Need Assistance

[saakura]

Could someone kindly explain the exact meaning of the word อภิปราย, thanks. Also what is the thai word you would use for 'OPINION'. If possible, pls include two simple sentences in thai using both words. Thanks in advance.

[mikenyork]

Opinion - ความคิด ความเ็ห็น

Example: In my opinion, Thai women are beautiful

ตามความคิดความเห็นของผมผู้หญิงไทยเป็นผู้หญิงที่สวยมากๆ

อภิปราย to debate or discuss (I usually only hear this used in a governmental, usual legislative, context, never in the context of a discussion between ordinary people, in a "family debate", for example.

Let's hope for the best for my spelling which is more than a little hit or miss.

[Peppy]

I think ความคิดความเห็น khwahm-kit khwahm-hen is perhaps a little too flowery for everyday speech--just ความคิดเห็น khwahm-kit-hen should do fine.

Regarding อภิปราย a-pih-bpraai, I concur with Mikenyork--I too have only ever heard it in regard to legislative debates, and to me the word connotes long-winded speeches explaining a particular position in great detail.

PS. If I may critique the sentence ตามความคิดความเห็นของผมผู้หญิงไทยเป็นผู้หญิงที่สวยมากๆ, I'd say it's grammatically correct, but unnecessarily convoluted. To me it reads, "In my opinion, Thai women are women who are very beautiful." I'd change ตามความคิดความเห็นของผม to "ตามความคิดของผม" (I often hear this phrase, and to me it's equivalent to "in my opinion"), and ผู้หญิงไทยเป็นผู้หญิงที่สวยมากๆ to "ผู้หญิงไทยสวยมากๆ". So the final sentence would be ตามความคิดของผม ผู้หญิงไทยสวยมากๆ. (Perhaps with a นะ thrown in, either in the middle or at the end, depending on which part I'd like to emphasize.)

That's just my opinion, though. What do you guys think?

[Peppy]

Edit: Double post. Sorry!

Edited August 24, 2010 by Peppy

[bifftastic]

This gives me the opportunity to ask something

In this kind of sentence is there a need for the verb 'to be'? I see that Peppy left out the 'เป็น' in his version.

Cheers,

Biff

[mikenyork]

I agree with Peppy about the formality of my original sentence and the more conversational tone of his submission. As for the verb เป็น being dropped, Thai drops this verb at every opportunity in normal conversation. It is, I suppose, "understood" in Peppy's version. Many Thai constructions do away with this verb and this is often carried over into Thai's grammatical mistakes in English--they don't "feel" the necessity of a to be verb in a lot of sentences.

[anchan42]

เป็น is not required rather than being dropped in the sentence Peppy used. It just how noun and adjective are put together. For example "this car is red" รถคันนี้สีแดง "red car" รถสีแดง "I think this car is red" ผมว่ารถคนนี้สีแดง

ผู้หญิงสวย "beautiful girl" ผู้หญิงคนนี้สวย "this girl is beautiful" ผมว่าผู้หญิงไทยสวย "I think Thai girls are beautiful"

[mikenyork]

เจ้าของภาษา are always to be given the final word on these matters. Thank you Anchan 42. Haven't seen your posts for a while. We need native speakers here, so thank you.

There are sentences that require เป็น such as ผมเป็นคนไทย. Is the issue that predicate adjectives (เขาสวย)do not require a verb whereas predicate nominatives do have such a requirement?

These discussions are exposing the fact that my education in Thai grammar is, shall we say, limited (putting it politely--non-existent would be more accurate).

[bhoydy]

Not long after the recent unrest they had the อภิปรายไม่ไว้วางใจ, a debate of no confidence in the government's handling of events.

[bifftastic]

เป็น is not required rather than being dropped in the sentence Peppy used. It just how noun and adjective are put together. For example "this car is red" รถคันนี้สีแดง "red car" รถสีแดง "I think this car is red" ผมว่ารถคนนี้สีแดง

ผู้หญิงสวย "beautiful girl" ผู้หญิงคนนี้สวย "this girl is beautiful" ผมว่าผู้หญิงไทยสวย "I think Thai girls are beautiful"

Thank you

I notice you use ว่า rather than คิดว่า, so is คิด not needed because of the context?

[GarryP]

No confidence debates อภิปรายไม่ไว้วางใจ appear to be a national pastime. It makes the opposition look busy.

I agree with Pepy and would go with ความคิดเห็น rather than the more formal version ความคิดความเห็น which I don't recall ever hearing.

[saakura]

Not long after the recent unrest they had the อภิปรายไม่ไว้วางใจ, a debate of no confidence in the government's handling of events.

thanks bhoydy and everyone else. The above sentence was very useful in understanding the word.

[tgeezer]

This is a good word to look up in a dictionary อภิปราย a verb meaning 'to opine': to express your view which you hold as probable on grounds short of proof.

The alternative and shorter form is found in the definition; พูดขึ้นแจงแสดงความคิดเห็น 'saying what you think' so ผมคิดว่า or เขาบอกว่า if the context fitted.

[tgeezer]

This gives me the opportunity to ask something

In this kind of sentence is there a need for the verb 'to be'? I see that Peppy left out the 'เป็น' in his version.

Cheers,

Biff

There is a fundemental difference between verbs in English which only show 'action' and Thai verbs which also show 'condition' 'quality' and 'situation' สวย ดี however they have seen their mistake and mostly these words which used to be verbs are now called คำวิเศษณ์ . It is only interesting since having changed the classification they still insist on treating them as verbs.

English needs the cupola 'is' when using an adjective but the Thais still don't. Maybe with enough exposure to the 'truth' we can eventually say เขาเป็นสวย A complete thought (sentence) must contain a verb,you see, so 'She is beautiful' works in English but no longer does it work in Thai since เขาสวย lacks the verb!

[anchan42]

เป็น is not required rather than being dropped in the sentence Peppy used. It just how noun and adjective are put together. For example "this car is red" รถคันนี้สีแดง "red car" รถสีแดง "I think this car is red" ผมว่ารถคนนี้สีแดง

ผู้หญิงสวย "beautiful girl" ผู้หญิงคนนี้สวย "this girl is beautiful" ผมว่าผู้หญิงไทยสวย "I think Thai girls are beautiful"

Thank you

I notice you use ว่า rather than คิดว่า, so is คิด not needed because of the context?

คิดว่า is more formal then ว่า. They are used when you want to express your opinion. You should hear ว่า far more often then คิดว่า in normal speech.

[anchan42]

This gives me the opportunity to ask something

In this kind of sentence is there a need for the verb 'to be'? I see that Peppy left out the 'เป็น' in his version.

Cheers,

Biff

There is a fundemental difference between verbs in English which only show 'action' and Thai verbs which also show 'condition' 'quality' and 'situation' สวย ดี however they have seen their mistake and mostly these words which used to be verbs are now called คำวิเศษณ์ . It is only interesting since having changed the classification they still insist on treating them as verbs.

English needs the cupola 'is' when using an adjective but the Thais still don't. Maybe with enough exposure to the 'truth' we can eventually say เขาเป็นสวย A complete thought (sentence) must contain a verb,you see, so 'She is beautiful' works in English but no longer does it work in Thai since เขาสวย lacks the verb!

Hmmm, changing the planet status of the Pluto would not make it change its orbit. I think เป็น is a real verb in Thai and have to take nouns as an object. I also believe สวย can be both verb and adjective. Combine those two would make เขาเป็นสวย ungrammatical not to mention that my native weird meter is hitting full scale.

[anchan42]

เจ้าของภาษา are always to be given the final word on these matters. Thank you Anchan 42. Haven't seen your posts for a while. We need native speakers here, so thank you.

There are sentences that require เป็น such as ผมเป็นคนไทย. Is the issue that predicate adjectives (เขาสวย)do not require a verb whereas predicate nominatives do have such a requirement?

These discussions are exposing the fact that my education in Thai grammar is, shall we say, limited (putting it politely--non-existent would be more accurate).

My knowledge of Thai grammar is probably not much more then yours and don't ask me about tone rules or consonant classes.

I did ok with English tests back in school without knowing much about grammar. I developed English weird meter by reading a lot and watching a lot of English movies instead.

[tgeezer]

This gives me the opportunity to ask something

In this kind of sentence is there a need for the verb 'to be'? I see that Peppy left out the 'เป็น' in his version.

Cheers,

Biff

There is a fundemental difference between verbs in English which only show 'action' and Thai verbs which also show 'condition' 'quality' and 'situation' สวย ดี however they have seen their mistake and mostly these words which used to be verbs are now called คำวิเศษณ์ . It is only interesting since having changed the classification they still insist on treating them as verbs.

English needs the cupola 'is' when using an adjective but the Thais still don't. Maybe with enough exposure to the 'truth' we can eventually say เขาเป็นสวย A complete thought (sentence) must contain a verb,you see, so 'She is beautiful' works in English but no longer does it work in Thai since เขาสวย lacks the verb!

Hmmm, changing the planet status of the Pluto would not make it change its orbit. I think เป็น is a real verb in Thai and have to take nouns as an object. I also believe สวย can be both verb and adjective. Combine those two would make เขาเป็นสวย ungrammatical not to mention that my native weird meter is hitting full scale.

I am using เป็น to mean 'is' in the copulative sense which Thai it does not have.

How weird does 'She is beautiful' sound if compared to 'She is a beauty'?The true meaning of the verb 'To be'.

Incidentally that is the meaning of เป็น 'to be a'. It shows the relationship between nouns เขาเป็นครู

[bifftastic]

I did ok with English tests back in school without knowing much about grammar. I developed English weird meter by reading a lot and watching a lot of English movies instead.

Me too, and I'm English I like the phrase 'weird meter' btw

Edited August 25, 2010 by bifftastic

[Peppy]

 

I did ok with English tests back in school without knowing much about grammar. I developed English weird meter by reading a lot and watching a lot of English movies instead.

The only way to do it in my opinion--I developed my Thai "weird meter" (great phrase to use in a language context--love it!  ) the same way.

I am using เป็น to mean 'is' in the copulative sense which Thai it does not have.

I must admit I am perplexed. You admit that the verb "be" in Thai is NOT used with words that function as adjectives do in English, like "beautiful" or "good", yet you insist on using it. It just isn't used that way. That's the way it is. I don't think it's going to change. Thai speakers will continue with their verbless "incomplete thoughts"--which are actually perfectly understandable sentences--and no one will be the worse off for it.

(Sometimes, when you get to a certain point, the answer just is, "That's the way it is." Why do we need the verb "to be" with adjectives in English? Why do we have to say "he is" and not "he are"? Why does "is" read as "is"? Why does the letter "i" look like a line with a dot over it? Why does it sound like that? Because that's the way it is!)

[bifftastic]

This gives me the opportunity to ask something

In this kind of sentence is there a need for the verb 'to be'? I see that Peppy left out the 'เป็น' in his version.

Cheers,

Biff

There is a fundemental difference between verbs in English which only show 'action' and Thai verbs which also show 'condition' 'quality' and 'situation' สวย ดี however they have seen their mistake and mostly these words which used to be verbs are now called คำวิเศษณ์ . It is only interesting since having changed the classification they still insist on treating them as verbs.

English needs the cupola 'is' when using an adjective but the Thais still don't. Maybe with enough exposure to the 'truth' we can eventually say เขาเป็นสวย A complete thought (sentence) must contain a verb,you see, so 'She is beautiful' works in English but no longer does it work in Thai since เขาสวย lacks the verb!

Hmmm, changing the planet status of the Pluto would not make it change its orbit. I think เป็น is a real verb in Thai and have to take nouns as an object. I also believe สวย can be both verb and adjective. Combine those two would make เขาเป็นสวย ungrammatical not to mention that my native weird meter is hitting full scale.

So, do you mean 'สวย' can mean 'beautiful' and 'is beautiful' ? If that's the case I can understand that adding 'เป็น' wouldn't be right. That then, poses the question, when should 'เป็น' be used? (I need to get me one of those Thai meter thingys )

[tgeezer]

This gives me the opportunity to ask something

In this kind of sentence is there a need for the verb 'to be'? I see that Peppy left out the 'เป็น' in his version.

Cheers,

Biff

I will tell you the grammatical reason which may not always be supported by actual usage, since most seem to take a pride in not knowing grammar.

In post no. 2 ผู้หญิงไทยเป็นผู้หญิงที่สวยมาก It is comparing two nouns. Thai women are women who are very beautiful. You can see in the English version that 'are' does not mean the same in each case, and that is why Thai omits it.

In post no. 3 ผู้หญิงสวยมาก grammatically, is a noun described with an adjective. 'very beautiful women'.

I believe that if ผู้หญิงสวยมาก could be described as a noun-verb-adverb it would be more consistent.

Of course assimilating language works, but one can't get a decent discussion without grammar:ermm: also one is limited in knowledge by one's experience.

[anchan42]

I must admit that I find your posts confusing and difficult to understand but that probably due to me lacking the ability to handle complete thoughts conveyed in English.

You are trying to use English grammar to judge Thai grammar. I don’t think that is going to work. There are two very different languages.

Setting one up as a standard is a big mistake.

What do you mean by “comparing two nouns” with ผู้หญิงไทยเป็นผู้หญิงที่สวยมาก?

Is สวย a verb, an adjective or both in your opinion?

[mikenyork]

In using the phrase "comparing two nouns", I think tgeezer meant that the sentence as I had written it compared women (noun) Thai (adjective modifying women) with women (noun) all (adjective modifying "all" women but "all" is understood or implied in my sentence). Back in the day before birds appeared on the earth they actually taught something called diagramming sentences which made the grammatical relationships among words in a sentence explicitly clear.

But, Anchan 42, (or others) I want to return to a question I raised in an earlier post--is it generally true that noun predicates require a verb of being (เป็น or คือ) whereas adjective predicates do not?

Therefore: "เขาเป็นคนแก่" versus "เขาแก่"

I had never thought about this way of dividing Thai sentences using or not using เป็น, but to my non-native ear, this sounds right. Is it?

[tgeezer]

1. You are trying to use English grammar to judge Thai grammar. I don't think that is going to work. There are two very different languages.

Setting one up as a standard is a big mistake.

2. What do you mean by "comparing two nouns" with ผู้หญิงไทยเป็นผู้หญิงที่สวยมาก?

Is สวย a verb, an adjective or both in your opinion?

1. Not to judge, I am comparing, is there any alternative? Your own language is the only reference point possible, when learning another. The question was specifically about that comparison.

2. เป็น ก. เป็นคำกริยาสำรับแสดงความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างคำกับคำเพื่อให้เห็นว่าคำหน้าและคำหลังมีความเกี่ยวข้องกันอย่างไง maybe 'compare' is not the right word, 'relationship' maybe? and nouns in this case but any word will do; สำคัญเป็นพิเศษกว่าธรรมดา

[tgeezer]

In using the phrase "comparing two nouns", I think tgeezer meant that the sentence as I had written it compared women (noun) Thai (adjective modifying women) with women (noun) all (adjective modifying "all" women but "all" is understood or implied in my sentence). Back in the day before birds appeared on the earth they actually taught something called diagramming sentences which made the grammatical relationships among words in a sentence explicitly clear.

Maybe the reason we have these discussions is because this precision has disappeared in favour of woolly thinking. This is presumably the system which I learnt and forgot, but it is still with us in fact. With chat-room-talk, even if you cant understand the individual words, the basic grammar gives you a clue. Modern Thai seems to allow the words to be placed in any position, the fact of their existence is deemed sufficient however remotely they may be scattered around. The problem is that the aim of communication is sometimes not achieved, so that we all know what we mean but don't know what we have said.

But, Anchan 42, (or others) I want to return to a question I raised in an earlier post--is it generally true that noun predicates require a verb of being (เป็น or คือ) whereas adjective predicates do not?

Therefore: "เขาเป็นคนแก่" versus "เขาแก่"

I think these are seperate : 'He/She is an old person' 'He/She is old' I think you can see the difference.

แก่ must be a verb with the personal pronoun, (in spite of it being classed an adjective)unless you are saying 'old him'!

I had never thought about this way of dividing Thai sentences using or not using เป็น, but to my non-native ear, this sounds right. Is it?

I would say they are both right.

[HappyInCM]

In using the phrase "comparing two nouns", I think tgeezer meant that the sentence as I had written it compared women (noun) Thai (adjective modifying women) with women (noun) all (adjective modifying "all" women but "all" is understood or implied in my sentence). Back in the day before birds appeared on the earth they actually taught something called diagramming sentences which made the grammatical relationships among words in a sentence explicitly clear.

Maybe the reason we have these discussions is because this precision has disappeared in favour of woolly thinking. This is presumably the system which I learnt and forgot, but it is still with us in fact. With chat-room-talk, even if you cant understand the individual words, the basic grammar gives you a clue. Modern Thai seems to allow the words to be placed in any position, the fact of their existence is deemed sufficient however remotely they may be scattered around. The problem is that the aim of communication is sometimes not achieved, so that we all know what we mean but don't know what we have said.

But, Anchan 42, (or others) I want to return to a question I raised in an earlier post--is it generally true that noun predicates require a verb of being (เป็น or คือ) whereas adjective predicates do not?

Therefore: "เขาเป็นคนแก่" versus "เขาแก่"

I think these are seperate : 'He/She is an old person' 'He/She is old' I think you can see the difference.

แก่ must be a verb with the personal pronoun, (in spite of it being classed an adjective)unless you are saying 'old him'!

I had never thought about this way of dividing Thai sentences using or not using เป็น, but to my non-native ear, this sounds right. Is it?

I would say they are both right.

I definitely don't have a weirdness meter, but it seems whenever I encounter he is old in Thai, there's an already at the end: เขาแก่แล้ว . Although possibly not needed, is it just more common to add this?

[tgeezer]

[

I definitely don't have a weirdness meter, but it seems whenever I encounter he is old in Thai, there's an already at the end: เขาแก่แล้ว . Although possibly not needed, is it just more common to add this?

Is that 'already' in the 'Italian gangster speak 'He's old already' or the English 'He's already old'?

In Thai แล้ว means สิ้น จบ เสร็จ ล่วงไป I wonder which one is understood by a the native speakers here, probably 'already' = 'by this time, beforehand, thus early, rather than แล้ว. I suppose this is a good example of the different approach, English means 'time' Thai means 'done, finished, going beyond', time is got by inference.

Perhaps a young person might explain a union with an older man in this way meaning 'he is finished' or 'past it'.

[anchan42]

But, Anchan 42, (or others) I want to return to a question I raised in an earlier post--is it generally true that noun predicates require a verb of being (เป็น or คือ) whereas adjective predicates do not?

Therefore: "เขาเป็นคนแก่" versus "เขาแก่"

I had never thought about this way of dividing Thai sentences using or not using เป็น, but to my non-native ear, this sounds right. Is it?

I think it sounds about right. เป็น must be followed by noun. Generally speaking anyway.

เขาบ้า, เขาเป็นบ้า, เขาเป็นคนบ้า all mean the same things but it probably an exception or บ้า might have a certain attribute in mental dictionary that make it behave this way.

There is noting more practical then a good theory. When a theory does not go along with reality, the reality is hardly at fault.

[anchan42]

1. Not to judge, I am comparing, is there any alternative? Your own language is the only reference point possible, when learning another. The question was specifically about that comparison.

I am not try to be pick on you but just want to understand.

what do you mean by "incomplete thoughts"?

For me เขาสวย and "she is beautiful" conveying exactly the same thought so one can not represent complete thought while other represent incomplete.

I might be wrong but I got a feeling from some of your posts that Thai is a language still under development and the development path is to go towards English linguistic structure.