[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
> Dear Clem,
> I think my previous postings can help you understand my views on the
> formation of Hakka. Anyway, the following points is a summary:
> (1) Most Southern Chinese are mixbloods of southbound immigrants and local
> folks from the "Central plain" who came to the south in waves. Therefore at
> least the first three of the "five migrations" are not unique to Hakka.
My thinking that we were really a mix of different people matches yours.
possible that my views were formed after reading all the theories,
yours, and subconsciously decided that this explanation is more
> (2) Different dialects formed in the South which identified themselves with
> the county's/region's name only. Although the Jiaying dialect could have a
> history of more than five hundred years, it bore no name of "Hakka".
If the Jiaying dialect was not called Hakka, what was it called ? You
that other dialects "identified themselves with the county's/region's
Why not Jiaying, if Jiaying existed then as a province?
> (3) The name Hakka as a group of people did not appear until the 18th
> century, when farmers from Jiaying were invited by the Qing Regime to
> cultivate the land near the estauries fo Pearl River Delta. The Cantonese
> speakers call them Hakka (Guset families), and at first they were
> coexisting peacefully.
This is confusing to me. Why would Jiaying people suddenly now be called
Is it because the Cantonese did not know that the newcomers came from
Is there a map of the approximate area where Jiaying was located and how
> (4) When more and more people arrived into PRD, the locals felt threatened
> and the relationship between them worsened. A Hakka-Punti war broke out
> around 1852 leading to the climax of Hakka-identity construction.
> (5) After the war, Hakka became a name for a group of people who speak the
> Jiaying dialect and their descendents distinguish themselves from Cantonese
> when they move overseas.
In (3) you said that the newcomers were already called Hakka and that
the Hakka-Punti war, but in (4) and (5) you said that "After the war,
a name for a group of people". There seems to be a contradiction here.
> (6) There were still some misunderstanding between the Hakka and Cantonese
> speakers in the 20th century, but both became peaceful. Because of the
> better econmical development of cantonese speaking regions, Hakka speakers
> are assimilating into them. Unfortunately, even those Jiaying dialect
> speakers who did not migrated into the cantonese speaking regions are
> following the suit and leads to the problem of suicidal decline of Hakka.
I don't know what misunderstanding you are talking about. If it's a
discrimination, I find that to be true of all groups of people and even
the same group. We have to work against the discrimination within and
The fact that "Jiaying dialect speakers" migrate and assimilate into the
speaking regions is no fault of the Cantonese. They have migrated to
and other language speaking regions too and assimilated. If you say that
who have not migrated are giving up their "Jiaying dialect", why is it
so? It's not
that they don't have their own region, so what's the excuse?
> (7) Should Hakka remain as a real group with a language and culture or
> should it dissolve into an abstract concept for a "tower of Babel"? Should
> Hakka dialect continue or should we speak other languages? Although Hakka
> seems to be a united name, we are far from united to work out a solution
> for our future.
I agree that "Hakka should remain as a real group with a language and
culture". But I
don't think it's because we don't have a region, whether it be a town,
county or province.
The problem is more than that. We can put our heads together and
identify the true
problem(s) for the decline of the Hakka culture and dialect(s) and then
provide the solution(s).