Remembering Tones

[hiero]

Hi guys, been a lurker for a while but thought i'd join in.

I'm probably, hmm, dunno, around intermediate level maybe.

The last week i've been formally learning tones, the rules as such, i didn't really bother before and just kinda had the tone right by parrot fashion speaking with friends.

Now, it all makes sense, i have a chart where you can determine tones based on the consonant and sounds etc etc, this is not a problem and i'm also getting a lot better at determining which tones are which thanks to this..

http://www.thai-language.com/id/798459

So currently I can read syllables and then compare them to the chart to check the tone or i can (if it's a word I know) visualize the word and then make an educated guess as to what tone it is and this is getting easy the more i practice.

but...

how do you remember them each and every time you speak, without having to do this sort each and every time. I'm sure the answer is practice, but it just seems like such a difficult thing to accomplish. Is this something that very advanced foreigner speakers spend doing when learning thai or the most difficult thing to get perfect when you are in advanced stages? perhaps i'm running before i can walk worrying about it :/

[meadish_sweetball]

I was taught to understand from the very start that tones are not optional good-to-haves, but inherent parts of each word - just, or at any rate, nearly as important as the difference between distinct consonant and vowel sounds are in a non-tonal language.

Then, drilling to make sure you can hear the difference between the tones of syllables pronounced carefully in isolation, and also reproduce them.

Finally, when you hear a new word, ask the nearest Thai to confirm how it is pronounced and what it means.

If you can hear the difference between tones properly, then you'll hear straight away what the tone is.

Completely in context this is difficult though, because tones tend to change, be reduced or conform to nearby sounds.

The rest is practice, practice, practice.

[kriswillems]

You will remember the tones of the words after a while or you'll compare words with other similar words of which you already know the tone. In the beginning it's important to think about the tone of each individual word (don't ignore the tones to "save" time).

[tgeezer]

Dont forget the length of the vowel as well. It is easy to forget the vowel length; sound, length, and tone, you need; sometimes if you get two, the other falls into place.

Edited February 4, 2009 by tgeezer

[mynextgig]

You will remember the tones of the words after a while or you'll compare words with other similar words of which you already know the tone. In the beginning it's important to think about the tone of each individual word (don't ignore the tones to "save" time).

I agree, i posted this same question maybe 5 or 6 months ago and someone was kind enough to put a chart on the thread that nicely consolidated the tone rules into a single page table.

I then spent maybe 20 mins a day reading Thai text, not worrying about the meaning etc and within a few days i had the chart imprinted in my mind and after a couple of weeks the tones just started coming naturally without needing any reference.

Remember that you can read Thai without having a clue what any of it means so i suggest you split your study into reading/writing and comprehension and over time you will start remembering words in Thai rather than transliteration

[kriswillems]

If you think using tone tables uses to much time you can try to simplify the tone table by looking at the similarities between the classes. The tone rules are:

- syllable with tone mark

follow the tone mark

exception: low class initial consonant : take the next tone

- syllable without tone mark

- life syllable : mid tone

exception: high class initial consonant : rising tone

- dead syllable : low tone

exception: low class initial consonant

long vowel : falling tone

short vowel : high tone

Here's the tone table on half of an A4 page:

tone2.pdf

Edited February 4, 2009 by kriswillems

[hiero]

You will remember the tones of the words after a while or you'll compare words with other similar words of which you already know the tone. In the beginning it's important to think about the tone of each individual word (don't ignore the tones to "save" time).

I agree, i posted this same question maybe 5 or 6 months ago and someone was kind enough to put a chart on the thread that nicely consolidated the tone rules into a single page table.

Don't happen to remember that chart do you?

thanks for the replies.

I can see it takes time, at the moment if a syllable has a tone mark i instantly know the tone, which is something that took a couple seconds to work out a month or so ago and words without are becoming easier as well but obviously that takes longer..

[meadish_sweetball]

If you think using tone tables uses to much time you can try to simplify the tone table by looking at the similarities between the classes. The tone rules are:

- syllable with tone mark

follow the tone mark

exception: low class initial consonant : take the next tone

- syllable without tone mark

- life syllable : mid tone

exception: high class initial consonant : rising tone

- dead syllable : low tone

exception: low class initial consonant

long vowel : falling tone

short vowel : high tone

Here's the tone table on half of an A4 page:

Excellent kris, that will be helpful for new learners without a doubt. I've never thought about it from that angle before.

[tgeezer]

Excellent kris, that will be helpful for new learners without a doubt. I've never thought about it from that angle before.

What Meadish is trying to say is that you don't need a chart. There are live words and dead words. if you know what they are then the only other thing is that high class consonents have a base rising tone tone 4

Dead words = words with short vowels no closing consonent. ตะ เพราะ ending in kpt and no closing consonent short vowel สุก ลับ บิท

words ending in กดบ (kpt)

Live words = those that arn't dead

There are then only five rules.

1 live words no tone mark base tone ( rising high class or normal the rest)

2 live words with tone mark follow the tone mark except for low class use the next tone up.

3 dead words high and mid consonent no tone mark low tone

4 dead words low consonent long vowel " " " falling tone

5 dead words low consonent short vowel " " " high tone

(the ditto signs are supposed to be under no tone mark)

This subject was discussed in October a better version of this one with examples on 30th.

[mangkorn]

Actually, they are not live/dead "words," but rather syllables.

[Richard W]

- dead syllable : low tone

exception: low class initial consonant

long vowel : falling tone

short vowel : high tone

Here's the tone table on half of an A4 page:

And the table is arranged so that you can simplify the last rule to:

- dead syllable: As mai ek

exception: Low class initial consonant with short vowel: high tone

(I remember this as not having time to fall, but note that mai ek on a short-vowelled dead syllable with low class initial consonant does imply a falling tone.)

Incidentally, syllable initial ฤ counts as a low class initial consonant for the purpose of the rules.

[Richard W]

Dead words = words with short vowels no closing consonent. ตะ เพราะ ending in kpt and no closing consonent short vowel สุก ลับ บิท

words ending in กดบ (kpt)

Slightly misleading - there are about 28 possible final consonants for a dead syllable, all of which are pronounced as one of /k/, /p/, /t/, /s/ and /f/. (The last final sound is not acknowledged by Ratchabandit.)

There are then only five rules.

...

2 live words with tone mark follow the tone mark except for low class use the next tone up.

Rule 2 also applies to dead syllables e.g. เค้ก, น่ะ, ก๊าซ.

[tgeezer]

Dead words = words with short vowels no closing consonent. ตะ เพราะ ending in kpt and no closing consonent short vowel สุก ลับ บิท

words ending in กดบ (kpt)

Slightly misleading - there are about 28 possible final consonants for a dead syllable, all of which are pronounced as one of /k/, /p/, /t/, /s/ and /f/. (The last final sound is not acknowledged by Ratchabandit.)

There are then only five rules.

...

2 live words with tone mark follow the tone mark except for low class use the next tone up.

Rule 2 also applies to dead syllables e.g. เค้ก, น่ะ, ก๊าซ.

I don't know which RID you are reading but I took the definition of Dead words คำตาย straight from the Dictionary. The bit I left out was ' ในมาตรา กก กด กบ ' k,p,t, sounds I don't know why you have s&f

Rule two, should simply say follow the tone marks on all words. I think my other attempt at this in October was better but I am not sure.

[tgeezer]

Actually, they are not live/dead "words," but rather syllables.

I wondered whether I should put syllable or word and decided to go with what I found. Is the linguist's convention to say syllable?

[Richard W]

Slightly misleading - there are about 28 possible final consonants for a dead syllable, all of which are pronounced as one of /k/, /p/, /t/, /s/ and /f/. (The last final sound is not acknowledged by Ratchabandit.)

Rule 2 also applies to dead syllables e.g. เค้ก, น่ะ, ก๊าซ.

I don't know which RID you are reading but I took the definition of Dead words คำตาย straight from the Dictionary. The bit I left out was ' ในมาตรา กก กด กบ ' k,p,t, sounds I don't know why you have s&f

My authoritiy for its acknowledgement of final /s/ was the previous on-line version, which gave a phonetic transcription of every entry.

The 2542-4 printed edition actually doesn't assign final so so (ซ) to any of these three categories, but I strongly suspect that that is just an oversight. Are you seriously saying that ก๊าซ and ก๊อซ (older spelling กอซ) are live syllables?

As to final /f/, note that both Thai2English and Thai-Language.com give the pronunciation of ลิฟต์ as [H]lif, even though [H]lip is a 'purer' pronunication, and the one endorsed by the RID.

From Indic loanwords like [L]sa[L]nee เสน่ห์ and [H]ut[L]saa อุตส่าห์, I rather suspect that at least one register of Thai had final /h/ in dead syllables - though clearly this foreign influence on Thai phonology ultimately failed in its grosser effect, with only a tone alternation lingering on. (A more striking preservation of a Thai or Khmer effect of now silent final /h/ in Indic loanwords can be found in words like [HS]khraw เคราะห์, where the principle of silenced consonants not affecting pronunciation has ruled out the eymological spelling *ครห์.)

[Richard W]

Actually, they are not live/dead "words," but rather syllables.

I wondered whether I should put syllable or word and decided to go with what I found. Is the linguist's convention to say syllable?

It's not a mere convention. Words are (generally) composed of syllables, but in a language where all words were monosyllabic the difference would be irrelevant.

[tgeezer]

Actually, they are not live/dead "words," but rather syllables.

I wondered whether I should put syllable or word and decided to go with what I found. Is the linguist's convention to say syllable?

It's not a mere convention. Words are (generally) composed of syllables, but in a language where all words were monosyllabic the difference would be irrelevant.

I was asking if the linguists had decided that they would translate the Thai 'dead and live words' to 'dead and live syllables', after all we seem to be more keen on them than Thais, I don't mind either way, I don't read any books in English on Thai language. That is the reason I am so slow. If live and dead words are historical then as you say the distinction might not have been made, they don't feature in modern teaching books up to M1 which I have.

[tgeezer]

Hello, we are the only ones interested.

I am not that serious about anything. Why would I be saying that ก๊าซ is live? it ends with with the sound of ด some people who know good English might say gas but in Thai it is gat. Or was, it would be awkward to say s for final ซ since ซ is in มาตรา กด I have just looked at the on-line RID but don't know what I am looking for, ก๊าซ had no surprises. ฟ has been assigned the sound of บ มาตรา กบ and as you say in Thai it is lip.

It sounds somewhat affected if you say it in English in the middle of a Thai sentence, like an Englishman saying Pary instead of Paris when speaking to another Englishman.

If [H] means what I think it means then อุตส่า should be [L][L] It is not dead either because it has a long vowel, following the tone mark makes it low. อุตสาห- อุตสาหะ follow the conventions: tones 1,4,1

[Richard W]

Why would I be saying that ก๊าซ is live? it ends with with the sound of ด some people who know good English might say gas but in Thai it is gat. Or was, it would be awkward to say s for final ซ since ซ is in มาตรา กด I have just looked at the on-line RID but don't know what I am looking for, ก๊าซ had no surprises. ฟ has been assigned the sound of บ มาตรา กบ and as you say in Thai it is lip.

It sounds somewhat affected if you say it in English in the middle of a Thai sentence, like an Englishman saying Pary instead of Paris when speaking to another Englishman.

Usage varies. I note that the pronuniciations recorded in Thai-Language.com have final /s/ and /f/, but the first batch of speakers used for that site were residents of the USA, so their Thai may be a bit anglicised.

I first became aware of final /s/ in Thai when my pronunciation of ก๊าซ was corrected - by someone who did not use /r/ in Thai words nor pronounce /l/ in clusters. Of course, it may have been my tone that she was primarily correcting.

If [H] means what I think it means then อุตส่า should be [L][L]

You understand me, and I was wrong about the tone of the first syllable.

It is not dead either because it has a long vowel, following the tone mark makes it low. อุตสาห- อุตสาหะ follow the conventions: tones 1,4,1

But why does อุตส่าห์ have a tone mark at all?

My hypothesis is as follows. If the final ห were pronounced, as it is in Khmer, สาห would have been a dead syllable, and would automatically acquire the low tone - there was no independent tonal contrast in dead syllables until the Thai consonant shift. Once the affectation of pronouncing final ห was dropped, the final สาห would have been a live syllable with a low tone, and at some point the spelling would have become ส่าห์.

Does anyone know a better explanation?

[connel707]

You will remember the tones of the words after a while or you'll compare words with other similar words of which you already know the tone. In the beginning it's important to think about the tone of each individual word (don't ignore the tones to "save" time).

I agree, i posted this same question maybe 5 or 6 months ago and someone was kind enough to put a chart on the thread that nicely consolidated the tone rules into a single page table.

Don't happen to remember that chart do you?

thanks for the replies.

I can see it takes time, at the moment if a syllable has a tone mark i instantly know the tone, which is something that took a couple seconds to work out a month or so ago and words without are becoming easier as well but obviously that takes longer..

I learnt by using my fingers and thumb.... 5 tones..... 5 fingers...

[Gwindarr]

The way to get comfortable with the tones is through exposure. Just as with any foreign sound, you won't be able to pronounce it correctly until you can hear it correctly (as in distinguish it from other similar sounds). Kids can't pronounce things correctly first in their native languages either.

So just listen loads in the beginning. Even if you can speak now, but you are aware that your pronunciation might be not quite spot on yet then it can't hurt to spend some time listening. Watch tv, listen to podcasts, news..recordings of anything interesting. It doesn't even matter if you can't understand it. Its best if you can find stuff that you like. Don't watch boring textbook videos. Watch movies, music vids, soaps - whatever you can get into. Your brain needs quite a bit of time and loads of exposure to sort out the sounds and the more interesting it is the better. Try to imitate what you are hearing now and then. It isn't necessary to think of the tones in the sense of high, rising, etc when you are listening, though this may be of help while you are learning to read. For now, just put in the hours of exposure and it will pay off quick.

Anyways, the primary reason people can study a language for so long and still suck is because they haven't listened and/or read enough. Not because they are too old or too stupid or don't have the ever-sought-after-non-existent "natural language learning talent". All those excuses are lame and just wrong. They just haven't put in the time (or don't know how) to get anywhere yet.

Just keep at it and everything falls into place. It doesn't need to involve memorizing crazy charts and complex rules. Go study that stuff after you are fluent or are an aspiring linguist (the kind that studies how languages work rather than how to speak them).

[meadish_sweetball]

Hi Gwindarr - welcome to the forum.

You're correct that exposure and immersion are essential, and if we were talking about non-tonal languages, I might agree with you that immersion is without a doubt the most effective way to proficiency.

The problem is that for some people, even after 7-8 years of immersion in Thai, they are still unable to reproduce the tones, and certain sounds they don't have in their native languages, properly.

The brains of non-tonal language speakers are wired to change the tones of words according to the way they feel about what they are saying. That reflex is strong, and in my experience immersion alone is not enough to get rid of it.

Unlike children learning their first language, adults already have pre-wired models for language in their head. It is not always an easy task to replace those models.

The alphabet and the tone rules are essential to be able to read - and once you can read, you have the best shortcut to learning new vocabulary.

Remembering words is a whole lot more difficult if you can't ask people how they are written. And if you still have not grasped the tones, then you are even more stuck because a lot of the words you learn will be mispronounced from the outset.

Sure, theory IS tedious for a lot of people, but it pays off - it gives you a shortcut to acquiring advanced vocabulary the vast majority won't be able to learn properly just by immersion, trial and error.

I only know of one person who has become a truly proficient speaker of Thai through immersion, whereas I know several who started out studying formally. So while your method does indeed work well for some people who have that particular learning style, I still think most people benefit from tedious theoretical excercises, such as listening to tones in isolation, too. This does not rule out immersion. When you combine theory and immersion, you will be able to connect the dots between language theory and how people actually use the language. If you only focus on spoken language, you miss out on a lot, and you limit your chances of progressing past conversational Thai.

So my opinion is that a combination of theory and practice, is the best way to get a more complete picture of the language and can strive for near-native competency (which will still take many years to achieve). With -only- immersion, most of us don't stand a chance of getting there.

That's not to say it can't be fun. Language learning SHOULD be fun, otherwise one loses interest.

[Gwindarr]

Hi Gwindarr - welcome to the forum.

Thanks much!

You're correct that exposure and immersion are essential, and if we were talking about non-tonal languages, I might agree with you that immersion is without a doubt the most effective way to proficiency.

Hrm. Its certainly possible to get proficient without immersion. Depending on how you go about it, it may even be 'easier.' And this is what most people end up doing as far as I know. But I'm not sure why a language being tonal or not would be a factor.

The problem is that for some people, even after 7-8 years of immersion in Thai, they are still unable to reproduce the tones, and certain sounds they don't have in their native languages, properly.

Perhaps they haven't had the right setup as far as listening goes. All the people I've ever met who have been here that long and skill can't reproduce the tones properly either never made an effort or went about it the wrong way. People tend to get frustrated when they can't accomplish something with methods that they are accustomed to. This is a big problem in language acquisition among other things.

The brains of non-tonal language speakers are wired to change the tones of words according to the way they feel about what they are saying. That reflex is strong, and in my experience immersion alone is not enough to get rid of it.

Our brains can be rewired. We do it all the time. Try writing or brushing your teeth with your non-dominant hand. It seems almost impossible at first. Now try it for a minute everyday for a month. You'll be surprised. Different non-tonal languages have different intonation. It sounds a bit odd when you talk about it, but if you just imitate the native speaker, you can catch on quick.

Unlike children learning their first language, adults already have pre-wired models for language in their head. It is not always an easy task to replace those models.

I disagree here. It seems harder (as adults) because we have more distractions, psychological inhibitions and preconceived notions about what is necessary to learn a language. And we aren't trying to replace these models, rather we are trying to add to them.

The alphabet and the tone rules are essential to be able to read - and once you can read, you have the best shortcut to learning new vocabulary.

Remembering words is a whole lot more difficult if you can't ask people how they are written. And if you still have not grasped the tones, then you are even more stuck because a lot of the words you learn will be mispronounced from the outset.

Agreed. Even if you can't spell something properly, being able to write out something phonetically (in Thai) is a big help. And I'd add that you can't be truly fluent without literacy.

Sure, theory IS tedious for a lot of people, but it pays off - it gives you a shortcut to acquiring advanced vocabulary the vast majority won't be able to learn properly just by immersion, trial and error.

I feel like we are getting off topic here. You don't need any theory, grammar or anything other than your ears and your brain to get used to the tones. Are you with me there?

[meadish_sweetball]

Perhaps they haven't had the right setup as far as listening goes. All the people I've ever met who have been here that long and skill can't reproduce the tones properly either never made an effort or went about it the wrong way. People tend to get frustrated when they can't accomplish something with methods that they are accustomed to. This is a big problem in language acquisition among other things.

I think everyone can come a long way way by putting in a little effort every day. But most people don't appear to have the motivation or organisational ability to do so.

Hrm. Its certainly possible to get proficient without immersion. Depending on how you go about it, it may even be 'easier.' And this is what most people end up doing as far as I know. But I'm not sure why a language being tonal or not would be a factor.

In my experience for whatever it is worth, it is a more difficult task to get a tonal language right, than to adapt to an intonational language (because even though intonational languages do differ in intonation, as long as all the other parts are in place, you can still make yourself understood easily enough, with a tonal language the tones are more crucial since they have a phonemic rather than an emphatic or emotional role).

Some people, even with a lot of exposure and attempts, appear never to get to the point of mastering the tone system. There was a man in my class at university who was already functionally bilingual, and who studied very hard to become proficient in Thai, but he just could not wrap his head around the tone system. It just didn't happen. There were other, similar examples too.

Our brains can be rewired. We do it all the time. Try writing or brushing your teeth with your non-dominant hand. It seems almost impossible at first. Now try it for a minute everyday for a month. You'll be surprised. Different non-tonal languages have different intonation. It sounds a bit odd when you talk about it, but if you just imitate the native speaker, you can catch on quick.

Sure, different non-tonal languages have different intonation - but it's also true that a large percentage of adult learners never fully manage to get rid of their intonational accent. So while practice certainly helps, not everyone seems to have the ability to completely acquire a native accent.

It seems harder (as adults) because we have more distractions, psychological inhibitions and preconceived notions about what is necessary to learn a language.

Those are certainly all important factors, but I think there are other factors playing into it as well.

Why I harp on about structure and theory is because I am a firm believer in that if you have a structure to hang up your learning on, then what you learn is easier to recall and classify. If you're motivated or gifted enough you CAN do it all by yourself, but since others have done it before you and written about it, why not tap into their knowledge first?

You're right about going off topic. Even though I enjoy the discussion I don't feel I am offering anything substantial for the beginners anymore, so it might be best to stop here.