Transliteration...

[Totster]

My wife has got two ATM/debit cards from Bangkok bank, and her name is spelt in it's romanised form differently on each card.

So it got me thinking... who is it at Bangkok Bank or any other company decides how a Thai name should be spelt in it's romanised form, what standard is used, is there a standard..? As my wife's name is spelt differently on two cards issued by the same bank I'm thinking that it's just a "best guess" for whoever is dealing with it at the time...

This surely leaves a wide gap for mistakes, which I find worrying.. for instance if a name is spelt in one way it's romanised form on a legal document, but an official doesn't recognise that this is the same name as he can see written in Thai, what could happen...?

Another example.. I have recently bought tickets for us to fly from BKK to Khon Kaen, now it clearly states that the name must be exactly as it is in the passport or in my wifes case on the ID card, now as the ID only carries the Thai version of her name I have had to make decision between which romanised spelling to use.... what will happen if we get to the airport and the official says "that's not the same name as on the ID card (as I interpret it ).." ?

I'm sure that I read somewhere that there is an official standard/guide to transliterating a Thai word to the romanised form, but am I right in thinking that without people all using the same standard, for whatever reason, that as long as it sounds similar it will be ok...?

Totster

[jomama]

I think there is a standard transliteration book, but it can be way off:

Phonetic=Thai transliterated

Oy=Oil

Dah=Tor

Shinawat=Shinawatra

Suriwong=Surawongse

etc.

Those with better English will probably spell it closer to the real sound, while those who use a book for strict translation might end up with a spelling that is nowhere near the sound to us.

I've seen long-ranging, and at times heated, debates among Thais about how certain words should be spelled (transliterated).

[Neeranam]

http://www.royin.go.th/roman-translate01.html

Totster, this is a link to the official govt. transliteration.

Useless for foreigner, especially tourists, in my opinion.

Why do travel guides use it?

You get them on the sky train saying "charoen krung road" and nobody understands. If it was written "jarern groong" everyone would know.

Why on earth use "K" for "ก"?

It makes it very difficult for foreigners who don't know it to say place names for example. Kalasin should be "Galaseen".

Try sayin Krunthep(Bangkok), as it is written, I guarantee the Thai will not understand.

I have had a few tourists come to me and say,"do you know where Chatu chak market is?". Thais don't understand. That is because it is "Jatujak".

"จ" should be "J" in all circumstances, as an initial consanant.

Of course it is different as a final.

Another one is "ต" which IMHO, should be "DT".

With names, the most common problem I see for foriegners is the final "ล" which I think should be a "N", not an "L".

In saying all that, it is probably best if you stick to the official one.

Shinawat=Shinawatra

It is stupid though to use Shinawatra, as he is an international figure, when the final consonant is silent in Thai, just leave it out. Shiniwat is better. man I never thought I would ever write Shiniwat is better

ก k k กา = ka

นก = nok

ข ฃ ค ฅ ฆ kh๑ k ขอ = kho

สุข = suk

โค = kho

ยุค = yuk

ฆ้อง = khong

เมฆ = mek

ง ng ng งาม = ngam

สงฆ์ = song

จ ฉ ช ฌ ch๒ t จีน = chin

อำนาจ = amnat

ฉิ่ง = ching

ชิน = chin

คช = khot

เฌอ = choe

ซ ทร (เสียง ซ) ศ ษ ส s t ซา = sa

ก๊าซ = kat

ทราย = sai

ศาล = san

ทศ = thot

รักษา = raksa

กฤษณ์ = krit

สี = si

รส = rot

ญ y n ญาติ = yat

ชาญ = chan

ฎ ฑ (เสียง ด) ด d t ฎีกา = dika

กฎ = kot

บัณฑิต = bandit

ษัฑ = sat

ด้าย = dai

เป็ด = pet

ฏ ต t t ปฏิมา = patima

ปรากฏ = prakot

ตา = ta

จิต = chit

ฐ ฑ ฒ ถ ท ธ th๑ t ฐาน = than

รัฐ = rat

มณฑล = monthon

เฒ่า = thao

วัฒน์ = wat

ถ่าน = than

นาถ = nat

ทอง = thong

บท = bot

ธง = thong

อาวุธ = awut

ณ น n n ประณีต = pranit

ปราณ = pran

น้อย = noi

จน = chon

บ b p ใบ = bai

กาบ = kap

ป p p ไป = pai

บาป = bap

ผ พ ภ ph๑ p ผา = pha

พงศ์ = phong

ลัพธ์ = lap

สำเภา = samphao

ลาภ = lap

ฝ ฟ f p ฝั่ง = fang

ฟ้า = fa

เสิร์ฟ = soep

ม m m ม้าม = mam

ย y – ยาย = yai

ร r n ร้อน = ron

พร = phon

ล ฬ l n ลาน = lan

ศาล = san

กีฬา = kila

กาฬ = kan

ว w – วาย = wai

ห ฮ h – หา = ha

ฮา = ha

หมายเหตุ :

Edited August 4, 2005 by Neeranam

[barryofthailand]

As far as I know, the English spelling of a Thai name is up to you. When my wife got her passport a few years ago, they asked her how to spell her name in English. Now everywhere she goes where she has to use the english spelling of her neme, she uses the same spelling as on the passport. She opened a new bank account and they asked her the english spelling of her first name. She told them and they told her she was wrong. I've always been told, in English you can spell your name the way you want too. It's your name. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

Barry

[sabaijai]

Why on earth use "K" for "ก"?

Neeranam, it makes about as much sense as your preference for จ:

"จ" should be "J" in all circumstances, as an initial consanant.

Both จ and ก are unvoiced, unaspirated consonants that English doesn't have (at least not as an initial consonant). In fact /j/ and /k/ (or /g/if you prefer) are only approximate equivalents to จ and ก. The reason some factions (the RTGS for one) avoid using /g/ for ก is because /g/ adds voicing that the Thai letter doesn't have. Likewise /j/ for จ adds voicing that จ doesn't have.

However you decide to transcribe Thai, if you don't know the equivalent Thai sounds already, whatever comes out of your mouth is only going to be a very rough approximation, especially since tones are completely absent from most transliterations as are any distinctions between long and short vowels.

[lopburi3]

Another example.. I have recently bought tickets for us to fly from BKK to Khon Kaen, now it clearly states that the name must be exactly as it is in the passport or in my wifes case on the ID card, now as the ID only carries the Thai version of her name I have had to make decision between which romanised spelling to use.... what will happen if we get to the airport and the official says "that's not the same name as on the ID card (as I interpret it ).." ?

I had that problem on the Nok Air website as the English page would not accept Thai so called them and was advised to write all names in English which I did. Had no problems using Thai ID cards for several travelers but did have a problem with birth certificate of grandchild who had first name xxxyyy but registered as yyyxxx. It had been changed on an attached paper but did not find it and spent 5 minutes before this 3 year old was allowed to obtain a boarding pass.

[meadish_sweetball]

Why on earth use "K" for "ก"?

Neeranam, it makes about as much sense as your preference for จ:

"จ" should be "J" in all circumstances, as an initial consanant.

Both จ and ก are unvoiced, unaspirated consonants that English doesn't have (at least not as an initial consonant). In fact /j/ and /k/ (or /g/if you prefer) are only approximate equivalents to จ and ก. The reason some factions (the RTGS for one) avoid using /g/ for ก is because /g/ adds voicing that the Thai letter doesn't have. Likewise /j/ for จ adds voicing that จ doesn't have.

However you decide to transcribe Thai, if you don't know the equivalent Thai sounds already, whatever comes out of your mouth is only going to be a very rough approximation, especially since tones are completely absent from most transliterations as are any distinctions between long and short vowels.

As is often said, there is no perfect way of transliterating Thai using only the letters of the Roman alphabet. Only lots of compromises that arise from compromise.

Please note that it is not self-evident that it is the English pronunciation of the Roman alphabet that should form the basis for the transliteration, even if that makes the most sense since it is the first foreign language most Thais learn (not counting dialects and minority languages).

Using an English-based transcription, we are stuck in the differences between different 'Englishes' - British dialects, American variations, Canadian dialects, Australian, Kiwi and South African... not to mention India, where English is used daily as a lingua franca.

The most accurate way to romanize Thai, preserving the differences in terms of vowel length and sound value is to use any of the versions based on the international phonetic alphabet with added diacritics for the tones - the problem, of course, is that most people do not know IPA, and can not be bothered studying it. So we are stuck with our own ideas of what sounds best, as well as the Royal Institute standard that confuses just about everyone, including Thais.

Don't worry - be happy.

I basically agree with Sabaijai's post above, but also think that English [j] is a better alternative for จ than [ch], despite the voicing.

[Totster]

Thanks for all your replies guys...

I think my main point for posting was to discuss how the different transliterations can cause problems in business and legal / official matters, and how these can possibly be resolved should they occur.

My question still stands... " but am I right in thinking that without people all using the same standard, for whatever reason, that as long as it sounds similar it will be ok...? "

One poster says that as it is your name you can choose how you want it spelt, but surely that doesn't apply to transliteration. The name has already been "spelt", but now it needs to be transliterated into it's romanised form.

What I am ultimatly getting at is that if there is a dispute with an official, whether it be government or a check in clerk at the airport, how does it get resolved, surely this has been a problem before for someone..?

I wasn't neccesarily posting to get into a debate about how words should be transliterated from Thai to Roman alphabet and what sound/letter should be used and isn't etc.., more about the problems it causes, this is why I originally posted in the general forum.

totster

[Richard W]

There has to be some latitude in the RTGS simply because it has changed. The transcription 'uea' of เอือ is relatively new, and when my wife was having documents translated she got translations with 'ue' and 'ua', but no 'uea'. From reading the scheme, I get the impression that อื and อึ used to be transliterated 'u'. The lack of 'h' in aspirates is also quite common, but I'm not absolutely certain it can be found on official documents.

There's also supposed to be an official scheme that is closer to a transliteration, i.e. gives you a good chance of recovering the original Thai. Whether that is ISO 11940:1998 or a development of the 'graphical system' favoured by Rama VI, I don't know. ISO 11940:1998 seems to be dead in the water - it wasn't approved until 2003, and the only places I've seen it used are an Estonian web site and IBM's Internationalization Components for Unicode (ICU). The interpretations were radically different! Neither of them is an example of it being used in anger.

I can't find a specification of the 'graphical system' - it isn't obvious to me how you use it for native Thai words, and I suspect I've missed some subtleties of its application to words of Pali/Sanskrit origin. It's a shame, for I think it's the most useful basis for a transliteration for those who would appreciate having something reversible, unlike a transcription. Most people probably just need a transcription because they won't be trying to recover the original Thai.

[bannork]

I always thought ค was written in English as 'kh', so why is the name of the new Minister for the Interior, คงศักดิ์ วันทนา written as Kongsak Wantana?

Dazed and confused.

[greenwanderer108]

totster,

this might be related. As I'm half Thai/American, with my Thai mother being deceased (naturalized American citizen), the first time I went to go inquire about obtaining my dual Thai citizen rights, the official was looking at my American birth certificate which clearly states my mom as a Thai nationa, however the spelling of her name at the time was shortened from Grongjit (Thai language on her original Thai id card/house regestration) to Grong on my birth certificate (she had shortened it for convenience after over a decade being in the states) .

The official was saying, 'how do i know this is the same person' for the reason of her name being shortened, and perhaps the transliteration of using G for ก . Anyway, from an American perspective, G is far more acurate than K, as some Thais who use the K smell names like ก้อง and กุ้ง Kong and Kung but when any American reads these spellings, it will be prounounced Kong as in King Kong and Kung as in Lung with a ค K sound.

Anyway, to answer your question, yes from what I have seen, the officials can be pretty picky about petty junk, particularly transliteration. But I guess in asking for nationality rights, they have to be. Other minor business might not be as big a problem.

[sabaijai]

I basically agree with Sabaijai's post above, but also think that English [j]is a better alternative for จ than [ch], despite the voicing.

Mead, I agree, /j/ works better for me, too.

What I am ultimatly getting at is that if there is a dispute with an official, whether it be government or a check in clerk at the airport, how does it get resolved, surely this has been a problem before for someone..?

Totster, I don't think there is a standard way to resolve such a situation. I imagine it takes a lot of poise and charm (if not a small brown bag) to convince the concerned official that the divergent spellings refer to the same name.

On the other hand I can't quite imagine a Thai offical or bank clerk being that uptight about it. If you haven't actually had a problem, I wouldn't worry about it. My wife has had her name misspelt on air tickets and the Thais never seem to care (that wouldn't necessarily be the case in other countries).

I'd suggest, though, that in the future your wife offer her own transliteration to banks and other entities when filling out forms or requesting cards that require Roman. Most of my Thai friends and in-laws have a standard transliteration that they use for those instances where they need a Roman version of their name. I have two names, one Thai and one English, and am quick to let Thais and foreigners alike know how I prefer to have my Thai name Romanised.

[siamesekitty]

As far as I know, the English spelling of a Thai name is up to you. When my wife got her passport a few years ago, they asked her how to spell her name in English. Now everywhere she goes where she has to use the english spelling of her neme, she uses the same spelling as on the passport. She opened a new bank account and they asked her the english spelling of her first name. She told them and they told her she was wrong. I've always been told, in English you can spell your name the way you want too. It's your name. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

Barry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed, I don't think officials would have an issue with the English spelling with a Thai name. Just make sure that the spellings are the same for all documents.

If anybody questions why this transliteration was used, just say this is the spelling that you've always used for official purposes.