Miss-spelt Words For K And G

[LazyYogi]

It's because transliteration doesn't work.

Big shopping mall in ChiangMai pronounced Gat Su-an Gairw but written on the signs as Kad Suan Kaew (กาดสวนแก้ว) ... try asking a local where that place is!

I always wondered if it were deliberate to stop foreigners trying to learn Thai, or making it as difficult as possible.

Also you get the diffuculty of แ being written in roman script as 'AE' when it should be 'AIR' so Mae Rim and Mae Sai should actually be pronounced Mair Rim and Mair Sai.

The r is not evident in the thai pronounciation so they decided not to use the "air"

Thai words with an "r" at the end of a syllable would only make sense to speakers with a British accent. There is no word in Thai that ends in an "r" sound, so there is no reason to use it in transliteration. Also, the long "a" in Thai is a pure vowel. It is much more logical to write it as "aa" instead of "ar". So that's why I like "ajaan", but I can't stand the spelling "ajarn".

[LazyYogi]

It seems to me (based on observation) that Kh is used to indicate a K sound and K is used to indicate a G sound. The addition of the letter h also occurs with P (example Phuket) and T (example Thai). This is quite ok with me, as I was not expecting Thai to be english sounding.

The French pronounce Paris more like Ba-ree, and why not ?

It appears there are inconsistencies with some words; Pattaya and Bangkok being two examples. I have seen some roadsigns with Phattaya, and I was told that Bangkok is a deliberate error to try and help foreigners to pronounce it correctly. The letter g was added, when it is superfluous to a Thai. This could, of course, be just another urban legend.

That's a good point about Pattaya. It really should be Phatthaya if they wanted to be consistent. But you are wrong about Bangkok. The original Thai spelling is บางกอก, as in "Bang-kok". So the "g" is actually half of "ng", which in Thai is just one letter, ง. Though actually a much better spelling would be something like: baang-gawk

[almavro]

It is interesting to me that no one seems to have picked up on the root cause for most of the transliteration confusion, for which my favorite example is "Saruesdi" to represent former Prime Minister Sarit...

Foreigners assume that in transliterating Thai characters into Roman, the intent is to represent sounds so that they can be imitated by non-Thais. On the contrary, the basis for the official transliteration system (and all Thai-devised approaches) is to represent Thai words in such a way that native Thai speakers, seeing the romanization, can immediately visualize the proper Thai alphabet spelling and thus pronounce the word correctly.

Once you understand that romanization targets Thais and not foreigners, many of the idiosyncracies discussed here begin to make sense.

[sarahsbloke]

The original Thai spelling is บางกอก, as in "Bang-kok". So the "g" is actually half of "ng", which in Thai is just one letter, ง. Though actually a much better spelling would be something like: baang-gawk

I thought the original Thai spelling of Bangkok was ....

Short Name

กรุงเทพมหานคร

Grun-Tep Maha-Nakon

Full Name

กรุงเทพมหานคร อมรรัตนโกสินทร์ มหินทรายุธยามหาดิลก ภพนพรัตน์ ราชธานีบุรีรมย์ อุดมราชนิเวศน์ มหาสถาน อมรพิมาน อวตารสถิต สักกะทัตติยะ วิษณุกรรมประสิทธิ์

Krung Thep Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin Mahinthara Ayuthaya Mahadilok Phop Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman Awatan Sathit Sakkathattiya Witsanukam Prasit

Translated

The city of angels, the great city, the residence of the Emerald Buddha, the impregnable city (of Ayutthaya) of God Indra, the grand capital of the world endowed with nine precious gems, the happy city, abounding in an enormous Royal Palace that resembles the heavenly abode where reigns the reincarnated god, a city given by Indra and built by Vishnukarn.

Edited June 6, 2010 by sarahsbloke

[HappyInCM]

It is interesting to me that no one seems to have picked up on the root cause for most of the transliteration confusion, for which my favorite example is "Saruesdi" to represent former Prime Minister Sarit...

Foreigners assume that in transliterating Thai characters into Roman, the intent is to represent sounds so that they can be imitated by non-Thais. On the contrary, the basis for the official transliteration system (and all Thai-devised approaches) is to represent Thai words in such a way that native Thai speakers, seeing the romanization, can immediately visualize the proper Thai alphabet spelling and thus pronounce the word correctly.

Once you understand that romanization targets Thais and not foreigners, many of the idiosyncracies discussed here begin to make sense.

That is interesting, I'd love to know more about what they were or weren't thinking - Can you provide a reference link for this to an authoritative source?

[almavro]

It is interesting to me that no one seems to have picked up on the root cause for most of the transliteration confusion, for which my favorite example is "Saruesdi" to represent former Prime Minister Sarit...

Foreigners assume that in transliterating Thai characters into Roman, the intent is to represent sounds so that they can be imitated by non-Thais. On the contrary, the basis for the official transliteration system (and all Thai-devised approaches) is to represent Thai words in such a way that native Thai speakers, seeing the romanization, can immediately visualize the proper Thai alphabet spelling and thus pronounce the word correctly.

Once you understand that romanization targets Thais and not foreigners, many of the idiosyncracies discussed here begin to make sense.

That is interesting, I'd love to know more about what they were or weren't thinking - Can you provide a reference link for this to an authoritative source?

I'm afraid the authoritative source is me, having studied and lived here for 55 of my 62 years.

If you research the rationale for the Royal system with this perspective in mind, it will quickly begin to make sense. Among other oddities, it explains why the final 'i' is on so many transliterated words, even though it's unpronounced, in the original Thai -- so that a native Thai speaker can back-transliterate into the correct spelling... why it's spelled "Narayana Phand" instead of the way it sounds, "Narai Phan," "amataya" instead of "amat", and on and on.

[almavro]

It is interesting to me that no one seems to have picked up on the root cause for most of the transliteration confusion, for which my favorite example is "Saruesdi" to represent former Prime Minister Sarit...

Foreigners assume that in transliterating Thai characters into Roman, the intent is to represent sounds so that they can be imitated by non-Thais. On the contrary, the basis for the official transliteration system (and all Thai-devised approaches) is to represent Thai words in such a way that native Thai speakers, seeing the romanization, can immediately visualize the proper Thai alphabet spelling and thus pronounce the word correctly.

Once you understand that romanization targets Thais and not foreigners, many of the idiosyncracies discussed here begin to make sense.

That is interesting, I'd love to know more about what they were or weren't thinking - Can you provide a reference link for this to an authoritative source?

I'm afraid the authoritative source is me, having studied and lived here for 55 of my 62 years.

If you research the rationale for the Royal system with this perspective in mind, it will quickly begin to make sense. Among other oddities, it explains why the final 'i' is on so many transliterated words, even though it's unpronounced, in the original Thai -- so that a native Thai speaker can back-transliterate into the correct spelling... why it's spelled "Narayana Phand" instead of the way it sounds, "Narai Phan," "amataya" instead of "amat", and on and on.

Oh -- Just had an off-list exchange with David Houston, who points to the difference between "transliteration" and "transcription." Most (me included) mean 'transcription' when we say, 'transliteration.' In fact, under the rules of transliteration, the Thai approach is correct, for you are supposed to be able to relate the transliterated script back to the original, precisely. However, the result may be useless for the purposes of pronunciation, which is where the need for a strong transcription system comes in. Transliteration is well covered by the existing Royal system... a standard for transcription is what we need to develop.

[desi]

Foreigners assume that in transliterating Thai characters into Roman, the intent is to represent sounds so that they can be imitated by non-Thais. On the contrary, the basis for the official transliteration system (and all Thai-devised approaches) is to represent Thai words in such a way that native Thai speakers, seeing the romanization, can immediately visualize the proper Thai alphabet spelling and thus pronounce the word correctly.

Once you understand that romanization targets Thais and not foreigners, many of the idiosyncracies discussed here begin to make sense.

If you research the rationale for the Royal system with this perspective in mind, it will quickly begin to make sense. Among other oddities, it explains why the final 'i' is on so many transliterated words, even though it's unpronounced, in the original Thai -- so that a native Thai speaker can back-transliterate into the correct spelling... why it's spelled "Narayana Phand" instead of the way it sounds, "Narai Phan," "amataya" instead of "amat", and on and on.

Let me see if I have this straight... So what you are saying is that while the romanization is for foreigners (edit: no point in having the English otherwise), it's written in such a way that Thais can link back to the original script? Then why are there many versions of the same Thai street name and such?

Edited June 6, 2010 by desi

[farangnahrak]

Let me see if I have this straight... So what you are saying is that while the romanization is for foreigners (edit: no point in having the English otherwise), it's written in such a way that Thais can link back to the original script? Then why are there many versions of the same Thai street name and such?

I was always under the impression the Royal system was just a simple A=1 B=2 C=3 type of coding system. Just a look up table so that those Thais who can't speak English can still transliterate (transcript?) from Thai to English. Most Thais I know can't read the english spelling of Thai words, anyway . . .

Different versions of transliteration could simply be a result of Thai people not being aware that such a system even exists, and just 'winging' it.

[almavro]

Foreigners assume that in transliterating Thai characters into Roman, the intent is to represent sounds so that they can be imitated by non-Thais. On the contrary, the basis for the official transliteration system (and all Thai-devised approaches) is to represent Thai words in such a way that native Thai speakers, seeing the romanization, can immediately visualize the proper Thai alphabet spelling and thus pronounce the word correctly.

Once you understand that romanization targets Thais and not foreigners, many of the idiosyncracies discussed here begin to make sense.

If you research the rationale for the Royal system with this perspective in mind, it will quickly begin to make sense. Among other oddities, it explains why the final 'i' is on so many transliterated words, even though it's unpronounced, in the original Thai -- so that a native Thai speaker can back-transliterate into the correct spelling... why it's spelled "Narayana Phand" instead of the way it sounds, "Narai Phan," "amataya" instead of "amat", and on and on.

Let me see if I have this straight... So what you are saying is that while the romanization is for foreigners (edit: no point in having the English otherwise), it's written in such a way that Thais can link back to the original script? Then why are there many versions of the same Thai street name and such?

Because there is no standard *transcription* system, Desi. There *is* a standard transliteration system, even if it is not always followed. The transcription system is what we want to see developed.

A few of the signs you see are the input from whatever backpacker happened to be walking by when the need arose. Others are the courtesy of some slow-witted nephew who is trying to prove his worth to the family. Nothing systematic, in other words.

[HappyInCM]

If you research the rationale for the Royal system with this perspective in mind, it will quickly begin to make sense. Among other oddities, it explains why the final 'i' is on so many transliterated words, even though it's unpronounced, in the original Thai -- so that a native Thai speaker can back-transliterate into the correct spelling... why it's spelled "Narayana Phand" instead of the way it sounds, "Narai Phan," "amataya" instead of "amat", and on and on.

I haven't seen any system in Thailand where its possible to get back the original Thai text. That's because all the transliteration systems are one-to-many - i.e., lossy. E.g., white and rice both map onto some version of "kaoo" Or dog and come (i.e., maa) may be a better example since this isn't just about tone markers in this case - maybe one is maa and the other is hmaa? Or even worse,ย่า and หญ้า or น่า and หน้า. Or how about สระ since its pronounced differently depending on whether its a vowel or a pool.

But, what I really meant was, what is the use of Thais being able to get back the Thai spelling? Are foreigners supposed to write down where they want to go and then show them this and then they map it back to Thai writing? I guess in theory that would be more reliable than listening to the foreigners, but since the tone info is definitely lost and as Anchan says, most Thais aren't able to even get back the Thai without the tone info.

But, government institutions all over the world have done more useless things than this.

Edited June 6, 2010 by eljefe2

[Richard W]

Because there is no standard *transcription* system, Desi. There *is* a standard transliteration system, even if it is not always followed. The transcription system is what we want to see developed.

The standard transliteration (i.e. reversible) scheme, namely ISO 11940 Part 1, was clearly developed to fill in a wet afternoon and never properly reviewed. The only place I've seen it used is www.thai-language.com. It can be applied by computers, but is trickier than one might expect if one expects it to work from Roman to Thai in a Unicode compliant manner. There are other more-or-less reversible schemes, basically variants of the graphical scheme. Common shortfalls are that diacritics get omitted, and it is assumed that ro han may be transliterated 'ar' rather than 'arr' before consonants.

There is a standard transcription system, the RTGS. It is not a many-one substitution at the spelling level - it is a many to one substitution at the level of Thai pronunciation (non-Haas), and not quite as simple as working from phonetic spellings in Thai script. It assumes that one can dispense with tones (generally true in context if one is prepared to work hard) and vowel length (probably true if one has the tone) and that the ออ-โอ distinction can be blurred. It makes the painful concession that Anglophones can't be persuaded to read 'c' as an affricate (near enough English soft <ch>), and demurred at the prospect of <chh>, which one can still see in some Indian names in the UK.

The RTGS can be tweaked, as we did when this forum was new, to represent Thai sounds as accurately as most phonological analyses.

[Richard W]

But, what I really meant was, what is the use of Thais being able to get back the Thai spelling?

It's more for the benefits of people without a native knowledge of Thai names. For example, if I want to find the M.A. thesis 'Khwam taektang rawang phasa krungthep lae phasa songhkhla' by 'Chantavibulaya, Vichintana', I can back-transliterate the title by context, but I have three plausible candidates for the first letter of the author's surname. This is one of the references in a book from the University Press of Hawaii, but bought in Asia Books (I think) on Sukhumvit Road.

You will note that the relevant context is chiefly academic, which is probably why you haven't seen the graphic system in action in Thailand. In the graphic system, your eight examples come out as khāw v. ²khāw, hmā v. mā, ¹yā v. ²ñā and ¹nā v. ²hnā. (Unless I've mistakenly got 'w' for 'v'.) Note that this is all letter-for-letter transliteration, rather then phonetic transcription.

Are foreigners supposed to write down where they want to go and then show them this and then they map it back to Thai writing?

A more plausible wetware interface is librarians in big western libraries who don't know Thai.

[LazyYogi]

<!--quoteo(post=3668753:date=2010-06-05 22:59:19:name=LazyYogi)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LazyYogi @ 2010-06-05 22:59:19) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668753"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The original Thai spelling is <!--sizeo:4--><span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->บางกอก<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->, as in "Bang-kok". So the "g" is actually half of "ng", which in Thai is just one letter,<!--sizeo:4--><span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--> ง<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->. Though actually a much better spelling would be something like: baang-gawk<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I thought the original Thai spelling of Bangkok was ....

Short Name

กรุงเทพมหานคร

Grun-Tep Maha-Nakon

Full Name

กรุงเทพมหานคร อมรรัตนโกสินทร์ มหินทรายุธยามหาดิลก ภพนพรัตน์ ราชธานีบุรีรมย์ อุดมราชนิเวศน์ มหาสถาน อมรพิมาน อวตารสถิต สักกะทัตติยะ วิษณุกรรมประสิทธิ์

Krung Thep Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin Mahinthara Ayuthaya Mahadilok Phop Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman Awatan Sathit Sakkathattiya Witsanukam Prasit

Translated

The city of angels, the great city, the residence of the Emerald Buddha, the impregnable city (of Ayutthaya) of God Indra, the grand capital of the world endowed with nine precious gems, the happy city, abounding in an enormous Royal Palace that resembles the heavenly abode where reigns the reincarnated god, a city given by Indra and built by Vishnukarn.

Not quite. It is true that Krungthep is what Thais refer to the metropolis of 10 million people as. However, "Bangkok" as a place name existed much earlier. It referred to a specific village that existed long before there was a city here. "bang" means "village", and you might notice there are many areas of Bangkok today that start with this: Bang Kapi, Bang Na, Bang Lamphu, etc. "Bangkok" was known to foreigners since the Ayutthaya times since they would have passed it on their voyage upriver to the capital. And so they continued using the same name for the area even after the capital was moved there and the new city swallowed up all the villages.

[Tod Daniels]

Another pitfall when sa-pelling ANY thai word in engrish is the fact that a native engrish speakers' brain will immediately key into the words it recognizes in the engrish language FIRST no matter where they occur in a thai word sa-pelled in engrish.

While slightly off topic; here's a somewhat funny example.

I was at 7/11 once and a foreigner came in saying he couldn't get a taxi to take him somewhere. He asked the clerk where Central Pink-Lao was. Blank stares all around. Even I didn't know where he wanted to go, because of the really strong engrish pronunciation of Central, and the mispronunciation of Pinklao

He said it about 20 times, and got progressively louder as he did. I finally broke in and said, "These people aren't frickin' deaf, they just can't understand what you're trying to say. Are you sure you've got the word correct?"

He dug into his backpack and showed me the business card one side engrish one side was thai. It was immediately evident he wanted (เซ็นทรัลปิ่นเกล้า) Central Pin-Klao, NOT Pink-Lao. Even though to an ear tuned to engrish and not used to hearing thai, they're pretty close in sound, just not where the syllable breaks.

I said, Pin-klao and every person in the 7/11, workers, people who were eaves dropping, just busted up laughing, and started repeating it first the way he'd said it and then the correct way. The foreigner took it in good form, and once he knew where he was going got a taxi straight away.

Learning to read/pronounce even rudimentary thai is so critical to getting by here unless you live in a tourist area where you can usually compel people to interact with you in engrish. (And YES I routinely misspell the word ‘engrish’ on ‘porpoise’ )

[bkkjames]

Another pitfall when sa-pelling ANY thai word in engrish is the fact that a native engrish speakers' brain will immediately key into the words it recognizes in the engrish language FIRST no matter where they occur in a thai word sa-pelled in engrish.

While slightly off topic; here's a somewhat funny example.

I was at 7/11 once and a foreigner came in saying he couldn't get a taxi to take him somewhere. He asked the clerk where Central Pink-Lao was. Blank stares all around. Even I didn't know where he wanted to go, because of the really strong engrish pronunciation of Central, and the mispronunciation of Pinklao

He said it about 20 times, and got progressively louder as he did. I finally broke in and said, "These people aren't frickin' deaf, they just can't understand what you're trying to say. Are you sure you've got the word correct?"

He dug into his backpack and showed me the business card one side engrish one side was thai. It was immediately evident he wanted (เซ็นทรัลปิ่นเกล้า) Central Pin-Klao, NOT Pink-Lao. Even though to an ear tuned to engrish and not used to hearing thai, they're pretty close in sound, just not where the syllable breaks.

I said, Pin-klao and every person in the 7/11, workers, people who were eaves dropping, just busted up laughing, and started repeating it first the way he'd said it and then the correct way. The foreigner took it in good form, and once he knew where he was going got a taxi straight away.

Learning to read/pronounce even rudimentary thai is so critical to getting by here unless you live in a tourist area where you can usually compel people to interact with you in engrish. (And YES I routinely misspell the word 'engrish' on 'porpoise' )

Funny, I always thought Pink Lao was Spy.

[Tod Daniels]

Funny, I always thought Pink Lao was Spy.

And here all this time I thought Pink-Lao wasn't Sa-py but ยาดอง สีแดง (Red Yaa-Dong) . That tasty red stuff they make with the herbal block called สิบเอ็ดเสือ (11 tigers), and white whiskey เหล้าขาว (lao-khao).

Truly serious purveyors of fine thai spirits know it's the one they sell for 10 baht a shot on nearly every soi in the city, (and for the hard core drinkers; available in an M-150 bottle for 30 baht, or a flat SangSom bottle for 60 ) The guy outside my house sells close to 12 LITRES of it a nite, mostly shot by shot!

Live and learn, thanx James for clearing that up. ..

[Johpa]

All I can say that if you are hearing ก kai as a voiced /g/ sound and not a /k/ sound then you need to train your ear and brain a bit better. For English speakers try slowing down any single syllable word beginning with /sk/ such as sky or skate or ski, and then slowly removing the s without re-aspirating the /k/. Take a piece of paper and hold it in front of your mouth and practice until the sheet does not blow (aspirate) when you articulate the /k/ sound. Competency will come with practice. Be patient.

[Murf]

Thanks for all the replies.

I can read and write and speak pretty good Thai, even speak over the telephone and i'm usually understood, so i know how to say ก ไก่ in Thai. And it definitely sounds a lot more like G than K.

And if you pronounce กรุงเทพ Grung-tep rather than Krung-tep i'm sure more non English speaking Thai people would understand you first time.

In my opinion, ก ไก่ in an ideal world, should be transliterated as G not K. But i now at least understand the reasoning behind it.

[anchan42]

Thanks for all the replies.

I can read and write and speak pretty good Thai, even speak over the telephone and i'm usually understood, so i know how to say ก ไก่ in Thai. And it definitely sounds a lot more like G than K.

And if you pronounce กรุงเทพ Grung-tep rather than Krung-tep i'm sure more non English speaking Thai people would understand you first time.

In my opinion, ก ไก่ in an ideal world, should be transliterated as G not K. But i now at least understand the reasoning behind it.

I think you are right. Most of Thai people will hear "G" as ก.

[bhoydy]

I have just received a copy of a document which has been given to all teachers in our school. It is entitled หลักเกณฑ์ การถอดอักษรไทยเป็นอักษรโรมัน แบบถ่ายเสียง. It's full of ways to transcribe Thai sounds into English. The first on the list is ก with the roman equivalent given as 'k', with an example of กา=ka given. The head of English told me the Thai teachers are going to use this to teach the students how to spell their name in English. A pointless exercise if ever i saw one, i suggested that they should think about having a Thai name and an English name, this would save the time teaching them to speak incorrectly. I know from my own experience of roll call, where i use their nickname which they give me in English. The ones i know like nong น้อง and nicknames like that i usually get first time but other ones where i don't have the Thai writing and don't know the name, i pronounce it wrong for weeks, sometimes the whole term/year. I'm not offereing up any solution to this problem, just giving some more information.

[DavidHouston]

Bhoydy,

Thanks for that post. It would be interesting to know if your school's guidelines follow those of the Royal Institute.

[JamieP]

If you didn't know, how would you ever work out how to pronounce "Ple" which is a pretty common girls nickname?

[bhoydy]

Bhoydy,

Thanks for that post. It would be interesting to know if your school's guidelines follow those of the Royal Institute.

Having looked at the document you sent me from the Royal Institute, it's exactly the same as the one used in our school.

[Murf]

If you didn't know, how would you ever work out how to pronounce "Ple" which is a pretty common girls nickname?

When i started teaching i called a girl "Ple" as in the beginning of the word PLEasure and she laughed at me.

If a Thai person who is learning English thinks that "Ple" transcribes as เปิน (Pern i would write it, but i guess it would be written Pun by a Thai(or not)) then it's better for them to stop learning now.

Just call your self "Apple" darling...

[farangnahrak]

If you didn't know, how would you ever work out how to pronounce "Ple" which is a pretty common girls nickname?

I've met Thai girls named 'Jim' and 'Juu'. The names use the high tone, but farang call them using a rising tone which is just hilarious (I'll let you figure that one out). And lets not forget about girls named Porn or Supaporn (super porn!!!!).

I love it when transcription can go horribly wrong . . .

[Tod Daniels]

If you didn't know, how would you ever work out how to pronounce "Ple" which is a pretty common girls nickname?

When i started teaching i called a girl "Ple" as in the beginning of the word PLEasure and she laughed at me.

If a Thai person who is learning English thinks that "Ple" transcribes as เปิน (Pern i would write it, but i guess it would be written Pun by a Thai(or not)) then it's better for them to stop learning now.

Just call your self "Apple" darling...

That was one of the most overused and all too often heard thai nicknames out there. Thankfully it is on the way out with cutesy nicknames like Benz and Bank taking over

However, unless I'm mistaken, the name is question is nothing more than the last syllable of the engrish word APPLE, but spelled and pronounced with thai rules like this; แอปเปิ้ล. Even Thai Language dot come has เปิ้ล listed as "Apple" (diminutive) [Thai nickname]. Although why she spelled it as Ple is a total mystery and shows just how little she grasped engrish language pronunciation rules, especially if she thought she could just chop a word to pieces and still get any coherency. (One could only hope she wasn't a uni-student ) Funnily enough, you can chop quite a few multi syllable thai words into individual syllables and they still carry their inherent pronunciation, but alas, the same cannot be said for engrish.

A friend of mine had a thai significant other whose nickname he told me was 'Bun' (using a American Midwest accent). Yet when I asked her, she said it was เปิ้ล.

That's why, for the most part, I forgo the b/s thai nicknames altogether, and just ask them their real name. Surprisingly, once I have them write it down and hear it pronounced I've found that; despite their real name being FAR longer than their single syllable nickname, they are all quite unique, and at least to me, far easier to remember than the plethora of b/s nonsense nicknames out there.

[JamieP]

I've met Thai girls named 'Jim' and 'Juu'. The names use the high tone, but farang call them using a rising tone which is just hilarious (I'll let you figure that one out). And lets not forget about girls named Porn or Supaporn (super porn!!!!).

I love it when transcription can go horribly wrong . . .

I've been there and also with a boy who wrote his name in Roman script as "Ham".......

[Johpa]

When i started teaching.....

And do you use the same moniker in class Mr. Tod?

[Peppy]

I've been there and also with a boy who wrote his name in Roman script as "Ham".......

That actually seems to be a fairly common nickname, whether it's from Beckham, Hamtaro, or the luncheon meat I don't know. The strangest one I've ever come across was Ultraman, but a teacher friend once had a boy in his class called Superman. Then there's Boss, Garfield, Soda, Punch.... we could go on forever.