|
Post by Subu'atai on Apr 8, 2008 22:34:30 GMT 3
Do you buy it?
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 8, 2008 23:22:30 GMT 3
Yes, I also think that they are related a bit. Especially the Koreans.
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Apr 9, 2008 0:05:55 GMT 3
Care to elaborate? Related in blood or just ancient language?
Japan's history a little controversial compared to Altaics of the steppes. Korea was founded by a Central-Asian tribe though yes? But even if that was true they have far lost their nomadic roots and embraced the type of civilisation like China and Japan. Many have Altaic blood, but are they Altaic?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2008 10:28:12 GMT 3
This is a very complicated question, who knows how they're related to us but I believe that today there is still a linguistic connection between us and them. As for a racial, genetic and cultural connection, I don't see it today. I know some Turks, specifically Turkish and Uyghur, who have studied Korean and Japanese and told me that it was very easy for them since they didn't have to study too hard to get the grammar down. Their grammar is still very like Turkic grammar.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 12, 2008 12:17:30 GMT 3
Both, though from several milleniums ago. The Koreans are closer by blood, since the Japanese are heavily mixed with Pacific natives.
Japan's natives were of course non-Altaic, but there was at least one Altaic (or nomadic) migration to the Japanese islands. The similarity of the language, plus some genetical similarities are a proof of this. The Koreans are, however, much more similar with us when compared with the Japanese. The ancient Koreans had many cultural similarities with the Altaic nomads too. As far as I know, they are the closest related with the Tungusic peoples.
But of course today, they are under heavy Chinese influence.
Yes, I heard that too. There are some similar words as well as some similar grammar rules.
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Apr 12, 2008 13:56:22 GMT 3
Hmmm interesting, though they sound more like Altaic descendants rather then Altaics heh, similar to Ukraine especially. I guess all this was sparked by a few Koreans I met who said 'You are Mongolian? We are the same!!!' lol, yet I was like 'WTH?!', though I really appreciated their mentality when it came to one Korean gal heh
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Apr 12, 2008 20:59:32 GMT 3
Linguistically, definitely a connection.
Mongolian, Manchurian, Korean and Japanese can be viewed as Altaic belonging to the Mongolic / Tungusic branch. Although a lot of Japanese rather like to refer to their language as Japonic and isolated with Okinawan dialects. Its quite a controversial issue, it depends one like to be isolated or not.
I definitely think the Mongolic / Tungusic languages of North Asia are closely related to Korean and Japanese. The Turkic languages form the Western branch of this family.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2008 10:21:39 GMT 3
Officially the Korean and Japanese languages are isolated, they don't belong to any language category yet.
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on Apr 17, 2008 19:15:18 GMT 3
Linguistically, definitely a connection. Mongolian, Manchurian, Korean and Japanese can be viewed as Altaic belonging to the Mongolic / Tungusic branch. Although a lot of Japanese rather like to refer to their language as Japonic and isolated with Okinawan dialects. Its quite a controversial issue, it depends one like to be isolated or not. I definitely think the Mongolic / Tungusic languages of North Asia are closely related to Korean and Japanese. The Turkic languages form the Western branch of this family. Korean is a branch of Tungustic and japanese is a branch of old korean you just added mongolian who is a seprate group within the Altaic family.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2008 11:08:40 GMT 3
Atabeg, officially Koraen and Japanese are isolated languages, they don't, officially belong to any language family/group and are not officially a branch of any other languages.
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on Apr 24, 2008 0:10:36 GMT 3
^yeah but there different theories and if you go with the Altaic theory mine is the right one
|
|
|
Post by ryukyurhymer on Jul 17, 2008 3:50:51 GMT 3
between the Koreans and Japanese, the Koreans seem to be stronger proponents of the Altaic theory.. However I think much of this has to due with cultural and current events issues. To the north of them is China, a country whom they have had major disputes over history with. And to the east of them is Japan, a country that conquered them and hold resentment towards. To me at least, it feels that they're seeking some kind of outside relation because they certainly don't like or want to believe that they're related to any of their not so favorable neighbors.
here in Japan.. some teachers believe in the Altaic family, others not so much. At the moment I am one of those who believes that there's not enough evidence to support Korean or Japanese being related to the three main Altaic branches.. but that there's enough similarities in which one shouldn't totally dismiss any relations.
What makes it difficult is the amount of borrowing and influence between Altaic languages, which makes it harder for analysts to determine which words have common origins, and which words were something simply borrowed from the other.
|
|
|
Post by highsteppesdrifter on Jul 17, 2008 11:21:03 GMT 3
This is really an interesting topic.
First of all, as this is my first post, I'd like to say "hello" to everyone.
H. Ihsan Erkoc- I was wondering, what exactly was this Altaic (or nomadic) migration to the Japanese islands that you referred to? Was this a specific historical event or something that happened in prehistory? Did these people or this tribe have a name?
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Jul 17, 2008 11:47:22 GMT 3
between the Koreans and Japanese, the Koreans seem to be stronger proponents of the Altaic theory.. However I think much of this has to due with cultural and current events issues. To the north of them is China, a country whom they have had major disputes over history with. And to the east of them is Japan, a country that conquered them and hold resentment towards. To me at least, it feels that they're seeking some kind of outside relation because they certainly don't like or want to believe that they're related to any of their not so favorable neighbors. That is actually a very rational intepretation of the current issue. This thread in CHF was very objectively informative especially the post by chanpuru on the sources of Japanese peoples on the islands. www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=14491&st=75
|
|
|
Post by ryukyurhymer on Jul 17, 2008 12:05:28 GMT 3
^ that person is me ;D
|
|