Is Thai Really That Hard To Learn?

[Boon Mee]

I think that the conclusion is that Thai is a relatively difficult language to learn for an adult native speaker of English.  Not that it in itself is inherently more structurally complex than other languages.

For the most part you guys - BG's (Big Guns) are genuine linguists. My question - I've heard/read that the Basque language is rated as supposedly the most difficult to learn. Partly due I imagine to the geographic location ie way up in the Pyrenees. Any thoughts?

Thanks!

[sabaijai]

The Basques are known to have had their distinctive language as early as 7,000 BC, and they have the last remaining non-IndoEuropean language in the area. Their language, Euskara, is the oldest surviving language in all of Europe; many of their words for tools still incorporate the word for stone.

From about the 6th century BC, the Indo-European culltures wiped out all of the pre-Indo-European languages in Europe except for Basque. Attempts to link the Basque language with others, such as the Berbers of northern Africa, the Mayans and Old Sanscrit have not worked out. Basque has not been shown to be related to any other language on earth.

Those used to European languages found Basque very difficult to learn. There was an old story that the devil spent seven years among the Basques to learn their language, but only managed to learn three words; when he crossed a bridge to leave the land of the Basques, he forgot those. Many Basque words have entered other European languages. For example, laranga ('that which was first eaten') is the origin of the word orange (one of the few words in the English language that no other word rhymes with), and Basque sailors swearing 'by Janicot' gave rise to the British 'by jingo.'

The strong tradition of oral wisdom among the Basques is replete with dozens of well-used proverbs. Here are three:

1. "Gaua, gogapenen ama." -- 'The night is the mother of thought.'

2. "Izena duen guztiak izatea ere badauje." -- 'Everything with a name exists.'

3. "Nola soinu, hala dautza." -- 'Each kind of music calls for its own kind of dance.'

from:

basque stuff

[bannork]

'[For the most part you guys - BG's (Big Guns) are genuine linguists. My question - I've heard/read that the Basque language is rated as supposedly the most difficult to learn. Partly due I imagine to the geographic location ie way up in the Pyrenees. Any thoughts?'

So come on Firefoxx, you want a challenge, now you've got one. Pick up your Thai-Basque dictionary, get stuck into those Basque soaps, immerse yourself in the deep snow of the Pyrenees,(watch out for the snowleopards though and beware of the sounds of car bombs in the background). You should be able to master it in 2 years.

bannork.

[farang24]

Quite a few posters here reckon they can read the newspaper back the front and not find any word, expression or idiom that they don't understand.

Frankly, I doubt it.

In fact I would love to put you guys to the test and have a little wager on it.

As for the degree of difficulty well any language when you are an adult is hard to learn as it requires a lot of dedication.

Motivation really is the key to learning languages thou.

If you are sufficiently motivated to learn Thai i am sure you will eventually grasp a working knowledge of the language.

Now it may indeed be theoretically easier to learn another European language if you are a westerner but if you don't have the motivation and desire and dedication you will not be successful in reaching a workable knowlege of the language.

[Firefoxx]

Please, bannork. The flame wars are over. There's already enough bad karma in this board. Don't needlessly add to it.

I never said that I wanted a challenge. I have enough challenges in my life.

I still haven't gotten around to doing the newspaper test, with the Washington Post (a popular, local newspaper read by many Americans) and Thairath (ditto, for Thais).

I think that motivation does play a major part in the language learning process, since it plays a major part in any learning process. I'd like to learn Japanese, but since my prospects for actually going to Japan are slim, I'm hardly motivated.

[bannork]

Please, bannork.  The flame wars are over.  There's already enough bad karma in this board.  Don't needlessly add to it.

Apologies, Firefoxx, for my frivolous comments, but don't take life too seriously, this is LOS, you're not in the USA now, you can relax.

If you're harbouring notions of going to Japan I think I can help you there; go to Banglampoo, Khaosan road and its offshoots. There are hundreds of cute, independent travelling Japanese girls looking for fun, adventure and a taste of the exotic; a little bit of cultural exchange there, coupled with a marriage certificate, could see you in The Land Of The Rising Sun before you've learnt the Japanese conjunctions.

bannork.

[meadish_sweetball]

Quite a few posters here reckon they can read the newspaper back the front and not find any word, expression or idiom that they don't understand.

Frankly, I doubt it.

In fact I would love to put you guys to the test and have a little wager on it.

As for the degree of difficulty well any language when you are an adult is hard to learn as it requires a lot of dedication.

Motivation really is the key to learning languages thou.

If you are sufficiently motivated to learn Thai i am sure you will eventually grasp a working knowledge of the language.

Now it may indeed be theoretically easier to learn another European language if you are a westerner but if you don't have the motivation and desire and dedication you will not be successful in reaching a workable knowlege of the language.

And if someone has chopped off all your limbs you'll also find it hard to learn how to do the Charleston.

[timonase]

I wasn't trying to be original, rather I was trying to get comments on why westerners consider Thai to be so hard when it is actually much simpler and more structured than English. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all i dont want to compare my thai to yours at all, i still consider myself as a beginner++(after living here for 4 years). I can speak, i can read, but i would never call me fluent or say about myself i didnt have an accent at all.

But now to what i wanted to say, according to your quote, you compare english, the maybe easiest language in the world, with thai? Give me a break, i learnt english myself as i am not a native speaker and after 10 years only living in english speaking countries or now for four years in bangkok, living with native english speakers i can say i come close to be fluent.

But trying to learn thai, is far more complicated for me(eventhough i work with many thais). Also, please if you want to compare the difficulties of the thai language dont take the simple english as an comparison point, try turkish for example( one of the more tricky euro-asian languages or german)

Again, i dont want to doubt your abillity to handle thai but be resonable.

[Boon Mee]

'[For the most part you guys - BG's (Big Guns)  are genuine linguists. My question - I've heard/read that the Basque language is rated as supposedly the most difficult to learn. Partly due I imagine to the geographic location ie way up in the Pyrenees. Any thoughts?'

So come on Firefoxx, you want a challenge, now you've got one. Pick up your Thai-Basque dictionary, get stuck into those Basque soaps, immerse yourself in the deep snow of the Pyrenees,(watch out for the snowleopards though and beware of the sounds of car bombs in the background). You should be able to master it in 2 years.

bannork.

Thanks much, sabaijai!

I worked in Bilbao for a spell and can honestly say I don't remember a word of Basque. Didn't know that the Spanish word for "Orange" is a Basque derivative. Fascinating people though I wouldn't want to cross one in the slightest.

[meadish_sweetball]

I wasn't trying to be original, rather I was trying to get comments on why westerners consider Thai to be so hard when it is actually much simpler and more structured than English. 

First of all i dont want to compare my thai to yours at all, i still consider myself as a beginner++(after living here for 4 years). I can speak, i can read, but i would never call me fluent or say about myself i didnt have an accent at all.

But now to what i wanted to say, according to your quote, you compare english, the maybe easiest language in the world, with thai? Give me a break, i learnt english myself as i am not a native speaker and after 10 years only living in english speaking countries or now for four years in bangkok, living with native english speakers i can say i come close to be fluent.

But trying to learn thai, is far more complicated for me(eventhough i work with many thais). Also, please if you want to compare the difficulties of the thai language dont take the simple english as an comparison point, try turkish for example( one of the more tricky euro-asian languages or german)

Again, i dont want to doubt your abillity to handle thai but be resonable.

Sorry, but you're missing the point as well, that it chiefly depends on your background (language group/relative language proximity, age, stimulation of language-related skills in your environment, previous languages mastered.)

It is just as wrong to state that English is one of the easiest languages in the world as it is to state that Thai is.

It depends on your starting point. Of course, if you speak one or more Northern European languages from the start and have been exposed to latin-derived vocabulary through studies of science or direct studying of a Romance language, you will find it very easy to learn English, but not so if you are 40 years old and your starting point is Japanese with no previous exposure to European languages.

[timonase]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, but you're missing the point as well, that it chiefly depends on your background (language group/relative language proximity, age, stimulation of language-related skills in your environment, previous languages mastered.)

It is just as wrong to state that English is one of the easiest languages in the world as it is to state that Thai is.

It depends on your starting point. Of course, if you speak one or more Northern European languages from the start and have been exposed to latin-derived vocabulary through studies of science or direct studying of a Romance language, you will find it very easy to learn English, but not so if you are 40 years old and your starting point is Japanese with no previous exposure to European languages.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, firefox, there we go! So who stated in the original threat that Thai was not hard to lern?? You!! Coming to thailand, at a quite young age, so for YOU it wasnt that hard!!!!

Anyways, i am far off, wanting to fight with you as many others have done before, the only thing i would recommend to you is to be as diplomatic in your original threads as you try to be now.

To the english language, its not wrong to say that it is one of the easier languages in the world. as it is!!

I have two mother tounges, German and turkish, but grew up in germany. My father is turkish, so i was raised bilingual. Still, i have an german accent in my turkish so........ i dont want to comment on your statement, of not having an accent in your Thai AT ALL........

People, say the cannot here a german accent when i talk english, rather a brummi accent. Do i have to believe them, i rather think they mean, its as close as it gets to being gone. Always be careful with terms like "perfection" or "nobody" can hear the different.

Well, you neither dis-or encouraged me to learn, i just keep on learning anyway, whether its thai, english or even german and turkish.

cheers

[RDN]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, but you're missing the point as well, that it chiefly depends on your background (language group/relative language proximity, age, stimulation of language-related skills in your environment, previous languages mastered.)

It is just as wrong to state that English is one of the easiest languages in the world as it is to state that Thai is.

It depends on your starting point. Of course, if you speak one or more Northern European languages from the start and have been exposed to latin-derived vocabulary through studies of science or direct studying of a Romance language, you will find it very easy to learn English, but not so if you are 40 years old and your starting point is Japanese with no previous exposure to European languages.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, firefox, there we go! So who stated in the original threat that Thai was not hard to lern?? You!! Coming to thailand, at a quite young age, so for YOU it wasnt that hard!!!!

Anyways, i am far off, wanting to fight with you as many others have done before, the only thing i would recommend to you is to be as diplomatic in your original threads as you try to be now.

To the english language, its not wrong to say that it is one of the easier languages in the world. as it is!!

I have two mother tounges, German and turkish, but grew up in germany. My father is turkish, so i was raised bilingual. Still, i have an german accent in my turkish so........ i dont want to comment on your statement, of not having an accent in your Thai AT ALL........

People, say the cannot here a german accent when i talk english, rather a brummi accent. Do i have to believe them, i rather think they mean, its as close as it gets to being gone. Always be careful with terms like "perfection" or "nobody" can hear the different.

Well, you neither dis-or encouraged me to learn, i just keep on learning anyway, whether its thai, english or even german and turkish.

cheers

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whose post are you replying to, timonase???

[timonase]

sorry, indeed looks a bit confusing, i replied to a earlier answer from firefox, regarding me!!

[meadish_sweetball]

sorry, indeed looks a bit confusing, i replied to a earlier answer from firefox, regarding me!!

Merhaba Timonase!

I still think it is simplified to say that English is one of the easiest languages in the world. It depends where your starting point is. It has its own difficulties such as its spelling/pronunciation, and a larger vocabulary than many other languages.

You grew up in Europe with ready access to English/American culture, which in many ways is similar to the German culture you had around you when growing up (at least if you compare it to the situation for somebody of your age group who grew up in the Middle East, Far East or French-speaking Africa).

When you started to learn English, you had probably already mastered German and Turkish to a great degree, right?

I think that makes a huge difference.

German and Turkish belong to two different language families (Indo-European and Altaic) and your understanding of the differing tense concepts, inflictions and cases involved in both these languages should have ensured you found it rather easy to learn English, in comparison to German or Turkish.

This still says very little about how easy or difficult it is for a Japanese, Samoan, Aztec or Mongolian to learn English.

[meadish_sweetball]

sorry, indeed looks a bit confusing, i replied to a earlier answer from firefox, regarding me!!

Merhaba Timonase!

I still think it is simplified to say that English is one of the easiest languages in the world. It depends where your starting point is. It has its own difficulties such as its spelling/pronunciation, and a larger vocabulary than many other languages.

You grew up in Europe with ready access to English/American culture, which in many ways is similar to the German culture you had around you when growing up (at least if you compare it to the situation for somebody of your age group who grew up in the Middle East, Far East or French-speaking Africa).

When you started to learn English, you had probably already mastered German and Turkish to a great degree, right?

I think that makes a huge difference.

German and Turkish belong to two different language families (Indo-European and Altaic) and your understanding of the differing tense concepts, inflictions and cases involved in both these languages should have ensured you found English easy/uncomplicated, in comparison to German or Turkish.

This still says very little about how easy or difficult it is for a Japanese, Samoan, Aztec or Mongolian to learn English.

[Firefoxx]

timonase: I don't understand much of what you are trying to say, but I'll try my best to reply.

Yes, I did say that I thought that Thai was relatively easier than English (which is coincidentally hard for Thais, Japanese, French, etc. etc., but easy for English speakers), and I gave comparisons on why I thought it was so, and invited comments on what other people thought on the subject. Again, my original statement was that Thai should not be considered as being *that* hard to learn, explained already as having the honor of being one of the top ten hardest languages to learn. I really couldn't compare Thai to any other language like Turkish since I don't speak any other language and have little or no knowledge of said languages. And again, the (sort of) conclusion from this thread is that Thai is indeed difficult for adult native English speakers.

People who speak two languages fluently are bilingual (yes, there are scientific definitions, but that's the rough meaning). They do exist, and they do speak without any accent. I personally know of quite a few. They are the minority, but that doesn't mean that they can be ignored. My fluency has already been explained by the experts as arising from my age of learning. However, I've already talked extensively on this topic, and I really don't want the repeat myself yet again.

I can't find any earlier response from you (and a reply from me) in this thread. Am I mistaken? Are you perhaps talking about another thread?

I'm not very diplomatic, but I think that I was pretty civil considering the circumstances. I doubt that this thread became ugly because I wasn't a great diplomat. Who is?

[sabaijai]

People who speak two languages fluently are bilingual (yes, there are scientific definitions, but that's the rough meaning). They do exist, and they do speak without any accent. I personally know of quite a few. They are the minority, but that doesn't mean that they can be ignored.

Not putting words in your mouth, only what I read between the lines: I became fluent in Thai in two years, I'm in the minority.

You and your bilingual acquaintances are not in the minority of language learners given the context (totally immersed as children) in which you learned Thai. You would be unusual only if you hadn't learned Thai in such circumstances. You're completely normal, language-wise.

In fact there must be far more foreign-born residents in Thailand who became fluent at an early age than there are foreign-born residents who became fluent after studying as adults.

Now, had you arrived as an adult and become bilingual (I'm assuming you consider yourself biingual), we'd be impressed. Those are truly in the minority. I've only known one person who could really claim to native fluency as an adult learner. I've mentioned his case in another thread on adult fluency (anyone remember tv.com member 'mrentoul'? Now there was a fierce critic of the notion of fluency, on this forum). He was an American named Jerry Gainey who initially came to Thailand as a Peace Corps volunteer. He served in Surin, and not only learned Thai but Khmer while he was there. He later - about 10 years after arriving in Thailand as I recall - entered Thai university (Chulalongkorn or Thammasat, I forget which), and when he took the government entrance Thai language test, attained the highest score anyone (including native Thais) had ever achieved. Not that this remarkable feat itself is a necessary gauge of native fluency. Obviously he could've scored much lower and still have had native proficiency.

So yes adult SL native proficiency does happen, but it's rare. Your case is not rare.

Does anyone else here know any native English speakers who arrived as adults and achieved native fluency? I do know a considerable number of adult learners who manage very well in Thai but not so well that you would mistake them as native speakers if you were, for example, to read a page or two of their Thai writing.

[Firefoxx]

I did say minority, but I didn't say anything about being rare. To me, rare is something like an endangered species, less than a few hundred in the world rare. I also meant minority in the sense of learners of Thai, basically we are fewer in number than others. Saying that I personally know of quite a few also doesn't constitute "rare", since that means that there should be plenty others that I don't know of. I also didn't say that they were totally immersed, I only said that I was.

The reason I mentioned this was because, to many people in this forum, people who are learners of Thai and functionally fluent in Thai constitute such a minority in the way of things (pertaining to Thai learning) that we simply do not exist, and therefore do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. This was mentioned before, and I was speaking in this context since timonase brough it up.

I don't really know if we (in the real world "out there") would really outnumber adult learners of Thai. Somehow I doubt it, since I consider even casual adult leaners of Thai to be students of Thai, as long as the effort is being made. I also don't consider everyone who browses/contributes to this forum to be a leaner of Thai, since this is simply the "Thai language" forum, not the "Adult Native English speakers learning Thai" forum. I'm still learning Thai, not actively (as in taking classes and whatnot), but rather in the sense that, as said before, nobody ever stops learning a language. Therefore, I'm also not a true learner of Thai.

I really wasn't trying to impress anyone, since I think what I did wasn't extraordinary in any way. Seems like the concept still lingers. I think I also did agree, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, that adult SL Thai proficiency by a native English speaker, is very improbable, therefore rare.

Back to the newspaper theme: Another Thai friend of mine, a graduate of Chula and now studying for a masters degree, told me that it would be improbable for him to be able to read a Thai newspaper, front to back, and be able to know every word. He said that he, like any other Thai (or American or whatever), would probably be able to guess the meaning of any unknown word from the context. However, he's pretty sure that he doesn't know the meaning of every world in a Thai newspaper.

[booma]

I often hear that Thai is one of the top ten "difficult to learn" languages of the world.  I really don't think so... in fact, I think that it's easier to learn than English.  Let's compare some aspects of the Thai and English language:

Spelling: Thai is a lot more strict about the pronunciation of a certain word.  Once you know the rules, you can usually read any written Thai word without any problem.  English on the other hand is a mishmash of different languages and English words can be spelled any which way.  Take "two" for instance... if it were to follow the usual rule, you would be saying "ta-woe", but instead you're supposed to say "too".  Or was it "to"?  Then there's tough, which is spelled similarly to dough, but pronounced waaay differently, not to mention "doe".

Tones: This is the "killer" that most foreigners stumble on.  However, English also has tones very similar to Thai.  The big difference is that in English you can vary the tones depending on what you want to say, while in Thai it's set in stone.  Take for example the word "computer".  In a typical sentence, the tones would be "neutral-rising-low", but when it ends a question, it would be "neutral-rising-high".  Using different tones would make it sound strange, just like in Thai.  That's the reason why so many foreigners don't like the Thai pronunciation of English words, because Thais have set the tone to their own arbitrary way.

Adjectives and adverbs: In English, the adjectives are usually in the front and adverbs are usually in the back.  In Thai, both adverbs and adjectives are in the back.  I think that's even simpler than before.

Amount, degree, tense: In English, you have plurals to represent "more than one".  You also have tenses of words, many of which require memorization.  Then there's the "quick, quicker, quickest" fiasco.  Thais learning English always have trouble with these permutations.  Why?  Because Thai doesn't have these things.  There are no plurals, degrees, or tenses of words.  In Thai, you add the appropriate description: cows->many cow, quicker->more quick, worked->had work.  I think this is much easier than memorizing arbitrary permutations.

Can't think of any more right now.  Any comments on my theories?

In my case, I was able to speak Thai fairly well within a few months, fluently within a year, and was able to read/write fluently within 2 years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cactus = Cacti

Octopus = Octopi

Walrus = Walrusses

Y?

I think this was it .

Taken from a ntoilet door in BKK.

[meadish_sweetball]

I often hear that Thai is one of the top ten "difficult to learn" languages of the world.  I really don't think so... in fact, I think that it's easier to learn than English.  Let's compare some aspects of the Thai and English language:

Spelling: Thai is a lot more strict about the pronunciation of a certain word.  Once you know the rules, you can usually read any written Thai word without any problem.  English on the other hand is a mishmash of different languages and English words can be spelled any which way.  Take "two" for instance... if it were to follow the usual rule, you would be saying "ta-woe", but instead you're supposed to say "too".  Or was it "to"?  Then there's tough, which is spelled similarly to dough, but pronounced waaay differently, not to mention "doe".

Tones: This is the "killer" that most foreigners stumble on.  However, English also has tones very similar to Thai.  The big difference is that in English you can vary the tones depending on what you want to say, while in Thai it's set in stone.  Take for example the word "computer".  In a typical sentence, the tones would be "neutral-rising-low", but when it ends a question, it would be "neutral-rising-high".  Using different tones would make it sound strange, just like in Thai.  That's the reason why so many foreigners don't like the Thai pronunciation of English words, because Thais have set the tone to their own arbitrary way.

Adjectives and adverbs: In English, the adjectives are usually in the front and adverbs are usually in the back.  In Thai, both adverbs and adjectives are in the back.  I think that's even simpler than before.

Amount, degree, tense: In English, you have plurals to represent "more than one".  You also have tenses of words, many of which require memorization.  Then there's the "quick, quicker, quickest" fiasco.  Thais learning English always have trouble with these permutations.  Why?  Because Thai doesn't have these things.  There are no plurals, degrees, or tenses of words.  In Thai, you add the appropriate description: cows->many cow, quicker->more quick, worked->had work.  I think this is much easier than memorizing arbitrary permutations.

Can't think of any more right now.  Any comments on my theories?

In my case, I was able to speak Thai fairly well within a few months, fluently within a year, and was able to read/write fluently within 2 years.

Cactus = Cacti

Octopus = Octopi

Walrus = Walrusses

Y?

I think this was it .

Taken from a ntoilet door in BKK.

Why? Because 'walrus' is not Latin, it's a borrowing from Dutch so it can take a "natural" plural ending.

--------

walrus

1655, from Du. walrus, which was probably a folk-etymology alteration (by influence of Du. walvis "whale" and ros "horse") of a Scand. word, such as O.N. rosmhvalr "walrus," hrosshvalr "a kind of whale," or rostungr "walrus." O.E. had horschwæl, and later morse, from Lapp morsa or Finnish mursu.

[Richard W]

Octopus = Octopi

Walrus  = Walrusses

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And the first is bad English! The classical plural is supposed to be octopodes, so one should stick to octopuses.

Walrusses must be American; British English is walruses.

[Richard W]

Do Thais make up compounds like ปักษวายู up on the fly? If they do, unsilencing final letters (the ษ of ปักษ์) is quite comparable to remembering English past tenses. (It's taken me a couple of days to decide that ปักษวายู means 'wing storm'.)

[chuchok]

Gee you guys have big brains

I got lost after the 2nd post.

[snowleopard]

Octopus = Octopi

Walrus   = Walrusses

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And the first is bad English! The classical plural is supposed to be octopodes, so one should stick to octopuses.

Walrusses must be American; British English is walruses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not American English either.

one walrus_many walrus;or,many walruses

For octopus,both octopuses and octopodes are correct plurals.

Neither octopi nor octopussies is correct;

eventhough,the latter sounds kinda interesting.

Eight of a kind.

Snowleopard

[Richard W]

Do Thais make up compounds like ปักษวายู up on the fly?  If they do, unsilencing final letters (the ษ of ปักษ์) is quite comparable to remembering English past tenses.  (It's taken me a couple of days to decide that ปักษวายู means 'wing storm'.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Correction: That's ปักษวายุ, not ปักษวายู.

Where's the edit button gone? I can't find it this afternoon!

It came back as soon as I posted this. The matter's being discussed at Forum Support.

[Firefoxx]

Actually, it's ปักษาวายุ (buk sa wa yoo)

It follows the general rules of re-using old syllables. One example is อนุรักษ์ (a noo ruk=preservation), the ending ruk comes from รักษา (ruk sa=heal).

Wa yoo is the archaic word used in most literary things, so you'll have ดาบวายุ (wind sword) วายุอินทรีย์ (wind hawk) พฤกษาวายุ (wind plant) วายุพิฆาต (death wind) etc etc. Combine two archaic words and you have a very authentic looking new word that draws attention.

At least they're original when it comes to names for Thai movies. Translated Chinese movie names are usually very cliche.

[meadish_sweetball]

Actually, it's ปักษาวายุ (buk sa wa yoo)

It follows the general rules of re-using old syllables.  One example is อนุรักษ์ (a noo ruk=preservation), the ending ruk comes from รักษา (ruk sa=heal). 

Wa yoo is the archaic word used in most literary things, so you'll have ดาบวายุ (wind sword) วายุอินทรีย์ (wind hawk) พฤกษาวายุ (wind plant) วายุพิฆาต (death wind) etc etc.  Combine two archaic words and you have a very authentic looking new word that draws attention.

At least they're original when it comes to names for Thai movies.  Translated Chinese movie names are usually very cliche.

Speaking of which, my GF was really irritated at the Thai translation of the Chinese Martial arts flick "House of Flying Daggers" by Zhang Yimou, into "baan miid bin".

I realize it doesnt sound half as good in Thai as it does in English, somehow comes off more as a kitchen comedy than a martial arts saga.

Any suggestions for a better translation and/or an analysis of why the Thai translation sounds so bad? Is it to do with the connotations of "bin"?

[Firefoxx]

Yes, บ้านมีดบิน to a Thai would sound like "house with knives flying" in English, but the full title is actually "จอมใจบ้านมีดบิน" or "the romantic of the house with knives flying", a bit less idiotic (or is it more?). If you take a bit of poetic license, ศาสตราวายุ would sound convincingly archaic, and would mean "weapons of the wind".

I haven't actually seen the movie, so I don't know what "house" refers to, an actual house or a family. If it's a family, "จอมใจโคตรมีดบิน" would be more suitable. จอมยุทธโคตรมีดบิน would be "martial artist of the flying dagger family".

[meadish_sweetball]

Yes, บ้านมีดบิน to a Thai would sound like "house with knives flying" in English, but the full title is actually "จอมใจบ้านมีดบิน" or "the romantic of the house with knives flying", a bit less idiotic (or is it more?).  If you take a bit of poetic license, ศาสตราวายุ would sound convincingly archaic, and would mean "weapons of the wind".

I haven't actually seen the movie, so I don't know what "house" refers to, an actual house or a family.  If it's a family, "จอมใจโคตรมีดบิน" would be more suitable.  จอมยุทธโคตรมีดบิน would be "martial artist of the flying dagger family".

It's a secret society conspiring to overthrow the regime.