Talk:Hakka people/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

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.

Hakka is a distinctive Qing 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. 21:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

But the result of this study does not necessarily point to the Hakka ancestors to have bred directly with She or Hmong people. The She and Hmong genes may be shared by the the southern peoples such as the Yue Cantonese whose ancestors were a SE Asian people. The Hakka ancestors then bred with the local Yues, and thus the presence and transmission of these genes in the modern Hakka population. (talk) 15:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't believe any of the contents of the "scientific study" mentioned above if I were you. It is far more plausible that Hakka people are simply one of the many ethnic groups that originated in modern-day Southern China. I think political interference may have been involved in that piece of "scientific research". Just look at where the source was from (hint: any so-called scientific study that comes from any place where the media is dominated by the government or its agencies is highly suspect). Albert584 (talk) 10:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

But why would the Government or its agencies interfere with this research? What possible gain would the government make? I think the question to be answered is what is the relationship between the Hakka languages and the genetics of the Hakka people. That is if the Hakka languages are really a 'northern' language, then did the Hakka people also come from the north, or vice versa, if the Hakka people were a northern people, then are their languages also from the north. (talk) 00:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Discussion - who are Hakka?

The article should stress that not all people moving south are Hakka, Hakka is just restricted to the seashore area bordering Taiwan, the name "Guest" was given by Qing officials to those specific settlers. But later on adjoining suburband and countryside folks who spoke of a skewed Cantonese or Fuzhou.Minnan tongue were forceably included into the original so called "Hakka" group(who were given money by Qing court to move into vacant land in Fuzhou.) Article should call to readers' attention that any contryfolks and peasants who spoke with skewed Cantonese accent(as compared with the city folks) would later be claimed by the Hakka political party as one of them, since the TaiPing revolution gained power temporarily and mostly recruited countryfolks to join their apocalyptic cause. Analogy would be if you speak of a skewed accent because you are from the countryside rather than living in the big cities in the USA, you are forceably lumped into a single group called "Hakka", that is of course ridiculous, each person's ancestor is different, ppl came from different countries in Europe and elsewhere in the world to make up the population in the United States north and south, similarly the Hakka politburo has no right to claim any body who spoke with a skewed accent to be a Hakka more so then they are just Han Settlers or European settlers as the analogy shows. Because if you are an European settler living in the country side, your kids are likely grew accustomed to whatever the countrifolks speak, like the Southerners would speak with Southern accent, similarly the country folks from the South of China would speak with a Southern countryside accent, with Cantonese playing a major part in the accent, secondary tongue or accent would be MinNan, Zhejiang, Anhui, Henan,(because folks moved down from those areas to the south because forced by the annual flash floods each year for the last 7000 years of Chinese history).

Article should focus more on the analogies above and not participate into any political scheme giving unfair advantage to the Hakka politburo, because there are so many Han subgroups that are still unaccounted for in China and should deserve better credit. In short the exclusive term Hakka is a non-event, Hakka folks want to make it exclusive but it's not and shouldn't be. chinese had moved south for two thousands years and more, since Han Dynasty sent armies to annex Canton. A subgroup of Han is not that interesting anymore, so no special advantage should be given to the Hakka, whatever power they try to claim.

Language wise Hakka has no northern accent at all, they are all admixture of shouthern accents of Yue, very little tiny Putonghua, likely added later on in popular pop songs. And Hakka people should be proud they are Southerners and not trying to claim they came from anywhere above the Yangtze river. Yue should be proud of being Yue. Yue is of course Han, Yue is huge and is a big part of China's landscape and territory. And if Hakka means "Guests" as pertained to the group in the seashore line, then not all Chinese Southerners living in the countryside of Canton Hunan and interior land in the South are "Guests", they were well established Han living there way before Qing, since there were flood each year for the last 7000years!, they moved south and had lived, mixed successfully with the locals, they probably grabbed the most fertile lands, so technically they can't be called Hakka or "Guests", main article should make that distinction and notify the readers too.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

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. --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)

(Deleted irrelevant comments)

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.

Many Han Chinese have the split nail in the pinky toe. Indeed, it is said on Taiwan that this is the case. I think it inaccurate to believe this is the result of an infection. My wife (a Hakka from Taiwan) was never a farmer, yet has a the so-called double pinky toe. It is like a bump in the nail. If you don't have it, it does not mean you are not Hakka or Han. But don't assume that it is not prevalent and believed to be a sign of being a Han Chinese or Hakka. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

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 (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.

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.

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 (talkcontribs)

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 (talkcontribs)

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). (Removed overgeneralisation) The Puntis of Guangdong are Hans by naturalisation and not by blood. The Hakkas by contrast are true Hans, having descended from Hans from what's today's Central China around the Yellow River. 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)

I dispute that hundreds of generations were involved. Assuming 4 generations per century on average; there are 40 generation per 1000 years. So there are 80 generations in 2000 years; hardly the hundreds of generations portrayed. (talk) 23:26, 15 May 2008 (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. (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 (talkcontribs)

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 (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 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. 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. (talk) 13:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes 23 April 2006

Hakka if they are different in languages in each area then they are not Hakka, they are just the "local peasants", article should not mix up the two, Hakka is very specific to some shoreline coastal area bordering/facing Taiwan granted by the Qing government. Hakka would tell you any peasants in the South would be one of them even they speak different tongue. peasants or country folks speak tongues that are all different in each province of southern China, with accent closer to their respective big cities in the province where they are located, work, and live, so if you are from the Guanzhou countryside then you will speak like what the people in big cities of GuangZhou speak, so on and so forth.

"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. 00:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by (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)

Many Hakka in Taiwan do consider themselves as Taiwanese, but may distinguish themselves further saying something like "Taiwanese Hakka". Half of Taiwan's Hakka population also speak Hoklo Taiwanese. It is possible that many Taiwanese have mix of Hakka and Hoklo ancestors. Some Taiwanese were Hakkas who lost the ability to speak Hakka over a few generations and instead speak Hoklo. - User talk: Dlc_73 01:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The majority of people on Taiwan considered themselves Chinese. (talk) 02:09, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The above comment is pretty inaccurate. The majority of Taiwanese consider themselves of Chinese descent, within which they are mostly either "Hoklo"(AKA "Taiwanese") or "Hakka" but also around 20% are descended from recent, as in post-ww2, immigrants from the mainland who are mostly neither Hoklo nor Hakka. It is also said that "Hakka" in Taiwan actually includes the majority of the Sinicized aborigine population, and certain family names in Taiwan, such as 潘, are a sign of converted aborigine ancestry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:34, 27 December 2008 (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. 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)
Well Sun Yat sen acknowledged himself as cantonese, and even supported the cantonese as the national language of china. Here's an quote made by Sun Yat Sen himself
“ 予途遇之华人既稔予为粤人,始以粤语与予相酬答,且语且行,步履颇舒缓。” WarriorsPride6565 (talk) 2:46, 19 September 2011 (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. (Chinese) - Reference


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   “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。


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. 13:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:18, 11 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 (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. (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 (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. 22:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. How do you know this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (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. 22:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

POV nonsense. The most patriotic? Sources please. If they feature disproportionately in the leadership of China and Chinese, name one Hakka Emperor please. InfernoXV (talk) 13:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

There is no such a thing as a Hakka Emperor. The Emperor was all things to all people. Given the first Chinese empires were centred in central China, where the Hakkas originated, the spoken Imperial Court language could very well have been a Hakka-type language. What can be certain is that Shanghaiese and Guangdongese have never produced anyone of empire-wide significance. Deng Xiaoping was however sometimes called 'The Red Emperor' and Mr Deng was certainly a Hakka. (talk) 19:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The term Hakka was given by the Cantonese to the 'Hakka' people. The term 'Punti' was given by the Hakka to the Cantonese people. 'Punti' is the Hakka pronunciation. In Cantonese, 'Punti' is pronounced 'boon-day'. (talk) 09:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

To: inferno, I don't know why you're tended to be against Hakka. But, without Hakkas, Chinese wont be regarded as highly as presently.

1. Without Sun Yat Sen (a Hakka), there is no ZHONG GUO, chinese will still be scattered like it was on WARLORD era

2. Without Deng Xiao Ping (a HAKKA) with its economic policy, there will be no middle-class chinese, every chinese will still be peasants and government labourers. It was Deng who brought the changes that resulted in worldwide recognition of Chinese economy and power

3. Without Lee Kuan Yew (a HAKKA), Singapore DOESNT EXIST. He's that POWERFUL that singaporeans nominated him as Senior minister after he's retired

4. Thaksin Shinawrata and Abhisit Vejjajiva (both HAKKAS), are leaders of Thailand. This proves HAKKA'S beyond words intelligence and charisma; enable HAKKAS to even control a country where Chinese population is less than the natives

5. Yap Ah Loy (a HAKKA), Who formed KUALA LUMPUR, capital of MALAYSIA? its him<< a Hakka

6. Arthur Raymond Chung (again a HAKKA), president of Guyana. See how Hakka even control non-Asian country?

7. Even Lee Deng Hui is a Hakka

Hakkas need no explanation, no comments, they will keep flourishing worlwide with the Hakka talents and charisma. Hakkas think BIG Hakkas need no honor to be regarded as patriotic, Their ACHIEVEMENTS talk to themselves whether in CHINA, ASIA, even WORLDWIDE

Hear, hear. (talk) 01:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
InfernoXV is against the Hakkas because he is jealous. (talk) 00:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


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? (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. 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. (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 (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't just tell us, go and tell the Catholic Church. Go on, they won't burn you at the stakes nowadays. (talk) 01:09, 3 May 2008 (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. (talk) 01:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree it is both is true but women are not necessarily considered true equals. Women are not viewed as inferior but its not exactly equal either, the status of women back in the day is on par as with the status of modern women (are we truly equal?). Opportunities in relation to work and education is equal probably due to being outsiders and working on less fertile lands in the pass see the importance of using everyone effectively to work the land and manage finances. So in the past hakka families were more willing to or saw the sense in educating their daughters and their sons if they could afford it.

But Hakka sons are still more revered than their daughters even if the daughters are clever e.t.c. as they pass on the lineage of the family. Historical the women run the businesses and households, educate their children, they still cater to their husbands opinions/views. Sounds like the perception of what a modern mother should be no? Perhaps this has contributed to a common perception of non-hakka Chinese that Hakka males are lazy and opinionated. But to be fair to Hakka males like my paternal grandfather he was perfectly happy to doing the cooking and household chores whilst my grandmother worked and was not bothered by the jibes of his non-Hakka friends. There is much more co-operation in Hakka families if male egos don't get in the way! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MariposaChino (talkcontribs) 22:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course male and female are not equal. They are different anatomically, physiologically and socially. How many women want to share a public bathroom with men? Societies throughout all ages and cultures have catered for the needs of men and women in accordance of what was perceived to be their different requirements. Hakka sons are not more revered than daughters. Boys and girls have different needs. For example, the Hakkas realised that baby boys have a higher chance of infant death than baby girls (this phenomenon has recently been shown to be true), so they pay more attention to the needs of baby boys in infancy. If you don't take care of the girls, how would you get a complete family for the boys? (talk) 09:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know where you got the ' Historical the women run the businesses and households, educate their children, they still cater to their husbands opinions/views' part. Both men and women ran businesses, ran the household, worked the fields. To run businesses one need to be fast and accurate with mental arithmetics, and often Hakka women are very good at this, even if they could not read or write Chinese characters. I also believe there were many non-Hakka women who were just as capable as their Hakka sisters. (talk) 12:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

If you think Hakka boys are more revered than Hakka girls by their parents and grandparents, then you are wrong. Hakka boys get their backsides licked by a chicken-feather duster a lot more than their sisters. Mind you that's probably true with all Chinese anyway. (talk) 00:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Are questions of male-female equality/ non-equality here directed at the Han Chinese in general rather than the Hakkas, who are a sub-tribe of the Han Chinese? From discussions here it would appear that among the Han Chinese, including the Guangdong Yues who were originally non-Hans, the Hakkas practise female equality to a much greater extent than the other Han peoples. (talk) 11:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
But doesn't male-female inequality exist throughout Europe and the world? There is still in Europe the tendency for males to be heirs in preference to females. In the UK for example, for many years it was assumed boys did better at school exams because they were naturally 'brainier', now it has turned out that girls are out-performing boys year on year in school exams, excuses are made to explain away the results by saying examinations are designed to be more suitable for girls than boys.
In many ways, the Chinese female has more equality compared with the Chinese male, than the European female has with the European male. (talk) 03:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
To the Hakka lady in the UK from above: You should be glad that you did not come from a white family in the UK where child neglect and abuse, alcoholism, work-shyness and anti-social bahaviour are the norm nowadays. See references below: —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

== learning hakka-wa@hag ga fa ==

Off topic comments

I've deleted the reinsertion of a large number of chit chat comments. Please keep all comments on topic. I.e. how to improve the article. Cheers. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hakka history

The beginning of the article make it sound as though the entire 'Hakka' population from central China left for south China lock, stock and barrel, and they no longer exist in central China. Was this actually the case? Surely the ancestors of the Hakka people in central China were not themelves called Hakkas. And surely many people in central China share the same ancestry as the Hakka people of south China, if indeed the Hakkas of the south originated in central China. The languages of these people in central China should also share the same root as the Hakka languages of south China. Of course, the people of central China may not call their language Hakka, as they had never left the region. Are there any reports and reserach in this subject? (talk) 23:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Below is a link to CCTV9 giving a list of Hakka programs. There was a Hakka program broadcast today made by a Canadian lady that is not on the list. (talk) 00:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Isn't it a bit far fetched to claim the Han migrations from the north to the south in the 3rd Century AD, then the 5th Century, etc down to the 18th Century were all down to the same and the one people we call the "Hakkas" nowadays? If all the people had originally left in the 3rd Century AD, then there would have been no descendants to leave later as they had all left, so the 2nd and subsequent migrations could not have been of the same peoples. Chinese identity is almost completely defined by the "village" language, that is the binding force of the group is that of a lingo-ethnicity. If as claimed, the Hakkas had left in successive waves of migrations from central-north China, then it must mean they had not all left, and their spoken language still remain in those parts. Given that although distributed over a large area in southern China, the various spoken Hakka languages are pretty similar, if indeed the Hakkas had come from a certain area of central-northern China, then it is not too difficult to identify the area as the people there will still be speaking a Hakka language. On the flip side, if no such area can be found, then evidence for the migration theory as it stands cannot be supported. (talk) 22:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hakkas in Hong Kong

I find that the article emphasized too much on Hakkas in Hong Kong, which does not give a comprehensive picture of the Hakka culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Ne Win (Burma)

I am of the opinion that Ne Win should not be classified as Hakka (although he is suspected to be of Meixian ancestry, as he does not even claim to be Chinese, let alone Hakka. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


Moved from Hakka to Hakka people per nearly every other well-developed ethnic article on Wikipedia. kwami (talk) 10:13, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

List of names

Is such a long list of names necessary ? is it an encyclopedia or a famous people directory ?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The long list of names is inspiring. But it should also be balanced with a list of infamous hakka people because to much a good thing may trap hakkas into thinking they are naturally born with talent for good things when in reality are spoilt brats to their mother and those around. A list of shortcomings will also make a firm base of our psychological weaknesses to be aware of as our thinking progress. Otherwise we would be like the manchu empress cooked up in her palace and watching self-glorifying operas..... or like pre-dengxiaoping mentality (talk) 13:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you give us some examples? Talent is by definition naturally born. Unless someone has a natural musical talent, you are not going to be able to turn him/her into Mozart no matter how hard you try. In Chinese societies there do seem to be a lot of Hakkas who get to the top, in the same way a lot of British Prime Ministers were Oxford and Cambridge graduates. The question has to be asked why? Is it because the Hakka gene pool is stronger than that of the other Chinese? There may be some truth in this because marriage in the Hakka tradition is very strongly vetted to avoid marriage of related couples, unlike marriages of sub-continental India, and even the Teowchius and Hokkiens who accept cousin marriages. New blood is also introduced into Hakka societies as non-Hakka girls are taken as wives. This practice tends to breed hybrid vigour into the Hakka population. (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Chen Shuibian

(Removed link to state-run source; this is not a place for propaganda folks.) Albert584 (talk) 10:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

No one gives a damn, what matter is his ancestry was from Zhao'an, certainly not from someone with an Singapore's Nokia IP that goes around calling other who is Hakka and who is not.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

You seems to have plentyful of time on searching these 'resource', did someone paid you for this on constructing the list while other editor were busying elsewhere?—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

I have a suggestion; whenever you encounter a source from any state-run media, don't post links to it on Wikipedia (unless you are trying to show how a particular government is distorting the news or how its views influence state policy); Wikipedia is not a place for propaganda. Albert584 (talk) 10:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hang on a minute, can you trust the commercial media whose sole purpose is to increase their circulation and make money- lots of money? (talk) 01:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Added Traditional Characters

I went ahead and added traditional characters to the names in the Prominent Hakkas section for two reasons:

1. Make the article useful for those who have learned traditional characters (e.g., Hong Kong, Taiwan, Chinese as second language, etc.)

2. Traditional characters are more conservative than simplified because the simplification process involved the merging of characters. For names, this is most prominent with names including the traditional characters 雲 and 云 (merged into 云) and 傑 and 杰 (merged into 杰). Please correct any mistakes that may be in the update list resulting from the merger of simplified characters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Chinese-majority states

In the 1980s-90s, all the three foremost leaders of the three Chinese-majority states in the world are of Hakka origin, then listing Taiwan, Thailand and Singapore. So Thailand had a Chinese majority and the PRC wasn't a Chinese-majority state?-- (talk) 13:41, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out! I have already deleted it. But I am sure we will find other pieces of propaganda in the article sooner rather than later. Albert584 (talk) 10:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Migrations and group identification

Who were the Hakka (or more accurately Hak-Gar) before they became the Hakka of China? Were they the only migratory people in the entire history of China (which I find hard to believe)? The Hakka people of China is identified by their spoken language family, which is similar across the Hakka population of different localities; so that suggests they had all come from the same focal point centuries earlier. But what of the other migratory people, should they have existed? Were they once separate peoples from the Hakkas, who then became Hakkas, or do they still exist separately? (talk) 01:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Ma Ying-jeou is most probably not a Hakka

It seems that this question is discussed only by bloggers, so I did'nt manage yet to find a reliable source, but the odds for Ma Ying-jeou being a Hakka are thin. He started this claim in 1998 when he was running for the mayorship of Taipei and has visited since once a year a Hakka Ma family ancestor shrine in Miaoli. Nevertheless, it has been revealed recently that he has no blood connection with those Ma. Moreover, his father never identified himself as a Hakka and, while there are Hakka villages in Hunan, there are none in the region his family originated from. (talk) 15:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree. We should find some reliable source and take him off the list for good Miuki (talk) 07:02, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Chen Shuibian is a Hakka???!!! All uncited and unreferenced. It's becoming a joke. (talk) 13:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


Deleting some empty and duplicate articles. Pasting contents here in case some should be merged here. kwami (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Hakka Chinese are Hakka people, a unique ethnic group of "Han" Chinese ethnically native to the Yellow River area. Most of Hakka Chinese live in Guangdong, Jiangxi and Fujian provinces.[1] They are thought to be one of the earliest "Han" settlers in China. One theory has it that many of the early Hakkas were affiliated with the "royal bloods". The truth may be more complicated than that. It is highly likely that while Hakka may be a stronghold of Han culture, Hakka people traditionally also have married other ethnic groups and adopted their cultures during the long migration history of 2000 years. Due to the infusion of other ethnic groups from the northwest, north and northeast, these original settlers gradually migrated south and settled in Jiangxi, Fujian, and Guangdong. They were called Hakka by the locals when they first settled in. This term has been used since by non-Hakka and Hakka people, and in international publications. The spelling "Hakka" is derived from the pronunciation in Hakka dialect ( pronounced as "haagga" in Hakka and "kejia" in Mandarin). [1]

During the last hundred years or so, Hakka people migrated to South East Asia, East Africa, Europe (Holland, United Kingdom, France, Germany..), South America (Brazil, Trinidad...) Canada, US. About 7% of the 1.2 billion Chinese clearly state their Hakka origin or heritage. However, the actual number may be more as many Hakka Han who settled along the path of migration assimilate with the local people. The Hakka identity is gradually lost. [1]

Hakka people are noted for their preservation of certain cultural characteristics that could be traced to pre-Qin period (about 2200 years ago) as expressed in the custom, foods, spoken language, etc.[1]

Hakka people are also known to be very adamant in defending their cultural heritage, which was the reason for their migration to flee from the "northern" influence at that time. [1]

As a late comer to places initially occupied by locals, Hakkas usually had to struggle and survive on the less desirable lands. Thus, Hakka people are well-known for their perseverance even in the most adverse environment. [1]

Among all the Chinese people, Hakkas are among the most conservative in keeping the traditions. Yet, many are willing to take risks and seek new opportunities elsewhere to establish themselves. The migratory tradition results in the distribution of Hakka in the most remote part of the world. An anecdote has it that the north-most restaurant in the world close to the Arctic is in fact a Chinese restaurant run by a Hakka.[1]

The Hakka people, paradoxically conservative and endeavoring, hard-working and enduring, is reflective of the spirit of Chinese culture. [1]

Why it is paradoxical? Conservative, endeavoring, hardworking and enduring all go hand in hand. I see many lazy, liberal and live-for- the-day Chinese people, are they therefore not Chinese; and I see many conservative and endeavoring, hard working and enduring White people and African people, do these qualities then make them Chinese? (talk) 01:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Famous Hakka Chinese

Famous Hakka Malaysians

Famous Hakka Taiwanese

How many Hakka?

The infobox says 30-45 million worldwide, and yet later in the article it is said that there are 90-100 million Hakka speakers worldwide. Surely the number of Hakka speakers should be the same (or smaller) than the number of Hakka people. Which number is correct? Tomh009 (talk) 03:43, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Infobox: Notable people representing Hakka

I've updated the infobox with a mosaic of notable Hakka Chinese. The following are rationales for the inclusion of each picture, and what they represent:

Any objections?--Hongkongresident (talk) 07:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sentence in the lead

"Historically, Hakka women did not bind their feet when the practice was commonplace in China."

Why is this in the lead? It feels so misplaced. (talk) 10:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Foot-binding was never a commonplace practice in China. (talk) 02:44, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the 'commonplace' part, the feet binding article mentions this:

However, by the 17th century, Han Chinese girls, from the wealthiest to the poorest people, had their feet bound. It was less prevalent among poorer women or those that had to work for a living, especially in the fields. Some estimate[who?] that as many as 2 billion Chinese women had their feet bound from the late 10th century until 1949,[citation needed] when foot binding was outlawed by the Communists (foot binding had also been banned by the Nationalists, but the Nationalists never had thorough political control over the entire country, and were unable to enforce this prohibition universally).[2] According to the author of The Sex Life of the Foot and Shoe, 40–50% of Chinese women had bound feet in the 19th century. For the upper classes, the figure was almost 100%.[2] Generally speaking, footbinding was not as widespread in southern China as in the north. In contrast to the majority of other Han Chinese, the Hakka of southern China did not practise foot binding and had natural feet. Manchu women were forbidden to bind their feet by an edict from the Emperor after the Manchu started their rule of China in 1644. Many other non-Han ethnic groups continued to observe the custom, some of them practised loose binding which did not break the bones of the arch and toes but simply narrowed the foot.

Half of the figures are unsourced. I'm just going to place the sentence out of the lead. (talk) 21:53, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

What a load of rubbish. If female foot binding among the upper classes was almost 100%, then you would have seen that in the imperial tombs and in historic records of the time. There was no mention that all the Han Chinese emperors' wives/concubines and daughters had their feet bound, nor in those of his relations. (talk) 01:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


Listen, for god sake. First of all, I DID NOT WRITE that info about "invading" at Hakka. I just removed the spacing between the paragraphs (that info is NOT mine). Secondly, I am pointing out to you that the info that you keep on putting is duplicate as it's covered here Hakka_people#Hakka_as_Han (second paragraph) and should be written at that section. (talk) 07:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Posted this at article talk page, prefer you to reply there if you're going to reply. (talk) 08:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
i'm not doing this for gods sake. i'm doing this for the simple truth and honest information distributing of the Hakka people, regardless of how they are related to the Han and Hun people. These Asian people are all related one way of another, as historic records and popular and scientific conjecture goes, and there should be no exercising of bias in Wikipedia to delete or distort such information about the common ancestry of the Asian people. (talk) 08:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
you did remove vital information and links as to the origins of the Hakka people without attempt to fix the problem, while deleting the relevancy of the Hakka-Han-Hun historical relationships. there's this fascination in editing-out or making loaded weasel statements in regards to these Asian people's origins, often in context of racist anti-Asian and politically biased anti-China views. regardless if Hakka, Han or Hun, the historic records and conjectures of Asian people's ancestry should not be controlled in such manner, as it constitute fascist behavior to control information leading to truth about Asian peoples origins and identity. the information i provide is fair and just with solid academic support, so please don't wantonly remove these, thank you. (talk) 08:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
The "vital info" is in my eyes irrelevant and I did leave the main point intact, but I'll leave both alone now. Once again, I have placed it in that section. Also, don't accuse me of POV vandalism without checking that I actually was the one that wrote it (I wasn't). (talk) 08:47, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Why do you keep reverting it? I said I moved it to another section INTACT, I did not delete it, I moved it to The "Hakka is Han" section. I'd appreciate you undo that edit. (talk) 09:04, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
it's not up to you to decide what's 'irrelevant' when proper information and form is made to these articles. i don't revert what i contributed. my previous edit stood at 84,488kb, after which you exercised your control of the information in this article, and the information was reduced to 84,211kb, in any case, the information i provided for the readers is an overview of the ORIGINS and MIGRATIONS of the Hakka people. further details may appear elsewhere, but the intro to the Hakka's origins and migrations is a very sound and reasonable introduction at the top, in should not be displaced by your POV of what is and isn't irrelevant. the information regarding Hakka-Han-Hun kinship is an introductory footnote fit for the Origins and Migrations section, not the details of the 'Hakka as Han' section. (talk) 09:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Removal of my info of Han Chinese origins in central China, third party opinion needed


This edit about Hakka origins of Han Chinese from central China, the relevant section is "Origins, migrations and group identification" (first paragraph) and subsection "Hakka as Han". User IP keeps removing. Note that few info and refences are also removed by the user, while pushing his foreign tribes POV. (talk) 11:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

it's fact that origins of Han Chinese are centered at the central plains, while it is also fact that the Han Chinese and Hun-Hsiungnu people (without even mentioning the Hakka people), are from common roots in the central and northern plains. the Han people like Hun people, were considered nomadic and semi-nomadic before the development of Chinese civilization. The Hakka people, even more so! these are simply facts i'm presenting, and not what you wish to describe as my 'pov'. like i've already advised you: feel free to insert tags where you deem fit, but please stop manipulating and torturing good viable information and citations presented herein by contributors such as myself. you are in the Netherlands and i'm in the United States, neither one of us are truly experts on the subject, and we should only go by reasonable science and archaeology, historic records and academic studies, but not twisting and torturing or outright deleting other people hard work and edits. (talk) 11:49, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, all that talk, yet you do straight the opposite. Looks like quite the double standards. Removing my citations and all. Funny, you don't want me to move your edit, and yet you keep on doing it yourself to my edit (and even going so far to just remove some citations of mine).
Also, you tagged something as {{vague}}, I'd like to know what since you didn't had civility in your edit to give a {{vague|REASON}}. Otherwise, I'm gonna remove the tag. (talk) 20:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposal: I'd like some outsider opinion, since this user keep on moving my edit [4] down (note: the complete removal of info at the second red text, POV), while he doesn't want any of his to be moved (which is in my opinion hypocritical and pushing POV) or any other sourced info placed near his. To be specific, my info of the "central plain of China" origin, which is well suited as the early point of orgin. It should be placed there. (talk) 21:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

It's widely believed that Hakka people are part of Han Chinese, though some opinions might indeed suggest otherwise. The difference between Hakka and Hun-Hsiungnu is that the Huns are in central China thousands of years ago when Han Chinese is not yet clearly identified, but the Hakkas are Han people who are driven south less than 2,000 years ago with a clear Han origin. As professor Lo Hsiang-lin of Hong Kong University, who was pioneering in Hakka research, confirmed this in the 1930s, I think this edit shall not be seen as invalid. Though, these two paragraphs are not in the best form and can be improved.--Certiffon (talk) 03:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I'll just move it back up and leave the form for some other party to edit. (talk) 10:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Some observations:
- Wikipedia values perspectives based on verifiability, not "truth".
- Sourced information shouldn't be removed.
- Wikipedia should represent all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. If an editor has a good source that discusses the theory that the Hakka are descended from a Non-Han ethnic group, please add this information in a new section, with appropriate citations. Don't remove information just because it contradicts a particular theory.
- I suggest marking contentious-yet-plausible unsourced statements with a [citation needed] tag, rather than simply deleting them, in order to give editors supporting the inclusion of that information time to source that information properly, as per WP:UNSOURCED. It's fairly common for alot of WP:CHINA articles right now to contain unsourced statements that are not the result of original research.Ferox Seneca (talk) 08:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
- First point. I know, yeah so?
- Second and third point, can you provide me with an exact diff that shows that I plainly removed sourced info relevant to the topic "Hakka" if that's implying an accusation, and if it was not than nevermind (I can't tell).
- Third point, NPOV, too bad someone kept removing parts of my sourced info whilst leaving one's own prominently in and diff was provided right there (Yes, I realize some was moved, but also removed). Hmmmm....
- I am well in my right to remove whatever uncited before I reach seniority, unless there's a policy that states that I have to tag it first. WP:UNSOURCED or WP:BURDEN also states that I may remove it after some time, several years now, and the burden lies to whomever adds or restores it. -- (talk) 10:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
In case it wasn't clear, I am mostly suggesting some things that User: could take into consideration in order to edit more constructively. I don't see any evidence that User: has made inappropriate edits.Ferox Seneca (talk) 09:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC)