Expressing Verb Tenses In Thai

[snowleopard]

We know that English has several verb tenses for past,present and future.

For instance,in active voice of the indicative mood,no less than twelve different tenses can be found.

Verbs in Thai aren't conjugated;but instead,auxiliaries are used to indicate past or future actions!

The most common would be จะ "ja",แล้ว "laeow",and ได้ "dai".

How many separate tenses can be expressed when using the Thai language?

The examples below are some ideas on how to show the English tenses in Thai;eventhough,those particular tenses,with their names,are English and not really Thai in nature.

The verb "to eat" is used throughout because we all need food-so the word กิน "gin" should be well known to everyone browsing these forums.

1.Present Simple: เรากินที่ร้านอาหารแห่งนี้ประจำ "raow gin tee rahn ahaan haeng nee pra-jam"=We regularly eat at this eatery.

2.Present Continuous(progressive):ฉันกำลังกินอาหารเช้าอยู่ "chan gamlang gin ahaan chaow yoo"=I am eating breakfast.

3.Present Perfect: วันนี้เราได้กินสองมื้ออาหารแล้ว "wan nee raow dai gin song meuw ahaan laeow"=We have already eaten twice today.

4.Future Simple: เราจะไปกินที่นั่นวันพรุ่งนี้ "raow ja pai gin tee nan wan prong-nee"=We will eat there tomorrow.

5.Present Continuous Tense for Future: เรากำลังจะกินอาหารเย็นกัน "raow gahm-lang ja gin ahaan yen gun"=We are going to eat dinner together.

เรากำลังจะไปกินที่โน่น "raow gahm-lang ja pai gin tee-noohn"=We are going to go and eat over there.

6.Past Simple Tense: ฉันกินแล้วจึงไม่หิวเลย "chan gin laeow jeung mai he-oh ley" =I ate so I'm not hungry at all.

Apart from the above examples,I've got several suggestions for expressing other verb tenses in Thai both with and without timal adverbs to assist in the effort.

So,does anybody know of some other neat ways of showing tense in Thai?

Now,Username 2004,it's time for you to spring into action and help out with some insightful suggestions on how to use your wonderful vernacular!

Everybody else's input is also welcome... so let's get it on folks!

Cheers.

Snowleopard.

[RamdomChances]

1.Present Simple: เรากินที่ร้านอาหารแห่งนี้ประจำ "raow gin tee rahn ahaan haeng nee pra-jam"=We regularly eat at this eatery

How about the same as above but with "boi = often" rather than "pra-jam=regularly"

raow mai kouy pai talad = we've never been to the market

raow mai kooy pai talad = we seldom go to the market

raow mai dai buy talad = we did'nt go to the market

raow koo-an buy talad = we should go to the market

Ok I find markets simple

Also most thais i talk to shorten gamlang to galang in speach, took me ages to work out!!

[snowleopard]

1.Present Simple: เรากินที่ร้านอาหารแห่งนี้ประจำ "raow gin tee rahn ahaan haeng nee pra-jam"=We regularly eat at this eatery

How about the same as above but with "boi = often" rather than "pra-jam=regularly"

raow mai kouy pai talad = we've never been to the market

raow mai kooy pai talad = we seldom go to the market

raow mai dai buy talad = we did'nt go to the market

raow koo-an buy talad = we should go to the market

Ok I find markets simple

Also most thais i talk to shorten gamlang to galang in speach, took me ages to work out!!

Hi Random Chances!

Good to see you back in action!Were you AWOL?

Here's my take on your tense suggestions!

How about the same as above but with "boi = often" rather than "pra-jam=regularly"

Good!A new frequency adverb but still present simple!

raow mai kouy pai talad = we've never been to the market

Present perfect tense used in a negative statement!Never been at the bazaar up to the present time but still alive and might go there some sunny day!

raow mai kooy pai talad = we seldom go to the market

Present simple t. with a new adverb of frequency!

raow mai dai buy talad = we did'nt go to the market

Past simple tense used in the negative

raow koo-an buy talad = we should go to the market

Good one!Use of a modal auxiliary verb to show what should be done in the future!

Thanks for some fine suggestions Random C. and please keep'em coming,will you?

Cheers.

Snowleopard.

[Richard W]

We know that English has several verb tenses for past,present and future.

For instance,in active voice of the indicative mood,no less than twelve different tenses can be found.

Do you realise what a hornet's nest you may have stirred up by claiming English has a future tense? Be prepared for arguments that English uses a mood; it actually makes sense if you note how often จะ is used in subordinate clauses that could very easily appear in the subjunctive in some Western European languages.

Presumably your 12 tenses are (future/present/past) × (progressive / non-progressive) × (perfect / non-perfect). Your tally overlooked some of the preiphrastic (and modal?) forms, some of which you've used below.

Verbs in Thai aren't conjugated;but instead,auxiliaries are used to indicate past or future actions!

The most common would be จะ "ja",แล้ว "laeow",and ได้ "dai".

How many separate tenses can be expressed when using the Thai language?

The examples below are some ideas on how to show the English tenses in Thai;eventhough,those particular tenses,with their names,are English and not  really Thai in nature.

The verb "to eat" is used throughout because we all need food-so the word กิน "gin" should be well known to everyone browsing these forums.

<Snip>

6.Past Simple Tense: ฉันกินแล้วจึงไม่หิวเลย "chan gin laeow jeung mai he-oh ley" =I ate so I'm not hungry at all.

I'd translate your example as, 'I've already eaten, so I'm not hungry at all.' - present perfect (simple) tense.

Apart from the above examples,I've got several suggestions for expressing other verb tenses in Thai both with and without timal adverbs to assist in the effort.

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

The implications are very different if it is not a good place to eat!

[snowleopard]

We know that English has several verb tenses for past,present and future.

For instance,in active voice of the indicative mood,no less than twelve different tenses can be found.

Do you realise what a hornet's nest you may have stirred up by claiming English has a future tense? Be prepared for arguments that English uses a mood; it actually makes sense if you note how often จะ is used in subordinate clauses that could very easily appear in the subjunctive in some Western European languages.

Presumably your 12 tenses are (future/present/past) × (progressive / non-progressive) × (perfect / non-perfect). Your tally overlooked some of the preiphrastic (and modal?) forms, some of which you've used below.

Verbs in Thai aren't conjugated;but instead,auxiliaries are used to indicate past or future actions!

The most common would be จะ "ja",แล้ว "laeow",and ได้ "dai".

How many separate tenses can be expressed when using the Thai language?

The examples below are some ideas on how to show the English tenses in Thai;eventhough,those particular tenses,with their names,are English and not  really Thai in nature.

The verb "to eat" is used throughout because we all need food-so the word กิน "gin" should be well known to everyone browsing these forums.

<Snip>

6.Past Simple Tense: ฉันกินแล้วจึงไม่หิวเลย "chan gin laeow jeung mai he-oh ley" =I ate so I'm not hungry at all.

I'd translate your example as, 'I've already eaten, so I'm not hungry at all.' - present perfect (simple) tense.

Apart from the above examples,I've got several suggestions for expressing other verb tenses in Thai both with and without timal adverbs to assist in the effort.

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

The implications are very different if it is not a good place to eat!

Do you realise what a hornet's nest you may have stirred up by claiming English has a future tense?

Howdy Richard.

Well...I reckon you actually enjoy having had the hornet's nest stirred up by me Richard;so welcome out of your horny nest now and take a stab at destroying our illusion of a future condition where we have a sense of a tense.

Maybe a relaxed mood would be better than a tense one!

Remember that tense refers to time!

Please open the pandora's box and show us what you've got in there kiddo!

Be prepared for arguments that English uses a mood

Don't get too moody now,will you?

it actually makes sense if you note how often จะ is used in subordinate clauses that could very easily appear in the subjunctive in some Western European languages.

I've never seen the Thai word จะ used in any English sentence.Neither in a subordinate "slave" clause nor in a bossy main clause.Maybe you could meet it in a mixed up English/Thai sentence in the "insanity clause" of a contract!

Presumably your 12 tenses are (future/present/past) × (progressive / non-progressive) × (perfect / non-perfect). Your tally overlooked some of the preiphrastic (and modal?) forms, some of which you've used below.

Presume no more Rickie!These are the 12 tenses in indicative mood of English,which are printed in many text books.

If they are not tenses in your opinion,then you might wanna invite the authors and printing house reps for a semantic debate.Tense is time.

Let me introduce you to all twelve of them.

1.The Simple:Past Simple;+Present Simple;+Future Simple=3 simple tenses.Very simple indeed.

2.The Continuous:Past Con.+;Pres.Con.;+.Future Con.=3 con.tenses.Don't get conned now.Only three.

3.The Perfect:Past Perfect;+Present Perfect;+Future Perfect.=3 perfect tenses.For perfectionists?

4.The Perfect Continuous:Past Perfect Con.+Present Perfect Con.+Future Perfect Con.=3 perfect con.tenses.

According to the laws of thermodynamics the entropy increases and time,as we experience it, moves from the past into the future while by-passing the present.We therefore have three time dimensions-namely past,present and future-which each has four tenses to its name.

3 multiplied by 4 is 12.Twelve tenses.You do the math Rickie!

I guess you could make a case for more than 12 but remember I said,"no less than twelve indicative mood tenses",in my introductory post of this thread.

Your tally overlooked some of the preiphrastic (and modal?) forms, some of which you've used below

I think I was only talking about the indicative mood in my original post and the subjunctive mood was then first introduced by Mr Random Chances na' Isaan in his post.

I'd translate your example as, 'I've already eaten, so I'm not hungry at all.' - present perfect (simple) tense.

You're right that Present Perfect is a good choice in that example because "the eating" has been completed and the result of "the eating action" can still be felt and is evidenced by the satiated tummy;but,the past simple "ate" isn't wrong either.

I choose that example to teach some Thai lingo in the process.In Thai it's the past simple tense.

I would use, "I've already eaten so I'm not hungry at all" when I suspect the hunger might resurface and more eating could occur.

I would use,"I ate.." when the eating session is history;or the lunch hour is up.

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

There will be no such ambiguity left at all Rickie if you could use your Thai more articulately!You could then masterfully elaborate on your concept by volunteering some additional and relevant information for the recipient!

1.คุณเคยกินที่นั่นประจำ "khun khoey gin tee nan pra-jahm"=You used to eat there regularly.

2.คุณเคยกินที่นั่นครั้งเดี่ยว "khun kheuy gin tee-nan khrang dee-o"=You have eaten there once.

The implications are very different if it is not a good place to eat!

Don't worry about that Richard.There are plenty of good restaurant selections for you in Thailand to last several lifetimes.

If the eatery in question ain't no good,it'll soon belong to the annals of history and the past simple tense will prevail!

Hope this concoction is a remedy that helps in your quest.

Snowleopard.

[sabaijai]

Do you realise what a hornet's nest you may have stirred up by claiming English has a future tense? Be prepared for arguments that English uses a mood; it actually makes sense if you note how often จะ is used in subordinate clauses that could very easily appear in the subjunctive in some Western European languages.

Depends, too, on how you define the word 'tense'. I would say that the Thai language has no tenses, only aspect. True tense, as I understand it, comes about through verb declensions. Thai, as has been thoroughly demonstrated in this thread, merely piles other words - acting as modals - before and/or after the verbs to create a time aspect.

These modals don't express future or past time directly, rather they express the perfective status of an action in the case of what we English speakers would think of as past tense, and intention with regard to actions that will take place (in this way Thai is very much like English, which as Richard says, lacks a true future tense).

Of course many Thai language learners find it easier to think in terms of tense. But there usually comes a point where you see that at the very least, 'tense' in Thai differs a lot from 'tense' in English, not just structurally but functionally.

Here's a link to an article on tense vs aspect with regard to Hausa, an African language, but substitute 'Thai' for 'Hausa' and it's applicable for anyone who wants to explore the differences between tense and aspect.

tense vs aspect

Edited August 2, 2004 by sabaijai

[sabaijai]

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

Actually only no 2 is the proper transaltion as เคย does not imply habitual action on its own. As snowleopard pointed out, you'd have to add pra-jam (sorry, using Opera browser at the moment so can't type fresh Thai) at the end to bring that off properly.

Edited August 2, 2004 by sabaijai

[Richard W]

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

Actually only no 2 is the proper transaltion as เคย does not imply habitual action on its own. As snowleopard pointed out, you'd have to add pra-jam (sorry, using Opera browser at the moment so can't type fresh Thai) at the end to bring that off properly.

The problem I have definitely encountered is that many well-educated Thais have been taught that translation (1) is the correct expression of meaning (2). English-speakers are also being taught that "เคย" will convey the meaning 'used to'. There was a discussion of this on thai-language.com, but it's lost until thai-language.com returns.

[meadish_sweetball]

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

Actually only no 2 is the proper transaltion as เคย does not imply habitual action on its own. As snowleopard pointed out, you'd have to add pra-jam (sorry, using Opera browser at the moment so can't type fresh Thai) at the end to bring that off properly.

Could you use "คุณเคย มัก (จะ) กินที่นั่น" (khun khoei mak (ja) kin thii nan) to indicate habit as well?

Is only "prajam" sufficient, or should it rather be "pen prajam"?

[Johpa]

Depends, too, on how you define the word 'tense'. I would say that the Thai language has no tenses, only aspect. True tense, as I understand it, comes about through verb declensions. Thai, as has been thoroughly demonstrated in this thread, merely piles other words - acting as modals - before and/or after the verbs to create a time aspect.

I agree here. English has only two tenses: present and past. Thus we have both present participles and past participles in English but no future participle. Thai has perhaps but a single present tense. Both English and Thai, as well as most other languages of the world can express countless aspects of time without the need for the complications of using verb tenses.

[snowleopard]

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

Actually only no 2 is the proper transaltion as เคย does not imply habitual action on its own. As snowleopard pointed out, you'd have to add pra-jam (sorry, using Opera browser at the moment so can't type fresh Thai) at the end to bring that off properly.

Could you use "คุณเคย มัก (จะ) กินที่นั่น" (khun khoei mak (ja) kin thii nan) to indicate habit as well?

Is only "prajam" sufficient, or should it rather be "pen prajam"?

Hi there Meadish.

I haven't heard มัก (mak);or,มักจะ (mak-ja) used in that context and my guess is that it isn't a good choice.

I might be wrong about not using มักจะ in the situation you describe above so I'll be curious as to what Username 2004 has to say on the issue.

My understanding is that มัก (mak) is very similar to ชอบ (choop) and both imply that the action they describe has an inclination or inherent tendency to be happening frequently.

Both มัก and its synonym ชอบ =probably,likely

Examples using มัก and ชอบ:

1.ที่ภาคเหนือของประเทศสวีเดนหิมะมักจะตกในฤดูหนาว "tee pahk nua korng pra-teht Sweden he-ma mak-ja dtok nai reu-doo naow"=It's likely to snow in northern Sweden during winter.

2.หิมะชอบตกตั้งแต่เดือนตุลาคมถึงเดือนมีนาคม "he-ma choop dtok dtang-dtae deuan dtoh-lah-kom teung deuan me-nah-kom"=It will probably snow from October to March.

3.ที่นี่ฝนชอบตกตอนเย็น "tee-nee fon choop dtok dtohn yen"=It's likely to rain here in the evening.

4.ในฤดูนั้นอากาศมักจะเลว "nai reu-doo nan aah-kaaht mak-ja leow"=During that season the weather is usually bad.

Cheers.

Leopard from the snowy north.

[username2004]

Could you use "คุณเคย มัก (จะ) กินที่นั่น" (khun khoei mak (ja) kin thii nan) to indicate habit as well?

Is only "prajam" sufficient, or should it rather be "pen prajam"?

meadish_sweetball, it's better to say, "คุณกินที่นั่นเป็นประจำ" (khun kin tee nun pen prajam = You always eat there.)

It's even more natural to say:

1. "คุณกินที่ร้านนั้นเป็นประจำ" (khun gin tee ran nun pen prajam = You always eat at that place.)

2. "คุณชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น" (khun chob pai gin tee ran nun = You like to eat at that place. But in Thai, it means, you often eat there.)

All sentences can be both present and past tense, depending on context.

As for this sentence "คุณเคย มัก (จะ) กินที่นั่น," I assume that you wanted to say that "You always ate at that place in the past, but not anymore." To say it in Thai, you can say, "เมื่อหลายปีก่อน คุณชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น แต่ตอนนี้ไม่ได้ไปแล้ว" (mue lhai pee gon / kun chop pai gin tee ran nun / tea ton nee mai dai pai leaw = Several years ago, you liked to eat there, but not anymore.)

pattern: Time + คุณชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น + but not anymore.

4.ในฤดูนั้นอากาศมักจะเลว "nai reu-doo nan aah-kaaht mak-ja leow"=During that season the weather is usually bad.

snowleopard, it's better to use แย่ (yae), instead of เลว (bad).

======

My understanding is that มัก (mak) is very similar to ชอบ (choop) and both imply that the action they describe has an inclination or inherent tendency to be happening frequently.

"มัก" What a complicated word! I've never thought of this complexity before!!!!

snowleopard, all of your sentences illustrate the correct use of มัก.

But มัก also indicates habit. For instance: เค้ามักจะกินข้าวที่นี่ (เป็นประจำ) (koa muk ja gin kow tee nee (pen prajam) = S/he (always) eats/ate here.)

Hope this helps!

[sabaijai]

There's the dangerously ambiguous:

คุณเคยกินที่นั่น "khun khoey kin thii nan" =

1. "You used to eat there."

2. "You have eaten there (at least once)."

Actually only no 2 is the proper transaltion as เคย does not imply habitual action on its own. As snowleopard pointed out, you'd have to add pra-jam (sorry, using Opera browser at the moment so can't type fresh Thai) at the end to bring that off properly.

The problem I have definitely encountered is that many well-educated Thais have been taught that translation (1) is the correct expression of meaning (2). English-speakers are also being taught that "เคย" will convey the meaning 'used to'. There was a discussion of this on thai-language.com, but it's lost until thai-language.com returns.

In both case they've been taught wrong. เคย + verb simply creates the Thai equivalent of present perfect, eg, เคยกิน, in the absence of any other modals, simply means 'have eaten' in reference to a past event.

You can't combine เคย with มักจะ either as the latter refers to a more general time frame that includes the present, more closely allied to the English 'usually' but without being limited to the past, rather including present and future.

To usue 'usually' in reference to the past you'd use 'pokati' or some such adverb.

[meadish_sweetball]

Snöleopard, Användarnamn2004 (Username2004) and Sinnesfrid (sabaijai):

Thank you very much for the clarifications! One more piece added to Meadish' Thai language jigsaw puzzle...

It is very interesting to see how many words are required in Thai to represent a superficially very simple concept in English - and the other way around too, of course. This is what I love about languages - they tell us something about the vastness of human experience and perception.

Let me ask another question:

I would also assume that it does not work to use "khoei" as a time aspect modifier of "chawb", as in my following example, which I assume is ungrammatical?

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

[snowleopard]

Snöleopard, Användarnamn2004 (Username2004) and Sinnesfrid (sabaijai):

Thank you very much for the clarifications! One more piece added to Meadish' Thai language jigsaw puzzle...

It is very interesting to see how many words are required in Thai to represent a superficially very simple concept in English - and the other way around too, of course. This is what I love about languages - they tell us something about the vastness of human experience and perception.

Let me ask another question:

I would also assume that it does not work to use "khoei" as a time aspect modifier of "chawb", as in my following example, which I assume is ungrammatical? 

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

Snöleopard, Användarnamn2004 (Username2004) and Sinnesfrid (sabaijai):

I love it!

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

"keuy choop pai gin tee raan nahn"

It sounds quite ok to me and I might have said it on occasion.

Let's see what Thai language professor Username says.

Cheers.

Snöleoparden

[SweGuava]

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

"keuy choop pai gin tee raan nahn"

It sounds quite ok to me and I might have said it on occasion.

Let's see what Thai language professor Username says.

I am not username, but I can't see that this would be nothing but a perfectly correct way to say "I used to like eating at that restaurant"

I know I have used similar expressions without causing any raised eyebrows.

/Z

[OOLEEBER]

Hi Snowleopard and 2004 and all others,

This is my first post and I only found this forum in the last couple of days but already I've copied and printed many pages of your posts to help me learn Thai.

I live in a villiage 30klm outside Sukhothai with very few Farangs and while this has the benefit of me not having much English communication, I'm forced to speak Thai (willingly I should add) it also restricts me from asking questions about the language that seem to crop up faster than the Morning Glory in my pond. This forum is the perfect remedy and I hope to bug you all with many questions. My wife speaks pretty good English but 50% of the time she can't answer (or I don't understand her explanation), no matter how hard she tries.

I'd like to say thank you to all who have posted and given me some fascinating information to work on. I've lived here for two years and I'm ashamed to say that I only started learning Thai script last week. I have limited time so I'm only up to about 20 letters so far but I love it and already I can recognise letters on road signs etc.. that were for so long so alien to me. It's really a joy and although I'm learning slowly it does seem rather easy. I've yet to learn how I'm supposed to pronounce the letters phoneticaly which does seem rather complicated and then there's many more rules I believe I must master but at this stage I'm raring to go.

I should point out that I have no linguistic skills at all and I only discovered what "classifier' meant today (which is pretty pathetic now that I think about it) but I'll plod on and already I've learned something from your postings. I hope that gives you all some heart. Your contributions to this forum are much much more than a medium that satiates your own love of the language. It helps new commers like me and I'm very grateful. I mean that sincerely.

A note to Snowleopard - I thought you were a bit harsh on Richard in this thread. Your response to him was not in-keeping with your usual rapport with everyone else. Unless of course you've had confilct with him before that I've not read so far. But in any case, this is not a jousting arena. I'm sure you'd agree it's not the place for anger or one-upmanship (if thats how you write it) We all know something and no-one knows everything and all information can be priceless to some receipients. (just my tuppence worth and no criticism intended)

Sorry I don't have a funky picture or GIF to go with the username. I'll work on that later.

Anyway, thanks again to all and any links to Thai learning sites will be warmly received.

OOLEEBER is how Thais pronounce my name, can you work it out?

I'll post this on a new thread too.

[snowleopard]

Snöleopard, Användarnamn2004 (Username2004) and Sinnesfrid (sabaijai):

Thank you very much for the clarifications! One more piece added to Meadish' Thai language jigsaw puzzle...

It is very interesting to see how many words are required in Thai to represent a superficially very simple concept in English - and the other way around too, of course. This is what I love about languages - they tell us something about the vastness of human experience and perception.

Let me ask another question:

I would also assume that it does not work to use "khoei" as a time aspect modifier of "chawb", as in my following example, which I assume is ungrammatical? 

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

Snöleopard, Användarnamn2004 (Username2004) and Sinnesfrid (sabaijai):

I love it!

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

"keuy choop pai gin tee raan nahn"

It sounds quite ok to me and I might have said it on occasion.

Let's see what Thai language professor Username says.

Cheers.

Snöleoparden

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น "keuy choop pai gin tee raan nahn"

Hi again Meadish!

I've been thinking about your expression and I feel quite confident that it's ok to use it unedited!

It shows the past habit and that habit has changed so it's not the same at present time!

Where's username nowdays?

Let me put it this way..

คุณเสือดาวยืนยันว่าการพูดแบบนี้ใช้ได้เลย "kuhn seua-daow yeun-yahn wah gahn pooht baep nee chai dai leuy"=Mr Leopard confirms that it's not hazardous"!

Cheers.

Snowleopard.

[username2004]

Hello all! How are you all doing?

I would also assume that it does not work to use "khoei" as a time aspect modifier of "chawb", as in my following example, which I assume is ungrammatical? 

*เคยชอบไปกินที่ร้านนั้น

meadish_sweetball, it's absolutely grammatical -- but to make it more natural, please add a pronoun "ผม/ดิฉัน" at the beginning.

It is very interesting to see how many words are required in Thai to represent a superficially very simple concept in English - and the other way around too, of course. This is what I love about languages - they tell us something about the vastness of human experience and perception.

Yes, it also amazes me! And I once had a lengthy discussion with my brother on this issue. I observed that English was a "vocabulary" language -- that is, you need to learn vocabulary in order to express your thoughts/feelings. On the other hand, Thai was an "explanatory" language, one that requires its speakers to explain their feelings/thoughts in a series of words, since it has no specific vocabulary. (**I am not sure if my uses of past tense and present tense is appropriate here. So, if anyone could please kindly correct and explain, I'd greatly appreciate it . Thank you in advance.)

Let me clarify my observation with an example:

Calculator = เครื่องคิดเลข (krueng-kid-leg: krueng = machine; kid = to think; leg=numbers)

Notice that the word "calculator" represents an object; but the Thai translation "เครื่องคิดเลข" explains the function of the object (literally means a machine that thinks about numbers).

Please correct me if my observation is wrong.... Or, any thought on the issue?

=====

OOLEEBER, on behalf of all members here, I welcome you to the board.

[snowleopard]

Calculator = เครื่องคิดเลข (krueng-kid-leg: krueng = machine; kid = to think; leg=numbers)

Notice that the word "calculator" represents an object; but the Thai translation "เครื่องคิดเลข" explains the function of the object (literally means a machine that thinks about numbers).

Hello Username

How about abacus ลูกคิด (loohk kit)?Who is thinking in this instance?

ลูก (loohk) refers to child,fruit or brood,doesn't it?

"The kid is thinking"!

There are many words in Thai that have the prefix ลูก (loohk)-e.g.key=ลูกกุญแจ (loohk kuhn-jae);and,employee=ลูกจ้าง (loohk jaang).

Any idea where this affix comes from?

Cheers.

Snowleopard.

[username2004]

Hi all:

How about abacus ลูกคิด (loohk kit)?Who is thinking in this instance? 

ลูก (loohk) refers to child,fruit or brood,doesn't it?

"The kid is thinking"!

snowleopard: I've never thought of it!!

There are many words in Thai that have the prefix ลูก (loohk)-e.g.key=ลูกกุญแจ (loohk kuhn-jae);and,employee=ลูกจ้าง (loohk jaang).

Any idea where this affix comes from?

My guess: notice that they often come in pair:

--ลูกกุญแจ (loohk koon jae = key) vs แม่กุญแจ (mae koon jae = a lock). (Mae = แม่ = mother; loohk = ลูก = a kid). A key (a kid) is smaller than a lock (a mother.)

--ลูกจ้าง vs นายจ้าง (nai jang = an employer) (nai = a pronoun used with men). How can I explain this? I have no idea

[Richard W]

Notice that the word "calculator" represents an object; but the Thai translation "เครื่องคิดเลข" explains the function of the object (literally means a machine that thinks about numbers).

Please correct me if my observation is wrong.... Or, any thought on the issue?

Actually, calculator means 'one who calculates', and 'calculate' originally meant 'to do something with pebbles', presumably a reference to a crude form of abacus. As Snowleopard implicitly pointed out, 'abacus' is the word you wanted. The opposite pattern is shown by 'computer' in English and Thai. The Thai borrowing merely means the machine, but the English word means 'person or thing who computes'. ('Computer' used to be an occupation!)

[meadish_sweetball]

Good point, Richard.

However, the problem for ESL learners such as Username2004 and myself, is that 'calculate' is a comparatively uncommon word, and the fact that it has to do with 'counting with little rocks' is by no means obvious, whereas a person who knows the basic vocabulary of Thai will inuitively understand 'khrueang khit lek'.

To sum it up - several Thai words are very obvious explanations of what they describe, even to someone with a limited vocabulary.

English, mainly due to the influence from French and Latin, tends to have more words which are less obvious to a second language learner (unless he or she speaks a Roman language fluently, of course...).

This is of course just a tendency - there are plenty of Sanskrit, Pali and Khmer-derived words in today's Thai, and I have also noticed a strong fondness among Thais to use the 'difficult' words whenever possible, even when there are good synonyms within the vernacular.

The same phenomenon as in English really; many native speakers of English prefer Latin-based synonyms, probably because the use of 'difficult' words adds more weight to one's opinions (difficult words signal education).

[snowleopard]

Notice that the word "calculator" represents an object; but the Thai translation "เครื่องคิดเลข" explains the function of the object (literally means a machine that thinks about numbers).

Please correct me if my observation is wrong.... Or, any thought on the issue?

Actually, calculator means 'one who calculates', and 'calculate' originally meant 'to do something with pebbles', presumably a reference to a crude form of abacus. As Snowleopard implicitly pointed out, 'abacus' is the word you wanted. The opposite pattern is shown by 'computer' in English and Thai. The Thai borrowing merely means the machine, but the English word means 'person or thing who computes'. ('Computer' used to be an occupation!)

the English word means 'person or thing who computes'.  ('Computer' used to be an occupation!)

Very good post Richard,and a very elucidating explanation of the word "computer".

I've seen some pictures taken way back in the last century which show entire offices filled to the brink with old fashioned human "computers"!

In those pix,scores of employees are sitting behind their desks while computing manually.

Their combined effort in the "labor camp" and the computing power they could produce wouldn't even match an outdated PC of today's world!

Cheers.

Snowleopard.

[snowleopard]

Snöleopard, Användarnamn2004 (Username2004) and Sinnesfrid (sabaijai):

Sinnesfrid[/i](sabaijai):

Hej Meadish,

Tack för den finurliga och passande översättningen till Svenska av Thailändska Sabaijai!

Jag trodde nog att det borde betyda något i stil med "Hjärtstillestånd".

Hälsningar.

Snö Leo.

[Neeranam]

To sum it up - several Thai words are very obvious explanations of what they describe, even to someone with a limited vocabulary.

Very true. I tried to get the word for rolling pin, and all I got was, "mai nuat baeng" - wood massage flour