Splitting A Sentence Into Words

[coalminer]

I and my wife were helping our daughter (Prathom 1) with her homework and had a problem with a certain phrase.

The object of the excersize was to split a sentence into words.

The following sentence count 4 words according to my wife and a Thai teacher in my neighborhood, but the 4 was redlined by her teacher and replaced with a 5.

นกซื้อเสื้อสีชมพู (Nok buys a pink shirt)

Our solution was 4 words:

นก ซื้อ เสื้อ สีชมพู

But the solution of the Thai teacher was 5 words:

นก ซื้อ เสื้อ สี ชมพู

"Color" and "pink" are seen as 2 words in this case.

But here comes the second and strange part of the explanation why it is seen as 5 words.

"สีชมพู" are seen as 2 words because the word "ชมพู" can also be used to describe the fruit "chompoo".

If the sentence would have been "นกซื้อเสื้อสีแดง (Nok buys a red shirt)", then it would be split into 4 words because "แดง" has no other use as a singular word and thus "สีแดง" would be seen as 1 word.

This is also been explained that way in the teachers book, and thus cannot be refuted.

Or is the teachers book wrong?

How would you see it?

(ภาษาไทย, ป.๑, page 46, sentence 6)

(www.aksorn.com)

[Tywais]

Since the exercise is to pull out as many individual (stand alone) words then the สีชมพู separation makes sense. About the สีแดง since แดง can be used as a noun (for red) or as an adjective such as in มดแดง, เนื้อแดง or แดงจัด and appears it can not stand alone, it would seem to be correct to indicate สีแดง as a single word. Would be interesting to see others view points on this.

//edit - now that I think of it I have never heard แดง used by itself but always combined with another term/word.

[coalminer]

Since the exercise is to pull out as many individual (stand alone) words then the สีชมพู separation makes sense. About the สีแดง since แดง can be used as a noun (for red) or as an adjective such as in มดแดง, เนื้อแดง or แดงจัด and appears it can not stand alone, it would seem to be correct to indicate สีแดง as a single word. Would be interesting to see others view points on this.

//edit - now that I think of it I have never heard แดง used by itself but always combined with another term/word.

From the dictionary (Super dictionary, www.corecell.co.th) :

แดง

(N) red

(v) be revealed, come to light

[DavidHouston]

Coal Miner,

It's a trick question. Many Thai words are compound words, made up of multiple syllables, each syllable of which can be a stand-alone word. The word "เสื้อผ้า" means "clothing" but each of its components "เสื้อ" and "ผ้า" can have an independent meaning; "รถยนต์" means automobile but both the word "รถ" and "ยนต์" have separate meanings.

In your case "สีแดง" means "the color red" but each of its components, "สี" and "แดง" can and are used separately. On this issue I agree with Tywais.

Now, if pedagogically, the teacher is trying to make the point that 1 + 1 can make a number greater than two in a linguistic sense (that is the Gestalt principle that the combination of two elements can create an idea above and beyond the two elements themselves), then this is too complex of an issue for a first grader. Shame on the teacher!

[coalminer]

Coal Miner,

In your case "สีแดง" means "the color red" but each of its components, "สี" and "แดง" can and are used separately. On this issue I agree with Tywais.

Tywais replied that the word "แดง" can not stand alone.

I gave the proof that "แดง" can be used as verb and in this case CAN stand alone.

Now, if pedagogically, the teacher is trying to make the point that 1 + 1 can make a number greater than two in a linguistic sense (that is the Gestalt principle that the combination of two elements can create an idea above and beyond the two elements themselves), then this is too complex of an issue for a first grader. Shame on the teacher!

The quoted sentence comes from a study book for Prathum 1 (1st grade) students.

Thus I would rather put the shame on the writers of this book than on the teacher.

Regards

[yoot]

One thing for sure about study books or exercise books is all of them have errors.

When I got this problem, I wrote some note and let my kids took it to their teachers to explain how it would work.

"สีชมพู" are seen as 2 words because the word "ชมพู" can also be used to describe the fruit "chompoo".

In this case, it's obviously wrong to explain so, because the word for the fruit 'chompoo' is ชมพู่ with low tone mark, notชมพู without tone mark.

[coalminer]

One thing for sure about study books or exercise books is all of them have errors.

Fully agree.

When I got this problem, I wrote some note and let my kids took it to their teachers to explain how it would work.

Could as well commit suicide.

A fahrang telling a Thai teacher that she (the book) is wrong.

"สีชมพู" are seen as 2 words because the word "ชมพู" can also be used to describe the fruit "chompoo".

The strange thing about this, is that 3 Thai teachers I spoke with give 3 different explanations.

Another sentence in the same page has the word "โรงเรียน" (lit. school building) in it and here the correct answer is that the 2 words are seen as 1. Nevertheless, the word "โรง" can be used as a stand alone word (building).

I'm totally confused about this.

In this case, it's obviously wrong to explain so, because the word for the fruit 'chompoo' is ชมพู่ with low tone mark, notชมพู without tone mark.

Your explanation makes sense to me and sounds very acceptable.

This would imply that "สีชมพู" and "สีแดง" would be not split into 2 words.

But then your explanation fails on the word "โรงเรียน".

I can understand now how a 6 year old kid feels about the Thai lessons.

[yoot]

Another sentence in the same page has the word "โรงเรียน" (lit. school building) in it and here the correct answer is that the 2 words are seen as 1. Nevertheless, the word "โรง" can be used as a stand alone word (building).

If this explanation really came out from the P1 teacher, then the problem must be from the teacher herself.

Could you please tell me the name of your daughter's school?

[coalminer]

Another sentence in the same page has the word "โรงเรียน" (lit. school building) in it and here the correct answer is that the 2 words are seen as 1. Nevertheless, the word "โรง" can be used as a stand alone word (building).

If this explanation really came out from the P1 teacher, then the problem must be from the teacher herself.

I doubt that the teacher is to blame as the teacher follows everything exactly as it is written in the books (answers from the workbook for teachers).

Could you please tell me the name of your daughter's school?

Send by PM to you

[rgs2001uk]

One thing for sure about study books or exercise books is all of them have errors.

Fully agree.

When I got this problem, I wrote some note and let my kids took it to their teachers to explain how it would work.

Could as well commit suicide.

A fahrang telling a Thai teacher that she (the book) is wrong.

"สีชมพู" are seen as 2 words because the word "ชมพู" can also be used to describe the fruit "chompoo".

The strange thing about this, is that 3 Thai teachers I spoke with give 3 different explanations.

Another sentence in the same page has the word "โรงเรียน" (lit. school building) in it and here the correct answer is that the 2 words are seen as 1. Nevertheless, the word "โรง" can be used as a stand alone word (building).

I'm totally confused about this.

In this case, it's obviously wrong to explain so, because the word for the fruit 'chompoo' is ชมพู่ with low tone mark, notชมพู without tone mark.

Your explanation makes sense to me and sounds very acceptable.

This would imply that "สีชมพู" and "สีแดง" would be not split into 2 words.

But then your explanation fails on the word "โรงเรียน".

I can understand now how a 6 year old kid feels about the Thai lessons.

Call me cynical, however far from finding this strange i find it to be the norm in Thailand.

I to use nieces and nephews school text books as a source of study, one thing i have found is, not only is it learning by rote, its also teaching by rote.

Dont upset the apple cart, its always been that way, this is the way we have always taught seems to be the attitude of some of the teachers and schools.

[Tywais]

I can understand now how a 6 year old kid feels about the Thai lessons.

So true. I just talked to two staff members here, one a PhD student and the other a Physics professor. Both ended up scratching their heads as to which way is correct.

[yoot]

I can understand now how a 6 year old kid feels about the Thai lessons.

So true. I just talked to two staff members here, one a PhD student and the other a Physics professor. Both ended up scratching their heads as to which way is correct.

Actually both are correct. But the problem is for which level?

For P.1 students who never learn about compound word, this explanation would give only confusion for them. But if they are studying compound word, then this explanation is correct, except saying แดง can't stand alone.

So, for P.1 lesson สีแดง, สีชมพู and โรงเรียน have to be taught as one word, not two.

But for junior high shool students, saying that สีแดง, สีชมพู and โรงเรียน each can be separated to two is correct.

[coalminer]

Just for those that want to repeat the exercise, I have scanned the relevant page in.

Note:

- the corrected answers are written in red (4, 6, 10),

- the remark of "see chomphoo" and "see daeng" is written above line 6,

- the line with "rong rian" is in line 8 and is correct (1 word),

- in line 4, "อู๋รีบ" was considered as a name where the actual name was only "อู๋".

[yoot]

I think the problem is really from the teacher.

Looking at No.10 it's obvious that the teacher was wrong. There is no way to separate that sentence to be 3 words, even for P.1 lesson. Shame on the teacher.

[Rikker]

Yeah, this is really an impossible task, because using only the directions given there is no way to be 100% certain how to define คำ according to their meaning. Saying that there is one meaning of คำ for P.1 students and another meaning of คำ for older students doesn't really work, either, since you can probably expect parents/teacher to be helping the student.

So they're supposed to divine the unspecified intention of the homework, which is then graded inconsistently. As Yoot pointed out, by the teacher's grading, ร้องเพลง is one word and เสียงดัง is one word. How many people, whether P.1 or PhD, do you think would agree with that!

[NaiGreg]

Perhaps the exercise should require the students to identify grammatical elements in the sentence; subject, verb, object, modifier. This eliminates the amiguity introduced by compound words (although maybe too much for P.1 students to grasp, it will at least get the teachers to agree on the correct answers.)

[Milo]

"Could as well commit suicide.

A fahrang telling a Thai teacher that she (the book) is wrong."

Too true, back when I was teaching had a blue with a 55y/o Thai teacher about the pronunciation of 'cousin' and 'fruit juice'. She was adamant it was 'cow-sin' and 'froo-eet joo-eece', hang on a minute my dear, being English isn't this why the school employs me?! Wouldn't even say good morning to me for six months after that little episode!!

[coalminer]

"Could as well commit suicide.

A fahrang telling a Thai teacher that she (the book) is wrong."

Too true, back when I was teaching had a blue with a 55y/o Thai teacher about the pronunciation of 'cousin' and 'fruit juice'. She was adamant it was 'cow-sin' and 'froo-eet joo-eece', hang on a minute my dear, being English isn't this why the school employs me?! Wouldn't even say good morning to me for six months after that little episode!!

5555555555555555555555555555555

Even in your own field, Thai teachers knows the best!!!!!

[Rikker]

Should've told her "soo-eet yowrself!"

[kriswillems]

Details about compound words are given in the P.6 book.

To be honest, even after reading the description in this book I am still not able to say when a noun followed by an adjective ( f.i. เสียงดัง) or a verb followed by a noun (ร้องเพลง) is a compound word.

I think the decision whether a word is a compound word is arbitrary.

But I am not sure the decision is irrelevant because of the following:

I never split words into syllables at the end of a line (I just go to the next line). Is it allowed to split compound words into syllables at the end of line of text?

[Maestro]

Based on the two sample sentences, http://www.thai2english.com seems to do a good job in splitting a sentence into individual words:

นกซื้อเสื้อสีชมพู = 5 words

http://www.thai2english.com/trans.html?query_id=76830

นกซื้อเสื้อสีแดง = 4 words

http://www.thai2english.com/trans.html?query_id=76832

--

Maestro

[mangkorn]

Hmm... Why is "color pink" two words, while "color red" is only one word?

[coalminer]

Based on the two sample sentences, http://www.thai2english.com seems to do a good job in splitting a sentence into individual words:

นกซื้อเสื้อสีชมพู = 5 words

http://www.thai2english.com/trans.html?query_id=76830

นกซื้อเสื้อสีแดง = 4 words

http://www.thai2english.com/trans.html?query_id=76832

--

Maestro

Splitting the given sentence in words with the help of the "Thai2English" dictionary gives the "right" answer as the Thai teacher suggested.

"Chomphoo" is used in trough the dictionary as a singular word with several other meanings and is thus a separate word.

"Daeng" has no singular other meanig as "red" and is thus not a singular word.

But "Daeng" is given as a singular word in other dictionaries (see my previous post on this) and then the theory of the teacher fails.

[Rikker]

That still doesn't make sense--both แดง and ชมพู have one common meaning--the colors. The fruit, ชมพู่, while historically derived from the same word, has a different tone and thus is spelled differently.

Strictly speaking, both have multiple definitions, and red much more than ชมพู. From RID:

แดง ๑ ว. สีอย่างสีเลือดหรือสีชาด, ใช้ประกอบสิ่งต่าง ๆ บางอย่างโดยอนุโลมตามลักษณะสี เป็นชื่อเรียกเฉพาะ เช่น มดแดง ผ้าแดง.

ก. ลักษณะที่ความลับซึ่งปกปิดไว้ได้ปรากฏออกมา เช่น เรื่องนี้แดงออกมาแล้ว.

(ปาก) น. สตางค์ เช่น ไม่มีสักแดงเดียว. (ตัดมาจาก สตางค์แดง).

แดง ๒ น. (๑) ไม้แดง.

(๒) เทียนแดง. (ดู เทียนแดง ที่ เทียน ๓).

แดง ๓ ดู ชะโอน และ เนื้ออ่อน.

ชมพู ๑ (แบบ) น. ไม้หว้า. (ป., ส. ชมฺพุ).

ชมพู ๒ ว. สีแดงอ่อน, สีแดงเจือขาว.

I'd say we can reject that explanation, then. Somebody's arbitrary preference sounds more like the actual answer.

[coalminer]

That still doesn't make sense--both แดง and ชมพู have one common meaning--the colors. The fruit, ชมพู่, while historically derived from the same word, has a different tone and thus is spelled differently.

Strictly speaking, both have multiple definitions, and red much more than ชมพู. From RID:

I'd say we can reject that explanation, then. Somebody's arbitrary preference sounds more like the actual answer.

That explanation fails even more if one looks at the answers given by the teacher on the 9 other sentences (see my previous posts).

Don't forget also that the OP is extracted out of the exercise book of a P1 student!!!!

Still, I'm not sure if one can say that the answers are given arbitrary or are given by someone that only refers to 1 dictionary and rejects all others.

Edited September 19, 2008 by coalminer

[mangkorn]

Well, "sii" (color) is a word, in and of itself. And "daeng" is regularly used without "sii" in front of it - e.g., "traffic light," which is called "fai daeng" much more than "fai sii daeng" - so they seem to clearly be two separate words; if not, then "daeng" used alone would be, what, a half-word?

I don't understand why thai2english.com regards "sii" as a separate word when used with "chompuu," but not when used with "daeng."

[Rikker]

Still, I'm not sure if one can say that the answers are given arbitrary or are given by someone that only refers to 1 dictionary and rejects all others.

Since they're apparently not basing it on any standard definition of คำ, and both native Thai and foreign contributors are unable to identify any logic underlying the correct answers, I think it's safe to call it arbitrary. We've also ruled out mistake as an option, because the teacher defended her choice (with an illogical argument)! Yikes!

Those poor first graders...

[coalminer]

Well, "sii" (color) is a word, in and of itself. And "daeng" is regularly used without "sii" in front of it - e.g., "traffic light," which is called "fai daeng" much more than "fai sii daeng" - so they seem to clearly be two separate words; if not, then "daeng" used alone would be, what, a half-word?

"Daeng" is used in both examples as an adjective to denote the red color.

"Daeng" has in your examples no other meaning than "red".

I don't understand why thai2english.com regards "sii" as a separate word when used with "chompuu," but not when used with "daeng."

Because "chompuu" can have the meaning of denoting the color pink and also the fruit, it has 2 or more different meanings and thus is considered as a separate word.

[coalminer]

Still, I'm not sure if one can say that the answers are given arbitrary or are given by someone that only refers to 1 dictionary and rejects all others.

Since they're apparently not basing it on any standard definition of คำ, and both native Thai and foreign contributors are unable to identify any logic underlying the correct answers, I think it's safe to call it arbitrary. We've also ruled out mistake as an option, because the teacher defended her choice (with an illogical argument)! Yikes!

Those poor first graders...

Dear Rikker, my daughter came on Monday with her Thai homework to us to help her out.

She needed to put 5 sentences into the right order.

My wife and several Thai teachers who use to gather at our home in the evening could not reach a consensus. Each of them had a different solution. And my daughter was convinced that SHE had the right solution.

I told my daughter to write HER solution and not listen to her mother or the Thai teachers.

Tuesday, my wife as anxious to see what remarks the teacher had written in her book and the only note was "10/10 Good work".

Now, 3 days later, my wife and the Thai teachers are still discussing the result and each of them is convinced that she has the right answer.

Call it what you want.

Arbitrary, a mistake, anything.

If Thai is so difficult that 4 full grown and graduated Thais can't reach a consensus about a simple question where a 6 year old can give the right answer, I have only feelings of disgust for the whole Thai learning system.

[DavidHouston]

Sorry, I'm not Rikker,

But, perhaps, Thai syntax is flexible enough to allow multiple correct solutions based on word order. Just because one is correct, that does not invalidate other correct answers.

Congratulations to your daughter for getting 10/10 correct.