เป็นไปอย่างปกติ

[Briggsy]

Here's a sentence วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริณเติบโตเป็นไปอย่างปกติ

I understand the meaning but I would like to be able to parse the phrase in red and then go on to use it or manipulate it in sentences I have produced myself.

Can anybody add anything other than "It means 'normally'". For instance why is เป็นไป there as อย่างปกติ looks like it would suffice?

[RickBradford]

เป็นไป as a phrase can mean 'to happen, to develop'

This can be extended to เป็นไปได้, which therefore carries the meaning of 'possible, feasible.'

[Briggsy]

Thanks. That makes sense.

[tgeezer]

Just remember that it is two words, a helping verb and main verb, meaning 'going forward'.

อย่างปกตี is not enough because that would be ;(operative words in bold type.)

วิตามิน B2 ให้ชว่ยการเจริญเติบโตอย่างปกตี Vitamin B2 helps growth normally.

วิตามิน B2 ให้ชว่ยการเจริญเติบโตปกตี Vitmin B2 helps normal growth.

วิตามิน B2 ให้ชว่ยการเจริญเติบโตเป็นไปอย่างปกตี Vitamin B2 helps growth to go forward normally. Same as above isn't it?

I haven't translated ให้ it is used here saying that Vitamin B2 wishes to help or intends good. Difficult to explain but แม่ให้ลูกไปนอน means that mum makes the child go to bed for its own good. It is not worth translating IMO.

On reflection if you said 'benefits growth' it may be right. Benefit= favourable or helpful factor. Looks like it fits!

Vitamin B2 is a benefit to normal growth.

[tgeezer]

The fact that no-one has 'shot this down in flames' means that people just don't believe it at all, and I think that this is compatable with the way the language is meant to be. There is no better way to get a yawn from a learner or native speaker, than to try to tie down meaning, other than at the most superficial level. Those distinctions I have made up, even if they are at all right, probably are not worth making in English, but I feel less so in Thai. I think that the 'straight-jacket' which is English grammar doesn't fit Thai at all. There is a reason why อย่าง is used but you will find it often ignored and why not? If you want to compose you have to use combinations of words which you have seen used, grammar doesn't necessarily come into it; in fact a correct composition is likely to be objected to simply because of คนไทยไม่พูด . What perhaps they should say is คนไทยยังไม่ได้พูด .

Edited February 26, 2010 by tgeezer

[farangnahrak]

The fact that no-one has 'shot this down in flames' means that people just don't believe it at all, and I think that this is compatable with the way the language is meant to be. There is no better way to get a yawn from a learner or native speaker, than to try to tie down meaning, other than at the most superficial level. Those distinctions I have made up, even if they are at all right, probably are not worth making in English, but I feel less so in Thai. I think that the 'straight-jacket' which is English grammar doesn't fit Thai at all. There is a reason why อย่าง is used but you will find it often ignored and why not? If you want to compose you have to use combinations of words which you have seen used, grammar doesn't necessarily come into it; in fact a correct composition is likely to be objected to simply because of คนไทยไม่พูด . What perhaps they should say is คนไทยยังไม่ได้พูด .

Thai's have a rule that if you can remove words from a sentence and it can still be perfectly understood, then do it.

for example:

ผมจะไปนอนลับที่เตียงนอนครับ

จะไปนอนหลับ

นอน

The 3rd example would drive crazy anyone trying to follow grammar rules . . .

But then when you write, it has to be สวย (ภาษาสวย). I have a farang friend who likes to speak in ภาษาสวย and it drives them nuts to our amusement. This is probably why it needs to be เป็นไปอย่างปกติ - its pretty to say.

[anchan42]

Dont make me think, It hurts

I have updated my firefox and text box in this forum seems to stop working properly. Spell checker is also not working so bare with me.

I probably don't have a satisfactory grammatical explanation but let try.

Hmmm..where to start. Let start with nitpicking.

ปกติ not ปกตี

ช่วย not ชว่ย

ให้ช่วย sounds very wrong. It should be ช่วยให้. ให้ is a very versatile word. It can be verbs. It can be preposition with many different meanings. The closest word in English would be the preposition “to”

แม่ให้ลูกไปนอน: ให้ here means to get somebody doing something, to persuade or force or order some one to do something either good or bad. I think this is an idiomatic usage probably shorten from สั่งให้ (order sb to), บอกให้ (tell sb to), บังคับให้ (forced sb to), ขอร้องให้(ask sb to) which one exactly, as usual, depends on context.

You can have แม่ให้ลูกไปนอน or แม่บอกให้ลูกไปนอน or แม่บอกลูกให้ไปนอน. The first is idiomatic usage and vague comparing to the last two.

Get back to the original sentence.

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตเป็นไปอย่างปกติ = Vitamin B2 helps growth to go on normally

You can change the structure to bring it closer to English.

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยการเจริญเติบโตให้เป็นไปอย่างปกติ Same same but different. J

Let look at tgeezer’s sentences with slight modification.

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตอย่างปกติ Wrong. In this particular structure “อย่างปกติ” cannot modify noun “การเจริญเติบโต”

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตปกติ OK

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตเป็นไปอย่างปกติ OK

[DavidHouston]

I wonder whether the relevant Thai term is "สละสลวย". From the RID:

สละสลวย[สะหฺละสะหฺลวย] ว. ที่กล่าวหรือเรียบเรียงได้เนื้อถ้อยกระทง

ความและมีสำนวนกลมกลืนไพเราะระรื่นหู (ใช้แก่ถ้อยคำ

สำนวน) เช่น บทความนี้มีสำนวนสละสลวย.

ไพเราะระรื่นหู = "pleasant to the ear"; "elegant (in a turn or phrase)";

The fact that no-one has 'shot this down in flames' means that people just don't believe it at all, and I think that this is compatable with the way the language is meant to be. There is no better way to get a yawn from a learner or native speaker, than to try to tie down meaning, other than at the most superficial level. Those distinctions I have made up, even if they are at all right, probably are not worth making in English, but I feel less so in Thai. I think that the 'straight-jacket' which is English grammar doesn't fit Thai at all. There is a reason why อย่าง is used but you will find it often ignored and why not? If you want to compose you have to use combinations of words which you have seen used, grammar doesn't necessarily come into it; in fact a correct composition is likely to be objected to simply because of คนไทยไม่พูด . What perhaps they should say is คนไทยยังไม่ได้พูด .

Thai's have a rule that if you can remove words from a sentence and it can still be perfectly understood, then do it.

for example:

ผมจะไปนอนลับที่เตียงนอนครับ

จะไปนอนหลับ

นอน

The 3rd example would drive crazy anyone trying to follow grammar rules . . .

But then when you write, it has to be สวย (ภาษาสวย). I have a farang friend who likes to speak in ภาษาสวย and it drives them nuts to our amusement. This is probably why it needs to be เป็นไปอย่างปกติ - its pretty to say.

[anchan42]

If you take หลับ out, they would sound more native.

Becarful not to use หลับนอน instead of นอนหลับ

The fact that no-one has 'shot this down in flames' means that people just don't believe it at all, and I think that this is compatable with the way the language is meant to be. There is no better way to get a yawn from a learner or native speaker, than to try to tie down meaning, other than at the most superficial level. Those distinctions I have made up, even if they are at all right, probably are not worth making in English, but I feel less so in Thai. I think that the 'straight-jacket' which is English grammar doesn't fit Thai at all. There is a reason why อย่าง is used but you will find it often ignored and why not? If you want to compose you have to use combinations of words which you have seen used, grammar doesn't necessarily come into it; in fact a correct composition is likely to be objected to simply because of คนไทยไม่พูด . What perhaps they should say is คนไทยยังไม่ได้พูด .

Thai's have a rule that if you can remove words from a sentence and it can still be perfectly understood, then do it.

for example:

ผมจะไปนอนลับที่เตียงนอนครับ

จะไปนอนหลับ

นอน

The 3rd example would drive crazy anyone trying to follow grammar rules . . .

But then when you write, it has to be สวย (ภาษาสวย). I have a farang friend who likes to speak in ภาษาสวย and it drives them nuts to our amusement. This is probably why it needs to be เป็นไปอย่างปกติ - its pretty to say.

[farangnahrak]

If you take หลับ out, they would sound more native.

Becarful not to use หลับนอน instead of นอนหลับ

explain please . . .

[anchan42]

นอนหลับ=(lay down and) go to sleep, ie go to sleep in lay-down position.

หลับนอน=having sex in any positions

If you take หลับ out, they would sound more native.

Becarful not to use หลับนอน instead of นอนหลับ

explain please . . .

[SoftWater]

นอนหลับ=(lay down and) go to sleep, ie go to sleep in lay-down position.

หลับนอน=having sex in any positions

Brilliant! What a difference word order makes!

[tgeezer]

Dont make me think, It hurts

Let look at tgeezer's sentences with slight modification.

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตอย่างปกติ Wrong. In this particular structure "อย่างปกติ" cannot modify noun "การเจริญเติบโต"

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตปกติ OK

วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตเป็นไปอย่างปกติ OK

I gladly acknowledge all the mistakes and spelling errors, it is the reason I stirred it up.

Actually I didn't think that the first sentence was wrong, อย่างปกติ does not modify the noun, as my black type is showing. What makes that particular predicate different from this one?; เขาทำงานอย่างปกติ อย่างปกติ is after the noun งาน .

So assuming that you think that grammar is important where do you find the rules? In the RID for ให้ for example is not a preposition.

Quick edit noone has picked up my opening mis-statement เป็นไป is two words!

Edited February 26, 2010 by tgeezer

[tgeezer]

I wonder whether the relevant Thai term is "สละสลวย". From the RID:

สละสลวย[สะหฺละสะหฺลวย] ว. ที่กล่าวหรือเรียบเรียงได้เนื้อถ้อยกระทง

ความและมีสำนวนกลมกลืนไพเราะระรื่นหู (ใช้แก่ถ้อยคำ

สำนวน) เช่น บทความนี้มีสำนวนสละสลวย.

ไพเราะระรื่นหู = "pleasant to the ear"; "elegant (in a turn or phrase)";

Just the opposite I should have thought, that is more like adding words; maybe กะทัดรัด Certainly explains the 'yawn' when it isn't.

[GarryP]

เป็นไปอย่างปกติ

เป็นไปอตามปกติ

What is the difference between these two? I normally use the latter.

[tgeezer]

เป็นไปอย่างปกติ

เป็นไปอตามปกติ

What is the difference between these two? I normally use the latter.

In my way of thinking; nothing much, ตาม โดย อย่าง ;words in proximity to one another must mean something.

[anchan42]

It is frustrating that the firefox 3.6 is not working with text box in this forum. All the bold type in my previous post is not my intention at all.

เขาทำงานอย่างปกติ

อย่างปกติ modify ทำงาน which is verb. This is not always true though.

Where did I find the rules? Linguist will be screaming at this. I made most of them up. Dictionary tell me that ให้ is helping verb and I disagree.

I think grammar is very important for you to understand a foreign language but not as important as how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers. Grammar is just a tool to help tuning you brain to a new language. Maybe similar to a walker and a baby. Once the baby has learnt how to walk, the walker is completely forgotten.

[DavidHouston]

Anchan,

I think grammar is very important for you to understand a foreign language but not as important as how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers. Grammar is just a tool to help tuning you brain to a new language. Maybe similar to a walker and a baby. Once the baby has learnt how to walk, the walker is completely forgotten.

I thought that "grammar" was, in fact, the codification of the rules of "how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers". And, with respect to the Thai language, aren't most of us babies just learning how to walk?

[farangnahrak]

It is frustrating that the firefox 3.6 is not working with text box in this forum. All the bold type in my previous post is not my intention at all.

Use Chrome instead

[tgeezer]

It is frustrating that the firefox 3.6 is not working with text box in this forum. All the bold type in my previous post is not my intention at all.

เขาทำงานอย่างปกติ

อย่างปกติ modify ทำงาน which is verb. This is not always true though.

Where did I find the rules? Linguist will be screaming at this. I made most of them up. Dictionary tell me that ให้ is helping verb and I disagree.

I think grammar is very important for you to understand a foreign language but not as important as how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers. Grammar is just a tool to help tuning you brain to a new language. Maybe similar to a walker and a baby. Once the baby has learnt how to walk, the walker is completely forgotten.

The verb is ทำ. The whole predicate part is normally modified when using อย่าง, which is the natural thing to do.

อย่าง ใช้ประกอบคำวิเศษณ์หมายความว่า โดยอาการที่ . Try this ทำงานรวดเร็ว ทำงานโดยอาการที่รวดเร็ว

The first is 'quick work', whatever that means and the second is 'work quickly'. Basically the same, but not in a court of law.

'

You are not allowed to disagree with the RID because apart from meaning 'give' and 'allow' ให้ is a helping verb, in which role it is supposed to force compliance with the following verb. I believe from an earlier post on สอน you think that it is a preposition, but it in that role it is superfluous, so has no classification apart from perhaps คำเสริม

The grammar rules are in the RID for the same reason that ภาษากลาง is the official language, because if everyone decided his experience trumped the rules there would be misunderstanding between dialects.

David's point is good; we are all learning to walk in language terms we should learn the proper way first. What people use is interesting up to a point, sounds like a Thai, but not if it hinders understanding of the standard language.

This is a good discussion I am learning quite a lot, I am answering some of my own questions too.

Edited February 27, 2010 by tgeezer

[anchan42]

Grammarian could only try,IMHO For me คนไทยไม่พูดอย่างนั้น is very important. If a native speaker tell me that my sentence is grammatically correct but it sounds odd because it is not the way a native speaker say it. That sentence is no good to me.

Probably time for me to pick a Thai-grammar book up. Any recommendation? Thais' awareness of their own language grammar probably a lot less then English native speakers. You would not have two Thais arguing about they grammar too often.

Conversation like should it be "it's me" or "it's I" is unlikely for Thais to have.

I probably have not paid much attention to English grammar neither. (You probably roll your eyes and say that explains a lot ) I would not look at a sentence and broke it down to subject,predicate and then verb, indirect, direct objects etc. I would look at a sentence and try to understand that this is X doing Y to Z in A manner.

Anchan,

I think grammar is very important for you to understand a foreign language but not as important as how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers. Grammar is just a tool to help tuning you brain to a new language. Maybe similar to a walker and a baby. Once the baby has learnt how to walk, the walker is completely forgotten.

I thought that "grammar" was, in fact, the codification of the rules of "how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers". And, with respect to the Thai language, aren't most of us babies just learning how to walk?

Edited February 27, 2010 by anchan42

[DavidHouston]

I recommend "ไวยากรณ์ไทย" by อาจารย์ นววรรณ พันธุเมธา, โครงการเผยแพร่ผลงานวิชาการ คณะอักษรศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, ๒๕๕๑, 190 baht.

Let me stress that Ajarn Nawawan professes to be presenting the grammar of spoken Thai, not written Thai so this book should be useful to all who are interested in speaking the Thai language correctly.

The only place I have been able to locate this book is at the Chula Book Center, behind Siam Square.

Good luck!

[tgeezer]

I recommend "ไวยากรณ์ไทย" by อาจารย์ นววรรณ พันธุเมธา, โครงการเผยแพร่ผลงานวิชาการ คณะอักษรศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, ๒๕๕๑, 190 baht.

Let me stress that Ajarn Nawawan professes to be presenting the grammar of spoken Thai, not written Thai so this book should be useful to all who are interested in speaking the Thai language correctly.

The only place I have been able to locate this book is at the Chula Book Center, behind Siam Square.

Good luck!

I have that book and read it a couple of times. She uses her own classifications 1.calling words 2.main words 3.words used in place of main words 4. amplifiing words 5 joining words 6 extra words. Having said that the first things we see in 2., main words, are nouns and verbs, but that is the last time familiar classification appears until page 145 when she starts explaining constuction of sentences phrases etc. much of which has already been seen in the 1-6. As a reference book it is difficult to find anything. No headings on pages meant that the first thing I did was cut the corners off alternate chapters, then in magic marker the section and subsections as they appear throughout the chapters. It still appears a hotchpotch, but I am getting used to it. There are masses of examples.

[Tod Daniels]

For me คนไทยไม่พูดอย่างนั้น is very important. If a native speaker tell me that my sentence is grammatically correct but it sounds odd because it is not the way a native speaker say it. That sentence is no good to me.

Not to piss on anyone's parade but. ..

Given the average education of the masses of indigenous natives here (which btw is quite LOW); the simple fact that the 'average thai' wouldn't speak like that doesn't dissuade me from speaking correct thai in the least.

Here's a crude but effective example; If I was wantin' to speak engrish, I probably wouldn't go to Hicksville USA and learn from 4th grade drop outs.

I mean; to each their own, and by all means learn from who ever you want; just realize the giant limitations learning thai from the errr 'average' thai.. ..

And I do concur totally with the next post. Sorry, grammar is the rules to use a language correctly. Rules are not usually open to interpretation or re-writing simply for the fact they don’t fit with your preconceived notions of a particular language.

I thought that "grammar" was, in fact, the codification of the rules of "how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers". And, with respect to the Thai language, aren't most of us babies just learning how to walk?

[anchan42]

That probably depends on where you live and associate yourself with. You could also select your sampling group.

For instance, วิตามิน B2 ช่วยให้การเจริญเติบโตอย่างปกติ would not be acceptable to educated Thai. They would understand what is being said but would find it ขัดหู.

There are accidental lexicon gap and there are probably also accidental grammar gap. You could say the collocation is more important to me than grammar.

We have descriptive grammar and prescriptive grammar. For me descriptive take precedence. We also have grammar at conscious and sub-conscious level. For grammar at sub-conscious level take precedence.

I do understand that grammar is the rule of a language but the problem I have with it is that it is full of exception and continually changing. "Different then" was considered incorrect. It was wrong to begin a sentence with conjunctions but many natives are doing it now.

It is useful to study grammar when we are learning a new language but to hang on to it like shit stick to a blanket is not he way to go for me.

I know many Thais who do very well on English tests but have problems communicating with native when they start breaking rules and throw in a few slang.

For me คนไทยไม่พูดอย่างนั้น is very important. If a native speaker tell me that my sentence is grammatically correct but it sounds odd because it is not the way a native speaker say it. That sentence is no good to me.

Not to piss on anyone's parade but. ..

Given the average education of the masses of indigenous natives here (which btw is quite LOW); the simple fact that the 'average thai' wouldn't speak like that doesn't dissuade me from speaking correct thai in the least.

Here's a crude but effective example; If I was wantin' to speak engrish, I probably wouldn't go to Hicksville USA and learn from 4th grade drop outs.

I mean; to each their own, and by all means learn from who ever you want; just realize the giant limitations learning thai from the errr 'average' thai.. ..

And I do concur totally with the next post. Sorry, grammar is the rules to use a language correctly. Rules are not usually open to interpretation or re-writing simply for the fact they don't fit with your preconceived notions of a particular language.

I thought that "grammar" was, in fact, the codification of the rules of "how the language is really used and perceived by native speakers". And, with respect to the Thai language, aren't most of us babies just learning how to walk?

[DavidHouston]

Tod,

You said:

"Sorry, grammar is the rules to use a language correctly. Rules are not usually open to interpretation or re-writing simply for the fact they don’t fit with your preconceived notions of a particular language."

Please let us know what book or books constitute the set of grammar "rules" for the Thai language and under whose authority are these books published. Thanks for your help.

[meadish_sweetball]

Hehe.

[SoftWater]

Hehe.

What is grammar? Yep, you're really into the deep realms of linguistic controversy here.

I think both Tod and anchan42 have a point, it depends on your objective.

I'd agree that anchan42 is correct in this: conventional word choice and collocation of terms is a sign of competence within a linguistic community. While a dodgy construction may get your meaning across, it does so at the expense of showing you have not mastered the language.

On the other hand, for my purposes as a Thai speaker, I'm only ever interested in getting my meaning across and not aiming to impress anyone with my level of Thai. This, however, is often not the objective of people learning English, who usually have to demonstrate some kind of high level of competence to employers, University entrance boards and so on over and above mere communicative success.

[anchan42]

We could probably do with differentiation between stylistic grammar and mental grammar.

To have mental grammar as the same level as 4th grade dropouts would be a dream come true for me. The same could be said to many people who is learning Thai as a foreign language.

The grammar acquired by native during childhood is far more complex and richer than grammar taught in school.

[SoftWater]

Hi anchan, can I read for 'stylistic grammar' -- formal (written) grammar (something along the lines of ภาษาเขียน) and for 'mental grammar' something like natural speech patterns (ภาษาคุยพูด). If so I think I agree, if I got your meaning wrong, could you specify the difference between 'stylistic' and 'mental' please?