From: yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Y.W.m.c.)
Subject: Re: Hus Fu and the Japanese
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 20:01:05 GMT

In article <ljk1miINN9ei@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM (Steven Lin) writes:
>In article <1hbcbgINNmou@agate.berkeley.edu>  (Henry Robertson) writes:
>>I don't understand what the fuss is about.  It's obvious to anyone that the
>>Japanese are predominantly of East Asian descent, not Polynesian or 
>>Caucasian.  Japanese assert their difference from the Chinese because of the
>>difference in linguistics. 
>
>I have found the related postings on SCC once for a while in the past four
>years and none comes up convincible argument, while some of Japanese netters
>tend to deny the Chinese netter have no reliable source to convince people.
>While the Japanese intend to rewrite their history of invasion of China and
>the mass masscare in north eastern China and many cities, in particular the
>capital of Nanjing, the research evidence may serve the Japanese, it was so
>guailty that a branch of Chinese descendents, the Japanese, came homeland 
>to kill many millions of brotherhood Chinese.

Hmm..well, scientifically, your claim that Japanese are brothers of Chinese
is just as strong as the Malay claim of brotherhood. Remember, the Japanese
people are not just a direct "branch" of Chinese descendents. Throughout
the years, many people from many cultures have blended in and mixed, that
is obvious. The only "foreign" race that you could say is from Chinese 
descendents are probably Koreans. Even then, Koreans are a mix of many 
different peoples. Also, the only "foreign" race that Japanese would say
they are descendents from are Koreans. So Korea is like a bridge between
China and Japan. The blend of her people are Chinese in origin, but are
related to the Japanese descendents to the East. So I wouldn't say that
the Japanese are descendents of Chinese in the direct manner that you said.
Although I do not doubt that they have Chinese lineage, that is no doubt.
 
>> The written language is adopted from Chinese,
>>but the grammar & spoken language is completely dissimilar.  Japanese has a
>>range of classifications from Altaic to Malayo-Polynesian.  
>
>This assertion to Chinese people is not convincible. Many postings stated that
>the current Japanese speaking language has many similarity with Cantonese,
>the Min-nan. Because all of these were considered as ancient Chinese languages

Hmm.. I do not know of any linguists that have proposed this theory, perhaps
you could enlighten me? I agree with the original poster. Japanese was 
invariably different from Chinese before Heian. After that time, much knowledge
was imported, including Chinese words. So, obviously, Japanese would become 
more sinicized to the point it is today. However, that is not a valid reason
to deduce that the two languages must therefore be related from the beginning.
The structure is what really counts, and as far as I know, Chinese structure
is more closely related to English than it is to Japanese.

>or dialects, those were spoken in central China. After various enviornmental
>change and wars, people moved to east, to south or Pacific islands, therefore
>the isolation of long time was a major factor that caused the language differed.

I, like the majority of students and linguists, believe that the two languages
do not share a common heritage (that is not to say that they are not currently
related, which they are).

>However, the major Japanese writing is Chinese with various simplification or
>transformed, that was believed that the Japanese lost the connection with China
>and so they forgot Chinese writing partially or completely. The Japanese

I do not understand this. I do not understand "lost the connection with China
and so they forgot Chinese writing partially or completely". The first time, 
ever, that the Japanese started using Chinese written was during the 4th 
century, when Wani brought the classics to the islands. I'm afraid I don't
understand what you are trying to say. Also, the first time Japan had any
sort of direct contact with China was during the 7th century. Before
that, Japan was in no way an organized society. Perhaps you are thinking of
after? In that case, I do not contest your point that Japanese writing draws
its inspiration from the Chinese literary culture. But you must also remember
that it wasn't until around the 15th century when Japan could be called a 
"kingdom" or nation.

>scholars also found their ways of inventing auxilary writing in complementary of 
>lost Chinese writing in order to make expression more complete.
>This theory also holds in Chinese people. Though, Chinese people speak various
>of dialects, they have common writing and unique writing too.

Yes. I don't think, however, that the Japanese language is a "dialect" of 
Chinese, although I DO agree that their written language is.

>That long period of isolation was believed there were various of tributal wars
>inside the Japan. Soon after that, the Japanese appeared in Chinese record 
>again while the Japanese sent many people to China to learn various skills.
>Many studies proved the recent Japanese temples, houses and cloth were the
>ancient Chinese style, particular of Tang Dynasty.

Ahh.. I agree with most of what you are saying, however.. the Japanese didn't
send any people to China until around the 12th century. Up to that time, 
the primitive denizens were taught the advanced ways of T'ang by Chinese and
Korean emigrants, artisans, scholars, monks, etc. In fact, it is well known 
that these emigrants to Japan from the more advanced continental nations were
highly regarded by tho native islanders. By the 10th century, a census counted
nearly 40% of the Japanese noble people claiming either direct Chinese or 
Korean descendent, or having some Chinese or Korean blood. However, the natives
didn't seek contacts by actually going to China. Instead, they learned from
scholars and monks who went to Japan. And as their enthusiasm for the advanced
techniques grew, and as their ship-building developed close to Chinese and
Korean standards, they were able to go to China. The very few that did go to
China during the Pan East-Asian Era didn't go for political reasons, for Japan
was as disorganized as an adolescent's room (you must remember that Buddhism
was a new religion at the time, and it competed with Shinto...and the famous
Soga/Mononobe Wars resulted from it). They went to study Buddhism or some other
field. They also relied on Korean ships built by Chang Po-go and his vast 
commercial empire during the late Silla Dynsty. In fact, he had a virtual 
monopoly on trade with Shantung and the Middle East.

>>Then in the Heian era proto-Japanese
>>adopted Chinese written language, introducing more vocabulary and a 
>>written language.  There is evidence that the phonemes of Japanese pronunciations
>>have changed considerably over time, with scientific proof that it did so
>>since the Heian era.  Therefore, it is just as likely that Japanese
>>pronunciatiosn were considerably Sinofied during the Heian era, from the 
>>previous Polynesian-like Ryukyuan language.  Since MacArthur's occupation,
>>considerable modifications have been made to the "standard" Tokyo Japanese
>>as taught in schools, summarily to make it easier for foreigners to learn.

The previous author is very correct.