Learn Thai In One Simple Step

[witold]

One simple but hard step, that is...

This is how a Korean attained high proficiency of English language in 2 years. (In addition to some Spanish.)

http://askakorean.blogspot.com/2010/01/kor...n-and-best.html

Language learning is like dieting. There might be tons of advertisement about fast results and magic formulas, but at the end of the day, honest effort is the only thing that works. Only the undisciplined deludes herself into believing that some other magic might work. Want to lose weight? Eat healthier and exercise more. Want to master a second language? Memorize grammar and vocabulary. It is that simple.

If someone wants to learn Thai - or any other language - they will save themselves a lot of time and trouble if they stop looking for the magic bullet/program/formula and just start memorizing and using words.

[anchan42]

I could not agree more.

[RickBradford]

Some interesting points.

The myth of “fun, immersive language learning” usually takes on this narrative: “Children learn their first language nearly effortlessly. They do this by being constantly surrounded by the new language. So when learning a second language, you must surround yourself with that second language, with emphasis on a lot of listening and speaking. (Because children do not pick up their first language from books.) Once you are immersed the second language, you will pick up that language as if through osmosis.”

Innumerable language-learning books, software and curricula were created pursuant to this philosophy. It seems to make sense, because we all know at least one language, and we think we remember how we learned it. The philosophy also has an irresistible appeal of inertia – without having to actively learn, one can pick up a very useful skill simply by sitting around and absorbing.

But this is wrong, all wrong. It is wrong mostly because it is fundamentally based on an erroneous assumption -- that an adolescent/adult can learn a language the same way as a child can.

[NBD]

I agree that the magic formulas are rubbish, but immersion is hellish effective. A few years ago back in England I threw myself into learning French at home. I read books, conversed with my mother (who is fairly fluent) in French daily. Plus I had already learned French at school and have visited France reasonably regularly for most of my life. And French is really not that different from English, at least compared to Thai/English. Yet I still never mastered it, or got anywhere close. Now I've forgotten most of it!

After a little over a year of living and working in Thailand my Thai is easily far better than my French.

Yes you absolutely need to learn and memorise the grammar, but hearing and speaking it daily is, for me at least, the best way to get on top of it.

The fun element does come into it as well. There really is only so long I can read a book, but going out and using it throws up all kinds of interesting and fun situations. Again, for me. For some people, wondering around the market for an hour, poking through stalls and thumbing your phrase book and dictionary is a form of hel_l. For me it was a joy, and sometimes still is.

[Samuian]

every time I read some topic like this a smile flashes across my face...

isn't it with many, if not all tasks, skills we want to acquire?

if someone wants to go from A to B... what he/she has to accomplish?

which is the surest way to get there?

are there any short cuts?

aids...?

if one starts moving right away he/she may have reached B before anyone else has found a solution AROUND the problem!

[Tod Daniels]

Sorry this is long, you know my penchant for bloviating.. ..

Living almost directly behind what is purported (by the owner) to be the 'largest thai language school in the world', I have met quite honestly HUNDREDS of thai language students. To a person they enroll in the school thinking that simply by attending the 4 hour minimum requirement the MOE has as a qualification for an ED visa they will suddenly start speaking/reading thai.

Unfortunately, in the 3+ years I've known those students (and many of the former and current thai teachers too); I've never met a single person who came into the classes 'cold', knowing neither how to speak or read, and yet after attending a year of 4 hours a week could do either with anything resembling proficiency. Even the students who have attended several years are far from speaking coherent semi-structured thai in anything but the most basic situations. In fact, I can count on a single hand with some fingers (and my thumb) left over the number of students I've met who can carry on a conversation in thai without having to break back into engrish when they forget a word. Most of those people have native language interference to such a great degree that when speaking thai their structure is almost unintelligible.

IMHO, there is NO short cut to learning thai; no magic pill you can take, no magic method that fills you with the language within a specific time frame. It is an investment of a lotta time and a lotta effort too, nothing more. True, different people learn differently, and a particular methodology may work better for me, and not so well for you, but it still boils back down into the time you’re willing to put into learning.

Invariably I meet people who profess to being able to speak thai, some have been here 15-20 years, have thai wives, kids, etc. Yet when I hear them speak it's more along the lines of '2-word-tourist-thai', or 'horse-peak' (bar-thai). That manner of speaking is certainly NOTHING I'd ever want to speak at say, Immigrations, or when dealing with anyone who holds a position in even a semi-official capacity here. It makes me sad that someone could live here in this country, have a thai wife, thai kids, houses, cars, buffaloes, etc, yet never put the time into learning the language.

The excuses I've heard for people failing to pick up even rudimentary thai are nearly universal; I'm too old, I’m tone deaf, and can't hear the tones in the words, I'm not good at languages, blah-blah-blah. It's all b/s because they won't/don't put the time into learning. I am no language pundit, nor do I excel at anything in particular. I'm far from the sharpest knife in the proverbial drawer but I was able to do it. If I can, anyone can, plain and simple.

I've been here over 5 years, but I've only studied thai about 30 months now. I taught myself to read, first by learning the alphabet, but NOT in the traditional way. I didn't give two shits what a letter was called nor did I care what its corresponding word was. I learned by recognizing the characters which (to me) made similar sounds. Here's an example; (And I included the chart I used to learn as well)

Thai has

1 - 'g' sound - ก

5 -'k' sounds - ข,ฃ,ค,ฅ,ฆ

3 - 'ch' sounds - ฉ,ช,ฌ

4 - 's' sounds - ซ,ศ,ษ,ส

6 - 't' sounds - ฐ,ฑ,ฒ,ท,ธ,ถ

AND SO ON.

I learned to recognize the initial sound a character made and the corresponding ending sound. I also learned the vowels and more importantly vowel length (a BIG deal here). Sadly I spent zero time learning the tone rules, and freely admit I've no clue about 'em at all other than the most rudimentary ones. I taught myself to recognize written thai words by memory ONLY;

white – ขาว

news – ข่าว

rice – ข้าว

he/she – เขา

knee – เข่า

enter – เข้า

I also learned to weed out spurious definitions when reading by the context of a sentence. If I am not certain of the meaning of the word I look at the words around it or in the previous sentence. Many times I can get a words meaning simply by ruling out similar sounding words whose meanings don’t make any sense in the sentence.

Face it, if you read a word and don't know the meaning, you just don't know the meaning, plain and simple. Being able to pronounce it perfectly does NOT help you remember the meaning, it only gives you the ability to pronounce it and maybe ask someone what it means.

This is one of the reasons I'm reticent to speak thai daily as my pronunciation is, well, it's outta whack. I mean it's totally understandable, but I hafta do what I call the normal "song and dance" (ice-breaker), "Hello, how are you?”, “I’m fine thanx.” “Can you speak english", "Oh I can speak thai a little as well, maybe we can chat.” “What do you think about that?". Now if I do that; to a person every thai I speak with understands me just fine. Just as the thais I interact with on a daily basis understand my foreign accent when speaking thai to them.

However if I walk up to someone I don't know / doesn't know me, and ask a question without doing the seemingly prerequisite "song & dance"; nearly to a person thais will not put the effort into understanding me. (FWIW, my thai teacher friends said they’d never met someone who knew more thai, could read and understand thai as well as I do, and yet spoke such off toned thai. Actually when they said that it made me very sad Although they said if I put in a month or so of only speaking thai I'd be able to dial it in to something less mangled )

When I first started learning I made up my own sheets of common verbs, opposite words, directions, common foods, etc and drilled with them every day. I also made flash cards of every vocab word from my language school, by chapter, and drilled them until I could recognize each word when I saw it. The same with Benjawan Becker’s “Speak Like a Thai” series.

I went to a language school for a year and it increased my reading ability but not my speaking. I've bought, begged, borrowed, and stolen more thai lesson books from the various and sundry language schools out there than I care to count. It has taken HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of hours to even get to the level I have, and I've a long way to go to be anything resembling proficient in this language.

To me learning thai is about one thing(actually two things really), but the first one; word memorization is the ball breaker. The second is thai language structure, which is outta kilter from english structure in MANY areas (I know it's still a S-V-O structured language, but you know what I mean). I also think english language interference when speaking thai can send you "off the script" faster than poorly pronounced or enunciated thai.

Remember what works or worked for me, may not for you, your mileage may and likely will vary, there is no expressed or implied warranty, some restrictions apply, call now operators are standing by.

And NEVER EVER forget the thai saying; "Something is better than nothing", colloquially spoken as กำขี้ดีกว่ากำตด or coarsely translated as; "A handful of shit is better than a handful of fart". Knowing ANY thai is better than knowing none.

Good luck, in your language endeavors,

Thai_Consonant_Sounds_Initial_Ending.doc

[Peppy]

....So when learning a second language, you must surround yourself with that second language, with emphasis on a lot of listening and speaking. (Because children do not pick up their first language from books.) Once you are immersed the second language, you will pick up that language as if through osmosis."

I agree completely with the first sentence above. While learning grammar and vocabulary is absolutely necessary, as the author of the article argues, you won't learn to speak like a native just by studying those things. You will learn 'about' the language, but you won't 'learn' the language.

As the author points out, the second sentence is fundamentally flawed in that learning just doesn't work that way for adults. However, I still believe that immersion is very important to language learning, but you must be observant, attentive, and actively seek to understand what you read and hear--again, as the author says, sitting back and expecting to pick it up the way babies do won't get you very far.

Learning a language is ultimately a combination of the two approaches (study and immersion). Those who only study a language may understand it somewhat but not speak it well, if at all (many linguistics professors are good examples of this), and those who immerse themselves in language without studying grammar may find themselves fairly fluent but stuck with terrible pronunciation, bad grammar, and poor vocabularies (many people who immigrate to a foreign country as an adult are good examples of this).

And of course, age is a factor: For most people who speak a foreign language, the level of fluency they achieve is directly related to the age they started learning it. Almost every foreigner in Thailand that I know of who speaks Thai well started learning well before they turned 30. (Actually, that applies to all the Thais I know who speak English well, too.)

[witold]

In my opinion, most westerners don't learn Thai for two reasons. First, they are in LOS primarily for pleasure. Who wants to spend their short or extended vacation doing vocabulary drills each day? I know I wouldn't.

Second, Thai is a pretty useless language outside of LOS. Obviously it is very important if you plan to live in LOS, but if future is uncertain, it's not the same as learning Spanish or French where you have a big chunk of the world speaking it. The second you leave LOS borders, your Thai skills mean nothing. This is a lot of effort to obtain an unmarketable skill.

***

NBD/Peppy, I think the Korean presumes immersion as an integral part of the learning program. He mentions watching closed captioned TV, school interaction, avoiding the Korean crowd where he won't be using English, etc. The Korean's main point is that memorization is key to vastly speeding up immersion learning. I am an immigrant to the US and have observed this phenomena many times. Immersion is how most immigrants learn to speak fair, adequate, poor, or decent English - generally over a long period of time. The ones that have truly gained mastery of the English language in a short period of time have always put in serious hours studying - primarily via word and grammar memorization. Obviously, different people react differently to different memorization drills. Some are more effective than others. But at the end of the day, simple memorization is absolutely critical to speeding up the learning curve.

Edited June 2, 2010 by witold

[ozzieovaseas]

went to a language school for a year and it increased my reading ability but not my speaking. I've bought, begged, borrowed, and stolen more thai leson boos from the various and sundry language schools out there than I care to count. It has taken HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of hours

Interesting post todd

The thing that puzzles me about the issue is the need for learning to read thai..

Its seems the schools and people with a vested interest insist its absolutely neccesary to read thai, first and foremost, before any real gains can be made..

But in your own experience it seems you've put heaps of time in reading,learning sounds,vowels ect ect..in flawless textbook fashion, yet you seem to give the impression you are not completely happy with your actual speaking/tones in typical situations??

SO, my question..is it really neccesary to read thai first??...AM i missing out by not doing so?

Im a bit like you described..a bit of a two word wonder, but i am learning daily from a GF that speaks zero English..I have two books which are in constantly use between us, but it never really occured to me that learning to read would be much help to me.

Im sure the GF and friends think its "cute" (i hope thats the accurate word anyway) my trying to speak Thai and she always has me on speakerphone when i ring her..i guess so her family/friends/whoever can listen to the silly farang talk like a 4 year old thai kid

[meadish_sweetball]

is it really neccesary to read thai first?

No, it is not strictly necessary, but it is generally well worth the effort.

If you learn the Thai writing system properly, together with pronunciation (where tones and vowel length are crucial if you want to have an acceptable accent), then it will help you in the following ways:

1. You will be able to ask Thais how a word is spelt to better understand how it should be pronounced. Tying up a Thai word to a mental image of it written in Thai script is usually more effective from a pronunciation point of view than thinking of it as in the Western script. If you do this properly you will not think of, say, Phuket as 'Phuket' anymore, but as ภูเก็ด, pronounced as the Thais actually pronounce it themselves.

2. You can increase your vocabulary by reading Thai texts and looking up new words.

3. There is a risk with using a romanization system, that you want to pronounce the words according to how the letters sound in your native language, and this is usually quite far from the correct pronunciation. When you learn the Thai letters you have no preconceived notion of what they 'should' sound like, hence you will (hopefully) listen more closely for the actual Thai sound that the letter represents, and not try to categorize it mentally as an 'r' sound, an 'l' sound etc. [This risk is not as great for people who have learned to pronounce a second or third language written with Latin letters well already, because their brains will already be wired to accept that there is not only one pronunciation possible for the letters in the Latin alphabet.]

[NBD]

It's definitely not necessary - I know a few people who can converse in Thai very well but have never made any effort to read or write it.

I'm making a concerted effort to learn to read at the moment and I am finding it very useful though. The pronounciation difference between แลัว (laew as in "already") and ลาว (Laos the country) was pretty much lost on my tone deaf ears, I learned it with practice because แลัว (already) is a word that's used all the time, and living in Isan where people speak what they call ภาษาลาว (passah Laos) I learned that too. Now seeing it written it's quite clear how to say each differently. With words that you don't use often though, or where the context isn't so readily apparent then being able to read them and see it makes it much easier to remember, for me.

Of course some people can read and write stuff until the cows come home and not remember it, then can hear it and say it once or twice and it will sink in. In this case it is less important, but I would still say worth while. How much vocabulary can you pick up by reading signs, tickets, maybe even a book?

Then finally it depends what you want to do with it. If you want to have a bit of banter with people in the market or the bar then again not worth while (but impressive) for me, I'm a nosey bugger and I want to understand as much as possible of everything that is said and wr itten around me, so as long as I live and work here then it's well worth my while trying.

[Parvis]

....So when learning a second language, you must surround yourself with that second language, with emphasis on a lot of listening and speaking. (Because children do not pick up their first language from books.) Once you are immersed the second language, you will pick up that language as if through osmosis."

I agree completely with the first sentence above. While learning grammar and vocabulary is absolutely necessary, as the author of the article argues, you won't learn to speak like a native just by studying those things. You will learn 'about' the language, but you won't 'learn' the language.

As the author points out, the second sentence is fundamentally flawed in that learning just doesn't work that way for adults. However, I still believe that immersion is very important to language learning, but you must be observant, attentive, and actively seek to understand what you read and hear--again, as the author says, sitting back and expecting to pick it up the way babies do won't get you very far.

Learning a language is ultimately a combination of the two approaches (study and immersion). Those who only study a language may understand it somewhat but not speak it well, if at all (many linguistics professors are good examples of this), and those who immerse themselves in language without studying grammar may find themselves fairly fluent but stuck with terrible pronunciation, bad grammar, and poor vocabularies (many people who immigrate to a foreign country as an adult are good examples of this).

And of course, age is a factor: For most people who speak a foreign language, the level of fluency they achieve is directly related to the age they started learning it. Almost every foreigner in Thailand that I know of who speaks Thai well started learning well before they turned 30. (Actually, that applies to all the Thais I know who speak English well, too.)

It always gets me to hear the ignorance of individuals who claim that age has anything to do with ability to learn a language (or anything else for that matter) and then provide "many people who immigrate to a foreign country as an adult are good examples of this" and "the level of fluency they achieve is directly related to the age they started learning it" as proof.

It is probably correct that older individuals - especially in Thailand - feel no need to speak the language and very often do not have the desire to learn. As an older individual you tend to associate "with your own kind" rather than go out to meet "native people." This applies to "immigrants" in other countries as it does to older individuals living in Thailand.

My own personal life alone refutes this contention that age in itself is a detriment to learning.

I was born in a country that "changed hands" after World War 2 and learned both languages. As a young adult I went to Australia - and English is now my "primary language". I would certainly refute any suggestions by a native speaker that my English is not at least as good as his (although I still retain an accent) and probably is generally much better.

I am in my mid 60th now and have been in Thailand for about 4 years. I made no significant attempt to learn Thai for the first 3 years. I just had no need for it - little desire - and Thai is a tough language.

In October 09 I started to learn Thai in earnest for the following 8 month. Now - I can read Thai - I am told my pronounciation is fairly good. I can hold a simple conversation. I even understand Thai News to "some extend" - but no - I do not consider myself to be fluent YET.

What prevents an older individual from learning Thai is often his own lack of desire - and being told - by individuals (including a certain Thai Language School owner) - YOU ARE TOO OLD TO LEARN. There is no scientific evidence that this is true - but many ignorant individuals continue to perpetuate this myth.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Parvis

[bhoydy]

Second, Thai is a pretty useless language outside of LOS. Obviously it is very important if you plan to live in LOS, but if future is uncertain, it's not the same as learning Spanish or French where you have a big chunk of the world speaking it. The second you leave LOS borders, your Thai skills mean nothing. This is a lot of effort to obtain an unmarketable skill.

I disagree, i was recently home on holiday for a month around Scotland and in London. I hardly spoke a word of it but i used it a lot every day, typing to friends online. Times have changed a lot due to technology and i cannot type nearly as fast in thai as in english but, it really improves my spelling when online. Although since i've been back i've not used it so much.

[Peppy]

It always gets me to hear the ignorance of individuals who claim that age has anything to do with ability to learn a language (or anything else for that matter) and then provide "many people who immigrate to a foreign country as an adult are good examples of this" and "the level of fluency they achieve is directly related to the age they started learning it" as proof.

It is probably correct that older individuals - especially in Thailand - feel no need to speak the language and very often do not have the desire to learn. As an older individual you tend to associate "with your own kind" rather than go out to meet "native people." This applies to "immigrants" in other countries as it does to older individuals living in Thailand.

My own personal life alone refutes this contention that age in itself is a detriment to learning.

I was born in a country that "changed hands" after World War 2 and learned both languages. As a young adult I went to Australia - and English is now my "primary language". I would certainly refute any suggestions by a native speaker that my English is not at least as good as his (although I still retain an accent) and probably is generally much better.

I am in my mid 60th now and have been in Thailand for about 4 years. I made no significant attempt to learn Thai for the first 3 years. I just had no need for it - little desire - and Thai is a tough language.

In October 09 I started to learn Thai in earnest for the following 8 month. Now - I can read Thai - I am told my pronounciation is fairly good. I can hold a simple conversation. I even understand Thai News to "some extend" - but no - I do not consider myself to be fluent YET.

What prevents an older individual from learning Thai is often his own lack of desire - and being told - by individuals (including a certain Thai Language School owner) - YOU ARE TOO OLD TO LEARN. There is no scientific evidence that this is true - but many ignorant individuals continue to perpetuate this myth.

Thank you for your comments on my post--I certainly didn't mean to imply that all older people have difficulty learning languages, but in my experience it seems that a great many do, and noticeably more so than their younger counterparts. Whether or not this is true is a debate that I don't think we're going to be able to resolve immediately, but here's some interesting information I found after doing a search on the subject:

Certainly, older learners of a second language rarely achieve the native-like fluency that younger learners display, despite often progressing faster than children in the initial stages. David Singleton (1995) states that in learning a second language, "younger = better in the long run," but points out that there are many exceptions, noting that five percent of adult bilinguals master a second language even though they begin learning it when they are well into adulthood — long after any critical period has presumably come to a close. (from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period_hypothesis)

Another site has the following, under the heading "The Older Language Learner":

Can older adults successfully learn foreign languages? Recent research is providing increasingly positive answers to this question. The research shows that: 

--there is no decline in the ability to learn as people get older; 

--except for minor considerations such as hearing and vision loss, the age of the adult learner is not a major factor in language acquisition; 

--the context in which adults learn is the major influence on their ability to acquire the new language.

(from

http://www.language-learning-advisor.com/a...-learning.html)

While the conclusions listed above would seem to support the idea that "there is no decline in the ability to learn as people get older" the body of the article itself does note that older people in general are slower learners, have poorer short-term memories, and are more inflexible when it comes to learning styles. They advise teachers to take these things into account when preparing lessons for their more elderly pupils.

I must say I'm interested in your statement that your personal life supports the idea that older people can still learn. You mention that you grew up bilingual, and began learning English in Australia as a young adult (I presume "young adult" means under 30). I don't mean to get too personal, but how many languages have you become fluent in since then? (After all, you did bring up your personal life as an example. And I should add that your English is excellent and is to be complimented on regardless of the age you learned it at.)

To summarize, I agree with you that it depends on the individual, but I stand by my original statement that age is a factor. I'm quite certain that if you took one hundred 70-year-olds and one hundred 20-year-olds, and forced them all to study and practice a foreign language day in and day out for five years, the average ability of the younger group would far exceed that of the older group, though there would of course be individual exceptions. I'm talking averages here, not individuals.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Peppy

[Parvis]

Peppy

Age is never a learning factor in "healthy individuals" - but motivation certainly is - at all ages. From my own experience one looses interest - therefore motivation as one ages. You certainly appear to know zilch about the resilience of the human brain - or what causes memory problems - therefore learning difficulties. You show me one individual in his 20th who has been able to progress as fast as I have in 8 month.

You make rush statements but do not even specify scientific research - simply because there is none - that support your theory. If you tell a 10 year old 1000 times he is stupid and he gets no positive reinforcement from anyone else - you will hinder his progress. Does that apply to older people? - in some respects probably yes. But you ride on your high horse making condenscending "complimentary statements" of my English. - Did you ever consider that this is an insult?. You are sounding off with knowledge - you obviously DO NOT HAVE.

I certainly hope you are not a so-called "teaching professional" - but I do compliment you on your English if you are a 12 year old High School Kid.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Parvis

[Peppy]

Parvis

My comments regarding your English skills were sincere and genuine, and I'm sorry if you interpreted them to be anything else. Your style of writing is fluid, with plenty of idiomatic expressions and precise vocabulary, and I probably wouldn't have guessed that you were anything but a well-educated native speaker had you not informed me otherwise. (You do make the occasional error in your spelling and grammar, but as you yourself noted, many native speakers are far worse.)

As I said, I don't think we'll be able to resolve this dispute immediately. I'm sure we can both find evidence supporting our viewpoints somewhere online, but then we'll just be back to square one. My suggestion that age affects learning ability was only put out for the sake of argument that there are other factors that affect language learning besides the points of 'study' and 'immersion' discussed earlier in the thread, but my personal experience as a language learner and my observations of other speakers of foreign languages do support this theory.

I'm not a "professional" teacher, but I do give private English lessons. I don't want to blow my own horn too much here, but I've been very pleased with the level of English some of my students have reached after only 8-12 months study (with lessons comprising grammar and structure, phonics, pronunciation drills, free and guided conversation, reading and writing practice, and so on)--and these are upper-primary and high-school level students who couldn't count to 20 or consistently understand the difference between "How are you?" and "How old are you?" when they started. I've also taught older learners--the oldest being 65--and while those that had some English ability prior to studying with me got plenty of practice and reinforcement of what they already knew, I didn't feel that they learned a great deal of new material in terms of either structure or vocabulary. Perhaps this reflects on my abilities as a tutor, but as I said, I have had rather satisfactory results teaching younger learners.

All of this may reflect the issue of a "learning habit" more than age, but I think the "learning habit" tends to decrease with age, since the older you get the better you are at navigating the world around you, and learning new skills becomes less necessary than it was when you were younger. This is not true for all older people, since many may continue to foster the "habit" of learning new things throughout their life (and conversely, a fair number of young people seem to try as hard as they can to forget this habit as soon as they reach puberty). I would imagine that people who are habituated to learning (and perhaps you are one of these people) are probably the best language learners regardless of age; but I still say the majority of people who have this habit intact are probably under thirty.

[witold]

My take on this is that most older individuals have not really studied since graduating university. Learning a language - or any very specific skill/subject - will be tough for them simply because it's been a long time since they really had to study. Heck, I'm 30 and I would hate it if I had to study up my multi-variable calculus to get back the knowledge I had at 21.. and that's not even learning something new!

On top of that, older individuals tend to have more distractions in their lives - family, money - although that may not apply to the Thai community as much...

[kpmsprtd]

This is NOT a deliberately provocative statement, just my version of the truth based on a lifetime of language learning (myself) and language learning coaching (others):

Memorization = useless. Memorization is great for "practicing" language, but has absolutely no connection with one's ability to genuinely use a language.

Acquisition = everything. Those who become proficient knowingly or accidentally set up conditions for acquiring language. However much language one has acquired is directly reflected in one's proficiency.

For those who want to wade through a fraction of the research, I recommend the following for starters:

Dr. J. Marvin Brown - From the Outside In

Rod Ellis - Second Language Acquisition

Stephen Krashen - anything by Krashen

Note: For an idea why/how reading ability affects second language acquisition, check out Krashens' The Power of Reading

[dvc]

'Motivation'…I'd expand on this word by adding, 'drive' & 'incentive'. From my own experience, these qualities are in greater concentration during youth. As a fifty two year old, I remember the powerful rush associated with doing and learning, I had, when I was say, twenty five. I don't have these qualities to the same degree, now that I'm older, but my ability to acquire new information is no less now than it was twenty years ago. It's just the motivation that has waned.

With regard to other posts on this page: If one studies the Thai written language without fully comprehending and absorbing the tone rules, the result will be poor pronunciation and accent. Correct replication of tones is an integral part of good Thai speech. The tone rules should be embedded in the mind, to the point where they become automatic. A number of Thai language students of my acquaintance have larger vocabularies than me, but their success in being understood by native Thai speakers is significantly lower than mine. The people in question do not pronounce tones accurately.

In many instances I may lack the necessary words, but so far, what I am able to say is always understood. This gives me the encouragement to try harder, and continue to absorb new vocabulary and attempt more complex sentence structure.

Here is what I've learned, regarding the ability to correctly pronounce tones, from the point of view of a native English speaker. In the beginning, one must discipline the voice so as to correctly replicate the tones. The native, (English), language will always try to interfere with this process. After some time spent speaking in this fashion the feeling of 'unnaturalness' will gradually fade, and the pronunciation of the tones will become automatic. The next step in the process, (and the one I'm working on now), is to give some emotive value to words whilst still adhering to correct tone values. I've noticed that all native Thai speakers have this ability. You only have to listen to a Thai pop song to hear examples. The singer will almost always be able to load words with different emotive values, (intonations), whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone.

Edited June 3, 2010 by dvc

[bhoydy]

The singer will almost always be able to load words with different emotive values, (intonations), whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone.

I don't listen to a lot of Thai music by choice, but i do hear songs around in daily life. I was under the impression that in Thai songs the correct tone is not always adhered to, rather the melody of the tune is followed. Feel free to correct me if i'm wrong.

[dvc]

The singer will almost always be able to load words with different emotive values, (intonations), whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone.

I don't listen to a lot of Thai music by choice, but i do hear songs around in daily life. I was under the impression that in Thai songs the correct tone is not always adhered to, rather the melody of the tune is followed. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

All I can say is, that's not what I hear. Obviously, your listening / interpretation is different to mine. Perhaps a better example would be to listen to a Thai television soap opera.

Edited June 3, 2010 by dvc

[anchan42]

The singer will almost always be able to load words with different emotive values, (intonations), whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone.

I don't listen to a lot of Thai music by choice, but i do hear songs around in daily life. I was under the impression that in Thai songs the correct tone is not always adhered to, rather the melody of the tune is followed. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

All I can say is, that's not what I hear. Obviously, your listening / interpretation is different to mine. Perhaps a better example would be to listen to a Thai television soap opera.

Tones rule in Thai songs can be a bit bendy but only occasionally. Artistic license, I supposed.

[Parvis]

Peppy and etc. etc.

Some of you made valid comments why it "appears" that older people may have more difficulties in learning which has nothing to do with age - but motivation - the "zest" that you may have as a younger person has long past you by.

But as far as actual deficiencies - there just aren't any - if you are a healthy individual.

Most "studies" are actually theories and opinions of younger individuals wanting to "blabber on" not actual objective scientific research.

Peppy - even your comment on my "occational spelling mistakes (there aren't any)" and my "grammatical mistakes" (yes - I write the way I speak) are "condenscension" - which you are obviously too insensitive to understand.

To all those that feel (or have been told) they cannot learn Thai because of their age. This "myth" is as incorrect as "the science of phrenology" was when it was developed around 1800 by a German Scientist - yet - these prejudices still exist and are being perpetuated by some individuals often even in the teaching profession.

The most difficult hurdles to overcome are those you create for yourself - and - those created by prejudiced (pre-judge) ignorant individuals.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Parvis

[dvc]

The singer will almost always be able to load words with different emotive values, (intonations), whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone.

I don't listen to a lot of Thai music by choice, but i do hear songs around in daily life. I was under the impression that in Thai songs the correct tone is not always adhered to, rather the melody of the tune is followed. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

All I can say is, that's not what I hear. Obviously, your listening / interpretation is different to mine. Perhaps a better example would be to listen to a Thai television soap opera.

Tones rule in Thai songs can be a bit bendy but only occasionally. Artistic license, I supposed.

Thanks. Coming from a native Thai speaker, (hope I'm correct in this assumption), I'll take that as validation of my statement.

PS: Peppy...you have my sympathies.

Edited June 3, 2010 by dvc

[Peppy]

Peppy - even your comment on my "occational spelling mistakes (there aren't any)" and my "grammatical mistakes" (yes - I write the way I speak) are "condenscension" - which you are obviously too insensitive to understand.

While I can understand how you could feel my compliments are a form of condescension, please rest assured that they are not. I'm well aware that mastering a foreign language to the extent that one could be mistaken for a native speaker takes an enormous amount of time and effort, and I have great respect for anyone who can do that, regardless of my feelings about their opinions.

As for the issue of whether or not you make the occasional spelling mistake in your posts, I'll let the above quote speak for itself.

[bhoydy]

Thanks. Coming from a native Thai speaker, (hope I'm correct in this assumption), I'll take that as validation of my statement.

Your very quick to validate your own statement when your assumed native Thai speaker (i believe you're right there though) has just said the 'tone rules can be a bit bendy,' while you said 'whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone'. I mean they're either adhered to or they're not.

Yes soap operas would be a better example, unless it's a karaoke scene.

[dvc]

Thanks. Coming from a native Thai speaker, (hope I'm correct in this assumption), I'll take that as validation of my statement.

Your very quick to validate your own statement when your assumed native Thai speaker (i believe you're right there though) has just said the 'tone rules can be a bit bendy,' while you said 'whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone'. I mean they're either adhered to or they're not.

Yes soap operas would be a better example, unless it's a karaoke scene.

To me; the phrase...'can be a bit bendy', indicates the practice in question does not occur very often. I enjoy listening to Thai pop music and my observations regarding adherence to tones is based on two years personal experience.

I stand by my earlier post, and the statements it contained.

[bhoydy]

Thanks. Coming from a native Thai speaker, (hope I'm correct in this assumption), I'll take that as validation of my statement.

Your very quick to validate your own statement when your assumed native Thai speaker (i believe you're right there though) has just said the 'tone rules can be a bit bendy,' while you said 'whilst still maintaining adherence to correct tone'. I mean they're either adhered to or they're not.

Yes soap operas would be a better example, unless it's a karaoke scene.

To me; the phrase...'can be a bit bendy', indicates the practice in question does not occur very often. I enjoy listening to Thai pop music and my observations regarding adherence to tones is based on two years personal experience.

I stand by my earlier post, and the statements it contained.

Of course. I rarely listen to Thai music as i previously mentioned, but the times i have i have heard tone discrepancies hence my initial disagreement. Keep enjoying your Thai music, all music is good if you enjoy it. I quite like Sek Loso, but the 2 albums of his i have bought have got that annoying karaoke keyboard playing along with some of the songs so i never listen to them.

[Parvis]

Peppy - even your comment on my "occational spelling mistakes (there aren't any)" and my "grammatical mistakes" (yes - I write the way I speak) are "condenscension" - which you are obviously too insensitive to understand.

While I can understand how you could feel my compliments are a form of condescension, please rest assured that they are not. I'm well aware that mastering a foreign language to the extent that one could be mistaken for a native speaker takes an enormous amount of time and effort, and I have great respect for anyone who can do that, regardless of my feelings about their opinions.

As for the issue of whether or not you make the occasional spelling mistake in your posts, I'll let the above quote speak for itself.

Amazing - you actually caught two - perhaps because instinctively I make reference to "dense" in one case.

That's why "spelling checks" are so useful - I just don't use them.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Parvis

[bkklife]

Thai can be learnt very fast depending on what you want your end results to be. For example... Over the years living in Bangkok with my Thai girlfriend and her family, we have had a number of Burmese girls working as maids for us. They where all around 16-20 years old and didn't speak a word of Thai having just came across the border. After only 1 year most of them could speak almost perfectly, this was due to them being thown straight in the deep end and knowing that they must learn in order to gain a better salary etc....

But me on the other hand can speak decent Thai but took me about 5 years to grasp as my girlfriend and her whole family speak perfect English.

This is my observation anyway !!!