Tone Rules Question

[eJai]

Hi, does anyone know of a reference in the internet or be kind enough to explain on the subject that covers the "Tone Rules" for word cluster that ends with only either short or long vowel without Live/Dead syllable?

Thanks.

[withnail]

Try this http://www.thai-language.com/default.aspx?ref=tonecalc

[wasabi]

Try this http://www.thai-language.com/default.aspx?ref=tonecalc

I can't get that calculator to work even with IE. How do u get it to recalc?

[expatwannabe]

There is no such thing as a syllable without a live or dead ending.

If there is no final consonant, a short vowel is considered a dead ending and a long vowel is considered a live ending.

So for consonants without tone marks:

MID + LIVE = MID

MID + DEAD = LOW

HIGH + LIVE = RISING

HIGH + DEAD = LOW

LOW + LIVE (long vowel) = MID

LOW + DEAD (short vowel, or short vowel + K,T,P ending) = HIGH

LOW + DEAD (long vowel + K,T,P ending) = FALLING

Edited June 13, 2007 by expatwannabe

[withnail]

I couldn't get it to work either (although I have in the past) but the rules are all there anyway

[Johpa]

If there is no final consonant, a short vowel is considered a dead ending and a long vowel is considered a live ending.

If there is a short vowel with no final consonant then the syllable ends with a glottal stop, which technically is itself a consonant.

อ aang is used as the symbol for the glottal stop consonant when it is in syllable initial position.

This is a tough consonant for native English speakers to master as English does not use a glottal stop phonemically and it is only used phonetically in exclamations such as "oh-oh".

[expatwannabe]

If there is a short vowel with no final consonant then the syllable ends with a glottal stop, which technically is itself a consonant.

A vowel is not a consonant - "technically" or not.

Edited June 13, 2007 by expatwannabe

[Johpa]

If there is a short vowel with no final consonant then the syllable ends with a glottal stop, which technically is itself a consonant.

A vowel is not a consonant - "technically" or not.

Yes of course, but all short vowels in Thai that are not followed by obvious consonants are followed by a glottal stop, and a glottal stop is indeed a consonant. I told you this would be a tough one to grasp.

Hopefully you will recognize that the Thai letter อ aang is not a silent letter but a real consonant and that words like achaan do not begin with a vowel but with a consonant that, perchance, is not used in English nor is it represented in the Roman alphabet.

[expatwannabe]

Yes of course, but all short vowels in Thai that are not followed by obvious consonants are followed by a glottal stop, and a glottal stop is indeed a consonant. I told you this would be a tough one to grasp.

I grasp it just fine. A glottal stop is not a consonant. It's just a glottal stop. The OP asked about clusters that end in a vowel. Like "ะ." The additional points you're asserting is just going to confuse him.

Hopefully you will recognize that the Thai letter อ aang is not a silent letter but a real consonant and that words like achaan do not begin with a vowel but with a consonant that, perchance, is not used in English nor is it represented in the Roman alphabet.

I'm not going to argue this because it has absolutely nothing to do with the OP's question. Why you brought it up, I don't know.

You do agree that the sun is hot, don't you?!!

Edited June 13, 2007 by expatwannabe

[meadish_sweetball]

Johpa is right. It is a consonant phoneme, visible in the script or not.

Most of us do not hear the glottal stop because to us it is a non-sound. The fact that Thai script does not indicate the glottal stop that occurs after short vowel sounds in final positions, does not mean it does not exist.

To understand that the glottal stop is a consonant phoneme actually clarifies the rules of live/dead syllables - because it means all dead syllables end in a consonant - even the ones that end in short vowels.

As indicated by its name, it is produced by sealing off the glottis - and the middle (lack of) sound of "oh-oh!", or the way the 'tt' in "letter" comes out when pronounced with a Cockney accent, (leh'er).

In rapid/sloppy speech, it may be dissolved though.

[expatwannabe]

Johpa is right. It is a consonant phoneme, visible in the script or not.

Great. So find the place where the OP asked about glottal stops.

Actually, you know this is kind of amusing. When I worked supporting IT customers, I always had to translate what the "techie" IT guys were saying. They just couldn't bring themselves to speak in intelligible language, and it made our customers feel stupid, incompetent, and sometimes angry. The concepts weren't difficult; it's just that people like to show how smart they are, even if it means they aren't communicating.

What shall we talk about next? Parapsychology?

Edited June 13, 2007 by expatwannabe

[meadish_sweetball]

No need to get on the defensive side just because somebody corrects you a little - it is a valid point and no need to get upset about.

I am fairly sure the OP will understand what we are talking about if he reads the thread thoroughly, and if he feels confused it is always possible to ask additional questions.

[sabaijai]

So find the place where the OP asked about glottal stops.

The Thai glottal stop, in fact, is treated as a consonant by both Thai and foreign educators. Example (from A Profile of the Thai Language):

As for syllable-final consonants, only m, n, ng [N], y, w, p, t, k and the glottal stop [?] occur.

I think the confusion arises in that although we find the glottal stop in both Thai and English, in Thai it is a phoneme,

while in English it is not.

You can't point out the fact that the glottal stop is a consonant in Thai without bringing it up.

[eJai]

Thank you all for your input.

Please allow me to ask the question in a different manner.

Referring the chart provided below, I think we all agree with the tones shown on the left & right branches of the chart. What's bothering me is the one in the middle with BLACK branches. Can anyone please verify the validity of this particular section?

(Please don't ask me where I get it from because the person who gave it to me has also forgotten the source of it.)

Thanks.

Edited June 13, 2007 by eJai

[expatwannabe]

Please allow me to ask the question in a different manner.

The "no final consonant" branch is for clusters that end in a vowel - long or short.

And once again .. a short final vowel does not equate to a consonant for the purpose of pronunciation. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as "no final consonant" with a "short vowel," now would there?

Edited June 13, 2007 by expatwannabe

[expatwannabe]

An example of a Thai word that would fit into the "no final consonant" category is the Thai word for "because" (เพราะ).

The consonant is low class and the vowel is short, resulting in a dead syllable and a high tone - according to both your chart and my description earlier.

Edited June 13, 2007 by expatwannabe

[withnail]

But you will notice that the rules for 'short vowel no final consonant' and 'short vowel dead syllable' are the same as are the 'long vowel no final consonant and live syllable' rules. Because they are the same.

Edited June 13, 2007 by withnail

[mangkorn]

Interesting polemic unleashed here. I never thought of it as a consonant, but after reading Johpa's discourse, it makes sense and I can accept it. Even so, that's unlikely to affect the part of my mental hard drive that I have programmed for tone recognition, because I will see a vowel. Expatwannabe seems to be saying that it may not be helpful to confuse a new student, like the OP, with what is a fairly esoteric linguistic point. When you're first starting to learn the rules, they are daunting enough. But once you do learn them, it's like riding a bicycle.

Since we are talking about tone rules, what methods do people use to remember which class each consonant belongs to? One teacher I had gave me two brilliant phrases, one each for the middle and high classes (all you need to remember), and I learned immediately. Please excuse the transliterations, still having some text-encoding "issues"):

Mid - gai jik dek dtaai bon bpaak aang (chicken pecks child dies on rim of water basin)

High - pii faak toong khaao saan hai chan (a ghost left a bag of polished rice for me)

Just curious: are there other methods?

[withnail]

I printed off three sheets of paper and stuck them to my wall, you really only then have to remember the high and mid class consonants cos everything else then is obviously low. I've largely forgotten the rules now to be honest but seem to get the tones right when reading which is the main thing.

[mangkorn]

Hi, does anyone know of a reference in the internet or be kind enough to explain on the subject that covers the "Tone Rules" for word cluster that ends with only either short or long vowel without Live/Dead syllable?

Thanks.

No disrespect to the OP, but from the wording of the question, it seems he/she is certainly not a linguist, and perhaps not a native English speaker. Ergo, expatwannabe does make a good point in arguing for simplicity of linguistic terms in this case.

I'm not sure the phrase "word cluster" was the intention (character cluster?): I think it would be a "syllable that ends in a short or long vowel" - because the OP was not familiar with the complete rules for live/dead syllables.

[mangkorn]

I printed off three sheets of paper and stuck them to my wall, you really only then have to remember the high and mid class consonants cos everything else then is obviously low. I've largely forgotten the rules now to be honest but seem to get the tones right when reading which is the main thing.

Excellent! I did the same thing, but instead of printing them, I wrote them out on HUGE sheets of paper, along with other huge sheets for vowels, tone rules, and lots of homonyms, the formal name for the capital city, etc. The walls are completely covered...

Yet I still remember the teacher's phrases - burned into my brain. I think that's how they teach Thai children, perhaps?

[withnail]

I also colour coded them high = sky blue mid = grass green

Edited June 13, 2007 by withnail

[mangkorn]

I also colour coded them high = sky blue mid = grass green

So, low would be dirt-brown?

[CSS]

Interesting polemic unleashed here. I never thought of it as a consonant, but after reading Johpa's discourse, it makes sense and I can accept it. Even so, that's unlikely to affect the part of my mental hard drive that I have programmed for tone recognition, because I will see a vowel. Expatwannabe seems to be saying that it may not be helpful to confuse a new student, like the OP, with what is a fairly esoteric linguistic point. When you're first starting to learn the rules, they are daunting enough. But once you do learn them, it's like riding a bicycle.

Since we are talking about tone rules, what methods do people use to remember which class each consonant belongs to? One teacher I had gave me two brilliant phrases, one each for the middle and high classes (all you need to remember), and I learned immediately. Please excuse the transliterations, still having some text-encoding "issues"):

Mid - gai jik dek dtaai bon bpaak aang (chicken pecks child dies on rim of water basin)

High - pii faak toong khaao saan hai chan (a ghost left a bag of polished rice for me)

Just curious: are there other methods?

I agree with Mangkorn. I too never thought of it as a consonant, but also found that it makes sense after reading Johpa's discourse. I probably benefited from the simplicity in not knowing this when learning the tone rules and thus using the categories of "no final consonant" with either long or short vowels. However, I also liked the point withnail made, that linguistically and practically for tone rules the "no consonant" long vowel is the same as the live ending long vowel. And the tone rules for "no consonant" short vowel is the same as dead ending short vowel. So, the previous discourse could be beneficial to the OP in that they would have two fewer categories to memorize.

In thinking about Mangkorn's question concerning memorizing consonant classes it made me wonder whether someone who has studied phonology could answer answer a question of mine. I memorized the middle consonants easily because they all just "felt" the same. Is there any particular reason why my mind grouped them together phonologically? Or are they just common Thai letters and I was just used to them? Is there any particular reason why mid-consonsants are mid-consonants and high consonants are high-consonants and so forth?

In case the OP is interested, I used a different tone rules chart, which was produced by the US Peace Corps (so if any acknowledgement of the chart needs to be given it should be given to them), that I found helpful and easy to read. It allowed me to be able to pull out the patterns in the tone rules and thus memorize them much easier and faster. I retyped the chart and added to it slightly but it's still the US Peace Corps chart.

Note: This is my first ThaiVisa attachment so I assume it was attached correctly (even though it doesn't show up when I preview my post) but if it isn't here when I post you'll know why.

[withnail]

CSS It's probably because the mid class consonants don't have a representative (for want of a proper expression) in the other two classes that you can remember them. If that's what you meant. Ignore me if this isn't what you meant I'm rereading this and realising it might be <deleted>.

Edited June 13, 2007 by withnail

[mangkorn]

It's probably because the mid class consonants don't have a representative (for want of a proper expression) in the other two classes.

Is that a political statement? Hmm...seems right for the current situation.

[mangkorn]

If there is a short vowel with no final consonant then the syllable ends with a glottal stop, which technically is itself a consonant.

A vowel is not a consonant - "technically" or not.

Yes of course, but all short vowels in Thai that are not followed by obvious consonants are followed by a glottal stop, and a glottal stop is indeed a consonant. I told you this would be a tough one to grasp.

Hopefully you will recognize that the Thai letter อ aang is not a silent letter but a real consonant and that words like achaan do not begin with a vowel but with a consonant that, perchance, is not used in English nor is it represented in the Roman alphabet.

Okay, now I'm confused enough to wish to pick some nits. When you write: "the Thai letter อ aang is not a silent letter but a real consonant..." that seems to me to be talking about two mutually exclusive ideas. Of course it is a consonant, but it is a silent letter, also. The อ aang is used in the case of อาจารย et.al. because a vowel cannot stand alone in Thai script, but must be anchored to a consonant. So, yeah, it's a consonant, and a silent one, to boot. Those ideas can co-exist peacefully, no?

English has a lot of silent letters, but they are still real consonants, aren't they?

[Johpa]

Johpa is right. It is a consonant phoneme, visible in the script or not.

Great. So find the place where the OP asked about glottal stops.

Actually, you know this is kind of amusing. When I worked supporting IT customers, I always had to translate what the "techie" IT guys were saying. They just couldn't bring themselves to speak in intelligible language, and it made our customers feel stupid, incompetent, and sometimes angry. The concepts weren't difficult; it's just that people like to show how smart they are, even if it means they aren't communicating.

What shall we talk about next? Parapsychology?

Despite the internal conflicts at the theoretical levels, linguistics is not a pseudo science. I believe there is a regular poster in ThaiVisa who is professionally involved in such a field if you are interested in such conversation.

The OP did not mention anything about glottal stops, but a subsequent poster, hey it was you, gave a good yet incomplete description of a short vowel syllable.

If there is no final consonant, a short vowel is considered a dead ending and a long vowel is considered a live ending.

The reason a short vowel is considered to have a "dead ending" is because it is followed by a full stop consonant.

The conceptual difference between a phone and a phoneme, the difference between the phonetic and the phonemic, is indeed a difficult concept to grasp. I was just trying to give further information and to clarify the matter and I apologize if I have made you "feel stupid, incompetent, and sometimes angry."

[CSS]

It's probably because the mid class consonants don't have a representative (for want of a proper expression) in the other two classes.

Is that a political statement? Hmm...seems right for the current situation.

I think that could be it. All the sounds of all the other letters are "represented" in both the low and high classes so the mid class are unique in that, and that must have been why they stood out in my mind. Thanks.

[mangkorn]

CSS: I can't answer your query about mid-class consonants, but what did you do to memorize the high-class consonants?