Thai Partners Teaching The Language.

[Harcourt]

Sounds like sound advice VF.

Thanks all.

[thithi]

There is NO logic or science in studying Thai language, for Thai people.

but why u fink that Thai language is supposed to be logic? we didn't have any latin words in our language.

and why English is logic?

[scorecard]

I think the OP contained an interesting question, but I'm worried about the misconceptions flying around in some of the replies.

If you want to know how Thai is learned, and you want to improve your own Thai, dump all those foreigner 'learn thai' books and go to the schoolkids section in a SE-ED or other thai bookstore and get the books they use for teaching thai to thais. (I've talked about this at length in the 'Let's get ready...its the government P6 exam' thread in the Thai language forum)

I have learnt this valuable lesson. The books are so much cheaper and now i have found books which tell stores with Thai script and the English version too. Therefore i get to read the Thai and can read the English to get the gist and learn new words.

15 baht from central the last one..full colour.... similar the the little comic books the teenagers like to read.

another one is nameebooks kiddy.....

lots of interesting stories and printed with Thai and English making it more fun than the language books...which i have done to death....

You mentioned above: "15 baht from central "

Can you please share which Central and roughly where within the store.

Thanks.

[a2396]

She learned Thai in her own (native) language and it is not easy for her to explain it in Thai. She could probably explain it to you in Thai. We learn English in much the same way.

You seem to have a very condescending attitude towards the way Thai is taught. I hope my impression about your post is incorrect.

I am far from an attitude of condescension! I am merely ignorant about the way Thai is taught, thus my question.

My question arises because if my GF has a question about English, as long as the theory is not toooooo deep, I am able to explain why we say or spell it in english in a particular way. (Lets not get into the vast illogic of English just now, for the sake of this discussion, please accept that there are a number of "rules" and logical progressions in english theory...the use of prefixes and suffixes for example follow general rule of thumb guidlines.) She grasps what I explain, because she has learnt english from a "scientific" angle.

Etymology is a good example of a sub-branch of linguistic science. When my GF asks why do we say, "oval" for the cricket ground, I can explain about the shape, and the root of the word....and all of a sudden she see's the linguist connection to ovary....and then some time later, can deduce the meaning of "ovulation" in the context of what she was reading. There is a logical progression that she can follow and reach reasonable conclusions.

On the other hand, if I ask a question of her about Thai, this intelligent woman can just say, "This is it, this is how it is, there is no reason for it, it just IS."

My OP is to try to find out if there IS a degree of logic that I can hope to fathom, or do I resign myself to learning parrot fashion?

Well here's another twist of how some Thais are 'forced' to try to learn English:

My son is at Thai university. His english is very advanced from his long-term immersion in the language and he's taken many additional professional classes in Bkk and in Singapore to try to improve his English just a little more.

He often brings his student friends home and 99% of them can't speak one word of English, most even struggle with simple numbers.

At his university all students must attend English class, my son included.

His English teacher is a 20 year old Thai girl who can't speak English. For every class she produces a handout with simple sentences on it and the students repeat the sentences over and over. Asking the teacher questions is not allowed.

The lessons are not progressive in any way, there has never been any foundations (e.g. learn all the questions words and how to use them - why, where, when etc).

Additionally, the handouts contain numerous mistakes including no punctuation marks. Examples:

- He am 18 year old

- What time yesterday will you go school

Further, end of course examinations are based solely on these handouts, so my son must make sure he remembers the incorrect sentences.

When this teacher first started my son tried to carefully, away from other students, point out the mistakes. He was told instantly that he was wrong, she was right because she has an undergraduate degree and he doesn't, and that he was very rude to question a teacher, and at the end of the course he got an F.

This might explain why many univ grads in LOS cannot put a sentance together in English. Particularly with regard to speaking.

[sk1max]

She learned Thai in her own (native) language and it is not easy for her to explain it in Thai. She could probably explain it to you in Thai. We learn English in much the same way.

You seem to have a very condescending attitude towards the way Thai is taught. I hope my impression about your post is incorrect.

I am far from an attitude of condescension! I am merely ignorant about the way Thai is taught, thus my question.

My question arises because if my GF has a question about English, as long as the theory is not toooooo deep, I am able to explain why we say or spell it in english in a particular way. (Lets not get into the vast illogic of English just now, for the sake of this discussion, please accept that there are a number of "rules" and logical progressions in english theory...the use of prefixes and suffixes for example follow general rule of thumb guidlines.) She grasps what I explain, because she has learnt english from a "scientific" angle.

Etymology is a good example of a sub-branch of linguistic science. When my GF asks why do we say, "oval" for the cricket ground, I can explain about the shape, and the root of the word....and all of a sudden she see's the linguist connection to ovary....and then some time later, can deduce the meaning of "ovulation" in the context of what she was reading. There is a logical progression that she can follow and reach reasonable conclusions.

On the other hand, if I ask a question of her about Thai, this intelligent woman can just say, "This is it, this is how it is, there is no reason for it, it just IS."

My OP is to try to find out if there IS a degree of logic that I can hope to fathom, or do I resign myself to learning parrot fashion?

Well here's another twist of how some Thais are 'forced' to try to learn English:

My son is at Thai university. His english is very advanced from his long-term immersion in the language and he's taken many additional professional classes in Bkk and in Singapore to try to improve his English just a little more.

He often brings his student friends home and 99% of them can't speak one word of English, most even struggle with simple numbers.

At his university all students must attend English class, my son included.

His English teacher is a 20 year old Thai girl who can't speak English. For every class she produces a handout with simple sentences on it and the students repeat the sentences over and over. Asking the teacher questions is not allowed.

The lessons are not progressive in any way, there has never been any foundations (e.g. learn all the questions words and how to use them - why, where, when etc).

Additionally, the handouts contain numerous mistakes including no punctuation marks. Examples:

- He am 18 year old

- What time yesterday will you go school

Further, end of course examinations are based solely on these handouts, so my son must make sure he remembers the incorrect sentences.

When this teacher first started my son tried to carefully, away from other students, point out the mistakes. He was told instantly that he was wrong, she was right because she has an undergraduate degree and he doesn't, and that he was very rude to question a teacher, and at the end of the course he got an F.

There is no one way to learn any language. Rote or repition is used in Thai because the language has a lot more 'stuff' at the base of the laguage. Eglish has only 26 letters including the vowels. Whereas Thai has 44, plus numerous vowels and vowel combinations. It's crazy to say Thai is learnt or taught by rote.

As for Thais teaching English PLEASE don't get me started

[a2396]

I think the OP contained an interesting question, but I'm worried about the misconceptions flying around in some of the replies.

I can answer some of these questions cos my kids go to Thai school, so yes, I can assure you that Thai's learn Thai systematically. They use concepts of noun, verb, adjective and so on (word forms, or parts of speech as they used to be called). they learn about word groups (phrases) and clauses, too.

If you want to know how Thai is learned, and you want to improve your own Thai, dump all those foreigner 'learn thai' books and go to the schoolkids section in a SE-ED or other thai bookstore and get the books they use for teaching thai to thais. (I've talked about this at length in the 'Let's get ready...its the government P6 exam' thread in the Thai language forum)

There's a couple of misconceptions here:

1. Thai is not logical - false. It is a systematic and rule-governed language, far more so than English. However, the complexities of Thai do not so much revolve around word form as they do in English, but around collocations and register. English has many roots (Latin and German to name the two most influential), Thai does too (Pali, Sanskrit, Khmer). It' s not that its not systematic, it's just that it's different.

2. Thai is not as accurate - false. I'm forever hearing this nonsense, which only shows ignorance of the language. Look at the myriad number of words Thais have for different family relations compared to the paltry few we have in English., The complaint that Thai is not accurate is like an Eskimo saying 'cor, English is not very accurate, they only have one word for snow whereas we have 32.' A language reflects the interests and activities of its culture, and if you want to talk about Thai culture accurately forget English. If you want to talk about English culture accurately, forget Thai. A lot of technical words in Thai are borrowed from English because the technology came from outside Thailand. That's got nothing to do with accuracy, its just etymology.

So why can't Thais explain their language to you? Try this - can you explain to your wife in English the difference between 'will' and 'shall' - probably not. Can you explain in THAI why we say 'If she were any more beautiful, my eyes would pop' instead of 'If she was...' - Can you explain that in THAI? Because effectivey you're trying to ask your wife to explain a difficult concept in a second language. That' s not easy. You probably can't do it it in English, let alone in Thai.

So C'mon! Don't complain that your educated wife is not a linguist. Presumably you married her for other reasons rather than to save on school tuition fees!

Just becasue Thai may have more names for family relatives than English, does not necessarily mean Thai is a more precise language. It certainly does not provide much accuracy when Thais constantly refer to non-related friends a "brother", "sister" or "aunt", when they are nothing of the sort. An interesting comparison would be to know the number or words available in the two languages. English has approx 500,000 +. As for Thai, I cannot find a number. Any "experts" out ther know the answer?

[SoftWater]

Just becasue Thai may have more names for family relatives than English, does not necessarily mean Thai is a more precise language. It certainly does not provide much accuracy when Thais constantly refer to non-related friends a "brother", "sister" or "aunt", when they are nothing of the sort.

Agreed. That was exactly my point - just as Inuit is no more accurate than English because they have 32 words for snow and we have one. My point was talking about 'accuracy' is a nonsense (possibly the word that got me into trouble for pomposity, but it reflects my strength of feeling, not my claim to authority); you cannot measure two languages in terms of 'accuracy', since you would need a common standard of measurement. What would that be? Number of words in a dictionary means nothing (back to the 32 for snow example).

Languages are relative to their cultures. When you complain that it is 'inaccurate' for Thais to call someone their 'sister' who is, perhaps, their cousin, or just a close friend, they are not using Thai inaccurately - they are using ENGLISH inaccurately. พี่สาว or น้องสาว has a wider use than 'sister' in English; that doesn't make the LANGUAGE less accurate, it means the TRANSLATION is inaccurate. Look at it this way, -you won't find Thais getting confused about who they are related to, only farangs!

Edited July 15, 2009 by SoftWater

[SoftWater]

It certainly does not provide much accuracy when Thais constantly refer to non-related friends a "brother", "sister" or "aunt", when they are nothing of the sort.

Where I grew up (north of England), kids often call non-relatives 'uncle John', 'uncle Bob' when they are close family friends but not relatives. Is it so different from Thai?

I don't mean to be partronising, but I think people who complain abou thai forget how colloquial our own language is. People speak informally in every language. How many English books still tell students that 'How do you do?' is an greeting in English? Have you EVER heard anyone say this in real life??? Conversely, how many books mention that 'how's your father' is a euphemism and not a question? Is your point so different from a Thai complaining that

"English is not accurate, its so annoying when they ask how your father is when they're not referring to your father at all!"

Edited July 15, 2009 by SoftWater

[a2396]

Just becasue Thai may have more names for family relatives than English, does not necessarily mean Thai is a more precise language. It certainly does not provide much accuracy when Thais constantly refer to non-related friends a "brother", "sister" or "aunt", when they are nothing of the sort.

Agreed. That was exactly my point - just as Inuit is no more accurate than English because they have 32 words for snow and we have one. My point was talking about 'accuracy' is a nonsense (possibly the word that got me into trouble for pomposity, but it reflects my strength of feeling, not my claim to authority); you cannot measure two langauges in terms of 'accuracy', since you would need a common standard of measurement. What would that be? Number of words in a dictionary means nothing (back to the 32 for snow example).

Languages are relative to their cultures. When you complain that it is 'inaccurate' for Thais to call someone their 'sister' who is, perhaps, their cousin, or just a close friend, they are not using Thai inaccurately - they are using ENGLISH inaccurately. พี่สาว or น้องสาว has a wider use than 'sister' in English; that doesn't make the LANGUAGE less accurate, it means the TRANSLATION is less accurate. Look at it this way, -you won't find Thais getting confused about who they are related to, only farangs!

Yes, very good points. That is why communication between Thai and Farang can get so mixed-up, particularly when both parties have scant knowledge of each others language. However, I am sure some Thais are well aware that they are not being accurate, in some of their conversations with Farangs. I think some of this "obfustication" is done deliberately, when it suits various purposes.

[SoftWater]

I am sure some Thais are well aware that they are not being accurate, in some of their conversations with Farangs. I think some of this "obfustication" is done deliberately, when it suits various purposes.

Dissembling is a multicultural phenomenon แน่นอน !!

[PeaceBlondie]

If I may kindly suggest: never mind your native language, if it's not Thai and you're learning Thai.

Most uni-trained teachers of Thai appear poorly trained to teach Thai to farang. Like the Thai teachers of English, maybe one in ten is half decent at their job.

[bungy007]

She learned Thai in her own (native) language and it is not easy for her to explain it in Thai. She could probably explain it to you in Thai. We learn English in much the same way.

You seem to have a very condescending attitude towards the way Thai is taught. I hope my impression about your post is incorrect.

I am far from an attitude of condescension! I am merely ignorant about the way Thai is taught, thus my question.

My question arises because if my GF has a question about English, as long as the theory is not toooooo deep, I am able to explain why we say or spell it in english in a particular way. (Lets not get into the vast illogic of English just now, for the sake of this discussion, please accept that there are a number of "rules" and logical progressions in english theory...the use of prefixes and suffixes for example follow general rule of thumb guidlines.) She grasps what I explain, because she has learnt english from a "scientific" angle.

Etymology is a good example of a sub-branch of linguistic science. When my GF asks why do we say, "oval" for the cricket ground, I can explain about the shape, and the root of the word....and all of a sudden she see's the linguist connection to ovary....and then some time later, can deduce the meaning of "ovulation" in the context of what she was reading. There is a logical progression that she can follow and reach reasonable conclusions.

On the other hand, if I ask a question of her about Thai, this intelligent woman can just say, "This is it, this is how it is, there is no reason for it, it just IS."

My OP is to try to find out if there IS a degree of logic that I can hope to fathom, or do I resign myself to learning parrot fashion?

Sounds like the way Thais deal in questions relating to their culture I'm afriad you are using logic to comprehend a non-logically driven culture. It could well be that there are logical connections in building a grasp of Thai linguistics but Thais won't come at a problem from that perspective. For example, they say their regal leader invented their writing system when infact it is a derrivative of sandskript from India. Their 'take' on all things tends to be a lot more loose and 'irrational' as we would term it. I think you would probably have to connect the dots yourself or as you are rightly doing, ask the international community who have already studied the language and can make a rational comparison. Good luck

[caf]

Just becasue Thai may have more names for family relatives than English, does not necessarily mean Thai is a more precise language. It certainly does not provide much accuracy when Thais constantly refer to non-related friends a "brother", "sister" or "aunt", when they are nothing of the sort.

Agreed. That was exactly my point - just as Inuit is no more accurate than English because they have 32 words for snow and we have one. My point was talking about 'accuracy' is a nonsense (possibly the word that got me into trouble for pomposity, but it reflects my strength of feeling, not my claim to authority); you cannot measure two languages in terms of 'accuracy', since you would need a common standard of measurement. What would that be? Number of words in a dictionary means nothing (back to the 32 for snow example).

Languages are relative to their cultures. When you complain that it is 'inaccurate' for Thais to call someone their 'sister' who is, perhaps, their cousin, or just a close friend, they are not using Thai inaccurately - they are using ENGLISH inaccurately. พี่สาว or น้องสาว has a wider use than 'sister' in English; that doesn't make the LANGUAGE less accurate, it means the TRANSLATION is inaccurate. Look at it this way, -you won't find Thais getting confused about who they are related to, only farangs!

Totally agree, softwater. "Accuracy" is a non-topic. Language is about communicating with people and your point about being relative to cultures is spot on.

To understand a language you need to understand the "culture", in my view.

My Uk doctor is African and we were chatting informally about a conversation I overheard in Greece. ( I forget now how we got into this conversation)

Roughly went like this but i will shorten it.

Teenager. Can I go to the party?

Father Yes

So she did not go. After a while I understood the thought processes. If the father had approved he would have said something like "Yes of course, my dear. I hope you enjoy yourself.

My doctor surprised me by saying it was the same in his culture. And even living now in the Uk he could imagine having a similar conversation with his own teenage children!

Language learning should be fun. Learn the language . Learn about the people.

I am not a fan of too much grammar learning. Get out and speak the language, you can learn from that.

[caf]

If I may kindly suggest: never mind your native language, if it's not Thai and you're learning Thai.

Most uni-trained teachers of Thai appear poorly trained to teach Thai to farang. Like the Thai teachers of English, maybe one in ten is half decent at their job.

I think I agree with you but I do not find your post easy to follow.

Do you mean "I suggest that, as a foreigner learning Thai, you forget any preconceived rules or constructions that you have of your native language and try to understand Thai structures. If that is so, I am with you 100%

[bungy007]

If I may kindly suggest: never mind your native language, if it's not Thai and you're learning Thai.

Most uni-trained teachers of Thai appear poorly trained to teach Thai to farang. Like the Thai teachers of English, maybe one in ten is half decent at their job.

I think I agree with you but I do not find your post easy to follow.

Do you mean "I suggest that, as a foreigner learning Thai, you forget any preconceived rules or constructions that you have of your native language and try to understand Thai structures. If that is so, I am with you 100%

I agree the end game is to be able to think and therefore communicate 100% in whichever language you are trying to learn. However, getting there presents a number of options - the old rote learning methodology or a communicative approach, for example. It's just a case of 'whatever floats your boat'. Whichever route you take to become fluent in a second language you will always make comparisons with L1 - it's a natural part of the process

[Groongthep]

Thai does indeed have grammar and syntax rules, but they are often quite different from those in English. Here are a couple Thai grammar books which I have found very helpful. There are lots of examples and explanations in all of them.

1.) James Higbee and Snea Thinsan Thai Reference Grammar A detailed and in depth work. Highly recommended. Higbee & Snea Thai Grammar

2.) David Smyth Thai: An Essential Grammar Less material than the publication above but very readable and easy to understand. Thai: An Essential Grammar

3.) Richard Noss A Thai Reference Grammar An old and rather outdated US Foreign Servive Institude (FSI) publication but still considered a classic work on the subject. Noss

Edited July 15, 2009 by Groongthep

[caf]

Thai does indeed have grammar and syntax rules, but they are often quite different from those in English. Here are a couple Thai grammar books which I have found very helpful. There are lots of examples and explanations in all of them.

1.) James Higbee and Snea Thinsan Thai Reference Grammar A detailed and in depth work. Highly recommended. Higbee & Snea Thai Grammar

2.) David Smyth Thai: An Essential Grammar Less material than the publication above but very readable and easy to understand. Thai: An Essential Grammar

3.) Richard Noss A Thai Reference Grammar An old and rather outdated US Foreign Servive Institude (FSI) publication but still considered a classic work on the subject. Noss

Higbee and Thinsan is a good reference book

[Ijustwannateach]

OP - Some people are not naturally good teachers. It is a bit of an art and a social talent. Your girlfriend may know very well how to speak Thai, but not how to teach it- there IS a difference. Furthermore, you point out a very salient difference between speaking and teaching: you have to have very intimate systematic knowledge of the language.

As an example, right off the top of your head, in imperative sentences like "Be good," which tense or aspect of the verb is used? It may take you a moment to figure it out.

Of course, you know how to use this with perfect fluency. But explaining how to find the right verb form as part of a system that you are explaining to someone else takes a different kind of knowledge of the material, and furthermore the ability to explain it at the appropriate level. This is NOT trivial and it is why experienced teachers are valuable.

I would suggest that you invest in a real teacher of Thai- and be willing to look around until you find a *good* one- to help you with your basic level studies; then you can practice with your Thai friends and partner. However, if you already have a dynamic in which both of you usually communicate in English, you may find that your eagerness to practice Thai is not matched by hers (as she may be looking at you the same way for English)!

As one possible suggestion, I had a friend who finally helped his wife to help him learn to speak fluently using role-play- he told her to speak as if she were different types of persons and they would practice conversations that way (both in English and Thai).

[Harcourt]

OP - Some people are not naturally good teachers. It is a bit of an art and a social talent. Your girlfriend may know very well how to speak Thai, but not how to teach it- there IS a difference. Furthermore, you point out a very salient difference between speaking and teaching: you have to have very intimate systematic knowledge of the language.

As an example, right off the top of your head, in imperative sentences like "Be good," which tense or aspect of the verb is used? It may take you a moment to figure it out.

Of course, you know how to use this with perfect fluency. But explaining how to find the right verb form as part of a system that you are explaining to someone else takes a different kind of knowledge of the material, and furthermore the ability to explain it at the appropriate level. This is NOT trivial and it is why experienced teachers are valuable.

I would suggest that you invest in a real teacher of Thai- and be willing to look around until you find a *good* one- to help you with your basic level studies; then you can practice with your Thai friends and partner. However, if you already have a dynamic in which both of you usually communicate in English, you may find that your eagerness to practice Thai is not matched by hers (as she may be looking at you the same way for English)!

As one possible suggestion, I had a friend who finally helped his wife to help him learn to speak fluently using role-play- he told her to speak as if she were different types of persons and they would practice conversations that way (both in English and Thai).

Ahhh, this is connected to my next question (which has arisen from all the excellent opinions coming forth), possibly a redundant question now... would learning Thai "from the pillow" (a Fijian expression implying learning anything from your partner) be detrimental to later recieving formal lessons?

If so...should I stop trying to learn from private study accompanied by my GF's input? (Assuming I intend t o eventually get formal tuition)?

I would settle for having passable Thai, but I would prefer to be fluent. I speak 3 languages now, but they were all learnt when I was young....I think I have an apptitude even though I'm getting on in years now.

[caf]

OP - Some people are not naturally good teachers. It is a bit of an art and a social talent. Your girlfriend may know very well how to speak Thai, but not how to teach it- there IS a difference. Furthermore, you point out a very salient difference between speaking and teaching: you have to have very intimate systematic knowledge of the language.

As an example, right off the top of your head, in imperative sentences like "Be good," which tense or aspect of the verb is used? It may take you a moment to figure it out.

Of course, you know how to use this with perfect fluency. But explaining how to find the right verb form as part of a system that you are explaining to someone else takes a different kind of knowledge of the material, and furthermore the ability to explain it at the appropriate level. This is NOT trivial and it is why experienced teachers are valuable.

I would suggest that you invest in a real teacher of Thai- and be willing to look around until you find a *good* one- to help you with your basic level studies; then you can practice with your Thai friends and partner. However, if you already have a dynamic in which both of you usually communicate in English, you may find that your eagerness to practice Thai is not matched by hers (as she may be looking at you the same way for English)!

As one possible suggestion, I had a friend who finally helped his wife to help him learn to speak fluently using role-play- he told her to speak as if she were different types of persons and they would practice conversations that way (both in English and Thai).

Ahhh, this is connected to my next question (which has arisen from all the excellent opinions coming forth), possibly a redundant question now... would learning Thai "from the pillow" (a Fijian expression implying learning anything from your partner) be detrimental to later recieving formal lessons?

If so...should I stop trying to learn from private study accompanied by my GF's input? (Assuming I intend t o eventually get formal tuition)?

I would settle for having passable Thai, but I would prefer to be fluent. I speak 3 languages now, but they were all learnt when I was young....I think I have an apptitude even though I'm getting on in years now.

"from the pillow" is fine.

enjoy learning thai/english together.

when you were knee high to a grasshopper your mum and dad didn't rush out to buy you english text books. that omission doesn't seem to have done you any harm. learn a language the natural way

certainly use a good reference grammar to check some points out but basically stick to talking to thais

When i expalin a point in english I never use technical terms, i use examples. Works well for me

Good luck. There have been some good posts on here but avoid the technical stuffn whether from teachers or not

[PeaceBlondie]

If I may kindly suggest: never mind your native language, if it's not Thai and you're learning Thai.

Most uni-trained teachers of Thai appear poorly trained to teach Thai to farang. Like the Thai teachers of English, maybe one in ten is half decent at their job.

I think I agree with you but I do not find your post easy to follow.

Do you mean "I suggest that, as a foreigner learning Thai, you forget any preconceived rules or constructions that you have of your native language and try to understand Thai structures. If that is so, I am with you 100%

Sorry - I wasn't clear. My first comment was a gentle nudge to my fellow native speakers of English to stop talking about English.

Yes; forget how your native languate(s) work; learn Thai, if Thais can teach Thai to farangs.. I doubt they can.

[caf]

If I may kindly suggest: never mind your native language, if it's not Thai and you're learning Thai.

Most uni-trained teachers of Thai appear poorly trained to teach Thai to farang. Like the Thai teachers of English, maybe one in ten is half decent at their job.

I think I agree with you but I do not find your post easy to follow.

Do you mean "I suggest that, as a foreigner learning Thai, you forget any preconceived rules or constructions that you have of your native language and try to understand Thai structures. If that is so, I am with you 100%

Sorry - I wasn't clear. My first comment was a gentle nudge to my fellow native speakers of English to stop talking about English.

Yes; forget how your native languate(s) work; learn Thai, if Thais can teach Thai to farangs.. I doubt they can.

if Thais can teach Thai to farangs.. I doubt they can.

I would not agree with that

The only way to learn a language is by speaking with natives. And I do precisely that with Thais. Generally I find them happy to help you learn their language.

I hope Harcourt and others can continue to learn Thai using this natural method.

If, by the quote above, you mean Thais can not teach Thai in a formal setting - a teacher/student relationship - I would not wish to comment. It would get me started on the comments I get from Thais on how they are taught English by farang teachers.

The only time I had a Thai criticise my Thai language errors (they are usually polite and want to help rather than score cheap points on one's language mistakes) was with a young girl on the Paknam web forum. But In think that was a one-off. She was just expressing her Xenophobia ( incidentally ignored by their mods as she is their "token Thai")

[PeaceBlondie]

how a few bad teachers from Birmingham teach English in Thailand is off topic. How well Thais with degrees in Thai teach Thai language to farang is on topic. In my experience and that of my friends, a decent Thai teacher is one in ten teachers.

[Harcourt]

how a few bad teachers from Birmingham teach English in Thailand is off topic. How well Thais with degrees in Thai teach Thai language to farang is on topic. In my experience and that of my friends, a decent Thai teacher is one in ten teachers.

Interesting. I hark back to a question I posed in this thread: If I learn Thai from my partner (colloquially), will it affect my learning if I went to formal lessons later?

I take on board the advice from Caf and other like-minded opinions: I think you are right. For now I will continue with my informal learning....and I will worry about the understanding of why the language is such as it is, later.

The thread bagan with mention of logic, and at least one poster questioned the logic of English... I am sure I qualified my OP with the acknowledgment that English is not logical (but it has "rules"...). So to balance any percieved disparagement of Thai language, a humourous example of how difficult it must be for learners of English to approach it with logic:

The Chaos

by G. Nolst Trenite’ a.k.a. “Charivarius” 1870 - 1946

Dearest creature in creation

Studying English pronunciation,

I will teach you in my verse

Sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse

I will keep you, Susy, busy,

Make your head with heat grow dizzy.

Tear in eye your dress you’ll tear,

So shall I! Oh, hear my prayer,

Pray, console your loving poet,

Make my coat look new, dear, sew it!

Just compare heart, beard and heard,

Dies and diet, lord and word,

Sword and sward, retain and Britain.

(Mind the latter, how it’s written).

Made has not the sound of bade,

Say said, pay-paid, laid, but plaid.

Now I surely will not plague you

With such words as vague and ague,

But be careful how you speak,

Say break, steak, but bleak and streak.

Previous, precious, fuchsia, via,

Pipe, snipe, recipe and choir,

Cloven, oven, how and low,

Script, receipt, shoe, poem, toe.

Hear me say, devoid of trickery:

Daughter, laughter and Terpsichore,

Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles.

Exiles, similes, reviles.

Wholly, holly, signal, signing.

Thames, examining, combining

Scholar, vicar, and cigar,

Solar, mica, war, and far.

From “desire": desirable–admirable from “admire.”

Lumber, plumber, bier, but brier.

Chatham, brougham, renown, but known.

Knowledge, done, but gone and tone,

One, anemone. Balmoral.

Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel,

Gertrude, German, wind, and mind.

Scene, Melpomene, mankind,

Tortoise, turquoise, chamois-leather,

Reading, reading, heathen, heather.

This phonetic labyrinth

Gives moss, gross, brook, brooch, ninth, plinth.

Billet does not end like ballet;

Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet;

Blood and flood are not like food,

Nor is mould like should and would.

Banquet is not nearly parquet,

Which is said to rime with “darky.”

Viscous, Viscount, load, and broad.

Toward, to forward, to reward.

And your pronunciation’s O.K.,

When you say correctly: croquet.

Rounded, wounded, grieve, and sieve,

Friend and fiend, alive, and live,

Liberty, library, heave, and heaven,

Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven,

We say hallowed, but allowed,

People, leopard, towed, but vowed.

Mark the difference, moreover,

Between mover, plover, Dover,

Leeches, breeches, wise, precise,

Chalice, but police, and lice.

Camel, constable, unstable,

Principle, disciple, label,

Petal, penal, and canal,

Wait, surmise, plait, promise, pal.

Suit, suite, ruin, circuit, conduit,

Rime with “shirk it” and “beyond it.”

But it is not hard to tell,

Why it’s pall, mall, but Pall Mall.

Muscle, muscular, gaol, iron,

Timber, climber, bullion, lion,

Worm and storm, chaise, chaos, and chair,

Senator, spectator, mayor,

Ivy, privy, famous, clamour

And enamour rime with hammer.

Pussy, hussy, and possess,

Desert, but dessert, address.

Golf, wolf, countenance, lieutenants.

Hoist, in lieu of flags, left pennants.

River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb,

Doll and roll and some and home.

Stranger does not rime with anger.

Neither does devour with clangour.

Soul, but foul and gaunt but aunt.

Font, front, won’t, want, grand, and grant.

Shoes, goes, does. Now first say: finger.

And then: singer, ginger, linger,

Real, zeal, mauve, gauze, and gauge,

Marriage, foliage, mirage, age.

Query does not rime with very,

Nor does fury sound like bury.

Dost, lost, post; and doth, cloth, loth;

Job, Job; blossom, bosom, oath.

Though the difference seems little,

We say actual, but victual.

Seat, sweat; chaste, caste.; Leigh, eight, height;

Put, nut; granite, and unite.

Reefer does not rime with deafer,

Feoffer does, and zephyr, heifer.

Dull, bull, Geoffrey, George, ate, late,

Hint, pint, Senate, but sedate.

Scenic, Arabic, Pacific,

Science, conscience, scientific,

Tour, but our and succour, four,

Gas, alas, and Arkansas.

Sea, idea, guinea, area,

Psalm, Maria, but malaria,

Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean,

Doctrine, turpentine, marine.

Compare alien with Italian,

Dandelion with battalion.

Sally with ally, yea, ye,

Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, key, quay.

Say aver, but ever, fever.

Neither, leisure, skein, receiver.

Never guess–it is not safe:

We say calves, valves, half, but Ralph.

Heron, granary, canary,

Crevice and device, and eyrie,

Face but preface, but efface,

Phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.

Large, but target, gin, give, verging,

Ought, out, joust, and scour, but scourging,

Ear but earn, and wear and bear

Do not rime with here, but ere.

Seven is right, but so is even,

Hyphen, roughen, nephew, Stephen,

Monkey, donkey, clerk, and jerk,

Asp, grasp, wasp, and cork and work.

Pronunciation–think of psyche–!

Is a paling, stout and spikey,

Won’t it make you lose your wits,

Writing “groats” and saying “grits"?

It’s a dark abyss or tunnel,

Strewn with stones, like rowlock, gunwale,

Islington and Isle of Wight,

Housewife, verdict, and indict!

Don’t you think so, reader, rather,

Saying lather, bather, father?

Finally: which rimes with “enough”

Though, through, plough, cough, hough, or tough?

Hiccough has the sound of “cup.”

My advice is–give it up!

[caf]

how a few bad teachers from Birmingham teach English in Thailand is off topic. How well Thais with degrees in Thai teach Thai language to farang is on topic. In my experience and that of my friends, a decent Thai teacher is one in ten teachers.

You and your friends are entitled to your opinion on Thai nationals who are teachers though where you get your 10% ststistic from ( my experience and that of my friends) is stataistically flawed.

They of course are equally entitled to their view.

I don't follow your reference to bad teachers from Birmingham ( UK?)