>>95116859
>I'm pretty sure on'yomi is so different from chinese (even classical chinese

You have to stop doing this, stop conflating writing with speaking. Classical Chinese is not a spoken language, Classical Chinese is a literary language. It might as well be a second language for all the relation it bore to the spoken language. It was a terse core of morphemes, not necessarily words, that remained constant even while the vernacular changed over the centuries. One character of Classical Chinese character could be read in different ways as different words depending upon the character's function in a sentence which would depend upon the other characters.

>>95117755
In your first sentence you named five languages all part of the same family with their ancestor. In your second sentence you named four languages from four unrelated families. I have to point that out because the guy who replied to you would have had to try hard to be more wrong.

>>95118129
>There's no need to assume. Korean and Japanese are closely related languages
FFS

>are also cousins of Mongolian and Manchu
FFS again
Mongolian has no surviving relatives outside of the Mongolic family. The Mongolic family contains neither Tungusic languages (including Manchurian) not Japonic nor Koreanic.

>If Korean and Japanese are akin to Italian and French
But they're not, there is a hint of speculation that they maybe, just maybe, are related but nothing concrete has been demonstrated so just stop there before you lead that anon even further astray.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/tg/

Thread:

How would you design a pidgin of korean, chinese and japanese to make a fantasy east asian race that would sound familiar to east asian gamers and…