YOU USE WHAT YOU HAVE TO GET WHAT YOU WANT.

morpheus101:


The jungle language is a Lingua France spoken by people across Africa and represents a colloquial dialect invented by the innovative West AFricans much like your WHite population who speak a broken pidgin Dutch language which they smartly coined as a real language named "Afrikaans" and your Zulu's and Xhosa's who stole another peoples click language.

Language is a fluid continium .

Good day you slow pokes!

LMFAO,how does the bolded make any sense ,whose language did Zulus and Xhosas steal? .....and how does one steal a language? ......in 2023 people still think like this .

morpheus101:


The best I can respond to that is my potential to be nice is equal to my propensity to be nasty. It all depends on a lot of variables.

Okay I see.

Lionessza6:



LMFAO,how does the bolded make any sense ,whose language did Zulus and Xhosas steal? .....and how does one steal a language? ......in 2023 people still think like this .

He must be referring to the Khoisan clicks.

JaceBlaze:


He must be referring to the Khoisan clicks.

Lol, I know what he's referring to but I just want to expose his mumuness

Lionessza6:


Lol, I know what he's referring to but I just want to expose his mumuness

He must just tell us how the language was "stolen"

Lionessza6:



LMFAO,how does the bolded make any sense ,whose language did Zulus and Xhosas steal? .....and how does one steal a language? ......in 2023 people still think like this .

Let me guess the war-like Nguni must have taken permission from the Khoi before incorporating the Khoi clicks into their language structure.

JaceBlaze:


He must just tell us how the language was "stolen"

vey simple explanation. When the Nguni started "stealing women" from the Khoi people and incorporating them into their clans, they invariably "stole" the clicks from the Khoi.

A good example would be the Gonaqua and the Gqunukhwebe

morpheus101:


Buffoon do you think Nguni languages originated with click sounds. The Nguni obviously incorporated Khoi click sounds as they absorbed their people into their folds.

Have you ever heard of the Gqunukhwebe's.

Shame you don't even know your own's country's history.

Bantu education I tell you.

LMFAO, educated illiterate, I'm xhosa dumb arse . So I know very well who we are ,and no slave trader can teach me about my bloodline.

How do we steal a language that was spoken by a people we partly originate from ,hows that possible? Do you reason with your anus daily?. Does your brainwashed arse know about Abathwa, Amagqinka, AmaQwabe, Gcalekas ect?

I like that you respectfully acknowledge that white South Africans incorporated different languages that are connected to their genetic makeup and turned it into a language that represents who they are today ( genetically). And then like a typical Nigerian coon,you turn around and accuse the Africans who did the samething of language thievery......next you will accuse us of genetic thievery I guess ?

morpheus101:


Let me guess the war-like Nguni must have taken permission from the Khoi before incorporating the Khoi clicks into their language structure.

LMFAO, numbskull the click parts of the languages don't come from the Khoe but the San people. Tswanas and Sothos are more likely to sound and look Khoeish than the Ngunis.

Did the whites ask for permission from the others like the French and Germans from incorporating their languages into theirs.?

Do you even know where the name Xhosa came from ?. So the *victims *were able to impose an identity on the strong ones ?

Lionessza6:


How do we steal a language that was spoken by a people we partly originate from ,hows that possible? Do you reason with your anus daily?. Does your brainwashed arse know about Abathwa, Amagqinka, AmaQwabe, Gcalekas ect?

When you absorb a people into your clans and this is what happened, you invariably "take" elements of their language and make it your own.

When you take something that is not yours and don't return it back, is that not "stealing"?

Lionessza6:


LMFAO, numbskull the click parts of the languages don't come from the Khoe but the San people. Tswanas and Sothos are more likely to sound and look Khoeish than the Ngunis.

1.The Khoi and the san are the same people with one set settling as farmers mostly and the other remaining "bushmen" or hunter gatherers so both had click sounds in their language structure.

2. Xhosa 's more so would carry a significant amount of Khoi than San DNA since they made first contact with them in the interior of South Africa on their way down to the eastern cape. There is a heavy morphological imprint of Khoisan features that exists amongst Xhosa people more so than the Zulu and you know this.

3. I would agree Tswanas and Sothos do carry Khoi and san phenotypes but not any more so than Xhosa's and their language has less click sounds in its structure ergo their early interactions would very likely have been minimal or less compared to the Nguni.

Lionessza6:

Did the whites ask for permission from the others like the French and Germans from incorporating their languages into theirs.?

I don't understand this question, Elaborate?

Lionessza6:

Do you even know where the name Xhosa came from ?. So the *victims *were able to impose an identity on the strong ones ?

Elaborate. Who were the victims and who were the strong ones?

morpheus101:


vey simple explanation. When the Nguni started "stealing women" from the Khoi people and incorporating them into their clans, they invariably "stole" the clicks from the Khoi.

A good example would be the Gonaqua and the Gqunukhwebe

And this is what you learned under a tree in Onitsha?

Parrot69:


It's better I die crossing the Mediterranean, than for a Black homosapien from Southern Africa to show me love.
I don't do gays, stay the Bleep out of mention with your skinny jean wearing, leaky anus friends.

@bolded it's really sad how you've accepted your pathetic existence as a Japagerian.

JaceBlaze:


And this is what you learned under a tree in Onitsha?

morpheus101:


1.The Khoi and the san are the same people with one set settling as farmers mostly and the other remaining "bushmen" or hunter gatherers so both had click sounds in their language structure.

2. Xhosa 's more so would carry a significant amount of Khoi than San DNA since they made first contact with them in the interior of South Africa on their way down to the eastern cape. There is a heavy morphological imprint of Khoisan features that exists amongst Xhosa people more so than the Zulu and you know this.

3. I would agree Tswanas and Sothos do carry Khoi and san phenotypes but not any more so than Xhosa's and their language has less click sounds in its structure ergo their early interactions would very likely have been minimal or less compared to the Nguni.




I don't understand this question, Elaborate?



Elaborate. Who were the victims and who were the strong ones?

1.The Khoi and the san are the same people with one set settling as farmers mostly and the other remaining "bushmen" or hunter gatherers so both had click sounds in their language structure.

You might as well call us and modern day East Africans the same people,since we share part of our ancestry with them *Abantu* who were farmers,herders and iron men....but that would be genetically incorrect and unrealistic . We are not the same people but we do share a lot of traits thanks to our shared ancestry. That goes for the Namas in the deserts of Namibia,we obviously share a lot of traits,both genetically and culturally but we are not the same people, we simply share a common ancestor.

The khoe and the san share a lot more traits with one another than with Abantu, but that still doesn't make them the exact same people and the differences are seen in today's population of South Africa, in particular the AmaXhosa and Abatswana who carry a lot of these differences culturally, genetically and linguistically.

Sothos use a lot of clicks and they also use a lot of kg's in xhosa we pronounce them as rh. These sounds dominate the Tswana,Pedi and Sotho languages just as the clicks dominate ours. What we call kwenas today are actually descendants of the Khoe not the San and their looks and languages are an obvious give away.

2. Xhosa 's more so would carry a significant amount of Khoi than San DNA since they made first contact with them in the interior of South Africa on their way down to the eastern cape. There is a heavy morphological imprint of Khoisan features that exists amongst Xhosa people more so than the Zulu and you know this.

Point of correction; there are no Xhosas who made contact with the khoe or the San , Xhosa people just like the majority of the so called black SA are a hybrid group of the Abantu and Khoe- San. The Xhosa nation was formed by the bloodlines of the aforementioned groups,hence the language and the physical appearance, so they are in actual fact not really Nguni and neither are they Khoe- San. Xhosa is what we are and we embrace all the groups that make up what we are the same. No one argued that Zulus were more or less Khoe-San than we are ,obviously the percentage of the Bantu or Khoe-San bloodline would differ from nation to nation and clan to clan.

3. I would agree Tswanas and Sothos do carry Khoi and san phenotypes but not any more so than Xhosa's and their language has less click sounds in its structure ergo their early interactions would very likely have been minimal or less compared to the Nguni.

I think I've touched on this Tswana ,Sotho Pedi issue above and the reason why they the other two don't have clicks but have obvious similar traits to us.


Did the whites ask for permission from the others like the French and Germans from incorporating their languages into theirs.?

I don't understand this question, Elaborate?

You glorified white South Africans for *creating* a language that incorporated different languages ,and demonised* Africsns for doing the same calling us language bandits . And you went on to ask if our Nguni ancestors asked permission from our Khoe-San ancestors to incorporate their languages which was obviously another stupid blunder from you. That's like asking an urban dude who speaks kasi lingo and lives in Limpopo why he is using Zulu,Sotho etc words when using the language * ......moronic!. When people procreate together or live next to each other ,it is inevitable for new languages and bloodlines to come up.

And by the way,Afrikaans was never invented by white people, they hijacked it and claimed it as theirs .



Do you even know where the name Xhosa came from ?. So the *victims *were able to impose an identity on the strong ones ? shocked cry

Elaborate. Who were the victims and who were the strong ones?

Smarty ,you said Xhosa people stole* the language and women* ,meaning that they probably were strong enough to bully the others. Meaning the other people were victims of these bandits * , so my question is .......how did the strong end-up with an imposed name from the victims ***.

morpheus101:


When you absorb a people into your clans and this is what happened, you invariably "take" elements of their language and make it your own.

When you take something that is not yours and don't return it back, is that not "stealing"?

You are a desperate slowpoke . How does one steal something that they inherited through genetics? . We use both Bantu and Khoe- San languages because they both rightfully belong to us,not by conquest but by blood. You should be more concerned about your pidgin that is littered with your oppressors words . Our language comes from us not some bright-eyed strange devils .

morpheus101:


vey simple explanation. When the Nguni started "stealing women" from the Khoi people and incorporating them into their clans, they invariably "stole" the clicks from the Khoi.

A good example would be the Gonaqua and the Gqunukhwebe

Numbskull the Ngqika ,Abathwa ,Amaqaba etc are not Nguni clans . They are Xhosa people from the San....I'm guessing they stole Nguni women they procreated with and consequently part of their language too? . What tf are you smoking over there ?.....it must be really strong

Lionessza6:




1.The Khoi and the san are the same people with one set settling as farmers mostly and the other remaining "bushmen" or hunter gatherers so both had click sounds in their language structure.

You might as well call us and modern day East Africans the same people,since we share part of our ancestry with them *Abantu* who were farmers,herders and iron men....but that would be genetically incorrect and unrealistic . We are not the same people but we do share a lot of traits thanks to our shared ancestry. That goes for the Namas in the deserts of Namibia,we obviously share a lot of traits,both genetically and culturally but we are not the same people, we simply share a common ancestor.

The khoe and the san share a lot more traits with one another than with Abantu, but that still doesn't make them the exact same people and the differences are seen in today's population of South Africa, in particular the AmaXhosa and Abatswana who carry a lot of these differences culturally, genetically and linguistically.

Sothos use a lot of clicks and they also use a lot of kg's in xhosa we pronounce them as rh. These sounds dominate the Tswana,Pedi and Sotho languages just as the clicks dominate ours. What we call kwenas today are actually descendants of the Khoe not the San and their looks and languages are an obvious give away.

2. Xhosa 's more so would carry a significant amount of Khoi than San DNA since they made first contact with them in the interior of South Africa on their way down to the eastern cape. There is a heavy morphological imprint of Khoisan features that exists amongst Xhosa people more so than the Zulu and you know this.

Point of correction; there are no Xhosas who made contact with the khoe or the San , Xhosa people just like the majority of the so called black SA are a hybrid group of the Abantu and Khoe- San. The Xhosa nation was formed by the bloodlines of the aforementioned groups,hence the language and the physical appearance, so they are in actual fact not really Nguni and neither are they Khoe- San. Xhosa is what we are and we embrace all the groups that make up what we are the same. No one argued that Zulus were more or less Khoe-San than we are ,obviously the percentage of the Bantu or Khoe-San bloodline would differ from nation to nation and clan to clan.

3. I would agree Tswanas and Sothos do carry Khoi and san phenotypes but not any more so than Xhosa's and their language has less click sounds in its structure ergo their early interactions would very likely have been minimal or less compared to the Nguni.

I think I've touched on this Tswana ,Sotho Pedi issue above and the reason why they the other two don't have clicks but have obvious similar traits to us.


Did the whites ask for permission from the others like the French and Germans from incorporating their languages into theirs.?

I don't understand this question, Elaborate?

You glorified white South Africans for *creating* a language that incorporated different languages ,and demonised* Africsns for doing the same calling us language bandits . And you went on to ask if our Nguni ancestors asked permission from our Khoe-San ancestors to incorporate their languages which was obviously another stupid blunder from you. That's like asking an urban dude who speaks kasi lingo and lives in Limpopo why he is using Zulu,Sotho etc words when using the language * ......moronic!. When people procreate together or live next to each other ,it is inevitable for new languages and bloodlines to come up.

And by the way,Afrikaans was never invented by white people, they hijacked it and claimed it as theirs .



Do you even know where the name Xhosa came from ?. So the *victims *were able to impose an identity on the strong ones ? shocked cry

Elaborate. Who were the victims and who were the strong ones?

Smarty ,you said Xhosa people stole* the language and women* ,meaning that they probably were strong enough to bully the others. Meaning the other people were victims of these bandits * , so my question is .......how did the strong end-up with an imposed name from the victims ***.

Well said

Khoe, san, xa, xu, griqua, baster, nama....


These people in here thinks they know us more than us

AfriqueDuZuid:


Well said

Khoe, san, xa, xu, griqua, baster, nama....


These people in here thinks they know us more than us

Their * knowledge * of us is dependent on white nationalist propaganda ...they call it history I believe . To many of these idiots writings of delusional white nationalists can override genes ,language formations and customs .....ofcourse not anywhere else in Africa, just here . Sickos!.

Lionessza6:


Their * knowledge * of us is dependent on white nationalist propaganda ...they call it history I believe . To many of these idiots writings of delusional white nationalists can override genes ,language formations and customs .....ofcourse not anywhere else in Africa, just here . Sickos!.

Lol i know right

Most of them think 80% of south Africa is zulu, just like they not aware over half of South Africa wealth is in black hands.

They so clueless on many things they not even aware, because they too naive

Lionessza6:


Numbskull the Ngqika ,Abathwa ,Amaqaba etc are not Nguni clans .They are Xhosa people from the San...

So in essence they are San people who merged with an Nguni clan,( the Xhosa), interbred with them and then the dominant Xhosa language replaced certain words in their language with words from the Khoi San. Where does this narrative differ with my interpretation?

Lionessza6:


You might as well call us and modern day East Africans the same people,since we share part of our ancestry with them *Abantu* who were farmers,herders and iron men....but that would be genetically incorrect and unrealistic . We are not the same people but we do share a lot of traits thanks to our shared ancestry.

You do share common ancestry with East Africans and are essentially a continium of groups of" people" that migrated in Southern Africa.

Lionessza6:

That goes for the Namas in the deserts of Namibia,we obviously share a lot of traits,both genetically and culturally but we are not the same people, we simply share a common ancestor.

Again the Khoi and san people are far more closely related linguisticly and genetically and are therefore essentially the same" people" much like the Nguni clans as the Ndebele, the Zulu and the Swati who are "essentially" the same people with variations in their language. siple because you name your clans with totems and change parts of your culture does not negate the fact that you are indeed genetically the same string of people.

Lionessza6:

[b]The khoe and the san share a lot more traits with one another than with Abantu, but that still doesn't make them the exact same people and the differences are seen in today's population of South Africa, in particular the AmaXhosa and Abatswana who carry a lot of these differences culturally, genetically and linguistically.

Zulu and Ndebele share more traits with one another than they do with Swahili speaking Kenyan but there are differences in their language and cultural practices however on a genetic level they are "pretty" much the same group of people.

Try to apply this logic to the Khoi and the san which is why linguistics merge the two groups together when refering those people

Please stop.

Lionessza6:

Sothos use a lot of clicks and they also use a lot of kg's in xhosa we pronounce them as rh. These sounds dominate the Tswana,Pedi and Sotho languages just as the clicks dominate ours. What we call kwenas today are actually descendants of the Khoe not the San and their looks and languages are an obvious give away.[/b]

THey do not dominate these 3 Sotho dialects. You are lieing here. The Xhosa have the heaviest use of the click sounds in their language and you know this. Stop fibbing.




[b]Point of correction; there are no Xhosas who made contact with the khoe or the San , Xhosa people just like the majority of the so called black SA are a hybrid group of the Abantu and Khoe- San. [/quote]

You are just trying to argumentative here, How does your so called statement above make sense if two groups did not make contact with one another. How do you get a hybrid again?

Lionessza6:

The Xhosa nation was formed by the bloodlines of the aforementioned groups,hence the language and the physical appearance, so they are in actual fact not really Nguni and neither are they Khoe- San. Xhosa is what we are and we embrace all the groups that make up what we are the same. No one argued that Zulus were more or less Khoe-San than we are ,obviously the percentage of the Bantu or Khoe-San bloodline would differ from nation to nation and clan to clan.

Rubbish There existed clans of people who spoke an Nguni language who migrated down to the eastern cape. These groups were often named by their totems or leaders and often merged to form larger groups of Nguni clans. What you know as Xhosa today were a group of Nguni people who had contact with Khoi San peoples and incorporated them into their clans hence the hybridization.

Again Xhosa are indeed Nguni people and still speak an essentially Nguni language.

Lionessza6:

[b]You glorified white South Africans for *creating* a language that incorporated different languages ,and demonised* Africsns for doing the same calling us language bandits . And you went on to ask if our Nguni ancestors asked permission from our Khoe-San ancestors to incorporate their languages which was obviously another stupid blunder from you. That's like asking an urban dude who speaks kasi lingo and lives in Limpopo why he is using Zulu,Sotho etc words when using the language * ......moronic!. When people procreate together or live next to each other ,it is inevitable for new languages and bloodlines to come up.

Point 1. If you read that except again you will see that I was actually castigating the Afrikaans language but then again your brain is slow.

Point 2. Language is fluid as I mentioned above however what we see in the Xhosa and Zulu context is that these "dominant" groups incorporated these other groups into their clans and so therefore "stole" these words into the dominant language which is still spoken today

If the Khoi were the dominant ones you would be speaking a strictly khoi language today.

Lionessza6:

Smarty ,you said Xhosa people stole* the language and women* ,meaning that they probably were strong enough to bully the others. Meaning the other people were victims of these bandits * , so my question is .......how did the strong end-up with an imposed name from the victims ***.

There were waring factions among Xhosa groups. The dominant groups absorbed the weaker ones. Its that simple.

As for the name Xhosa, if you are implying that the Khoi named the "xhosa" well you used to be bullied by Zulu people didn't you. I recall reading were some of them used to refer to you as their "xhosa dogs" lol.

AfriqueDuZuid:


Well said

Khoe, san, xa, xu, griqua, baster, nama....


These people in here thinks they know us more than us

GO take a DNA test you slowpoke you will see that Khoi genetics usually flows through Bantu peoples at a 25% median rate and in the Coloreds at a 75% median rate which means you absorbed the click sounding people as there were more of you. Just google any peer reviewed journal on Khoi genetics in the Bantu and you will get your answers, stop listening to old wives tales from your gogo. The science is clear .

morpheus101:


So in essence they are San people who merged with an Nguni clan,( the Xhosa), interbred with them and then the dominant Xhosa language replaced certain words in their language with words from the Khoi San. Where does this narrative differ with my interpretation?

I said to you there was no Xhosa nation before the merger....the Xhosa people didn't merge with the San or the Khoe ,they were created by them with the Ngunis. In essence ,there are no Xhosa people without the San or the Ngunis. We are result of their procreation and merger,that'swhy outside of the geographical territory called SA ,you don't have Xhosa people but you can find Ngonis and San. The Xhosa name itself is not Nguni, but San. I mentioned the few other clans to clear the normal created confusion that Gqunukhwebes are the main San clan among the Xhosa people ( a lot more to do with their assistance in the Anglo-Boer war). Those people are an insignificant minority compared to the Gcalekas, Abathwa,Amaqaba and Amangqongqo ,whom combined probably make up more than half of what today is known as the Eastern Cape( landmass and numbers). They were also part of the last groups to be driven out of what is called the Western Cape today. The Xhosa language has two versions because of this merger ,the Xhosa with the extreme *clicks that no one outside the Xhosa people can understand ,and then there is the Xhosa that is easily spoken by other Nguni *groups ( closely related to IsiZulu).

You do share common ancestry with East Africans and are essentially a continium of groups of" people" that migrated in Southern Africa.


So you you wanted to repeat what I said in your own words?. I said we share common ancestry, but we are not the same people genetically because both groups have other lineages in them that you cannot even deny just by looking at the people.  An average Ugandan can't walk into a room full of South Africans unnoticed and there are reasons for that, and that goes for a Namibian Nama as well.


Again the Khoi and san people are far more closely related linguisticly and genetically and are therefore essentially the same" people" much like the Nguni clans as the Ndebele, the Zulu and the Swati who are "essentially" the same people with variations in their language. siple because you name your clans with totems and change parts of your culture does not negate the fact that you are indeed genetically the same string of people.


I said this aswell lol. You really love to hear yourself speak hey?. I said the Khoe and the San have more in common with one another compared to the original Bantu people and vice versa. There are reasons why many of our Xhosa people have those oval shaped faces ( San ancestry) ,whilst the Tswanas took the much more rounded shape of the Khoe. Someone who really knows both groups can tell the difference just by looking at both faces,dont be confused by the eyes. The San and the Khoe are of the same family but there are features that made them stand out  from one another or atleast were more predominant in one group than the other.  For instance Abathwa have that oval shaped face and were much shorter with a bit more darker skin ( by that I mean not as yellowish as you'd expect a * khoisan * to be). 


Zulu and Ndebele share more traits with one another than they do with Swahili speaking Kenyan but there are differences in their language and cultural practices however on a genetic level they are "pretty" much the same group of people.

Try to apply this logic to the Khoi and the san which is why linguistics merge the two groups together when refering those people

Please stop.


Again,what did i say differently here? . They are " pretty " much the same yes ! But they are not exactly the same.  Zulus and us are classified under Nguni people and rightfully so,but we are not the exact same people genetically and linguistically . Even slight differences are differences, you cannot just choose to ignore certain things to suit the narrative.  


So you stop .



THey do not dominate these 3 Sotho dialects. You are lieing here. The Xhosa have the heaviest use of the click sounds in their language and you know this. Stop fibbing.


I don't know if you're demented or what ?. In which part did I say those 3 languages are dominated by click sounds ?. I said kg -pronounced rh in Xhosa dominate these 3 languages ,with the actual Sesotho having a lot of clicks as well . Those tl and kg sounds they make originate from the Khoe not the San. And yes we have them too but not as much. 



You are just trying to argumentative here, How does your so called statement above make sense if two groups did not make contact with one another. How do you get a hybrid again?


You are the moronic one here.  There was never any group called Xhosa people before the merger or the contact . It was the  Khoe- San groups and the Nguni. They mingled and produced the Xhosa people. Hence you find parts of the Xhosa people more Ngunid( closer to Kzn,and the further away you move deeper into the Eastern Cape the more the clicks become more extreme ). So the San didn't mix with the Xhosa as there was no such,but were part of the formation.  The Ngunis were initially clearly a minority in the Khoe-San stronghold before,that's they were easier to dominate 


Rubbish There existed clans of people who spoke an Nguni language who migrated down to the eastern cape. These groups were often named by their totems or leaders and often merged to form larger groups of Nguni clans. What you know as Xhosa today were a group of Nguni people who had contact with Khoi San peoples and incorporated them into their clans hence the hybridization.

Again Xhosa are indeed Nguni people and still speak an essentially Nguni language.


Again ,your dumb arse is repeating what I've been saying all along......Ngunis not Xhosas met the Khoe-San, and then the formation of the Xhosa . There were no pockets of Xhosa people who have ever existed anywhere in Africa before these groups started procreating,hence I said the name came from the San who were probably more dominant then.


Who denied Xhosa having more Nguni influence?

Point 1. If you read that except again you will see that I was actually castigating the Afrikaans language but then again your brain is slow.


LMFAO, you are changing the tune slowpoke,that's all. 

Point 2. Language is fluid as I mentioned above however what we see in the Xhosa and Zulu context is that these "dominant" groups incorporated these other groups into their clans and so therefore "stole" these words into the dominant language which is still spoken today

If the Khoi were the dominant ones you would be speaking a strictly khoi language today.


It is very clear that the Xhosa people were formed whilst Ngunis were a minority among the
Khoe-San,that's why they were able to name them,but it is also very clear that as time went things changed and more and more Ngunis joined in , and the demographics of the regions changed as well and obviously the language influence comes with that as well. San- dominated Xhosa is almost extinct now in most parts of the Province, but dialects like isiqadi ,isiqwebu etc are still around but mostly spoken by villagers in some parts especially the older women . This is why it was difficult in the 90s to merge the Eastern Cape and call it a Xhosa province because some groups like Amabhaca and Amampondo and others didn't want to be referred to as Xhosa but wanted to keep their individual identities...Unfortunately for them ......they had to take it. 







There were waring factions among Xhosa groups. The dominant groups absorbed the weaker ones. Its that simple.

As for the name Xhosa, if you are implying that the Khoi named the "xhosa" well you used to be bullied by Zulu people didn't you. I recall reading were some of them used to refer to you as their "xhosa dogs" lol



You are always stating the obvious, does that make you feel smarter in some way ?



I'm not implying, I'm stating a fact that you probably never came across in your "sciencebooks " .
We all know where you  might have *read *that, clearly from the people who gave you the basics of your beloved pidgin .

Looking at the second picture, It is not really impressive but the atmosphere and mid-clean environment is commendable.

If na Nigeria now, That surroundings would have been messed up littered with all sort of unimaginable garbages. What a terrible beings Tueh.

Lionessza6:


Their * knowledge * of us is dependent on white nationalist propaganda ...they call it history I believe . To many of these idiots writings of delusional white nationalists can override genes ,language formations and customs .....ofcourse not anywhere else in Africa, just here . Sickos!.

Genetics has nothing to do with White nationalist propaganda but I get it now. It depends on who is telling the story, you know just like how we here about the the narrative of Foreiginers "stealing your women".

You say they "stole" them but to me I say the foreigners or "Amakwerekweres" are simply interbreeding and merging cultures with them to become a new group of people.

Its all the same name neh!

morpheus101:


GO take a DNA test you slowpoke you will see that Khoi genetics usually flows through Bantu peoples at a 25% median rate and in the Coloreds at a 75% median rate which means you absorbed the click sounding people as there were more of you. Just google any peer reviewed journal on Khoi genetics in the Bantu and you will get your answers, stop listening to old wives tales from your gogo. The science is clear .

LMFAO, the "science "fooled you like it* fooled millions of dumb arses to inject themselves with vaccines that are finishing them off slowly . Science .

Which coloured is science** talking about? . The Ones from the Western Cape whom " Science " has brainwashed into thinking they are indigenous to this place because they are somehow yellowish ? .

There is s very small faction of coloureds in South Africa that could possible be 75% Khoe San, and most of them aren't in the Western Cape but the Northern and Eastern Cape. The Western Cape coloureds who are being fooled are obviously not from around here( I'm talking about the Cape Malays ),Genes dont lie but historians and scientists do
( depending on the funder's interests) . Malaysian blood can never be played with,it doesn't joke . The hairline,hair texture and body shape of the Khoe -San people can never go unnoticed or be dominated by some other bloodline it stays with you unshaken . Settler blood couldn't have resisted the domination better than Bantu blood ...never!!. I repeat there is no way we would come out looking more like the original Khoe San poeple in our numbers than people who supposedly have more of their Genes than us ....no ways . Bantu blood is way stronger than Euro and Malay blood,you see it when all three groups outside of SA have mixed kids. The kids will always look more closer to being black . Asians come next, but Euros can't recreate themselves. So how the the f did we end up with so many straight-haird ,flat arsed and tall 75 % genetic Khoe Sans . Fauci science I guess

morpheus101:


Genetics has nothing to do with White nationalist propaganda but I get it now. It depends on who is telling the story, you know just like how we here about the the narrative of Foreiginers "stealing your women".

You say they "stole" them but to me I say the foreigners or "Amakwerekweres" are simply interbreeding and merging cultures with them to become a new group of people.

Its all the same name neh!

White nationalist propaganda is centred around identity and and land ownership. And you cannot talk identity and land without talking genetics(roots, connection to the land) ,language and culture . This is what pisses them off the most, because no one here acknowledges their written history ,but Genes and customs are the ultimate history of Africa that can't be re-written....maybe WEF will win ....but until then...a stranger is stranger.

The narrative of foreigners stealing SA women ** is s narrative driven by foreigners themselves ....ofcourse with the help of those who are threatened by our genetics using their media houses to promote this filth....Unfortunately for them ,there are very little takers compared to what they were trying to achieve . Most SA women who marry foreigners are usually already multiple baby mamas or divorced women( have paid their dues) . So by the time she gets married to the foreigner,she's nolonger willing to have many children ...one at most . The experiment is a big failure, most of us saw it for what it was from the time the unusual influx started happening. Kwerekwrres can forget about that ambition shame .....they must use all that energy to go on a breeding spree in Europe using the rubber boats ....Europeans are the ones still asleep ....atleast some ...others are killing those kwerekwrre children even before they leave the hospitals.

Lionessza6:



LMFAO, the "science "fooled you like it* fooled millions of dumb arses to inject themselves with vaccines that are finishing them off slowly . Science .

Which coloured is science** talking about? . The Ones from the Western Cape whom " Science " has brainwashed into thinking they are indigenous to this place because they are somehow yellowish ? .

There is s very small faction of coloureds in South Africa that could possible be 75% Khoe San, and most of them aren't in the Western Cape but the Northern and Eastern Cape. The West Cape coloureds who are being fooled are obviously not from around here,Genes dont lie but historians and scientists do
( depending on the funder's interests) . Malaysian blood can never be played with,it doesn't joke . The hairline,hair texture and body shape of the Khoe San people can never go unnoticed or be dominated by some other bloodline it stays with you unshaken . Settler blood couldn't have resisted the domination better than Bantu blood ...never!!. I repeat there is no way we would come out looking more like the original Khoe San poeple that people who supposedly have more of their Gene's than us ....no ways . Bantu blood is way stronger than Euro and Malay blood,you see it when all three groups outside of SA have mixed kids. The kids will always look more closer to being black . Asians come next, but Euros can't recreate themselves. So how the the f did we end up with so many straight-haird ,flat arsed and tall 75 % genetic Khoe Sans . Fauci science I guess

Numskull do you know what is referred to as the phenomena of gene Intro gression . What this means is that the smaller the group of people in one given area, when a "foreign" gene is introduced into that group it initially spreads throughout the population but as that same population procreates they increase the original gene sequence back into that small population group.

In lay man terms if a group of Khoi people interbred with Europeans, Asians, and Bantu but stay isolated in a certain area as they begin to intermarry within their subset ,they would reintroduce the dominant genotype back into the population and would ergo carry a higher degree of Autsomal DNA the original marker(Khoi) in their gene sequencing regardless of Phenotype(physical appearance).

This would be the opposite for groups that were assimilated into the larger Bantu groups as the Khoi gene would be retrogressed or spread out more broadly among the populating causing the Kho ancestry in the Bantu to be less.

Genotype is the not Phenotype!

A couple of journals to peruse. Take your time but what we basically get from the study is that cape colores are predominantly Khoisan in genetic makeup regardless of admixture models.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20490549/

https://www.cell.com/fulltext/S0002-9297%2810%2900096-0

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.11.243840v1.full

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature08795

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Genetic-differentiation-of-Sotho-and-Xhosa-speakers-demonstrated-by-principal-component_fig2_321639935

Lionessza6:



LMFAO, the "science "fooled you like it* fooled millions of dumb arses to inject themselves with vaccines that are finishing them off slowly . Science .

Which coloured is science** talking about? . The Ones from the Western Cape whom " Science " has brainwashed into thinking they are indigenous to this place because they are somehow yellowish ? .

There is s very small faction of coloureds in South Africa that could possible be 75% Khoe San, and most of them aren't in the Western Cape but the Northern and Eastern Cape. The Western Cape coloureds who are being fooled are obviously not from around here( I'm talking about the Cape Malays ),Genes dont lie but historians and scientists do
( depending on the funder's interests) . Malaysian blood can never be played with,it doesn't joke . The hairline,hair texture and body shape of the Khoe -San people can never go unnoticed or be dominated by some other bloodline it stays with you unshaken . Settler blood couldn't have resisted the domination better than Bantu blood ...never!!. I repeat there is no way we would come out looking more like the original Khoe San poeple in our numbers than people who supposedly have more of their Genes than us ....no ways . Bantu blood is way stronger than Euro and Malay blood,you see it when all three groups outside of SA have mixed kids. The kids will always look more closer to being black . Asians come next, but Euros can't recreate themselves. So how the the f did we end up with so many straight-haird ,flat arsed and tall 75 % genetic Khoe Sans . Fauci science I guess

im glad you didn't take up the vaccine.

I didn't too