How difficult is Thai to learn

[qualtrough]

qual ... what sound for an absent vowel ......... no spaces between words etc .... crazy writing ....

but once you get it ... you mostly get it!

Yeah, the space thing is intimidating at first, but once you get the hang of it isn't the big deal that it seemed at first. As for the absent vowel, that is pretty logical. I would take Thai over English any day. YMMV!

[meadish_sweetball]

Spelling is pretty logical too, except for those usually silent endings from Sanskrit origins.

It is sketchy comparing languages as if they were absolutes on a scale in almost all respects... they have their own idiosyncracies.

When it comes to monosyllabic, common words in Thai, then I agree, the spelling is easier to learn than English spelling - but as you progress and get into more and more indic words, very little is for free - even though studying Sanskrit or Pali roots can help to an extent, you will still have to memorize several words whose spelling is by no means self-evident - silent letters abound.

So 'pretty logical' I guess is a fair assessment, but still a significant challenge to me. I still spell only marginally better than a garden rake - in fact I have gone backwards in that respect since I stopped studying. I don't need to write any Thai in my everyday life apart from my own name and address now and then, so while my reading speed and vocabulary have improved a bit, my spelling is worse than ever. And there's no other way of improving it than practice...

[jdinasia]

then there's รรรรร (yes that is a name ... well 2 names actualy as there are 2 ways to pronounce it

Edited May 29, 2007 by jdinasia

[RusT]

For my mind Thai is a relatively easy language to learn to speak. It's grammar is basic and most words are short and simple. Compared to English, European languages and most Asian languages it is a sensible and practical language.

I don't know how to read or write so cannot comment on that aspect.

[chutai]

One of the things that makes learning Thai difficult in my opinion is the lack of resources available to us as students and to Thais as teachers of Thai as a foreign language.

I also think that the Thai language is fairly easy to learn - it's just my memory that often lets me down. Leum gair leow

Although to be perfectly honest it's like any other subject, the more that you learn the more that you realise that you don't know.

I remember either hearing or reading someone say that anyone who is tone deaf woud probably be unable to learn Thai properly. I tend to think that's correct. I've known one or two people whose vocabulary isn't too bad but can only speak in monotone. It sounds dreadful - but they do get by on the basics.

So is it easy to learn ? Some people find it easier than others, obviously, an for a variety of reasons. But having a Thai partner does help. Although she may well get the hump that you're speaking Thai all the time and not teaching her English. Well that's my experience anyway,

[grtaylor]

A friend of mine worked here for six months about ten years ago, and then Vietnam for five years. He still remembers more Thai than Vietnamese, and considers that a much more difficult language than Thai.

G

[endure]

It's all in the genes (as usual)

From the Times of London (30 May):

Genetic differences between human populations may have influenced which languages are spoken around the world today, research has suggested.

People who carry particular variants of two genes involved in brain development tend to speak nontonal languages such as English, while those with a different genetic profile are more likely to speak tonal languages such as Chinese.

In tonal languages, which are most common in South East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, subtle differences in pitch can change the meaning of vowels, consonants and syllables. Nontonal languages, which prevail in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, use pitch only as a way of conveying emphasis or emotion.

The new findings from the University of Edinburgh also suggest that the very first human languages were probably tonal, sounding more like modern Chinese or Zulu than English or French. The genetic profile that appears to predispose to nontonal languages evolved only about 5,800 years ago, implying that all languages were probably tonal before that.

All humans have the innate ability to speak either type fluently, but the research indicates that genes may make one class slightly easier to learn. This raises the possibility that over thousands of years these differences could have guided the evolution of local languages according to the genetic variants in particular ethnic groups.

As most people in ancient China carried genes that favoured tonal language, Chinese would have become more tonal. In Europe, the genetic position was reversed, and local languages developed along nontonal lines.

“This does not mean that people with one set of genes cannot speak the other type of language, or that you have to be any smarter to learn one of these groups of languages rather than another,” Robert Ladd, who led the research, said. “What we have found, though, suggests that these genes might have a very small effect on individuals, and a larger effect on the populations in which they live. As the language is passed on culturally, it would then be more likely to develop along one path than the other.”

He cautioned, however, that the research had so far found only an association that appears to be more than chance, and that more work was needed to confirm a causal effect.

The study is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[DrFisher]

English is my native language I am fluent in Spanish to the point I think in Spanish when I am speaking Spanish, my French is not to bad I can get by and have a conversation as long as it's not about rocket science, I'm relatively fluent in Chinese (I lived in China for 10 years) I can read but I tend to make very big mistakes when I write. So, my reason for stating all that is to show I'm capable of learning different languages. As far as Thai goes I find it next to impossible, unlike most languages I have learned early on you can say "bathroom, restroom, washroom, toilet whatever and people know what you want. I tried this in Thai and the people looked at me like I had 2 heads because it was not a complete sentence. In any event I teach in an international program and my Chinese, Japanese and Korean students all agree Thai is the hardest language they have ever encountered. On the bright side I have never formally studied Thai and I know people that have taken a 3 month intensive class and come out speaking very good Thai. I plan on trying this intensive class next year on summer break and I would be happy to share the results. In the mean time good luck with you Thai studies everyone.

[CSS]

A friend of mine worked here for six months about ten years ago, and then Vietnam for five years. He still remembers more Thai than Vietnamese, and considers that a much more difficult language than Thai.

G

It's interesting how different peoples minds capture different things with more or less ease. I'm sure context of living arrangements do add a lot too.

I also have a friend who spent considerable time in both countries and she found Thai considerably harder to the point that even though she has lived in Thailand longer she speaks reasonably fluent Vietnamese but relatively no Thai.

[mangkorn]

English is my native language I am fluent in Spanish to the point I think in Spanish when I am speaking Spanish, my French is not to bad I can get by and have a conversation as long as it's not about rocket science, I'm relatively fluent in Chinese (I lived in China for 10 years) I can read but I tend to make very big mistakes when I write. So, my reason for stating all that is to show I'm capable of learning different languages. As far as Thai goes I find it next to impossible, unlike most languages I have learned early on you can say "bathroom, restroom, washroom, toilet whatever and people know what you want. I tried this in Thai and the people looked at me like I had 2 heads because it was not a complete sentence. In any event I teach in an international program and my Chinese, Japanese and Korean students all agree Thai is the hardest language they have ever encountered. On the bright side I have never formally studied Thai and I know people that have taken a 3 month intensive class and come out speaking very good Thai. I plan on trying this intensive class next year on summer break and I would be happy to share the results. In the mean time good luck with you Thai studies everyone.

Saying only one word is troublesome for being understood, and possibly due to improper pronunciation. And as discussed here before, Westerners will often inflect a word as they would to indicate a question in their own language, but in Thai it changes the meaning, or it makes a word have no meaning. But never fear, that is why there are question words or markers. If you want to ask for the bathroom or whatever, just add "...yoo nai khrab (where is?)" - and will be understood. It is difficult for many farangs to quit the habit of inflecting words, but when you remember to use question words at the end of a phrase, like "dai mai," it will help you to avoid that habit. Don't get discouraged.

[jackmuu]

It has also been written that people who are good at languages are not as good with numbers and vice versa.

Thai is by far the the language I am most fluent in, second only to English and it was so easy to learn but I attribute that to being in Thailand and using it daily (not through choice). I am sure it would be much harder to learn from overseas, but no more than vietnamese, tagalog, mandarin etc.

[soundman]

It has also been written that people who are good at languages are not as good with numbers and vice versa.

So thats why learning is so difficult for me?

Soundman.

[Khon Baan Nok]

It's grammar is very fluid, the tones are a big challenge if you are coming from a non-tonal background, and the writing system is as illogical as...say...English. But what a hoot!

I disagree. I think the Thai writing system is very logical, and much more so than English. Perhaps Meadish can address this, but I believe the various letters in the Thai alphabet are grouped by the part of the mouth where the sound is produced, e.g. dental, labial, etc. Spelling is pretty logical too, except for those usually silent endings from Sanskrit origins. There is nothing that I am aware of in Thai that is the equivalent of, say, the 'ough' combination in English.

You may disagree, but you would be wrong.

In fact it is the Sanskrit/Devanagiri letters that are grouped the way you describe. The Sanskrit alphabet begins with the character "ka" which is an unaspirated k sound beginning in the throat. It is paired with an aspirated k sound that comes from the same part of the throat. The alpahabet then moves forward with the tongue moving logically from the back of the mouth (glottals), up to the back of the palate (palatals), then to the roof of the mouth (retroflex), forward to the back of the teeth (dental), up to the lips (labial) and finally to the s sounds, of which Thai has 4 (actually 5) and Devanagiri has three.

The Thai characters can be mapped to Devanagiri on a character basis, but not phonetically. I have such character maps if you are interested (need to know both character sets to make sense of them...).

And if you want an equivalent of "ough" in English, how about:

ทร - pronounced as an "s"

or รร - which is usually silent, but not always

or the use of ห, which can either be a voiced "h" sound or a silent tone changer - same with อ

Bottom line - every character in a Devanagiri-based language has a distinct and unique sound. If you can hear it, you can spell it. If you can read it, you can say it. Perfectly.

You cannot do that in Thai - there is no audible difference between most of the "t" sounds, there is no audible difference between the "s" sounds (except when they are pronounced as "t", see above). And on top of that you have tone marks that behave differently based on the seemingly arbitrary classification of consonants into the three classes. It actually is not arbitrary, though you'd have to know Sanskrit/Devanagiri to see the correlation - which excludes 99% of Thai speakers and learners, including Thais...

Devanagiri and the languages based on it have benefit of the most consistent and precise mapping of character to sound that I've ever encountered. There may be better ones, but Thai is not one of them..

[mangkorn]

It's grammar is very fluid, the tones are a big challenge if you are coming from a non-tonal background, and the writing system is as illogical as...say...English. But what a hoot!

I disagree. I think the Thai writing system is very logical, and much more so than English. Perhaps Meadish can address this, but I believe the various letters in the Thai alphabet are grouped by the part of the mouth where the sound is produced, e.g. dental, labial, etc. Spelling is pretty logical too, except for those usually silent endings from Sanskrit origins. There is nothing that I am aware of in Thai that is the equivalent of, say, the 'ough' combination in English.

You may disagree, but you would be wrong.

In fact it is the Sanskrit/Devanagiri letters that are grouped the way you describe. The Sanskrit alphabet begins with the character "ka" which is an unaspirated k sound beginning in the throat. It is paired with an aspirated k sound that comes from the same part of the throat. The alpahabet then moves forward with the tongue moving logically from the back of the mouth (glottals), up to the back of the palate (palatals), then to the roof of the mouth (retroflex), forward to the back of the teeth (dental), up to the lips (labial) and finally to the s sounds, of which Thai has 4 (actually 5) and Devanagiri has three.

The Thai characters can be mapped to Devanagiri on a character basis, but not phonetically. I have such character maps if you are interested (need to know both character sets to make sense of them...).

And if you want an equivalent of "ough" in English, how about:

ทร - pronounced as an "s"

or รร - which is usually silent, but not always

or the use of ห, which can either be a voiced "h" sound or a silent tone changer - same with อ

Bottom line - every character in a Devanagiri-based language has a distinct and unique sound. If you can hear it, you can spell it. If you can read it, you can say it. Perfectly.

You cannot do that in Thai - there is no audible difference between most of the "t" sounds, there is no audible difference between the "s" sounds (except when they are pronounced as "t", see above). And on top of that you have tone marks that behave differently based on the seemingly arbitrary classification of consonants into the three classes. It actually is not arbitrary, though you'd have to know Sanskrit/Devanagiri to see the correlation - which excludes 99% of Thai speakers and learners, including Thais...

Devanagiri and the languages based on it have benefit of the most consistent and precise mapping of character to sound that I've ever encountered. There may be better ones, but Thai is not one of them..

Interesting rundown on Devanagiri. And I would agree with your take on the arbitrariness of Thai writing, because it is really a hybrid language made up of many others, sort of like English is. The alphabet was pieced together from different sources, and you do have a lot of spellings that are transliterations from Indic or other languages, including Khmer. I don't know Devanagiri, but it's hard to find any language with more consistent, precise and easy mapping than Castellano (Spanish). Then again, it doesn't really have very difficult or complex phones to it. Thanks for that lesson.

Edited May 31, 2007 by mangkorn

[chutai]

It has also been written that people who are good at languages are not as good with numbers and vice versa.

That's quite incredible to me as I've never heard of this before but always use it as an example when someone says, for example: "I must be stupid as I can't learn English easily." My reply is always , no you're your not stupid it's just that some people learn languages quickly, others are good at learning other things. Me, I'm totally hopeless at maths but quite good at learning languages.

It's also been my experience that those who are good with numbers find learning a foreign language difficult. My 'fairn' being no exception.

But I wonder why this is ? Something to do with which side of the brain one uses most perhaps ?

[qualtrough]

It's grammar is very fluid, the tones are a big challenge if you are coming from a non-tonal background, and the writing system is as illogical as...say...English. But what a hoot!

I disagree. I think the Thai writing system is very logical, and much more so than English. Perhaps Meadish can address this, but I believe the various letters in the Thai alphabet are grouped by the part of the mouth where the sound is produced, e.g. dental, labial, etc. Spelling is pretty logical too, except for those usually silent endings from Sanskrit origins. There is nothing that I am aware of in Thai that is the equivalent of, say, the 'ough' combination in English.

You may disagree, but you would be wrong.

In fact it is the Sanskrit/Devanagiri letters that are grouped the way you describe. The Sanskrit alphabet begins with the character "ka" which is an unaspirated k sound beginning in the throat. It is paired with an aspirated k sound that comes from the same part of the throat. The alpahabet then moves forward with the tongue moving logically from the back of the mouth (glottals), up to the back of the palate (palatals), then to the roof of the mouth (retroflex), forward to the back of the teeth (dental), up to the lips (labial) and finally to the s sounds, of which Thai has 4 (actually 5) and Devanagiri has three.

The Thai characters can be mapped to Devanagiri on a character basis, but not phonetically. I have such character maps if you are interested (need to know both character sets to make sense of them...).

And if you want an equivalent of "ough" in English, how about:

ทร - pronounced as an "s"

or รร - which is usually silent, but not always

or the use of ห, which can either be a voiced "h" sound or a silent tone changer - same with อ

Bottom line - every character in a Devanagiri-based language has a distinct and unique sound. If you can hear it, you can spell it. If you can read it, you can say it. Perfectly.

You cannot do that in Thai - there is no audible difference between most of the "t" sounds, there is no audible difference between the "s" sounds (except when they are pronounced as "t", see above). And on top of that you have tone marks that behave differently based on the seemingly arbitrary classification of consonants into the three classes. It actually is not arbitrary, though you'd have to know Sanskrit/Devanagiri to see the correlation - which excludes 99% of Thai speakers and learners, including Thais...

Devanagiri and the languages based on it have benefit of the most consistent and precise mapping of character to sound that I've ever encountered. There may be better ones, but Thai is not one of them..

Thank you for expanding on the Sanskrit/Devanagiri antecedents of Thai, and confirming that there is indeed a correspondence between Thai characters and the location where the sounds are produced, although not a perfect one. The post I commented on stated that Thai writing system was as illogical as English. I am sure that point can be argued, but you have presented no information here to justify saying that my contention was 'wrong'. Written Thai as illogical as English? You must be joking? Here is a little sample I what I am talking about:

I take it you already know

Of tough and bough and cough and dough?

Others may stumble but not you

On hiccough, thorough, slough and through.

Well done! And now you wish perhaps,

To learn of less familiar traps?

Beware of heard, a dreadful word

That looks like beard and sounds like bird.

And dead, it's said like bed, not bead-

for goodness' sake don't call it 'deed'!

Watch out for meat and great and threat

(they rhyme with suite and straight and debt).

A moth is not a moth in mother,

Nor both in bother, broth, or brother,

And here is not a match for there,

Nor dear and fear for bear and pear,

And then there's doze and rose and lose-

Just look them up- and goose and choose,

And cork and work and card and ward

And font and front and word and sword,

And do and go and thwart and cart-

Come, I've hardly made a start!

A dreadful language? Man alive!

I'd learned to speak it when I was five!

And yet to write it, the more I sigh,

I'll not learn how 'til the day I die.

Edited May 31, 2007 by qualtrough

[CSS]

I take it you already know

Of tough and bough and cough and dough?

Others may stumble but not you

On hiccough, thorough, slough and through.

Well done! And now you wish perhaps,

To learn of less familiar traps?

Beware of heard, a dreadful word

That looks like beard and sounds like bird.

And dead, it's said like bed, not bead-

for goodness' sake don't call it 'deed'!

Watch out for meat and great and threat

(they rhyme with suite and straight and debt).

A moth is not a moth in mother,

Nor both in bother, broth, or brother,

And here is not a match for there,

Nor dear and fear for bear and pear,

And then there's doze and rose and lose-

Just look them up- and goose and choose,

And cork and work and card and ward

And font and front and word and sword,

And do and go and thwart and cart-

Come, I've hardly made a start!

A dreadful language? Man alive!

I'd learned to speak it when I was five!

And yet to write it, the more I sigh,

I'll not learn how 'til the day I die.

Thanks for the poem. That was fun. It makes me count my blessings for being a native English speaker and feel sorry for all those struggling to try to learn it. So many people do though (many in this forum). I have to respect them.

[qualtrough]

Thanks for the poem. That was fun. It makes me count my blessings for being a native English speaker and feel sorry for all those struggling to try to learn it. So many people do though (many in this forum). I have to respect them.

I am glad you liked it, but I want to make it clear that I did not write it.

Here is another poem that makes the point even better. While Thai certainly has its inconsistencies, I think one would be hard put to come up with anything even close to this for Thai:

The Joy of English Pronunciation

by George Nolst Trenité (1870–1946)

Dearest creature in creation

Studying English pronunciation,

I will teach you in my verse

Sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse.

I will keep you, Susy, busy,

Make your head with heat grow dizzy;

Tear in eye, your dress you'll tear;

Queer, fair seer, hear my prayer.

Pray, console your loving poet,

Make my coat look new, dear, sew it!

Just compare heart, hear and heard,

Dies and diet, lord and word.

Sword and sward, retain and Britain

(Mind the latter how it's written).

Made has not the sound of bade,

Say—said, pay—paid, laid but plaid.

Now I surely will not plague you

With such words as vague and ague,

But be careful how you speak,

Say: gush, bush, steak, streak, break, bleak,

Previous, precious, fuchsia, via,

Recipe, pipe, studding-sail, choir;

Woven, oven, how and low,

Script, receipt, shoe, poem, toe.

Say, expecting fraud and trickery:

Daughter, laughter and Terpsichore,

Branch, ranch, measles, topsails, aisles,

Missiles, similes, reviles.

Wholly, holly, signal, signing,

Same, examining, but mining,

Scholar, vicar, and cigar,

Solar, mica, war and far.

From ‘desire’: desirable—admirable from ‘admire’,

Lumber, plumber, bier, but brier,

Topsham, brougham, renown, but known,

Knowledge, done, lone, gone, none, tone,

One, anemone, Balmoral,

Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel.

Gertrude, German, wind and wind,

Beau, kind, kindred, queue, mankind,

Tortoise, turquoise, chamois-leather,

Reading, Reading, heathen, heather.

This phonetic labyrinth

Gives moss, gross, brook, brooch, ninth, plinth.

Have you ever yet endeavoured

To pronounce revered and severed,

Demon, lemon, ghoul, foul, soul,

Peter, petrol and patrol?

Billet does not end like ballet;

Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet.

Blood and flood are not like food,

Nor is mould like should and would.

Banquet is not nearly parquet,

Which exactly rhymes with khaki.

Discount, viscount, load and broad,

Toward, to forward, to reward,

Ricocheted and crocheting, croquet?

Right! Your pronunciation's OK.

Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve,

Friend and fiend, alive and live.

Is your R correct in higher?

Keats asserts it rhymes Thalia.

Hugh, but hug, and hood, but hoot,

Buoyant, minute, but minute.

Say abscission with precision,

Now: position and transition;

Would it tally with my rhyme

If I mentioned paradigm?

Twopence, threepence, tease are easy,

But cease, crease, grease and greasy?

Cornice, nice, valise, revise,

Rabies, but lullabies.

Of such puzzling words as nauseous,

Rhyming well with cautious, tortious,

You'll envelop lists, I hope,

In a linen envelope.

Would you like some more? You'll have it!

Affidavit, David, davit.

To abjure, to perjure. Sheik

Does not sound like Czech but ache.

Liberty, library, heave and heaven,

Rachel, loch, moustache, eleven.

We say hallowed, but allowed,

People, leopard, towed but vowed.

Mark the difference, moreover,

Between mover, plover, Dover.

Leeches, breeches, wise, precise,

Chalice, but police and lice,

Camel, constable, unstable,

Principle, disciple, label.

Petal, penal, and canal,

Wait, surmise, plait, promise, pal,

Suit, suite, ruin. Circuit, conduit

Rhyme with ‘shirk it’ and ‘beyond it’,

But it is not hard to tell

Why it's pall, mall, but Pall Mall.

Muscle, muscular, gaol, iron,

Timber, climber, bullion, lion,

Worm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair,

Senator, spectator, mayor,

Ivy, privy, famous; clamour

Has the A of drachm and hammer.

Pussy, hussy and possess,

Desert, but desert, address.

Golf, wolf, countenance, lieutenants

Hoist in lieu of flags left pennants.

Courier, courtier, tomb, bomb, comb,

Cow, but Cowper, some and home.

‘Solder, soldier! Blood is thicker’,

Quoth he, ‘than liqueur or liquor’,

Making, it is sad but true,

In bravado, much ado.

Stranger does not rhyme with anger,

Neither does devour with clangour.

Pilot, pivot, gaunt, but aunt,

Font, front, wont, want, grand and grant.

Arsenic, specific, scenic,

Relic, rhetoric, hygienic.

Gooseberry, goose, and close, but close,

Paradise, rise, rose, and dose.

Say inveigh, neigh, but inveigle,

Make the latter rhyme with eagle.

Mind! Meandering but mean,

Valentine and magazine.

And I bet you, dear, a penny,

You say mani-(fold) like many,

Which is wrong. Say rapier, pier,

Tier (one who ties), but tier.

Arch, archangel; pray, does erring

Rhyme with herring or with stirring?

Prison, bison, treasure trove,

Treason, hover, cover, cove,

Perseverance, severance. Ribald

Rhymes (but piebald doesn't) with nibbled.

Phaeton, paean, gnat, ghat, gnaw,

Lien, psychic, shone, bone, pshaw.

Don't be down, my own, but rough it,

And distinguish buffet, buffet;

Brood, stood, roof, rook, school, wool, boon,

Worcester, Boleyn, to impugn.

Say in sounds correct and sterling

Hearse, hear, hearken, year and yearling.

Evil, devil, mezzotint,

Mind the Z! (A gentle hint.)

Now you need not pay attention

To such sounds as I don't mention,

Sounds like pores, pause, pours and paws,

Rhyming with the pronoun yours;

Nor are proper names included,

Though I often heard, as you did,

Funny rhymes to unicorn,

Yes, you know them, Vaughan and Strachan.

No, my maiden, coy and comely,

I don't want to speak of Cholmondeley.

No. Yet Froude compared with proud

Is no better than McLeod.

But mind trivial and vial,

Tripod, menial, denial,

Troll and trolley, realm and ream,

Schedule, mischief, schism, and scheme.

Argil, gill, Argyll, gill. Surely

May be made to rhyme with Raleigh,

But you're not supposed to say

Piquet rhymes with sobriquet.

Had this invalid invalid

Worthless documents? How pallid,

How uncouth he, couchant, looked,

When for Portsmouth I had booked!

Zeus, Thebes, Thales, Aphrodite,

Paramour, enamoured, flighty,

Episodes, antipodes,

Acquiesce, and obsequies.

Please don't monkey with the geyser,

Don't peel 'taters with my razor,

Rather say in accents pure:

Nature, stature and mature.

Pious, impious, limb, climb, glumly,

Worsted, worsted, crumbly, dumbly,

Conquer, conquest, vase, phase, fan,

Wan, sedan and artisan.

The TH will surely trouble you

More than R, CH or W.

Say then these phonetic gems:

Thomas, thyme, Theresa, Thames.

Thompson, Chatham, Waltham, Streatham,

There are more but I forget 'em—

Wait! I've got it: Anthony,

Lighten your anxiety.

The archaic word albeit

Does not rhyme with eight—you see it;

With and forthwith, one has voice,

One has not, you make your choice.

Shoes, goes, does. Now first say: finger;

Then say: singer, ginger, linger.

Real, zeal, mauve, gauze and gauge,

Marriage, foliage, mirage, age,

Hero, heron, query, very,

Parry, tarry, fury, bury,

Dost, lost, post, and doth, cloth, loth,

Job, Job, blossom, bosom, oath.

Faugh, oppugnant, keen oppugners,

Bowing, bowing, banjo-tuners

Holm you know, but noes, canoes,

Puisne, truism, use, to use?

Though the difference seems little,

We say actual, but victual,

Seat, sweat, chaste, caste, Leigh, eight, height,

Put, nut, granite, and unite.

Reefer does not rhyme with deafer,

Feoffer does, and zephyr, heifer.

Dull, bull, Geoffrey, George, ate, late,

Hint, pint, senate, but sedate.

Gaelic, Arabic, pacific,

Science, conscience, scientific;

Tour, but our, dour, succour, four,

Gas, alas, and Arkansas.

Say manoeuvre, yacht and vomit,

Next omit, which differs from it

Bona fide, alibi

Gyrate, dowry and awry.

Sea, idea, guinea, area,

Psalm, Maria, but malaria.

Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean,

Doctrine, turpentine, marine.

Compare alien with Italian,

Dandelion with battalion,

Rally with ally; yea, ye,

Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, key, quay!

Say aver, but ever, fever,

Neither, leisure, skein, receiver.

Never guess—it is not safe,

We say calves, valves, half, but Ralf.

Starry, granary, canary,

Crevice, but device, and eyrie,

Face, but preface, then grimace,

Phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.

Bass, large, target, gin, give, verging,

Ought, oust, joust, and scour, but scourging;

Ear, but earn; and ere and tear

Do not rhyme with here but heir.

Mind the O of off and often

Which may be pronounced as orphan,

With the sound of saw and sauce;

Also soft, lost, cloth and cross.

Pudding, puddle, putting. Putting?

Yes: at golf it rhymes with shutting.

Respite, spite, consent, resent.

Liable, but Parliament.

Seven is right, but so is even,

Hyphen, roughen, nephew, Stephen,

Monkey, donkey, clerk and jerk,

Asp, grasp, wasp, demesne, cork, work.

A of valour, vapid vapour,

S of news (compare newspaper),

G of gibbet, gibbon, gist,

I of antichrist and grist,

Differ like diverse and divers,

Rivers, strivers, shivers, fivers.

Once, but nonce, toll, doll, but roll,

Polish, Polish, poll and poll.

Pronunciation—think of Psyche!—

Is a paling, stout and spiky.

Won't it make you lose your wits

Writing groats and saying ‘grits’?

It's a dark abyss or tunnel

Strewn with stones like rowlock, gunwale,

Islington, and Isle of Wight,

Housewife, verdict and indict.

Don't you think so, reader, rather,

Saying lather, bather, father?

Finally, which rhymes with enough,

Though, through, bough, cough, hough, sough, tough?

Hiccough has the sound of sup.

My advice is: GIVE IT UP!

[chutai]

Which part of C19 was that lot written?

The first one was good though.

[Khon Baan Nok]

Thanks for the poem. That was fun. It makes me count my blessings for being a native English speaker and feel sorry for all those struggling to try to learn it. So many people do though (many in this forum). I have to respect them.

I am glad you liked it, but I want to make it clear that I did not write it.

Here is another poem that makes the point even better. While Thai certainly has its inconsistencies, I think one would be hard put to come up with anything even close to this for Thai:

The Joy of English Pronunciation

by George Nolst Trenité (1870–1946)

Dearest creature in creation

Studying English pronunciation,

I will teach you in my verse

Sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse.

[snip]

Hiccough has the sound of sup.

My advice is: GIVE IT UP!

It would indeed be difficult to produce evidence in ANY language that could match the illogic so beautifully demonstrated in this poem - thank you, it is a "keeper". I have to agree with CSS: it's lucky for me that English was my mother tongue because I'm not sure if I'd have mastered it otherwise.

One point of pedantic hair-splitting - in your post preceding this one, you said:

"Thank you for...confirming that there is indeed a correspondence between Thai characters and the location where the sounds are produced, although not a perfect one."

If I gave that impression, then I was unclear in what I said. Let me give it another shot:

1. The Sanskrit/Devanagiri system does have a logic between the alphabetic order and the location where the sounds are produced, beginning from the throat and ending with the lips.

2. Thai can be "mapped" to Devanagiri on an almost character-to-character basis...but

3. Thai pronunciation (at least current spoken Thai) retains the correlation with the original characters, but not with the sounds. For example, as best I can tell there are no aspirated consonants remaining in spoken Thai, and the entire "row" of retroflex consonants in Devanagiri is missing in spoken Thai, though the characters remain in words of Sanskritic origin. (These are the "d" and "t" consonants that give Indian languages (and "Indian English") its unique sound).

4. The most direct connection between modern Thai and Sanskrit/Devanagiri actually comes from the consonant classes with, for example, all of the mid-tone class consonants coming from a group of unaspirated/unvoiced consonants in Devanagiri. I'll stop there as it becomes progressively more arcane and uninteresting...

But the reason you have to spell something in Thai by saying the character and its associated "image" (g/gai, k/kai, etc.) is because the Thai characters have lost their connection with the original sounds. This is most evident in the "t", "k", "p" and "s" sounds.

That probably makes the waters even muddier than my original posting...my apologies if that's the case.

This is all a digression from the original point, which was that, for me, despite being one of those individuals to whom language acquisition comes relatively easy, I work harder for less progress in Thai than in any language I've acquired before (5, including my mother tongue...). The impression I get from this thread is that this is true for many, but by no means all, people with multiple languages at their command. I envy those of you to whom Thai has come easily.

[ray23]

I have to agree learning Spanish in comparison is very easy. If you have a musical ear ( I don't) tht helps the tones are very subtle and do make a diference.

I have one friend who is really a very good singer, he can sing Thai songs, but he does not not speak Thai.

For most of us it is very challenging, the sentence structure being reversed as to the norm we are used to.

The writing system is complex, the reality only a portion are used on a daily basis.

I can speak to my wife and our housekeeper, they understand me, in the world I could be understood if they try, most don't.

Living in Issan makes a big different since the only schools that are available teach proper Thai and are very proud of it. Shame it's not followed here in Issan. People understand me much better in Bangkok.

But in the end I live here, it's not up to the Thai's it's up to me. But I feel sorry for anyone who actually thinks they are going to learn this language in six weeks. That is so unrealistic, yuo didn't learn your native langugae in six weeks and your not going to learn Thai in six weeks.

[meadish_sweetball]

A side note: In Thai modern pop songs, the tone rules used when speaking are suspended by necessity (it is not possible, or at any rate a significant challenge, to preserve the tone shapes of words when composing a song within the framework of the 8-tone scale, and not end up sounding out of key).

I suspect traditional Thai music may have some system that allows for correct speech tone formation within the key of the song, but I do not know enough about how it works.

For most of us it is very challenging, the sentence structure being reversed as to the norm we are used to.

Actually, the basic Thai sentence structure is the same as in English - S V O (Subject Verb Object)

i.e.

English: I buy milk. vs

Thai: ผม/ดิฉันซื้อนม (phom / diichan sue nom).

It is the word order between nouns and their descriptions that is the opposite of English:

English: A red car

Thai: รถสีแดง คันหนึ่ง หนึ่งคัน rot sii daeng [khan nueng/nueng khan] car colour red [classifier one/one classifier]

[No beleeeeve!]

I think what makes Thai difficult to learn for a Westerner is that Thai is a tonal language, something completely out of the box for us Westerners.

As mentioned, throw in the social influences of the language and it becomes more complex.

But, much like anything about a Westerner living in the East, we must cognitively erase our Western concept of just about everything and learn things as a Thai would. I told a friend who moved to Thailand after I did to forget 95% of what he knows of life living in the West and relearn life living in Thailand. It is not a better or worse issue, just different. It's what makes this country facinating to me!!!

I'm sure a bit easier for me being a psychotherapist.

[manuchaomk]

I would say it is not so difficult to learn thai language but

there is a difference (difficulty) between speaking/listening and writing/ reading.

I spent a lot of time asking to thai people : 'anìi array, krapp ?' .... 'anuun array,krapp?' (what is this , what is there?)... step by step I memoriezed a lot of words (meaning, pronounciation).

About grammar ? Thai grammar is not so complicate than english (for me...ahahahaha)

About thai fonts ? uhmm.. the beginning was really difficult and I forgot to insist due to my busy life...

Anyway if you are really interested in Thai language, I suggest to spend a lot of time with thai people...but it will cost surely some time !!!

Manu Chaomk

[mangkorn]

I would say it is not so difficult to learn thai language but

there is a difference (difficulty) between speaking/listening and writing/ reading.

I spent a lot of time asking to thai people : 'an�i array, krapp ?' .... 'anuun array,krapp?' (what is this , what is there?)... step by step I memoriezed a lot of words (meaning, pronounciation).

About grammar ? Thai grammar is not so complicate than english (for me...ahahahaha)

It is a long stretch from "an nii a-rai khrap," to putting together complete and grammatically correct sentences, such as this recent example offered by Khun Yoot (Text encoding must be set to Unicode UTF-8 to read Thai script):

ตั้งà¹à¸•à¹ˆà¹€à¸‚าà¸à¸¥à¸±à¸šà¸ˆà¸²à¸à¹€à¸¡à¸·à¸­à¸‡à¹„ทยอà¸

ปนิสัยลัà¸à¸©à¸“ะนิสัยเขาเปลี่ยà¸

ไปนะดูดีขี้นไม่รู้ว่าเà¸à¸´à¸”อà¸

ไรขึ้น

That's not a terribly difficult concept being addressed, but I defy most farangs to come up with that one in the middle of a conversation, no matter how good they consider their own Thai language skill to be.

The difficulty depends on whom you wish to talk with, and about what. If you are asking for something to buy or somewhere to go, it is not difficult. But if you are trying to have an intelligent conversation complete with references to different points in time, human emotions, etc., and make yourself understood, well, one can't honestly call it easy.

Since every farang seems to have an opinion about the recent constitutional court ruling, try explaining what your own is, in a conversation. Nothing easy about that à¹à¸™à¹ˆà¸™à¸­à¸™

Edited June 2, 2007 by mangkorn

[walkon]

My take on it.

At first the non roman characters are very intimidating as are the new strange sounds. After you learn the consonants and vowels and some rules it is astounding to actually recognize words, read words, etc etc. Learning the alphabet is essential to proper spoken thai as many sounds cannot be transliterated. In some respects Thai is easier than english or spanish. It does not have multiple tenses as does english/spanish.

Tones are quite interesting also. Mai can mean #new #no Gau can mean #9 #old. It really isnt that much different than say #fear #fare #fair n english when you think about it.

my biggest problem in improving thai is motivational.

[grtaylor]

Problem reading posts: I'm running Windows XP professional which is enabled for Thai.

Meadish Sweetball's posts (and others) show up fine:

It is the word order between nouns and their descriptions that is the opposite of English:

English: A red car

Thai: รถสีแดง คันหนึ่ง หนึ่งคัน rot sii daeng [khan nueng/nueng khan]car colour red [classifier one/one classifier]

but mangkorns's posts (and others) show up like this:

ตั้งà¹à¸•à¹ˆà¹€à¸‚าà¸à¸¥à¸±à¸šà¸ˆà¸²à¸à¹€à¸¡à¸·à¸­à¸‡à¹„ทยอà¸

¸à¸›à¸™à¸´à¸ªà¸±à¸¢à¸¥à¸±à¸à¸©à¸“ะนิสัยเขาเปลี่ยà

¸™à¹„ปนะดูดีขี้นไม่รู้ว่าเà¸à¸´à¸”อ

ะไรขึ้น

Any idea why one should be OK and the other not?

Thanks,

Graham

[meadish_sweetball]

For Mangkorn's posts, set your browser to Unicode character encoding (View / Character Encoding / Unicode (UTF-8). Mangkorn posts from a Macintosh and can not use the Windows encoding.

My posts look ok to you because I am posting from an XP system. However, when I forget to switch back to Windows encoding when replying to a post from Mangkorn, something gets lost in the transmission, and the forum can not display my reply correctly irrespective of which encoding is chosen. I switched back to Thai Windows encoding and edited my post to avoid it being illegible.

Hope that explains it.

[ray23]

One of the thing you will run into is the pace of learning, you will in a matter of weeks be expected to know all the constenants and vowels, the tonal markers, the eight sound changes of final constanents in words. Of course then there are all the wonderful little of those time it wroks like this. Not impossible buy very challenging.

The difference between yuo learning and the Thai, your supposed to that with 24 hours of class time. The Thai takes years to learn it as a child. It can be done but it requires a lot of study time daily.

I suppose it all depends on what level you are striving for, for me the reading and r writing is actually coming a faster because I have thin I can do by myself, to study. Conversation really requires some one to correct your mistakes.

One of the things i have found about learnign is my wife really is not all that happy that I'm learning to understand moe about what is being said around me. LOL

I do understand a lot more then I did even if I can't pronounce or remember words a well a I would like yet.

Subtle diffrences car color red/ red car

Good luck have fun with it.

[Richard W]

3. Thai pronunciation (at least current spoken Thai) retains the correlation with the original characters, but not with the sounds. For example, as best I can tell there are no aspirated consonants remaining in spoken Thai,

Wrong. Varga positions 2, 3 and 4 (of 5) are all unvoiced aspirated consonants in Siamese. (I'm not counting the fricatives that you might assign to positions '2a' and '3a'.)