I was doing an AUA Book 3 drill (page 98) with my (non-AUA) teacher today like this:

Question: Is your book made of paper or wood? (หนังสือนี่ทำด้วยกระดาษหรือไม้)

Where such a question has an obvious answer, you might answer "Paper, of course." (ก็กระดาษน่ะซิ)

For my homework, I wrote a series of questions that I thought fit the pattern of obvious answers and did fine, except for this sentence:

คุณชอบอาหารไทยทำไม with an obvious (to me) answer of ก็อร่อยน่ะซิ (Why do you like Thai food? Because it's delicious, of course.)

My teacher said in this particular sentence, the ทำไม had to go to the beginning because otherwise it hurt her ears when she heard me say it. Unfortunately, she couldn't explain beyond that.

In the 5 or 6 examples given in the AUA book, ทำไม comes at the end of the particular sentences given.

My other homework examples (which my teacher said were fine) were:

คุณจะกลับไปอเมริกาทำไม ก็ไปเยียมสูกสาวน่ะซิ

คุณไปนอนทำไม ก็เหนื่อยน่ะซิ

ปิดไดทำไม ก็ประหยัดเงินน่ะซิ

My western brain doesn't decern any difference with the ทำไม at the beginning or at the end. Can anyone help explain the difference?

Thanks from Udon

thammmai is put at the end of afirmative questions and beginning of negative ones?

The difference is that "Going back to US", going to bed, turning off the light" are all involved "action"... while liking Thai food is just a preference.

ex.

ทำไมทำกับชั้นอย่างนี้ ?

คุณทำอย่างนี้กับฉันทำไม?

- why u did that to me?

ไปโรงเรียนทำไม?

ทำไมต้องไปโรงเรียน?

- why we have to go to school?

khun thithi: you seem to be suggesting that both ways are correct; why, then, did the teacher correct the OP on his example?

Is it just the way certain phrases and sentences sound, or are there rules that might determine the proper order in some cases?

Not sure, but I think putting ทำไม at the end makes it a bit more confrontational as if you are criticizing: 'WHY (on earth) do you like Thai food', whereas ทำไม ( ถึง[spoken language]/จึง[written language]) ชอบอาหารไทย sounds more neutral 'Why do/How come you like Thai food?'.

I could be wrong though.

Not sure, but I think putting ทำไม at the end makes it a bit more confrontational as if you are criticizing: 'WHY (on earth) do you like Thai food', whereas ทำไม ( ถึง[spoken language]/จึง[written language]) ชอบอาหารไทย sounds more neutral 'Why do/How come you like Thai food?'.

I could be wrong though.

I would like to second Meadish's feeling. That's the first impression I had also.

Not sure, but I think putting ทำไม at the end makes it a bit more confrontational as if you are criticizing: 'WHY (on earth) do you like Thai food', whereas ทำไม ( ถึง[spoken language]/จึง[written language]) ชอบอาหารไทย sounds more neutral 'Why do/How come you like Thai food?'.

I could be wrong though.

I would like to second Meadish's feeling. That's the first impression I had also.

i have used it at both the start and end of a question, and it has never been commented on (maybe the person i was talking to was too polite to mention it), it is interesting to hear ms say putting it at the end makes it more confrontational, i would have thought putting it at the beginning would have been truer.

the reason i say this is because of the example such as, mua ray khun ja klap baan, as oppossed to khun ja klap baan mua ray.

There are at least two separate but similar meanings of the word "why" in English:

What for (purpose)

Due to what (cause)

In Thai, I have observed that ทำไม is more like the first sense, while เพราะอะไร is more like the second sense. (I think this is what Patri was getting at.) It may be a false dichotomy, but it makes sense to me most of the time.

So ทำไม in the Thai food question may be strange because it's like asking for a justification of the preference, rather than the reasons. And in this scenario (as Meadish pointed out), ทำไม at the end of a sentence is more confrontational.

With a clear question of purpose like "Why are you going back to the U.S.?", your teacher finds it acceptable enough to use ทำไม, even at the end of the sentence. But that doesn't mean it's okay to use those sentences in any situation. Placing ทำไม at the beginning would make them more polite. A sentence like ปิดไฟทำไม is clearly confrontational--you aren't asking neutrally, rather you most likely disagree with their having turned off the lights, and are demanding an explanation. Another strategy for softening this type of phrase is to add หรือ/เหรอ at the end (and even a particle for good measure): ปิดไฟทำไมเหรอครับ? ทำไม by itself is pretty much always a demand. Alternatively, we can employ all the softening strategies at once, which gives: ทำไมถึงปิดไฟเหรอครับ. Very typical of spoken Thai--layered politeness.

So it's not a question of grammaticality, but rather a question of pragmatics--what are you conveying beyond the surface meaning of your words, either by ordering, inclusion or omission?

Edited May 1, 200818 yr by Rikker

rikker,

excellent reply, explaining the nuances of the language in a way that makes it easy for us mere novices to comprehend, thank you.

Putting ทำไม at the end is the spoken language, while putting in the beginning is written one.

We also put ทำไม at the beginning when we speak, but in written one, it's def. wrong if we put it at the end .. just like using "Why" in English Grammar. It must be only at the beginning.

i was about to explain in the ex. i gave above there, but i forgot ... short memo. here lol

Khun Mangkorn - actually both are correct na ka. and it depends on the proper order as well.

Edited May 2, 200818 yr by thithi

]So ทำไม in the Thai food question may be strange because it's like asking for a justification of the preference, rather than the reasons. And in this scenario (as Meadish pointed out), ทำไม at the end of a sentence is more confrontational.

With a clear question of purpose like "Why are you going back to the U.S.?", your teacher finds it acceptable enough to use ทำไม, even at the end of the sentence. But that doesn't mean it's okay to use those sentences in any situation. Placing ทำไม at the beginning would make them more polite. A sentence like ปิดไฟทำไม is clearly confrontational--you aren't asking neutrally, rather you most likely disagree with their having turned off the lights, and are demanding an explanation.

After practicing the page in the AUA book again, trying to substitute ทำไม at the beginning/end, Rikker's explanation makes sense to me. I think J. Marvin Brown's (the author) purpose in the exercise wasn't so much the question, but more giving an obvious answer to someone's question, with the ก็........น่ะซิ added to show the answer was obvious.

When I first started using the AUA books, my teacher took some exception to the style that J. Marvin Brown used in his exercises.....the one that I used in this discussion is a good example. My teacher might have commented about the abrasiveness of the dialogue. Now that I've finished books 1 and 2 and half of 3, I think J. Marvin Brown's purpose is more to drill a pattern......in this case, ก็........น่ะซิ, than to actually suggest using it in a polite conversation. Many of his transformation drills contain nonsensical sentences that I find very challenging when my teacher tries to present them to me in a rapid fire manner. If anyone can recommend any other books that use this sort of drill, I'd like to get my hands on them.

For example:

In a tone manipulation/transformation drill from book 3, my teacher will say, กางมุ้งที่ถนน และขายขวดที่ห้องนอน and I'm supposed to answer กางมุ้งที่ห้องนอน และขายขวดที่ถนน

It's on rare occasions doing closed book, rapid fire, drills like these that I get a sense of responding without doing a mental translation into English. I find them challenging but satisfying.

Sorry to get off track on my original post. As always, thanks for everyone's response.

I agree with Rikker's explanation but I think there are more than that.

As for ทำไม, เพราะอะไร or เพราะเหตุใด, sometimes they can be used alternately.

For examples;

ทำไมคนต่างชาติถึงชอบอาหารไทย

เพราะอะไรคนต่างชาติถึงชอบอาหารไทย

เพราะเหตุใดคนต่างชาติถึงชอบอาหารไทย

All have the same meaning 'why do foreigners like Thai foods?'. But เพราะอะไร and เพราะเหตุใด sound more formal. All can be used in both spoken and written langauges.

Some sentences ทำไม can be at the beginning or the end of the sentence without having different meaning as in thithi's examples.

Asking ปิดไฟทำไม and ปิดไฟทำไมเหรอครับ are different to me. The first one sounds like you are unsatisfied with it but the second one sounds like you don't understand and ask for reason.

Some questions ทำไม and ทำอะไร can be used alternately.

For examples;

Kid: พ่อครับ พรุ่งนี้ผมต้องไปโรงเรียนนะครับ

Dad: (it's during school break) ไปทำไม( เหรอลูก)or ไปทำอะไร(เหรอลูก) . In this case เหรอ can be used to soften the question.

For these examples;

คุณจะกลับไปอเมริกาทำไม ก็ไปเยียมสูกสาวน่ะซิ

คุณไปนอนทำไม ก็เหนื่อยน่ะซิ

ปิดไดทำไม ก็ประหยัดเงินน่ะซิ

These questions do sound confrontational and the answers are even worse. If you really answer these questions like this to others like your boss, you are asking for trouble. It can be used only with your close friends. I don't understand why they have to teach people who are new to the language the word 'น่ะซิ'.

And in this scenario (as Meadish pointed out), ทำไม at the end of a sentence is more confrontational.

I have read somewhere that it is the other way around.

I don't understand why they have to teach people who are new to the language the word 'น่ะซิ'.

I wondered about that one, too. Thanks for making that clear.

in my Colloquial Thai text it says that putting it on the end is common in informal Thai, however, it says it can sound harsh. I think for farang that aren't sure it's probably safest to keep it at the beginning... unless of course, you're trying to be a jerk. lol