20 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Well we can all go back a few thousand years to the 'origins' of languages

It's not a few thousand years – language changes every day! what you need to look at is pronuciationusage and meaning - they are not constant

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

I'm curious, you use the past tense, are you talking about your experience in the past?

Apparently you are saying you found that students who studied at international schools in Thailand spoke with British accents, is that what you mean?

Maybe this has changed with time.

Whatever the schools teach, the students don't speak with British accents anymore.

No, I worked in Thailand for over twenty years in the commerce industry and universities – I helped as a consultant in language policies in companies and even worked for the government and senior politicians. I gave up on-site work at the advent of Covid and now teach online.

Some of the biggest changes are digitalisation and Brexit. Since Brexit, many companies don't believe they need to learn English (as in British English) as they do Korean, Chinese, Japanese, etc. There are huge amounts of exchanges between China and Thailand, and China even sponsors both teachers and students in Thailand and in China.

If you wander around factories, though, you'll find most notices are in British-style English, as many public signs aren't self-composed in some Thai pidgin. However, a lot of health and safety is based on European methods and so uses British English – this is also reflected quite a lot in Thailand's neighbours. However, in commerce, the general usage would now ne described as "International Business English", which is a mix of many forms of English reflected in the regions' trade patterns.

You also have to identify what you think is "american" English – most people get that wrong

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

That's a personal thing – comprehending accents is a skill that often evades older and more parochial people

No it is an objective judgement.

If you present yourself and attempt to function as an English teacher, and have an accent which is incomprehensible, then you cannot effectively function as such. It really is very simple.

4 hours ago, wil iam not said:

Strange that Platinum, Sodium, Magnesiumand Uranium are spelt and pronounced the same.Was Pt discovered by the Yanks, and U by the Brits, or Sir Humphrey Davy to be precise.?

Or Humphrey Appleby perhaps.

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

No. Very few Scots do. It's more a Highlands thing rather than central or a southern Scotland thing (I'm from Glasgow but raised in the Borders).

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

No. Very few Scots do. It's more a Highlands thing rather than central or a southern Scotland thing (I'm from Glasgow but raised in the Borders).

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

No. Very few Scots do. It's more a Highlands thing rather than central or a southern Scotland thing (I'm from Glasgow but raised in the Borders).

then you speak English - Standard Scottish English, i.e the set of English dialects spoken across Scotland

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

It's not a few thousand years – language changes every day! what you need to look at is pronuciationusage and meaning - they are not constant

Susie Dent on Countdown's origins of words explains a lot.

Watch her You Tubes on the origins of swear words. Seeing a beautiful woman explaining where 4uuk, 5hit or c...t came from is so sexy.

41 minutes ago, JAG said:

No it is an objective judgement.

If you present yourself and attempt to function as an English teacher, and have an accent which is incomprehensible, then you cannot effectively function as such. It really is very simple.

No – that's incorrect; you aren't being objective. You aren't even identifying the problem – what you appear to be having difficulty with is "diction" rather than accent, quite a different thing.

I have interviewed employed teachers from all over the world – one of the major factors in employing them is working out how they perform in a class. Any accent works, but if their diction is poor, the students won't learn. Of course there are many people teaching English in Thailand who really have no idea of the language they are teaching, like not knowing the difference between accent and diction - - minimum training – and don't understand how English varies and if or how that affects the teaching. If you are going to teach English, it's a good idea to know a bit about the language you are trying to get across – usually this is "international business English". You want to get over 4 aspects – speaking, reading, writing and listening. None of this is accent-dependent; in fact students are quite advanced before they can differentiate accents. If they have trouble listening to the teacher, it is really down to the person who employed them for not recognising this...and of course, teaching itself is a skill on its own. Like they say, "those who can do and those who can't teach,", but it overlooks the fact that a lot of those who do (speak English) can't teach.

38 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

Or Humphrey Appleby perhaps.

Yes you are correct. Davy was given the task of naming it way back in 1800, with Aluminium, Aluminum or Alumin as the choices. He chose the right one.

Did Appleby discover it? Is it not the most prolific element on Earth?

6 minutes ago, wil iam not said:

Yes you are correct. Davy was given the task of naming it way back in 1800, with Aluminium, Aluminum or Alumin as the choices. He chose the right one.

Did Appleby discover it? Is it not the most prolific element on Earth?

Yes it is, minister.

3 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

Yes it is, minister.

Why the sarcasm on a correct post? /S

1 minute ago, wil iam not said:

Why the sarcasm on a correct post? /S

Oh dear. You have never watched British comedy television?

Lighten up.

7 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

Oh dear. You have never watched British comedy television?

Lighten up.

Ah, you refer to the Yes Minister series, which I never watched, thought it was silly.

I shall lighten up later with my special oil.! 555

52 minutes ago, kwilco said:

No – that's incorrect; you aren't being objective. You aren't even identifying the problem – what you appear to be having difficulty with is "diction" rather than accent, quite a different thing.

I have interviewed employed teachers from all over the world – one of the major factors in employing them is working out how they perform in a class. Any accent works, but if their diction is poor, the students won't learn. Of course there are many people teaching English in Thailand who really have no idea of the language they are teaching, like not knowing the difference between accent and diction - - minimum training – and don't understand how English varies and if or how that affects the teaching. If you are going to teach English, it's a good idea to know a bit about the language you are trying to get across – usually this is "international business English". You want to get over 4 aspects – speaking, reading, writing and listening. None of this is accent-dependent; in fact students are quite advanced before they can differentiate accents. If they have trouble listening to the teacher, it is really down to the person who employed them for not recognising this...and of course, teaching itself is a skill on its own. Like they say, "those who can do and those who can't teach,", but it overlooks the fact that a lot of those who do (speak English) can't teach.

I was a teacher - I taught English to primary classes. I fulfilled the requirements to teach English in Thailand to the letter. I speak clear English without a strong regional accent.

Amongst my colleagues were several Philippinos and a couple of guys from Cameroon. Most of the children, in fact most of the Thai teachers, could not understand them - the accent was so thick.

The classes I taught invariably had better results than the classes they taught. I managed to communicate with, and persuade coach, inveigle and yes teach my students to produce some English. Those classes taught by the other teachers had usually given up after 5 minutes.

To go back to my original point, they were employed because they were cheap - Philippines B20K a month, Cameroon as little as B12K!

7 hours ago, Rockyroad said:

Moo Thai lol

Moy Thai is even funnier...if you know then you know.

3 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Blame the French for inserting the useless U's. Webster did the best he could without starting another war. He also used Z more liberally, as in realize. It may be simpler, but it makes some sense.

Not really the French alone – it stems from an 18th-century spelling reform led by American lexicographer Noah Webster, who thought he could "simplify" the English language largely as a nationalistic thing. The truth is he failed pretty miserably, as compound and longer versions of the same root words couldn't follow his ideas – some were simply not taken up at all. In the meantime, British English had "standardised" through the compilation of dictionaries and written laws. The origins and etymology of the words are often useful to have, as it helps decide the spelling and pronunciation – but getting rid of that obscured their usage history and meaning. Most of the words Webster tried to change were Franco/Latin in origin and used universally in European languages and around the world – so it was an isolationist policy that was eventually dropped.

Webster was a product of the Revolution – the new US was basically isolated from the rest of the western world and populated by non-English-speaking immigrants. One of the first things the new country did was decide what language to use – many did not want English at all...but to this day there is no official language in the USA, only a "de facto"

It manifests itself in US culture in that they are the only country in the world who have not adopted the metric system and have very poor foreign language abilities, being unable to apply a universal logic to many words.

22 minutes ago, JAG said:

I was a teacher - I taught English to primary classes. I fulfilled the requirements to teach English in Thailand to the letter. I speak clear English without a strong regional accent.

Amongst my colleagues were several Philippinos and a couple of guys from Cameroon. Most of the children, in fact most of the Thai teachers, could not understand them - the accent was so thick.

The classes I taught invariably had better results than the classes they taught. I managed to communicate with, and persuade coach, inveigle and yes teach my students to produce some English. Those classes taught by the other teachers had usually given up after 5 minutes.

To go back to my original point, they were employed because they were cheap - Philippines B20K a month, Cameroon as little as B12K!

I don't see what your personal circumstances have got to do with anything... apart from scant knowledge of linguistics – but primarily, that's hardly important. I have over 20 years of education in Thai – but started in Europe (and Morocco) in the 1990s in industry, commerce and university mostly. I've also taught in Laos.... - I also was a consultant and had to interview and employ teachers – some for government schools. - I was not interested in how much they were paid; my concern was whether they could do the job. - Lots of the native English speakers might have had the qualifications (TEFL degree, etc.), but they didn't get the job because I felt they wouldn't go in a classroom. - There was a huge number of applicants who thought because they were native English speakers, they could teach, but they were deluding themselves and had little or no knowledge of English syntax, grammar or how it worked for students – neither knowledge of the language nor how to appropriately teach it. I think one thing to take away about English language teaching in Thailand is that many of those in charge are very shonky characters at best. - I di not have to worry about the cost; I was only concerned with their ability to teach. - I was amazed at the appalling standards of some of the British and American applicants – they basically could teach - I was employed to interview, as most of the Rhai business owners and school directors were Thai and had no idea whether the interviewees were any good or not and didn't have the language skill levels to do it...Of course, if you are motivated solely by money and how much you can keep for yourself, you are going to end up with drugs for the most part.

I did a lot of recruitment for TOEIC and TOEFL, and in those cases I often recruited Thai, Filipino or other nationalities because, unlike the English-speaking applicants, they were au fait with the technicalities needed for that set of English skills - most of these had degrees in Enlgish langauge and were a lot better qualified than some old git in cargo shorts from Rotherham who swore he didn't have a speech impediment

As for

"I fulfilled the requirements to teach English in Thailand to the letter." That's hardly saying much given the rules handed out by the Thai authorities. I presume you mean some kind of TEFL cert and any kind of degree.

"To go back to my original point, they were employed because they were cheap – Philippines B20K a month, Cameroon as little as B12K!" – but that's not what we were discussing, is it?

Edited June 10Jun 10 by kwilco

33 minutes ago, Aussie999 said:

Moy Thai is even funnier...if you know then you know.

Moy is how it sounds.

46 minutes ago, JAG said:

I was a teacher - I taught English to primary classes. I fulfilled the requirements to teach English in Thailand to the letter. I speak clear English without a strong regional accent.

Amongst my colleagues were several Philippinos and a couple of guys from Cameroon. Most of the children, in fact most of the Thai teachers, could not understand them - the accent was so thick.

The classes I taught invariably had better results than the classes they taught. I managed to communicate with, and persuade coach, inveigle and yes teach my students to produce some English. Those classes taught by the other teachers had usually given up after 5 minutes.

To go back to my original point, they were employed because they were cheap - Philippines B20K a month, Cameroon as little as B12K!

I don't see what your personal circumstances have to do with the issue, apart from perhaps illustrating a limited understanding of linguistics. which is what this is all about...

For context, I have over 20 years' experience in Thai language education, but I originally started teaching in Europe (and Morocco) during the 1990s in industry, commerce and university settings. I have also taught in Laos and worked as a consultant responsible for interviewing and recruiting English teachers, including for government schools.

My concern was never how much applicants were paid; it was whether they could actually do the job. Many native English speakers arrived with TEFL certificates, degrees and other qualifications, yet I would not recommend them because I did not believe they would be effective in a classroom.

A surprisingly large number seemed to think that being a native speaker automatically qualified them to teach English. In reality, many had little or no understanding of English grammar, syntax, language acquisition, or how to explain the language to learners. Speaking a language and teaching it are two very different skills.

One thing anyone involved in English-language education in Thailand quickly learns is that many of the people running schools and agencies are, at best, rather dubious operators. Cost was never my concern; teaching ability was. I was often astonished by the poor standards of some British and American applicants. Many simply could not teach.

In many cases I was hired specifically because the Thai school owners and directors lacked the English proficiency needed to assess applicants properly. They relied on someone who could determine whether candidates actually understood the language and how to teach it.

I also did considerable recruitment for TOEIC and TOEFL preparation programmes. In those cases I frequently recruited Thai, Filipino and other non-native speakers because they were familiar with the technical requirements of those exams. Many held degrees in English language or linguistics and were far better qualified than some ageing bloke in cargo shorts from Rotherham who assumed that being a native speaker was qualification enough and insisted he didn't have a speech impediment.

Edited June 10Jun 10 by kwilco

3 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Blame the French for inserting the useless U's. Webster did the best he could without starting another war. He also used Z more liberally, as in realize. It may be simpler, but it makes some sense.

Not really the French alone – it stems from an 18th-century spelling reform led by American lexicographer Noah Webster, who thought he could "simplify" the English language largely as a nationalistic thing. The truth is he failed pretty miserably, as compound and longer versions of the same root words couldn't follow his ideas – some were simply not taken up at all. In the meantime, British English had "standardised" through the compilation of dictionaries and written laws. The origins and etymology of the words are often useful to have, as they help decide the spelling and pronunciation – but getting rid of them obscured their usage history and meaning. Most of the words Webster tried to change were Franco/Latin in origin and used universally in European languages and around the world – so it was an isolationist policy that was eventually dropped.

Webster was a product of the Revolution – the new US was basically isolated from the rest of the western world and populated by non-English-speaking immigrants - one of the first things the new country did was decide what language to use – many did not want English at all...but to this day, there is no official language requirement in the USA

It manifests itself in US culture in that they are the only country in the world who have not adopted the metric system and have very poor foreign language abilities, being unable to apply a universal logic to many words.

53 minutes ago, JAG said:

I managed to communicate with, and persuade coach, inveigle and yes teach my students to produce some English

I could never understand this innate feeling. superiority that teachers had just because their students couldn't speak, read, write or listen to English very well when half of those teachers could hardly speak Thai, let alone the rest of those skills.....

You mean Chom Thien?

23 minutes ago, kwilco said:

I could never understand this innate feeling. superiority that teachers had just because their students couldn't speak, read, write or listen to English very well when half of those teachers could hardly speak Thai, let alone the rest of those skills.....

I really don't think there is much point in continuing with this discussion to be frank.

In the last three responses, quoting parts of my posts, you haven't answered, countered or rebuffed any of the points which I have made - rather used the exchange as a vehicle for demonstrating just how <deleted> clever you are!

Perhaps I may comment though, that whilst you list an impressive set of experiences and qualifications from places as diverse as Morocco and Laos, you don't describe or lay claim to any sustained practical experience of actually teaching in a classroom, choosing rather to rubbish my opinions and throw in comments on "any degree" and "elderly chaps in cargo shorts from Rotherham"!

Perhaps if I may extend your metaphor: those who can do, those who can't teach and those who can't manage either become consultants!

Still rest content, be sure we all admire just how clever you are!

Edited June 10Jun 10 by JAG

27 minutes ago, JAG said:

I really don't think there is much point in continuing with this discussion to be frank.

In the last three responses, quoting parts of my posts, you haven't answered, countered or rebuffed any of the points which I have made - rather used the exchange as a vehicle for demonstrating just how <deleted> clever you are!

Perhaps I may comment though, that whilst you list an impressive set of experiences and qualifications from places as diverse as Morocco and Laos, you don't describe or lay claim to any sustained practical experience of actually teaching in a classroom, choosing rather to rubbish my opinions and throw in comments on "any degree" and "elderly chaps in cargo shorts from Rotherham"!

Perhaps if I may extend your metaphor: those who can do, those who can't teach and those who can't manage either become consultants!

Still rest content, be sure we all admire just how clever you are!

Yes, I have – the topic is 'Why Can't Brits Say "Jomtien"?' – I've explained that and why it's an inaccurate premise.

I haven't and can't explain what you are talking about. I think it's extremely unlikely you would have passed one of my interviews – you're unqualified and have no idea of how to teach. Where did you train??

And then, without an argument, you've resorted to deliberately making up baseless conclusions –" I originally started teaching in Europe (and Morocco) during the 1990s in industry, commerce and university settings. I have also taught in Laos and worked as a consultant responsible for interviewing and recruiting English teachers, including for government schools."

How witless can you be?" - "You don't describe or lay claim to any sustained practical experience of actually teaching in a classroom, choosing rather to rubbish my opinions and throw in comments on 'any degree' and 'elderly chaps in cargo shorts from Rotherham'!" - Obviously touched a nerve!! - "I originally started teaching in Europe (and Morocco) during the 1990s in industry, commerce and university settings. I have also taught in Laos and worked as a consultant responsible for interviewing and recruiting English teachers, including for government schools."

I also had the privilege of training <deleted> tlike you how to teach... which, BTW, also involves classroom experience.

Sorry if you think being "<deleted> clever" is derogatory – but I suppose that's down to your perspective. but then I've studied linguistics and you haven't

Edited June 10Jun 10 by kwilco

4 hours ago, kwilco said:

You also have to identify what you think is "american" English – most people get that wrong

There is one stop sign in American English and another in British English.

51 minutes ago, PoorSucker said:

You mean Chom Thien?

51 minutes ago, PoorSucker said:

You mean Chom Thien?

55 minutes ago, PoorSucker said:

You mean Chom Thien?

THe usual transliteration is "Thian" with an A

On 6/8/2026 at 11:57 PM, HappyExpat57 said:

The one that really gets to me is when ANYONE (not just Brits) pronounce Pattaya pa TIE ya.

I have never heard pa TIE ya

On 6/8/2026 at 7:11 PM, flaming dragon said:

Especially Brit Youtubers consistently call it 'Jontiem'. Is it a form of dyslexia? They seem to be the only nationality that consistently screws up such a simple word.

In fact everyone should pronounce Jomtian, จอมเทียน

4 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

There is one stop sign in American English and another in British English.

This sign became the default in the States in the 1950s and in Europe in 1968 under the Geneva Convention that the US did not sign. The result is that many American road signs do not follow European and world convention – the world system runs on subliminal identification, such as shapes and colour, rather than roads, whereas American signs still have words written all over them, which renders them far less effective. Also one of the factors why the US lags so far behind the rest of the Western world in road safety

1 minute ago, kwilco said:

whereas American signs still have words written all over them, which renders them far less effective. Also one of the factors why the US lags so far behind the rest of the Western world in road safety

We can read in English in the USA, but unfortunately, many Europeans struggle with it.

6 minutes ago, daejung said:

จอมเทียน

Both syllables are flat mid-tones. You need to look at how J, CH, and SH transliterate in Thai as they don't do it easily.

5 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

We can read in English in the USA, but unfortunately, many Europeans struggle with it.

As I explained, reading is not satisfactory – Europeans will know that sign by its shape – but any sign that requires reading reacts more slowly with a driver regardless of what language they speak – hence the agreement at the Vienna convention. te ppoint being you don't HAVE to read it

Edited June 10Jun 10 by kwilco

2 hours ago, Aussie999 said:

Moy Thai is even funnier...if you know then you know.

it's down to tone!

The last couple of hours this thread reminds me of that American chat show host whose catchphrase was 'speak to the hand'