard of a Jewish rabbi? As for the argument whether or not 'Jew' is a derogatory term, I do not consider it derogatory, (but then again, I guess I am somewhat swayed by the Brit-Am's arguments that Europeans are the lost tribes of Israel [but I don't believe some of their other claims], am an American of 50% European heritage [so I guess I'm not exactly a European] and do not hate Jewish people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.176.195 (talk) 22:10, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

What you were taught is correct in part. What response would you get if you called a white non-Jewish American a Jew, especially in the Deep South? Jews were hated in Europe exactly because they lent money for interest. This is totally illogical but true. Could you expect anyone to give away money for no return on municipal projects? Of course some Europeans are related to Jews. Most of Europe was once under the Roman Empire, whose citizens included Jews. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 18:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course a white non-Jewish American is not a Jew. Even the lost tribes of Israel (whoever they are) are not Jews in the ethnic sense because they're not descended from Judah. A Jew in the religious sense is an adherent to Judaism. A Jew in the allegorical sense would be a member of an ethnic group who would be successful, despite tension with their native neighbors, like British and Dutch in South Africa or Northerners in the South. I don't know if this would apply to Confederados in Brazil, as I know little about them.l —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.228.114 (talk) 03:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"I said the Cantonese food in London was passable, but that the Northern and Western Chinese food was quite decent, look carefully"- Oh you you did not. Look carefully at what you wrote yourself. InfernoXV, you are making it bad on yourself by defending your porkies. Anyone with any sense can see that you have no credibility. Just own up and move on, that way others won't take offence at your infantile attempts at showing off. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 13:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I do find it ironic that Jews would be hated for lending money when that seems to be a problem for people other than the Jews and is not a problem for all Jews. There are honest Jewish people out there (Jesus Christ, Virgin Mary, Carpenter Joseph, Modern Orthodox Jews, for example) and there are dishonest non-Jews who charge excessive interest, e.g. Northerners who traveled to take advantage of the South's situation in the aftermath of the US Civil War. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.191.153 (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

At 16:21, 9 Nov 2007, I said Royal China was just about passable' - the only time I used the word 'passable', and Royal China serves mostly Cantonese food. At 19:15, 11 Nov 2007, I said 'The new generation of Chinese restaurants which have opened in the last 4 or so years, serving food from North and West China... are quite decent.' - note 'North and West China'. Try and read carefully. InfernoXV (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

"My standard for Chinese food is what is found in China and Hongkong": Just to let you know, when China re-opened in the 1980s, when hotels and private restaurant enterprises were re-introduced, the then Chinese in Guangdong and China had almost forgotten how to cook given that food had been scarce for four decades; during part of these years meals were cooked and served in communal canteens and not at home; metal pots and pans from homes were confiscated and melted for the GLF iron production programme, bowls and utensils were confiscated as there was no use for them at home, given everyone ate at canteens. Many of the chefs and cooks in these hotels and restaurants had to be hired from HK and elsewhere, to work there and to train the local Chinese cooks. Many of these were chefs were HK Hakkas. So you see, the standards of the food you mentioned in Guangdong are the standards of the Hakkas. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 21:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

So, let's see - since Many of these were chefs were HK Hakkas, it should be easy for you to provide a reference for this. InfernoXV (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, InfernoXV, if you want to verify then just pop into the kitchens of the Garden Hotel or the Hotel Guangzhou or The White Swan Hotel in Guangzhou and ask. Mind you, you can't talk as you've never lived or worked in China. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 13:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Since you claim to visit Canton so frequently, why don't you just pop your head into the hotel kitchens and ask for yourself? 81.154.205.12 (talk) 18:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

"My standard for Chinese food is what is found in China and Hongkong": Funny why a Singaporean should say food in HK is the standard for Chinese food. Are there no standards of Chinese food in Singapore, or is food in Singapore inferior to food in HK? 81.155.96.175 (talk) 11:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

InfernoXV, you haven't told us what food you like. Have you actually been to China and eaten the regional food and discovered how they are prepared? If you have, then how many times have been there? Do you know how to cook? Eating frequently in restaurants, do you mean once a day, once a week, once a month or once a year? What do you call 'Cantonese' food, or northern food or southern food? Come on InfernoXV, no porky pie please. 86.155.215.165 20:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright. That does it. You've violated WP:3RR and WP:NPA. You violated WP:APR first, and you've begun WP:EW. I now respectfully withdraw from this puerile line of questioning from an anonymous editor. I'm requesting page protection from anonymous ip editors. InfernoXV 20:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

InfernoXV, you may be able to bs past a lot of people, maybe even your folks and your profs and maybe even wiki, but unfortunately for you you can't bs past me. You know nothing about the Hakkas, Hong Kong, Guangdong, China or food. You can fantasize about these subjects as much as you like, but I suggest you get yourself a proper education first, then a proper job and then see how society really work. 86.155.215.165 21:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Enough is enough. Your IP has been blocked from editing wikipedia for a week. Hopefully you'll learn some civility in the meantime. 'Ad hominem' is not a respectable debating tactic. InfernoXV 03:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

NO offense 86.155.215.165, but how do you know what you know about the Hakka? Besides, everyone knows something about food, they've probably eaten it at one point. --69.234.184.43 18:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

No offence taken. It is quite common knowledge. True, everybody knows about food, but when you see a plain porky, you have to point it out. Strange why a Singaporean should say his standard for Chinese food is that in China and HK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.80.99 (talk) 18:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Simple, I'm first-generation Singaporean, and I spend a good half of the year variously in Peking, Shanghai, Canton, Hongkong and Macau. InfernoXV (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Peking, Shanghai, Canton, Hongkong and Macau, are very strange places for InfernoXV to do his research. 81.155.96.175 (talk) 11:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe that's where he goes to visit relatives. I would like to go to British Columbia to visit relatives there and I'm not interested in Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.209.73 (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I am sure he does, and I am sure you visit relatives in BC for over 6 months every year.-Not. 81.155.96.175 (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I said "I would like to go to British Columbia to visit relatives", I didn't say "I go to British Columbia to visit relatives." Please get your facts straight. As far as you are concerned, I might as well have said we're actually long-lost identical twin brothers. That is far from the truth. We are third cousins, and he is 100% Asian, whereas I'm 50% Asian, 50% European. And I said "Maybe that's where he goes to visit relatives." Don't forget the maybe. I don't know how InfernoXV spends his time, partly for the fact it's not my business, partly for the fact that he does not live in the US and I do. --69.234.210.254 (talk) 16:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, what's the likelihood of you getting 6 months to visit relatives in BC in the near future? 86.163.61.178 (talk) 21:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

You know, I don't think I could find that much time to vacation anywhere. I didn't say I wanted to be there for 6 months, anyways.--69.234.234.197 (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall ever saying that's where I do my research. You're awfully good at twisting and misrepresenting the words of others - you've done it at least ten times in this thread alone. InfernoXV (talk) 02:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Then I guess you did not say you spend the other less-than-half of the year in Singapore, which is equally a strange place to do your research. 81.155.96.175 (talk) 01:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Bingo - I didn't say I spent the 'other less-than-half' of the year in Singapore. As for what I do with my time, it's none of your business. Ad hominem is not a respectable debating tactic. InfernoXV (talk) 04:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Then why did you put down what you do in your Talk page for everyone to see? 86.161.63.5 (talk) 10:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Which is even more strange as Singapore has the power to cancel the citizenship of its non-resident citizens. And I guess you are not in China for your 6 months stay there right now as you can access Wiki.86.163.61.178 (talk) 21:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

It does, but only in the most dire of circumstances. How on earth is this even relevant to this discussion? As for where I am right now, a fig for your query. InfernoXV (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

We now know how Inferno knows what he knows about Hakkas. But how do you know what you know about the Hakkas? Wait-is the plural Hakka or Hakkas? Please excuse my American English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.176.195 (talk) 22:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh really? I thought you said you have withdrawm from this. But then what would one expect from a porky pie person like you? You have attacked the Hakka people with no justifiable reasons, only stereotyping. Come on, you claim to know so much about food, stop back-tracking and tell us what you know. BTW there's a difference between British English and your Singlish. 81.157.100.12 21:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Name one use of 'Singlish' in my contributions either to Talk pages or Articles. I, on the other hand, can point out at least ten egregious errors in your use of English on this page alone. InfernoXV (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Which makes your claim that you are a Singaporean Chinese even more strange. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 18:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Non sequitur. My being of Singaporean origin clearly has nothing to do with my use of perfect English, just as your allegedly having lived in the UK for four decades clearly has not prevented you from using lousy English. InfernoXV (talk) 02:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

But you are not of Singaporean origin. You claim to be of Shanghai and Cantonese origin and of Russian Orthodox in religion. Lousy English? This is how English is in real life. Ever seen East Enders? 81.155.96.175 (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

English in real life? Obviously we move in very different social and intellectual circles in Britain. =) Once again, I challenge you to point out one use of my 'Singlish' anywhere in my contributions on Wikipedia. InfernoXV (talk) 04:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

So InfernoXV do you think you are intellectually superior to Mark Twain? 86.161.63.5 (talk) 09:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Not having met or interacted with him, I could not say. Having interacted with you, I could definitely say I am intellectually superior to YOU. InfernoXV (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You mean you haven't read Mark Twain? Please explain in what way you are intellectually superior to me? 86.161.63.5 (talk) 23:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

86.161.63.5, he said he never met Mark Twain, not never read Mark Twain.

Which once again makes your claim to being a Singaporean even more strange. Singaporeans speak Singlish. So according to you, an intellectual from Scotland has to use Oxford English? How many places in the UK have you been to when you were at school here? Is it a case of school, then lodging, and oh don't forget a feed at all the top restaurants before bedtime, then school. 86.163.61.178 (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

That kind of stereotyping doesn't belong on wikipedia, except for articles on stereotyping. In the US they generally stereotype Asians as poor English speakers, and I finally ran into a guy that actually believes all that. This is probably what conservative talk show hosts mean when they say America exports media junk overseas. That kind of stereotyping seems to be the base of Uncyclopedia, though. What other stereotypes of East and Southeast Asians do you believe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.213.14 (talk) 17:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, is it stereotyping to say that the English speak English English, the Scots speak Scottish English, the Americans speak American English, the Australians speak Australian English, the Jamaicans speak Jamaican English, and the Singaporeans speak Singlish, together and all the sub-varieties within each group? It is not stereotypical, but factual.86.161.63.5 (talk) 10:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

'Singlish' and 'Singapore English' are two different creatures. 'Singapore English' refers to the locally-flavoured version of English, while 'Singlish' is a pidgin. I objected to your labelling my writing as 'Singlish' because my writing is flawless Oxford academic English - once again, you will not be able to find one example of 'Singlish' or even 'Singapore English' in my contributions to articles and talk pages. InfernoXV (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, InfernoXV stereotyped the Hakka people and the Chinese people. He even agrees with the claim or the figure of speech that Chinese are Jews and that calling someone a Jew was a complimentary term. 86.161.63.5 (talk) 02:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that calling someone a Jew is derogatory only to Antisemites, personally.--69.234.200.253 (talk) 16:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

1) Where did I stereotype either? 2) I said that the metaphor, like all metaphors, is useful to a certain extent, and that your assertion that the metaphor was meant to be insulting was not necessarily true. 3) Metaphorically speaking, referring to the Chinese as the 'Jews of Asia' is not the same as calling them Jews. If you can't figure that out, I think you need to re-learn the English language and logic and re-read this thread, though if you've actually spent four decades in the UK and still can't understand or follow a simple thread of discussion without misunderstanding and twisting it, you're probably beyond help. InfernoXV (talk) 15:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

You are just bs. You really need to see a psychiatrist to sort out your identity crisis la. 86.161.63.5 (talk) 19:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

86.161.63.5, what makes you think Inferno has an identity crisis? There is a such thing as a Chinese Christian. I've known many Chinese Christians, and am part Chinese and a Christian. A Chinese person can be enamored of Jewish culture, and a Jew can be enamored of Chinese culture. Everything about Inferno's profile describes what could be a real person. He says he attended an Anglo-Chinese school; maybe that's how he knows Oxford English. Foreign language courses are available in many countries; even if he did speak 'Singlish' (as you claim, although he seems like he speaks proper English to me) he could still learn proper English.--69.234.178.15 (talk) 19:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I have never heard InfernoXV speak English, have you la? His identity crisis is that he has created a myth about himself that is so full of holes that nobody with any intellect (InfernoXV's terminology) can believe. Then he applies the same methodology to make derogatory remarks about the Hakka Chinese. 86.161.63.5 (talk) 23:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't seem like InfernoXV is speaking Chinese. We can certainly read and understand what he is saying, except for "ex nihilo nihil fit." That sounds like Latin. As for his user boxes, some of them are in English, and some of them are in Chinese, Spanish, Latin, Cryllic, Armenian, Italian, Pig Latin, and languages that I can't recognize. And what's with the "la"?

ex nihilo nihil fit. I don't see you contributing constructively ANYWHERE on Wikipedia. I suggest you start with the article on Hakka cuisine, which you labelled as nonsense which needed rewriting. Make some constructive edits instead of bitching and whining and you might get some respect. InfernoXV (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you are the one who is bitching and whining la. Who wrote the comments about Hakka cuisine? 86.161.63.5 (talk) 23:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I've never been to any of the restaurants in England, but I like most of the Chinese restaurants I've been to in America. I don't have any clue if their owners are Hakka.

self-contradictions?

The lead paragraph asserts that the Hakka originate in northern China -- no, southern China -- no, actually, central China. Which is it? Can anyone clarify this? 68.54.206.193 (talk) 18:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

The Hakka ancestors were from what's today's central China. The North & South comments were left so the persons who wrote them can delete for themselves. Of course what's today's central China was at various times part of the northern Chineses kingdoms. In Guangdong or Hong Kong, at the southern extremity of China, anyone from anywhere north of Guangdong is referred to as a northerner. This classification includes almost all other Chinese and certainly the ancestors of the present Hakka people, as it was interpreted that they descended into the South from the North. For example, the Hongkongese regard the Hunanese and the Shanghaiese as northern Chinese peoples. It is important to point out these misunderstandings, as the general knowledge of the Hakka (outside of the Hakka people) in the West came from British sources who had their colony of Hong Kong. The impression the West had were from inaccurate sources.

Although the Chinese education placed great emphasis on the written language, where for example students/scholars were judged by the beauty of their calligraphy, very little importance was attached to the various spoken forms of Chinese. Many still regard Chinese speeches as being divided between south and north. Again to a Hongkongese (prior to its return to China), any Chinese not speaking Cantonese must be speaking 'northern' speech. I once witnessed a conversation in the hairdressers where a Cantonese middle-aged woman on hearing the hairdressers speaking in Hokkien which she couldn't understand, asked the hairdressers where they came from. The reply was Malaysia. The middle-aged woman then said, 'So you were speaking in Malaysian'. To which there was no reply.

There is much misinformation about the Hakka floating around, much of it from out of date and inaccurate sources from Hong Kong. 81.159.80.99 18:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Would you care to enlighten us with some reliable sources outside of your personal experiences at a hairdresser? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 02:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes Seicer, the hairdresser story was just an example. The knowledge is so commonly known amongst the Hakka, that all you have to do is to ask anyone in their community. If by a reliable source you are asking for a book, then you are onto the wrong track, because many things that were written about the Hakka are simply myths. It is like saying that the sun went around the earth, or that a whale is a fish because it is written down in the Jewish and Christian Bible. 81.154.205.12 (talk) 13:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I have both a book copy and a PDF File of the Bible, and I didn't find anything suggesting the sun went around the Earth. There are passages to suggest it is round though (Isaiah 40:12, Job 26:7) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.176.195 (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Description of gender relations doesn't make any sense- Oh yes it does.

The article states:

"Hakka society show a patriarchal hierarchy, as any other Han Chinese population; the fundamental unit of the family is conducted in line with a Confucian ethic."

and then goes on to say:

"In Hakka society, women are equal to men, for without women there will be no men."

Which one is it?

Critic9328 (talk) 12:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Both. It is a patriarchal hierarchy where the family takes and continues the father's clan name, but where women are not treated as inferiors as in contemporary European societies. The important teaching of Confucius was : "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." 'Others' cover all humanity, regardless of sex or creed. 81.159.81.146 (talk) 01:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)