If we know how to use Chinese Characters:
gr...@msn.com
are.
zhen
"Chinese" characters are not "Chinese" in origin. According to the
latest findings, the ancestors of ZhiYou, the LiangZhu, developed
proto-characters that would later serve as the basis for Hanzi (Han),
Kanji (Nippon), and Hanja (GaoLi). In other words, writing systems in
the Far East are based on characters and not alphabets. One could argue
that the yellow race, if there is such a thing, has character-based
writing system.
Han = ethnic Han. Zi = character. Hanzi = Han character. Nippon and
GaoLi borrowed from Hanzi. Because Hanzi radicals and composition of
characters were/are quite complex, Nippon and GaoLi simplified Hanzi.
GaoLi has a lot of circles; Nippon has a lot of curves. Hanzi is so
complicated (because it is enormous) that simplified version of Hanzi
is promoted even within China. Many, many characters seen in Hanzi,
Kanji, and Hanja maintain a single meaning transculturally. If you all
saw the character for Hmong, you can tell what each radical means,
really! This is not surprising since the character-based writing
systems of the Far East has a single root.
I have seen a lot of "Hmong" writing systems. They are ALL alphabet
based. I applaud the effective results of RPA Romanization and
ingenious linguistic abilities of Shong Lue Yang. However, Hmong people
do not have to look further than our own Paj Ntaub to find artifacts of
a Hmong writing system. Do not look to Mother of Writing, Chao Fa, RPA,
and what not for insight into what the "true" and "authentically" Hmong
writing system may have been. In my opinion, our writing system and
proof of it has been, LITERALLY, under our very own nose all this time.
Between Mong, Hmong, Miao, someone needs to study and compare/contrast
the Paj Ntaub characters.
As for Mong and Hmong, are the characters really that different? I
think clothing design is different, but the actual characters are
identical structurally and mean unequivocally the same thing. Unless
someone can substantiate the counter-argument that #1) Mong use
different characters in "their" Paj Ntaub and #2) these characters mean
a totally different thing for Mong (as opposed to Hmong), then, yes, we
find ourselves a very viable solution to resolve Mong vs Hmong
nonesense, not unlike the Mandarin/Cantonese dialect differences. We
could most certainly backtrack and redevelop our Paj Ntaub as our
"official" writing system.
I keep mentioning the Jews and their Zionist movement. I do not support
completely what the Jews have done, but one has to admire how this
"homeless" group of people established a nation based on their "ethnic"
identity and redeveloped their culture and language (Hebrew) into a
national identity and statehood utility. The Hebrew language was hardly
used (except for and during religious activities) until Israel came
into being, at which point, it was "reintroduced" back as the national
language. The Diaspora of the Jews has been cited as one of the main
reasons why statehood was not possible. Without self-rule and
sovereignty, what's the use of Hebrew or a "national" language and
writing system? Hebrew faded out and almost died. This is the same
situation with Hmong and Paj Ntaub.
Since it is very controversial, politically bitter, and legally
prohibitive to discuss Hmong statehood (and even seditious in some
political circles) let's not involve such idea in regards to the
possibility of having an official and single writing system for
Mong/Hmong/Miao.
Even though I desire the reality of having an official writing system
for our people, I too question the utility. Unless there is a
super-passionate individual or consensus to initiate the efforts, then
Paj Ntaub as a possibility for our writing system goes nowhere. We use
abstract symbols to manipulate metal objects to go to the moon. We use
abbreviated computer language to move trillions and trillions of
dollars and electronically manage international affairs.
What can Paj Ntaub do for us? Does it lift our pride and spirit? Does
it unite us? Does it resolve Mong and Hmong dialect differences?
Moobthaibteb Moobtwmzeej
story of the Hmong history could just be a made up story to brown nose the
missionary, was it Savina? Not too sure on that, the missionary's name.
However, in using that same line of thinking, this pajntaub thing could also
very well be just another copy cat or stolen story from the Chinese.
According to National Geographic, in their story, A Secret Scrip, for Women
Only. "For centuries they were forbidden to read or write, so women in
China's Jiangyong county came up with their own cryptic writing system known
only to themselves. Living under the strict control of men--often in
arranged and abusive marriage--they created Nu Shu, meaning 'female
writing,' as a way to communicate and help each other cope using poems,
stories, and songs, sometimes sewn into textiles. The characters are based
on traditional Chinese, but altered to make new meanings and written in a
wispy, graceful slant. The vocabulary was taken from local dialect. Today
only a handful of women read and write Nu Shu, but the Chinese government
has promised funds for a museum and dictionary to preserve the
script. --Marisa J. Larson"
Now, could this pajntaub idea that so many have given so much meanings into
it just be another copycat/stolen idea? Just some thought to provoke further
learning.
--
Moob Lajleeb
Kuv paub taag txhuatsaav-txhuayaam...
tsuas tshuav kuv tugkheej--
txhaj tseem najnub ua lajleeb tsi paub tsum :-)
"zhen" <zhe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111218196.3...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
zhen
I disagree with you 100%. You could not be more wrong in your
assumption.
In regards to the "flood" story, we have our own version. Furthermore,
we have our own creation story, Adam and Eve (Iab/Ong), and we have our
own confusion of tongue story. These are 100% Hmong and as old as our
people. These stories are authentically Hmong and not from the Torah.
Do you have a mother or father? Do you have relatives? If you do,
please, go ask them if what I am saying is true.
Just because the Torah has "a" version and Savina discovered Hmong
people "a" version too, does not mean that we copied/stole such
stories (and to a lesser extent, especially to please Savina). One
could just as easily argue that the Jews may have stolen such stories
from Hmong people. In fact, the origin of the "flood" story as
Jewish is in doubt by some; there is a "flood" story in Persian
culture that some have speculated the Jews borrowed/copied/stole the
original story from. Furthermore, the "flood" story is common
throughout different cultures in the world.
Who is this Professor Mai Na? Never heard of the professor. Give me a
book reference, website, phone number, or email, please.
Father Savina was cited by one of the greatest scholar on Hmong
history, Keith Quincy, for the hypothesis that the origin of Hmong was
Mesopotamia/Middle-East. Both these guys conjectured some very radical
historical possibilities, and many Hmong who do not study Hmong history
or culture acquiesce to these so called "authority." However, I do not
blame the believers of Keith Quincy or Father Savina's hypothesis
because these men published first, and since such resources were at one
time the only available references for Hmong history, those who sought
to investigate the origin of Hmong history may have had to accept these
statements/hypotheses as "facts".
I challenge anyone, anywhere to provide evidence and prove that Hmong
derived and copied from the Torah these stories of flood, Adam/Eve,
confusion of tongue, etc... Just because there are similarities does
not mean one is copied or derived from the other. The possibility of 2
distinct, separate groups of people (ethnically and geographically)
having similar stories is not very difficult to believe. This reminds
me of the story of Newton and Leibniz concurrently "discovering"
calculus. There was no copying of one from the other--each INDIVIDUALLY
was able to "discover" calculus.
You must remember, the great authority on Hmong history, Keith Quincy,
stated that Hmong people followed the ethnic Han into China and
borrowed their way of life to survive (i.e. agriculture). We know now
that the incorrigible authority, Keith Quincy, could not have stated
something farther removed from the historical truth. What is true (or
historically accepted by what I would argue a significant majority,
including both ethnic Han and Hmong historians) is that Hmong people
were in China before the ethnic Han, and from the Hmong, the ethnic Han
borrowed religion, government, agriculture, technology, etc...
Paj Ntaub is a copy cat or stolen? Do you see ethnic Han with Paj
Ntaub? The only thieves are those who want to take from our culture and
write us out of history. If you cannot see that Paj Ntaub is 100% Hmong
and that it is an artifact of our ancient writing system, then I have
to say that either you are ignorant of Hmong history/culture/people or
have your own hidden agenda which I cannot remotely speculate on.
The Paj Ntaub that Hmong women wear behind their shirts is known among
our people as a "letter" indicating a crime they committed in the
past. When the elders say go learn, they say, "Kawm ntaub kawm
ntawv." Which other ethnic group say these things? The Jews? The
Chinese?
This accusation of Hmong copying/stealing ideas is nothing new. We have
faced this type of allegation before. What is important is that we know
what is true and what is a part of our people, history, and culture.
Many will try to write Hmong out of history. Many will try to discredit
the intelligence of Hmong people. Many will even "steal" good
things about Hmong and write it as their very own.
Some say Hmong are too stupid and cannot create their own writing
system. But, Shong Lue Yang was able to create (by himself, without any
formal education or linguistic training) within the short span of his
life Hmong Pahawh.
Some say Hmong never had a homeland or country. But Juili, San-Miao,
Chu, Nanzhao, Kaitongs rivaled Imperial China for thousands of years.
The way things are going, one day, General Vang Pao will be argued as
not being Hmong. There will be scholars that say GVP was an ethnic
Laotian/Khmu/Mien/Yao and what not. And then, on SCH, someone will
raise the question, "Was GVP really Hmong?" This is the way it has
always been since the fall and defeats of our people to Imperial China.
However, it is a good thing that writing works both ways: for the truth
and for the lies. Even with all these lies written, someone will reveal
the truth. In the past, they (the empowered and/or majority) had the
publishing channels and time to skew history to their own advantage.
But today is a new day, and the playing field is leveled. As DRP often
says, the "other side" is coming out to tell their
interpretation/version.
The short story, Paj Ntaub = 99.9% Hmong, 99.9% artifact of a writing
system, 99.9% confirmed in our oral history and cultural knowledge as a
writing system.
zhen
You need to explain your or Professor Mai Na's story of how it is that
Hmong came about to learn/copy stories from the Torah. Such conjecture
is highly unlikely because Hmong could not read Hebrew or English when
Savina encountered them.
Unless you mean Savina told them a flood story and then they repeated
with nodding heads the very same story back to Savina, eh? Wouldn't
Savina be the least suspicious or intrigued at at such regurgitation?
Or did Savina ask them if the had a flood story, and they told Savina a
flood story that was indeed similar to the one stated in the Torah.
Does any of this make sense to anyone?
Our flood story is very different from the Torah and middle-eastern
variants of the flood.
Moobthaibteb Moobtwmzeej
going in here. I'm more interest in ideas than who's who, doing what, when
and where. Have not seen her in here of late. Perhaps she may have stopped
frequent this forum before you got in. However, if you really do wants to
know about Mai Na, just do a search in this google groups with her name and
I'm sure there will be plenty to learn from. I never said it is a proven
fact. Could very well to me is only may be, perhaps, etc. Again, my
intention was only to provoke further learning. Like you said, interpret it
anyway you want.
--
Moob Lajleeb
"zhen" <zhe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111296660.8...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
zhen
If you interested in who's who, at least you should know who's
Professor Mai Na? Eh? I said interpret what anyway you want? Seems like
you know what a lot of other people say but nothing about what you say,
eh?
Please, shed light on the issues I raised above. Do not just provoke
learning, participate. Provoke learning? Provoke is such a bold and
distasteful word in some circles, why not say "facilitate" learning?
Surely your intention was contention, eh?
J/K.
Interpret it anyway you want. LOL!
avan...@yahoo.com
where can I get more information on ntawv Paj Ntaub? Where is it being
used these days?
Thanks,
zhen
Where is it being used? Used as a writing system? Used as a part of
clothing design? Used how? Be more clear.
Paj Ntaub is not used as a writing system to any significant degree
today. But, it is known among Hmong people as their writing system from
days of old.
These days, the only productivity using Paj Ntaub is as design patterns
for clothing.
zhen
Google sucks as of lately. It's been not submitting my posts.
If you want more information on ntawv Paj Ntaub you are on your own. I
do not know of a single person who know how to use Paj Ntaub
characters. Paj Ntaub as a writing system is effectively "dead." We can
go back to China and investigate. There is a huge untapped repository
of human knowledge there.
Paj Ntaub, on the other hand, is used every day every single minute.
Our elders and history remind us that we were forced to assimilate into
Han culture and ONLY use their Hanzi variant of characters. Anyone who
used their own writing system had their necks chopped off. To preserve
our writing system, we embedded our characters in Paj Ntaub. Hence,
"kawm ntaub kawm ntawv" or "kawm ntaub ntawv."
avan...@yahoo.com
I guess, I am on my own searching for more information. Based on your
posts here, you are so much for the paj ntaub, and that makes me ask
those questions. here is the website that has a short description on
paj ntaub - http://www.omniglot.com/writing/hmong.htm "During the 1980s
and 1990s several other alphabets were invented to write Hmong: Ntawv
Paj Ntaub, based on Thai letters and Chinese characters, and Ai Ao Lo."
About the hmong leng's skirt, I heard about baring the hmong writing of
old days as you stated, but could not make much sense out of it. I
used to see my mother sew the skirts long time ago.
It is something for me to think about
zhen
Thank you for that website. I have observed and studied the Pollard
Script. Pollard based his development of a "Hmong" writing system based
on cultural "symbols" already in existence within the culture of the
group of Hmong he worked with. He thought by incorporating familiar
"symbols" this would speed up teaching literacy (and rightfully so in
retrospect).
That website also mentioned Mother of Writing and Pahawh Hmong. Pahawh
Hmong is an alphabet-based system, and very much like Indo-European
style of alphabets.
On that website, I would caution you in regards to the classification
of Hmong language as Austro-Tai. I believe the Hmong language is better
placed under the Sino-Tibetan group of languages. Hmong and Mandarin
are very close, and in many cases, have syntactic and semantic matches
with the same words. Learning Hmong and its dialects (green and white),
and learning Mandarin/Cantonese, it seems that white Hmong dialect is
like Mandarin, and green Hmong dialect is like Cantonese. It's just a
thought, an analogous relationship.
I have never heard of the Ai Ao Lo. But I have heard of Hmong people in
Thailand with their very own development of a writing system. But
again, this was an alphabet-based system.
I have seen one complete attempt to redevelop Paj Ntaub "characters"
into a writing system. The developers claimed that it was not
"developed" at all (or not developed recently), but the original Paj
Ntaub writing system. Indeed, the "puav pheej" that this was the
original Hmong writing system was because it exhibited Paj Ntaub
characters. Yet, it was also alphabet-based, and when I questioned why
it was alphabet-based and not character-based, we went on a long
tangent discussion and never came back to answering my question.
Again, the lineage of Far Eastern writing system is believed to be from
the LiangZhu people--they created proto-characters. It would be
characters, and not alphabets, that would become the basis of writing
systems for Far East civilizations. Since Hmong people are arguably
direct descendants of LiangZhu by way of ZhiYou, it only makes sense
that the Hmong Paj Ntaub writing system known of have existed in our
past, was also character-based.
I promote anyone who wants to develop a writing system for Hmong
people. I promote anyone who wants to redevelop and use Paj Ntaub as
pauv pheej for a writing system. This is good for our people.
Romanization of our language is also good. What I contend with are
claims of "authenticity" and "orginality" of X, Y, or Z writing system
as "the" Hmong writing system. It would have been great if Mother of
Writing was alive, then we could have a lively discussion. Our loss of
Mother of Writing is no less severe than the loss of the original Paj
Ntaub writing system.
avan...@yahoo.com
Interesting information. Based on Yupheng Xiong's video, ZhiYou or
Txivyawg destroyed the books that once contained hmong writing due to
war with the chinese. The only thing left that carry on to modern day
is the hmong leng's skirt and "dab tsos" on the back of the shirt.
That would be the idea of hmong writing that originated from hmong. I
just got started to study the Phajhauj and see that due to political
reasons, it would not suit for modern hmong unless politic is removed
from the writing system.
zhen
Which video is this? I have both Part I and Part II, and I did not hear
such statements. Please reply. Why would ZhiYou destroy his own books?
I would argue that Hmong people had a writing system post-Jiuli and/or
post-ZhiYou because San-Miao was engaged and continued to rival with
Xia Dynasty (Huaxia people).
It is told by many Hmong that we "lost" our writing system near the
time we crossed from Big Land (China) to Little Land (Southeast Asia).
By the time we moved into Burma, India, Thai, Laos, Vietnam, etc...,
the writing system was effectively out-of-use and fragments of it was
preserved in Paj Ntaub; this was a deliberate and desperate last
measure to conceal our writing system from the assimilating Chinese
machine (could be Mongolian Yuan or Manchurian Qing also). This means
that Paj Ntaub was the medium in which our original writing system was
preserved (paj ntaub itself is not the original writing system).
If you think about it, when a group is faced with severe adversity and
their way of life is being exterminated and/or crushed, their
skills/technologies/knowledge are embedded into their "art" to disguise
and camouflage it from the aggressors. This is the case with Hmong
people and their writing system and paj ntaub, this is the case with
(south-American) Black people and their martial arts and Copiera, this
is the case with people of Okinawa and their martial arts and "way of
life" (i.e. karate embedded in daily work).
The Kaitongs were the last to have any significant hold on Hmong
politik during last days of dynastic rule in China. By their time, I
would argue, it was the beginning of the end for the Hmong writing
system (embedded in paj ntaub). Granted, some Kaitong positions were
given to cause division among Hmong people, but, some Kaitong positions
actually required an examination (using Hanzi, of course). Awarding
government official posts (not just Kaitong position alone) via
examinations using Hanzi would have contributed to the futility of the
Hmong writing system.
As for Pahawh and politiks, you are right. Mother of Writing was a
politically charged figure. I say learn Pahawh if you have the time. I
wish I had the time and teacher. Pahawh, if the story is true of Mother
of Writing, is something Hmong people can prove and share to the world
that we are not the ancient, illiterate race others have painted us to
be, but we are a people with geniuses at all levels, and if left to
live our way of life, will certainly contribute to world history and
human progress.
avan...@yahoo.com
It was on part on part one when the chinese defeated ZhiYou by flooding
the town with the help of ZhiYou's fellow hmong who turned against him
by passing the secrete how to defeat the hmong. After the defeat,
ZhiYou found out the reason behind his defeat, he was so depressed and
desided to burn all the books. Correct me if my source is incorrect.
But that was how it was of the disappear of the hmong writing. Based
on what you were saying, hmong writing must have picked up again along
the way as hmong struggled to survive along side with the chinese.
As far as Phajhauj goes and based on what I learned so far, the writing
system was modified several times. As what I've seen so far, the
writing system was arranged quite simillar to the RPA, but out of
hmong's way of thinking and organization rather than of the
westerner's. By analyzing both side by side, Phajhauj can be easily
learn and teach to other with some modification. Again, without
removing the politic out of the writing system and without room for
improvement, it will survive, but progress is limitted. Based on what
I heard of Mother of Writing and the political struggle, as it was
said, it was created by hmong and for hmong. That's is the only
reason, why I want to study and see how it can be modify and make more
attractive to the ordinary people like you and me who are not involve
with this politic struggle among the hmong.
zhen
I will watch that section again, but I believe there was no such
statement made. Unless we are talking about 2 different documentaries?
The ones I am referring to are below at the end of this post. The story
of flooding that led to ZhiYou's defeat was only one of many versions.
In Yuepheng's video, it was not ZhiYou's people, but one of HuangDi's
general who master-minded the flood. Please check again. In fact,
ZhiYou died in the flood according to that story (so how can a dead
ZhiYou burn books?).
Based on what I am saying, I do not believe Hmong writing just
disappeared after the fall of Jiuli, and then picked up again; I
believe the Hmong writing system was lost only recently (in historical
terms/time). Please remember, in some versions of the end of Jiuli,
ZhiYou was never defeated, and so we may have reason to believe that
Hmong people transferred their writing system from Jiuli to San-Miao.
Although I find versions of ZhiYou not being defeated as difficult to
believe, since after all, Hmong people were displaced from Zhuolu.
As for Pahawh, there were 3 versions. Mother of Writing's last version
was completed while he was in jail (I think, gotta go read the book by
Smalley, Vang, and Yang). Are you currently studying Pahwah? From who?
Got some references/books for self-teaching?
TAUG TXOJ LW NTSHAV: KEEB KWM HMOOB NYOB SUAV TEB
http://www.hmongabc.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=56&products_id=242&osCsid=3e3ce881b9e2e700065c2001dd315fe0
TAUG TXOJ LW NTSHAV: TXOJ KEV MUS CUAG HUAB TAIS HMOOB
http://www.hmongabc.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=56&products_id=459&osCsid=2ed80bd83d16e51e91cfb02a5e1de270
avan...@yahoo.com
I might have to do the same, revisit the video. As for the Phajhauj, I
just got started two months ago. I got a small booklet by Lee,
YengCheng, published in 1999. It contained the vowels, consonants and
a short sentence of how to read and write in phajhauj. It requires
lots of practice, writing and memorization. If you know RPA, it's
similar, except the vowels have two sets rather than one. I am in the
process of making a user friendly CD for kids and other who wants to
learn or at list to encourage then to give it a try.