Thoh โธ่/โถ่

[katana]

I was trying to transcribe this short sound clip from a Thai film and thought the small girl ลดา said โธ่แม่ but a couple of Thais said it's โถ่แม่ (different spelling).

Does anyone know the difference between the two?

Are โธ่ andโถ่ the same word, same meaning, but one with a slang spelling?

Edited October 21, 2009 by katana

[tgeezer]

I was trying to transcribe this short sound clip from a Thai film and thought the small girl ลดา said โธ่แม่ but a couple of Thais said it's โถ่แม่ (different spelling).

Does anyone know the difference between the two?

Are โธ่ andโถ่ the same word, same meaning, but one with a slang spelling?

I looked those exclamation words up in the RID and the only difference in the definitions is in โธ่ it says only ความสงสาร หรือ ความรำคาญใจ and for โถ (เสียงโท) ความสงสารหรือเห็นอกเห็นใจ It would be nice if เห็นอกเห็นใจ meant a feeling toward someone but I don't know what it means since I can find only เห็นใจ I think I can see where a child might express an emotion and by adding แม่ seek approval and where if you were showing sympathy you might add the name of the person who is disadvantaged.

It was seeing แม่ which exited my interest; exclamations of this kind I have not come across. On the golf course โถ is often used after missing a putt, sympathy toward oneself, should it be or is it โธ่ which I am hearing?

To answer your question โถ่ appears to me to be mis-spelt.

Edited October 21, 2009 by tgeezer

[SoftWater]

I looked those exclamation words up in the RID and the only difference in the definitions is in โธ่ it says only ความสงสาร หรือ ความรำคาญใจ and for โถ (เสียงโท) ความสงสารหรือเห็นอกเห็นใจ It would be nice if เห็นอกเห็นใจ meant a feeling toward someone but I don't know what it means since I can find only เห็นใจ I think I can see where a child might express an emotion and by adding แม่ seek approval and where if you were showing sympathy you might add the name of the person who is disadvantaged.

เห็นอกเห็นใจ

[V] sympathize with; have sympathy for; be emotionally involved with S.เห็นใจ A.เห็นแก่ตัว Ex. หนุ่มสาวที่รักกัน เห็นอกเห็นใจกันอย่างซาบซึ้งแล้ว ก็ย่อมอยากมีพิธีสมรสให้สังคมรับรู้

(NECTEC Lexitron 2 TH-EN)

Edited October 22, 2009 by SoftWater

[tgeezer]

Thank you Softwater, I should have looked that up I suppose, but I don't use Lexitron mainly because the definitions and examples are not always RID.

I had to research exclamations and it appears that เห็นอกเห็นใจ is one, or at least the เห็นอก part, like กินข้าวกินปลา ผู้หลักผู้ใหญ่ อาบน้ำอบท่า it's easy when you have examples, but I am beginning to recognise some.

[Rikker]

I'd say that โธ่ and โถ are variations from the same word, a verbal interjection, and so the spelling is at best an imperfect way of capturing in writing the subtleties of feeling and meaning when it's said aloud.

โธ่เอ๋ย is a particularly common expression that โธ่/โถ is found in. But if you look online, people spell it virtually every way possible:

โธ่เอ๊ย

โธ่เอ้ย

โธ่เอย

โุธ่เอ๋ย

โถเอย

โถเอ้ย

โถเอ๊ย

โถเอ๋ย

โถ่เอ๊ย

โถ่เอ้ย

โถ่เอย

โถ่เอ๋ย

[tgeezer]

I'd say that โธ่ and โถ are variations from the same word, a verbal interjection, and so the spelling is at best an imperfect way of capturing in writing the subtleties of feeling and meaning when it's said aloud.

โธ่เอ๋ย is a particularly common expression that โธ่/โถ is found in. But if you look online, people spell it virtually every way possible:

โธ่เอ๊ย

โธ่เอ้ย

โธ่เอย

โุธ่เอ๋ย

โถเอย

โถเอ้ย

โถเอ๊ย

โถเอ๋ย

โถ่เอ๊ย

โถ่เอ้ย

โถ่เอย

โถ่เอ๋ย

I am sure that you are right I know that almost anything goes on line, I have just noticed that I wrote โถ(เสียงโท) instead of จัตวา!

I find the exclamations very unnatural and difficult, there is really no way of getting them right other than apeing your friends. I have a few from the golf course which I flatter myself sound ok and I write โอ๊ย! on my golf ball here instead of Oops!, but they do not campare; I don't know what is correct for Oops!

[katana]

Thanks. So it appears to be the same word as โธ่.

โธ่แม่/โถ่แม่ - Oh mum! (shows slight annoyance on being told it's time for her bed and she has to return home).

[SoftWater]

I'd say that โธ่ and โถ are variations from the same word, a verbal interjection, and so the spelling is at best an imperfect way of capturing in writing the subtleties of feeling and meaning when it's said aloud.

โธ่เอ๋ย is a particularly common expression that โธ่/โถ is found in. But if you look online, people spell it virtually every way possible:

โธ่เอ๊ย

โธ่เอ้ย

โธ่เอย

โุธ่เอ๋ย

โถเอย

โถเอ้ย

โถเอ๊ย

โถเอ๋ย

โถ่เอ๊ย

โถ่เอ้ย

โถ่เอย

โถ่เอ๋ย

I am sure that you are right I know that almost anything goes on line, I have just noticed that I wrote โถ(เสียงโท) instead of จัตวา!

I find the exclamations very unnatural and difficult, there is really no way of getting them right other than apeing your friends. I have a few from the golf course which I flatter myself sound ok and I write โอ๊ย! on my golf ball here instead of Oops!, but they do not campare; I don't know what is correct for Oops!

Domnern Sathienpong's Thai-English 4th edition records two spellings, both โธ่ and โถ (notice there is no tone mark in the variant, so the tone would be different, too) for the meaning of 'oh dear' or 'what a pity'.

[Rikker]

It may just be my ears, but the word written โธ่ in my experience is not actually pronounced with a falling tone, as the spelling would indicate. Rather, it's pronounced โถ่, with a low tone.

[DavidHouston]

It may just be my ears, but the word written โธ่ in my experience is not actually pronounced with a falling tone, as the spelling would indicate. Rather, it's pronounced โถ่, with a low tone.

The way I hear the word spoken is with a great deal of intonation which only partially resembles one of the four structured tones. This is similar to the exclamation "แม่" which can have several twists and turns in a single utterance. This goes for a lot of these Thai exclamation.

[GarryP]

I have heard โธ่ spoken in so many different ways, like DH suggests. If used to express disdain or disgust it would be pronounced one way, or used as an exclamation to suggest one had made a mistake another way, etc.

[Rikker]

The way I hear the word spoken is with a great deal of intonation which only partially resembles one of the four structured tones. This is similar to the exclamation "แม่" which can have several twists and turns in a single utterance. This goes for a lot of these Thai exclamation.

I agree with both David and GarryP. That's what I was trying to get at when I was talking about the spelling is an imperfect representation what the spoken word. Thais very much use different intonations to express shades of meaning in their speech. Which can be very hard to capture in writing.

[SoftWater]

Thais very much use different intonations to express shades of meaning in their speech. Which can be very hard to capture in writing.

Thanks Rikker. I have tried to argue this in the past, without much success. Not from any academic expertise (which, with regards to Thai, I have none), but just from my experience. It's too commonly assumed among foreigners that since Thai is 'a tonal language' any change of tone expresses a change in denotation. In fact, just like English, in many situations, changes in tone (sic: intonation) preserve denotation but change connotation. As Michael Caine is often quoted as saying (maybe you have to be a Brit for this one): "Not a lot of people know that!"

Edited October 27, 2009 by SoftWater

[tgeezer]

Thais very much use different intonations to express shades of meaning in their speech. Which can be very hard to capture in writing.

"Not a lot of people know that!"

Do you know that he never actually said that? I listened to an interview with him where this was revealed, someone attributed it to him.

A little bit of Thai referring to the little คำบอกท่าที words

ในการสื่อสาร ผู้ส่งาสารด้วยวิธีพูด จะนิยมใช้คำเสริมแทรกเข้าในประโยค เพื่อเน่นเจตนาของผู้พูด คำเหล่านี้มีลักษณะพิเศษ เมื่อพูดเสียงอาจสั้นหรือยาว สูงหรือต่ำ ตางจากภาษาเขียนคำบอกท่าทีเหล่วนี้ได้แก คำว่า ซิ ล่ะ นะ เถอะ ฯลฯ

I am not brave enough to say that these are คำอุทาน yet; but add weight to the 'ya tink too mut' argument.

[SoftWater]

Thais very much use different intonations to express shades of meaning in their speech. Which can be very hard to capture in writing.

"Not a lot of people know that!"

Do you know that he never actually said that? I listened to an interview with him where this was revealed, someone attributed it to him.

A little bit of Thai referring to the little คำบอกท่าที words

ในการสื่อสาร ผู้ส่งาสารด้วยวิธีพูด จะนิยมใช้คำเสริมแทรกเข้าในประโยค เพื่อเน่นเจตนาของผู้พูด คำเหล่านี้มีลักษณะพิเศษ เมื่อพูดเสียงอาจสั้นหรือยาว สูงหรือต่ำ ตางจากภาษาเขียนคำบอกท่าทีเหล่วนี้ได้แก คำว่า ซิ ล่ะ นะ เถอะ ฯลฯ

I am not brave enough to say that these are คำอุทาน yet; but add weight to the 'ya tink too mut' argument.

Actually yes! I did know that he didn't say it (that's why I said 'He is often quoted as saying...' rather than 'As Michael Caine said...'). I forget how the attribution came about - I think it may have been a comedian/impersonator who used it as a catchphrase while doing his 'Hello, I'm Michael Caine' act (possibly the great Mike Yarwood, but don't quote me on it).

Back to Thai: I don't buy the 'ya tink too mut' argument in language learning at all. It's true that some things just are the way they are without particular rhyme or reason, just an accident of convention if you like, but even figuring that out for a particular word (as we have on this thread with the variation of โธ่) is useful information. I don't see how analysis and questioning can do any harm at all.

Going the other way, accepting things without trying to analyse them may lead you to miss many learning opportunities, both directly and indirectly. As I think I've commented before in a different thread, the teachers that tell you you're 'thinking too much' are usually just trying to hide the fact they don't have an explanation, example or useful way to help you with that particular problem. If this is the only answer, rather than blaming the student ('you don't understand because you think too much'), it would at least be better to 'blame' the language 'It's just the way it is. Language is untidy. Sometimes the rules are broken, sometimes some conventions just don't have any rules.'

Edited October 28, 2009 by SoftWater

[tgeezer]

I agree.

I believe in working from the simple to the complex, lots of people find long nouns before learning simple one syllable verbs which are much more important. The verbs often show the way to what the nouns are I think. (My theory; grammaticists might argue)

Don't you agree that the way the quote explains นะ is so easy to understand that if it were read, at least one of the latest threads(นะครับ) would not have needed Yoot to step-in. Much of what was attributed to the expression didn't exist but people seemed to feel that there had to be more to it, usually there isn't, I feel that this language, has to leave something to the imagination.

[SoftWater]

I agree.

I believe in working from the simple to the complex, lots of people find long nouns before learning simple one syllable verbs which are much more important. The verbs often show the way to what the nouns are I think. (My theory; grammaticists might argue)

Don't you agree that the way the quote explains นะ is so easy to understand that if it were read, at least one of the latest threads(นะครับ) would not have needed Yoot to step-in. Much of what was attributed to the expression didn't exist but people seemed to feel that there had to be more to it, usually there isn't, I feel that this language, has to leave something to the imagination.

I get your point about imagination and inferring meaning from context, but I'm not really sure about that the value of the quote. One of my dictionaries defines นะ like this:

"a mild word tacked on to indicate

• emphasis
  persuasion
  sarcasm
  disappointment
  approval
  a question
  

for example..."

and then a whole list of examples-in-use are given. Effectively, Yoot and other native speakers are doing the same job for us in giving examples, and given the huge variety of the language functions this word and similar ones can indicate, that kind of help is invaluable for getting a good feel for the correct usage and understanding of these kinds of words.

Edited October 28, 2009 by SoftWater

[tgeezer]

I get your point about imagination and inferring meaning from context, but I'm not really sure about that the value of the quote. One of my dictionaries defines นะ like this:

"a mild word tacked on to indicate

• emphasis
  persuasion
  sarcasm
  disappointment
  approval
  a question
  

for example..."

and then a whole list of examples-in-use are given.

Can you show some of the examples? disappointment, approval, sarcasm, and question?

I agree again, my quote was to show the school curriculum teaches that there will be variations in the sounds of some words, you are right it would not have cleared up the meaning without examples which I have now included.

I think you will find that what Yoot did was to bring the topic back to earth because we were going off on the wrong tangent making นะ some degree of 'politeness'.

Here is นะ น่า

จะใช้ในประโยคบอกให้ท่ำ เช่น

เชิญมาเที่ยวกนอีกนะ

อยู่คนเดียวไปก่อนนะ

ช่วยถือของให้หน่อยน่า

You can't use any of them without practise and comparison with a native using them, by which time you will know the meaning.

[SoftWater]

Can you show some of the examples? disappointment, approval, sarcasm, and question?

I agree again, my quote was to show the school curriculum teaches that there will be variations in the sounds of some words, you are right it would not have cleared up the meaning without examples which I have now included.

I think you will find that what Yoot did was to bring the topic back to earth because we were going off on the wrong tangent making นะ some degree of 'politeness'.

I'm wondering whether we should take this discussion back to that thread, rather than continue it here (maybe the mods can decide on that); however, I don't think Yoot was saying that นะ does not add politeness. I think what he did was show how that concept can be distinguished more finely. I just went back to re-read that thread and Yoot says

นะ or นะครับ or นะคะ is used when you want to ask or persuade someone to do something, telling someone that you will do something or when you say thank, sorry, excuse, congratulate.

These are all functions which are aided by extra politeness, and I took Yoot's point to be that นะ aids these by doing just that.

That topic was going in the wrong direction because somebody introduced a confusion between นะครับ and ครับผม and not because of the point about politeness.

For the examples you asked for, these are from the 4th Edition of Domnern Sathienpong's 'Thai-English Dictionary', recently published by Se-ed:

ทำช้าๆ นะ ไม่ต้องรีบ

[Take it slow, there's no need to hurry.]

(My note: I assume this is sarcasm, the implication being that the speaker wants the listener to work/act faster, not slower.)

Question: ไม่ดีนะ

[That's not good, right?]

ตกลงไปด้วยกันนะ

[Let's go, Okay?]

Disappointment: เธอนะ เธอ ทำไมไม่ฟังฉันเลย

[Oh you, why don't you ever listen to me?]

Approval: ดีจริงนะ

[it's wonderful, isn't it?]

I hasten to add both the Thai and the translations are from the dictionary; they are not mine. However, DS does not identify each example with each function; he merely lists the functions then gives the examples. The identification is my best guess at matching them (it's worth pointing out that nothing can really be identified as sarcastic without a context, which is not provided for in the example).

Edited October 28, 2009 by SoftWater

[tgeezer]

No need to move it, I think that we have just about 'thrashed the a.. out of it'.

[SimonN]

I'd say that โธ่ and โถ are variations from the same word, a verbal interjection, and so the spelling is at best an imperfect way of capturing in writing the subtleties of feeling and meaning when it's said aloud.

There's yet another variation; โท่, which often comes paired with พุด; พุดโท่.

Both พุดโท่ and พุดโธ่ can be found in the expression พุดโท่พุดถัง/พุดโธ่พุดถัง

Anyone have any idea of the meaning of this expression?

[katana]

According to the Lexitron dictionary, พุทโธ่พุทถัง is a synonym of พุทโธ่.

Another source on Google seemed to suggest it's archaic though and not really used in modern Thai, same as for พุทโธ่.

[tgeezer]

I'd say that โธ่ and โถ are variations from the same word, a verbal interjection, and so the spelling is at best an imperfect way of capturing in writing the subtleties of feeling and meaning when it's said aloud.

There's yet another variation; โท่, which often comes paired with พุด; พุดโท่.

Both พุดโท่ and พุดโธ่ can be found in the expression พุดโท่พุดถัง/พุดโธ่พุดถัง

Anyone have any idea of the meaning of this expression?

โท่ means obvious, so it could mean anything from stating the obvious to speaking too loud. probably the first. Anyway that is not important unless you can give some context.

The thing is the extra words are just extra. They come in the group of คำอุทานเสีมบท described thus เป็นคำอุทานที่ผู้พูดกล่าวเพิ่มเติมถ้อยคำเสริมขึ้น โดยไม่มีความหมาย มักเดิมหน้า ต่อท้าย หรือแทกกลางคำพูด เพื่อเน้นความหมายของคำที่จะพูดให้ชัดเจนยิ่งขึ้น

I must say that it is suspicious that the two front elements have different meanings but the same meaningless partner, it could be a misspelling in โท่ so that they both say the same, I am guessng that it is describing a manner of speach; sympathetic?

That should keep us going a bit longer and sort of returns to the thread.

[tgeezer]

I was just flicking through the dictionary and I noticed that this morning when I replied I had it in my head that it was พูดโท่ instead of พุทโท่ it doesn't change much except that, my guess would be wrong; it is no more than an eclamation which we have to learn how to use.

[Rikker]

This is just a hypothesis, but I'd wager that all of these variations originate with the word พุทโธ, a literary variation of the word พุทธ "buddha". If the word came to be used as an interjection, with emphatic pronunciation on the second syllable, then it makes sense that the spelling พุทโธ่ (with ไม้เอก) would have arisen as a way of recording the difference. Then shortened versions of พุทโธ่ came to be spelled in a variety of ways, representing a variety of pronunciations.

Just a theory.

[tgeezer]

I was told that by a Thai, with reference to old women in despair which I compared with 'oh my god', which backs up an earlier reference as being โบราณ. I take it all with 'a pinch of salt', however that's at least two people with the same thought.

I tried to edit out that annoying piece of c..p from Google but I suppose that we have to live with it. Oh I see, now it is gone!

Edited October 30, 2009 by tgeezer