Teach Thai Students To Use English, Expert Says

[anterian]

The Thai language lacks precision, in fact where this is needed they often borrow English words, but with a Thai accent.

Except in simple matters Thais often cannot seem to understand each other, "say again" is probably one of the most common responses in a Thai conversation.

English has multiple redundancy in its usage; inverted, upside down, head over heels, arse over tit, topsy turvy, turned over, flipped, are all related concepts yet with subtle differences, try to explain this to a Thai

As others have already said, before Thais can learn a second language they need to sort their own out first. Particularly their abominable script.

This has not been my experience, as a native English speaker who has learned to speak, read and write Thai. Thai is as precise as English. Its script is actually much more precise than the English use of the Roman script. As you pointed out, it lacks much of the grammatical redundancy of English (and other inflected languages). The same could be said about Chinese. That's not the same as being imprecise.

Also, there are formal versions of most of the English loan words that you are referring to. They are usually borrowed from Sanskrit, Pali or Khmer, much the way English has borrowed from French, Latin and Greek for most of its higher vocabulary. All languages that borrow words from other languages impose their phonetics on the loan words, including English. Most of the foreign words that English has borrowed are pronounced using English phonetics (for example, the final "i" in the word "alumni" is not pronounced like the English word "eye" in its original Latin pronunciation; it is pronounced closer to "a-loom-nee"). Even a word like rendezvous, which we attempt to pronounce faithfully to its French origin, is not pronounced by English speakers exactly the way the French would say it.

The issue you are referring to is most likely due to several factors, the biggest of which are the very large grammatical and phonetic differences between Thai and English, combined with the fact that most Thais don't have many opportunities to practice speaking English with fluent speakers.

Consider the way many Western expats butcher the Thai language (some of whom have been living in Thailand for many years) when they are forced to try to communicate in Thai.

EDIT -- I see that by "redundancy" you were actually not referring to grammatical redundancy, which would have actually been a very insightful observation. But alas, you were making the bold statement that Thai lacks folksy idioms for expressing thoughts in subtly different ways. You are sorely mistaken! Just because the expression "arse over tit" wouldn't translate well into Thai doesn't mean that they don't have plenty of expressions for similar concepts, most of which wouldn't translate well into English. They are different languages. Unless you are fluent in both, of course you will be biased towards your mother tongue.

This is an interesting reply. I don't know enough about linguistics to feel confidently one way or the other about the precision or lack-thereof of Thai (as compared to English), but I do find it fascinating.

Can you tell me if you can agree that we can work from a framework that all languages are not equally suited to all tasks? If so, then we can at least move beyond language equality. I will argue (for the sake of intelligent discussion) that perhaps Thai is not as well suited to efficient precision of meaning construction in a wide range of academic topics as is English.

Having said that, what drives a language to adopt words to express more complex thought? I would suspect that the happenings in a particular culture play a large part in driving this process. Is it possible that since there have not been huge modern academic/philosophical/scientific/humanitarian movements in Thai culture Thai language has not really had a need to many vocabularies or other language structures to describe increasingly complex meaning? I mean absolutely no disrespect here, but if you had a nation comprised overwhelmingly of simple laborers and an educational system that did not encourage individual thought (if you do agree with this, of course), would the average person be interested/capable of discussing/understanding complex topics?

Like another poster, I have witnessed Thais, both educated (post graduate) and not so educated, speaking Thai and often having difficulty developing meaning easily. It's almost more like they are helping each other to develop the meaning of what they are saying. It's hard to explain... But, and I'm getting some of this from my wife as my Thai ability is almost nil, it's almost as though they are very painfully slowly developing the meaning by talking around things, describing things with ever more words giving each time to take in the meaning as it would seem that much of the meaning involves context. To me, a language that involves building context all the time is possibly not as efficient as one which either does not need context or can squeeze more meaning into words that quickly express complex or contextual meaning...

Anyway, language is such a complex topic.

I always thought it was interesting the way meaning is created with some words in Thai

drinking water - naam plao

fish sauce - naam plaa -- literally: fish water

flood waters - naam tooum -- literally: water everywhere, or too much water

ice - naam kairng

A language dictates the way you think, even for the one person in five who thinks primarily in pictures, to convey that thought to another involves the use of language (unless you are a skilled cartoonist). If a language does not have a discrete word for a particular concept then it cannot handle that concept other than in a roundabout may.

For example the Latin word "dignas" or the Thai word "grenjai" cannot be simply translated into English, although approximations exist.

English has the largest vocabulary of any language, over a million words and growing by several thousands every year. Put another way this means English can handle more concepts than any other language. Put yet another way, the more sophisticated or erudite a conversation, the more English becomes the language of choice.

I'm not saying every native English speaker has such an extensive vocabulary, the average tabloid reader gets along with about 20,000 words, the Times educational supplement uses about 200,000.

Apart from artificial languages and computer languages, no language is rational (in the sense that it can be defined by a set of standard rules). There are always anomalous constructs, irregular verbs and nouns, etc. One advantage of English is that one can usually transgress these rules and still be understood, at worst one may sound a little quaint. In Thai, get one inflection wrong and the Thai listener is baffled.

[Nanfarang]

The problem is so deep rooted making 2012 or 13, 14 & 15 special years isn't going to change a thing. My partner is a qualified teacher but cannot speak English beyond a few simple phrases (why? because I deemed it more important that, living in Thailand, I should learn Thai first). She is often asked to teach English as cover for other teachers to 13 year olds - what a jok,e I have to try and prepare her lesson plans for her. Equally, look at the English language press, English language books in the supermarket or school text books, they are riddled with mistakes.

When most learning is by 'rote' and questioning is not encouraged its the entire system that would need to be changed before decent results are achieved and, sadly that isn't going to happen in my life time and probably not my God's life time either

[metisdead]

A profanity post and a troll post have been removed.

[wxyz]

"Language classes must focus on content relevant to learners' daily lives. The content must be practical," she said.

This is so true, and at the risk of sounding crass, the proof is in the bars in the major tourist areas.

The average Thai bar girl speaks passable English much better than other Thais in almost any other sector of the population that I have met, because the content of their conversations with their customers is relevant to their daily lives, and they use it almost every day. I wouldn't expect them to be able to recite Shakespeare, and I have certainly met upper-class Thais with much higher English fluency and literacy, but in my experience they are rare.

maybe they should hire the bar girls to teach english, but they probably would not work for such little pay.

[anterian]

One recurring topic in this thread is the relevance or otherwise of grammar when learning a language. This has been discussed in detail by Bernstein and Chomsky, representing opposite views. Chomsky and many anthropologists will argue that grammar is innate, it is genetically hard wired into the child's brain. Bernstein will argue that it is a learnt ability.

Like many such debates it is becoming clear that the reality lies somewhere in the middle. The human brain has a structure organising capability which is innate, thus when presented with a language the brain starts to derive grammatical rules, for example the ending "-ed" to create the past tense. Children are logically correct when they then say "digged" rather than "dug".

Children first learn vocabulary, then as this vocabulary grows they start to classify it and derive rules, this is innate behaviour, simple grammar evolves from vocabulary. This is Chomsky's position.

However, as the vocabulary increases it becomes clear that many words do not obey these rules, as in my example of "digged" and "dug". Additional rules have to be learnt, rules which we describe as referring to "irregular" verbs and nouns. These rules cannot be arrived at by logic, they have to be derived by observation and rote learning. This is Bernstein's position.

Most native speakers will understand Chomsky type English grammar, just as we understand our children when they use it, "we have been there, done that".

So Bernstein grammar is essential for GOOD English, but Chomsky grammar is adequate for communication.

[Kilgore Trout]

"Language classes must focus on content relevant to learners' daily lives. The content must be practical," she said.

This is so true, and at the risk of sounding crass, the proof is in the bars in the major tourist areas.

The average Thai bar girl speaks passable English much better than other Thais in almost any other sector of the population that I have met, because the content of their conversations with their customers is relevant to their daily lives, and they use it almost every day. I wouldn't expect them to be able to recite Shakespeare, and I have certainly met upper-class Thais with much higher English fluency and literacy, but in my experience they are rare.

The bar girls are actually applying their "skills" so called, if you call phrases like "short time," or using gutteral expressions to describe actions they do/don't do "skills." Either way, I guess it helps them make money.

On that note, if a Thai has a use for language it will therefore motivate them to learn it. However, the culture; especially in grammar or high schools for instance; is so racist and xenephobic that I doubt any English learners understand why they should learn it.

What this lady doesn't realize is; that Thais ability or will to learn English is directly related to "culture," or common negative misperceptions and behaviors inherent in the Thai psyche. Until that changes, I can't see Thais becoming any more proficient in English than they are.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Kilgore Trout

[kanderson]

Concentrated Language Encounter-based - sounds very similar to Communicative Language Teacher (CLT) method.

This method she proposes dosn't seem new and is pretty much universally accepted as far as I know.

Anyone who does a TESOL should have this stuff ingrained in their teacher personallity. I'll bet the CELTA is similar.

I'm wondering if most TEFL courses highlight C.L.T. at all. ?? If not maybe new teachers should do a TESOL / CELTA instead.

I have a 3 and 5 year old. Language aquisition is a mirical. I have a hard time because my Wife has poor grammar "no can" etc.. So I am always

trying to correct their grammar "can't" - I can't see the TV.

[sparebox2]

Other than French, german, Latin, etc, English language also borrow words from Thai language. Farang, Tuk-tuk, Tomyum Khung are a few that I can think off.

[udonguy]

They should have adopted this approach years ago ... and I have always said that when they introduced the one child / one computer scheme some time back it should have been mandantory to learn to speak english as part of the program. !!

Years wasted when students could have been made to learn to speak proper english and then they would have opportunities to apply for jobs outside Thailand.

:jap:

Ahhh. Theres the rub. You see, if some educated Thai people found decent paying jobs outside Thailand, and that news started flowing back into Thailand, some people here might want more money than the big boys want to pay them. And you know the big boys surely don't want that. They will label this lady as a kook and keep on with things as they are.

and then they may return here and start 'thinking' - wow now that would be a threat!

[xthAi76s]

Other than French, german, Latin, etc, English language also borrow words from Thai language. Farang, Tuk-tuk, Tomyum Khung are a few that I can think off.

These are NOT words borrowed from Thai language. They are Thai words that we all use because if we use their English equivalents, 99% of Thais will not understand because they don't speak English.

Thai: Farang, English: Westerner

Thai: Tuk-Tuk, English: Auto Rickshaw

Thai: Tomyum Khung, English: Hot and Sour Soup

A better example, would be if Westerners started using a Thai word like "grenjai" or "namjai" and incorporated it into the English language because there are no Western equivalents, then that would be an example. But, to my knowledge, there are no words in English adapted from Thai that are in popular use.

Do you have better examples?

Thanks,

[Kilgore Trout]

Other than French, german, Latin, etc, English language also borrow words from Thai language. Farang, Tuk-tuk, Tomyum Khung are a few that I can think off.

These are NOT words borrowed from Thai language. They are Thai words that we all use because if we use their English equivalents, 99% of Thais will not understand because they don't speak English.

Thai: Farang, English: Westerner

Thai: Tuk-Tuk, English: Auto Rickshaw

Thai: Tomyum Khung, English: Hot and Sour Soup

A better example, would be if Westerners started using a Thai word like "grenjai" or "namjai" and incorporated it into the English language because there are no Western equivalents, then that would be an example. But, to my knowledge, there are no words in English adapted from Thai that are in popular use.

Do you have better examples?

Thanks,

How about "satay?" Everyone I know in Chicago knows what that is. Now you might counter that it is a bastardization of "steak," but my reply would be that most Westerners who use that word have no idea and think it is real Thai.

[xthAi76s]

Other than French, german, Latin, etc, English language also borrow words from Thai language. Farang, Tuk-tuk, Tomyum Khung are a few that I can think off.

These are NOT words borrowed from Thai language. They are Thai words that we all use because if we use their English equivalents, 99% of Thais will not understand because they don't speak English.

Thai: Farang, English: Westerner

Thai: Tuk-Tuk, English: Auto Rickshaw

Thai: Tomyum Khung, English: Hot and Sour Soup

A better example, would be if Westerners started using a Thai word like "grenjai" or "namjai" and incorporated it into the English language because there are no Western equivalents, then that would be an example. But, to my knowledge, there are no words in English adapted from Thai that are in popular use.

Do you have better examples?

Thanks,

How about "satay?" Everyone I know in Chicago knows what that is. Now you might counter that it is a bastardization of "steak," but my reply would be that most Westerners who use that word have no idea and think it is real Thai.

Do you mean:

Satay: which is claimed to be Indonesian in origin

** From Wikipedia **

"Although both Thailand and Malaysia claim it as their own, its Southeast Asian origin was in Java, Indonesia. There satay was developed from the Indian kebab brought by the Muslim traders. Even India cannot claim its origin, for there it was a legacy of Middle Eastern influence.

— Jennifer Brennan (1988).

^[4]"

or

Sauté: which is French

?

[Kilgore Trout]

Other than French, german, Latin, etc, English language also borrow words from Thai language. Farang, Tuk-tuk, Tomyum Khung are a few that I can think off.

These are NOT words borrowed from Thai language. They are Thai words that we all use because if we use their English equivalents, 99% of Thais will not understand because they don't speak English.

Thai: Farang, English: Westerner

Thai: Tuk-Tuk, English: Auto Rickshaw

Thai: Tomyum Khung, English: Hot and Sour Soup

A better example, would be if Westerners started using a Thai word like "grenjai" or "namjai" and incorporated it into the English language because there are no Western equivalents, then that would be an example. But, to my knowledge, there are no words in English adapted from Thai that are in popular use.

Do you have better examples?

Thanks,

How about "satay?" Everyone I know in Chicago knows what that is. Now you might counter that it is a bastardization of "steak," but my reply would be that most Westerners who use that word have no idea and think it is real Thai.

Do you mean:

Satay: which is claimed to be Indonesian in origin

** From Wikipedia **

"Although both Thailand and Malaysia claim it as their own, its Southeast Asian origin was in Java, Indonesia. There satay was developed from the Indian kebab brought by the Muslim traders. Even India cannot claim its origin, for there it was a legacy of Middle Eastern influence.

— Jennifer Brennan (1988).

^[4]"

or

Sauté: which is French

?

Well, with respect to Ms. Brennan (whoever the heck that is) and this obviously valid academic source; most people I know in the west associate satay with Thailand; probably because there is a Thai restaurant on every street selling it and Indonesian restaurants are virtually non-existent.

And if, as the article says, Thailand lays claim to it then I think my point has been made.

[binjalin]

To cut through all this thread 'noise' IF they are serious about spreading English why the heck don't they relax the visa restrictions and allow voluntary teaching?

Or do they really believe Thais can teach English? I have a TEFAL Diploma going to waste and I'd happily teach a few hours a week (free) but I can't because of the arcane law.

[Hardie]

Why not just flood the country with English speakers? That'd be easier... oh wait, that IS what's happening, isn't it? Thailand can be a little Persian Gulf in the South Pacific, generic mindless consumers with no culture left, only a manufactured history to remind them of it...perfect.

[VoterPower]

Great idea about thai students learning the international language, English.

But I mean all thai students, not just Bangkok schools.

Can you just imagine how a command of English, coupled with technological skills, will progress no end the advancement of the essarn youngsters into the wider thai society.

The future is bright, its almost Orange

[roamer]

The Thai language lacks precision, in fact where this is needed they often borrow English words, but with a Thai accent.

Except in simple matters Thais often cannot seem to understand each other, "say again" is probably one of the most common responses in a Thai conversation.

English has multiple redundancy in its usage; inverted, upside down, head over heels, arse over tit, topsy turvy, turned over, flipped, are all related concepts yet with subtle differences, try to explain this to a Thai

As others have already said, before Thais can learn a second language they need to sort their own out first. Particularly their abominable script.

This has not been my experience, as a native English speaker who has learned to speak, read and write Thai. Thai is as precise as English. Its script is actually much more precise than the English use of the Roman script. As you pointed out, it lacks much of the grammatical redundancy of English (and other inflected languages). The same could be said about Chinese. That's not the same as being imprecise.

Also, there are formal versions of most of the English loan words that you are referring to. They are usually borrowed from Sanskrit, Pali or Khmer, much the way English has borrowed from French, Latin and Greek for most of its higher vocabulary. All languages that borrow words from other languages impose their phonetics on the loan words, including English. Most of the foreign words that English has borrowed are pronounced using English phonetics (for example, the final "i" in the word "alumni" is not pronounced like the English word "eye" in its original Latin pronunciation; it is pronounced closer to "a-loom-nee"). Even a word like rendezvous, which we attempt to pronounce faithfully to its French origin, is not pronounced by English speakers exactly the way the French would say it.

The issue you are referring to is most likely due to several factors, the biggest of which are the very large grammatical and phonetic differences between Thai and English, combined with the fact that most Thais don't have many opportunities to practice speaking English with fluent speakers.

Consider the way many Western expats butcher the Thai language (some of whom have been living in Thailand for many years) when they are forced to try to communicate in Thai.

EDIT -- I see that by "redundancy" you were actually not referring to grammatical redundancy, which would have actually been a very insightful observation. But alas, you were making the bold statement that Thai lacks folksy idioms for expressing thoughts in subtly different ways. You are sorely mistaken! Just because the expression "arse over tit" wouldn't translate well into Thai doesn't mean that they don't have plenty of expressions for similar concepts, most of which wouldn't translate well into English. They are different languages. Unless you are fluent in both, of course you will be biased towards your mother tongue.

This is an interesting reply. I don't know enough about linguistics to feel confidently one way or the other about the precision or lack-thereof of Thai (as compared to English), but I do find it fascinating.

Can you tell me if you can agree that we can work from a framework that all languages are not equally suited to all tasks? If so, then we can at least move beyond language equality. I will argue (for the sake of intelligent discussion) that perhaps Thai is not as well suited to efficient precision of meaning construction in a wide range of academic topics as is English.

Having said that, what drives a language to adopt words to express more complex thought? I would suspect that the happenings in a particular culture play a large part in driving this process. Is it possible that since there have not been huge modern academic/philosophical/scientific/humanitarian movements in Thai culture Thai language has not really had a need to many vocabularies or other language structures to describe increasingly complex meaning? I mean absolutely no disrespect here, but if you had a nation comprised overwhelmingly of simple laborers and an educational system that did not encourage individual thought (if you do agree with this, of course), would the average person be interested/capable of discussing/understanding complex topics?

Like another poster, I have witnessed Thais, both educated (post graduate) and not so educated, speaking Thai and often having difficulty developing meaning easily. It's almost more like they are helping each other to develop the meaning of what they are saying. It's hard to explain... But, and I'm getting some of this from my wife as my Thai ability is almost nil, it's almost as though they are very painfully slowly developing the meaning by talking around things, describing things with ever more words giving each time to take in the meaning as it would seem that much of the meaning involves context. To me, a language that involves building context all the time is possibly not as efficient as one which either does not need context or can squeeze more meaning into words that quickly express complex or contextual meaning...

Anyway, language is such a complex topic.

I always thought it was interesting the way meaning is created with some words in Thai

drinking water - naam plao

fish sauce - naam plaa -- literally: fish water

flood waters - naam tooum -- literally: water everywhere, or too much water

ice - naam kairng

I'm not saying every native English speaker has such an extensive vocabulary, the average tabloid reader gets along with about 20,000 words, the Times educational supplement uses about 200,000.

Apart from artificial languages and computer languages, no language is rational (in the sense that it can be defined by a set of standard rules). There are always anomalous constructs, irregular verbs and nouns, etc. One advantage of English is that one can usually transgress these rules and still be understood, at worst one may sound a little quaint. In Thai, get one inflection wrong and the Thai listener is baffled.

I think many of us will be surprised to discover that the average tabloid reader "gets along" with 20,000 words. Your also missing the point by complicating it, 2000 words cover 95% of spoken English conversation, that, is what we are talking about.

As for " In Thai, get one inflection wrong and the Thai listener is baffled." . completely untrue. If you check out the Thai language forum you will see many people find they are able to get along more than adequately with less than 500 words and far less than perfect intonation. Expand that to a 2000 word vocabulary and you will find you can get around almost any situation where "your inflection leaves the Thai listener baffled". Sad that you want to perpetuate the myth that it is so difficult to get by in Thai.

Edited December 27, 2011 by roamer

[Daewoo]

I think many posters are getting tied up in their own vision of what English speaking means and why it is required.

Australia, especially Sydney, is extremely multicultural (for better or for worse)... in my 20 year career, very few of my colleagues have been, like me, native English (only) speaking... Many of them would struggle to put together a formal statement, or correspond with a customer in what I would consider appropriate language. In most companies, that would probably preclude them from highest levels of management (C level), but not from senior management, or well paying roles. So passable English, but not perfect English is all that is really required to enable someone to enter and sustain a fulfilling career.

My current company (for only a few more weeks, thanks be to Buddha) is Chinese. It is probably the largest Chinese multinational, and chooses from the top percent of university graduates each year. Here in Australia, 95% of the staff are Chinese on dodgy visas. Whilst obviously well qualified in the Chinese system, near enough to not a single one of them can speak, read, or write in passable English. This does not prevent The Company from putting them in front of CEOs, CxOs, Senior Management of massive companies, because within The Company, their ability to communicate is secondary to their ability to understand the company message and processes (and their ability to be controlled and exploited by The Company). So it would appear that not even passable English skills are core to being able to succeed in business in an English speaking country.

I have met quite a number of (educated) Thais who have taught themselves English, or learnt through short courses for University. Sure their gramma is usually pretty average, and sometimes it takes a bit of work to understand some more abstract concepts. Phone conversations (which exclude non-verbal communications) are difficult, but I do not see their level of English dramatically reducing their employability.

Further, with 70 million people, Thailand has a massive domestic market, that will always be addressed in Thai, and the workforce has limited exposure to foreigners. Tourism is only 6% of GDP, and even then, not all of those people are ‘customer facing’ and require good English skills.

Last point. My brother is a highly educated medical professional, and speaks much closer to ‘The Queen’s English’ than my less educated, bogan, Aussie drawl… He lives in Hong Kong, and The Chinese and Filipino staff find him more difficult to understand than the accent rich speech of his colleague from County Cork in Ireland… which English will we teach the Thai’s???

Cheers,

Daewoo

[roamer]

Great idea about thai students learning the international language, English.

But I mean all thai students, not just Bangkok schools.

Can you just imagine how a command of English, coupled with technological skills, will progress no end the advancement of the essarn youngsters into the wider thai society.

The future is bright, its almost Orange

I admire your optimism, just wish the future for these kids was that bright. My stepdaughter was one of them, came to England at 8, now 16 and happily studying for "A" levels with hopes of getting into Veterinary College. The peer group she left behind have little prospect of escaping the culture that leaves them stranded, some bright kids there going nowhere.

The type of culture that leaves my daughter unable to go into her forner village school and unable to help out with English lessons, no work permit problem here. Could you get a better teacher ? Native Thai & Khmer speaker from the village, known to all the kids and of an age they can relate to,and communicate with. Forget it, not allowed anywhere near. Funnily enough, they are happy enough to let the occasional farang in to talk with the kids...the fact that his native language could be German, his history unknown, that matters not.

Can you see what I'm getting at ?

Btw. We don't take defeat lying down, six weeks every year the house is crowded with kids who now speak better English than their teacher (not difficult) and there are Skype lessons every week. Shouldn't have to be this uphill battle though.

Edited December 28, 2011 by roamer

[VoterPower]

Yes Roamer, no justice.

However, look what happened in America with the obama model

It can happen, the essarn folk have seen whats on the other side.

Maybe one day your girl will be back there amongst it.

[Hardie]

Yes Roamer, no justice.

However, look what happened in America with the obama model

It can happen, the essarn folk have seen whats on the other side.

Maybe one day your girl will be back there amongst it.

What "Obama model?" I've never heard the term used before.

[xthAi76s]

I think many posters are getting tied up in their own vision of what English speaking means and why it is required.

Australia, especially Sydney, is extremely multicultural (for better or for worse)... in my 20 year career, very few of my colleagues have been, like me, native English (only) speaking... Many of them would struggle to put together a formal statement, or correspond with a customer in what I would consider appropriate language. In most companies, that would probably preclude them from highest levels of management (C level), but not from senior management, or well paying roles. So passable English, but not perfect English is all that is really required to enable someone to enter and sustain a fulfilling career.

My current company (for only a few more weeks, thanks be to Buddha) is Chinese. It is probably the largest Chinese multinational, and chooses from the top percent of university graduates each year. Here in Australia, 95% of the staff are Chinese on dodgy visas. Whilst obviously well qualified in the Chinese system, near enough to not a single one of them can speak, read, or write in passable English. This does not prevent The Company from putting them in front of CEOs, CxOs, Senior Management of massive companies, because within The Company, their ability to communicate is secondary to their ability to understand the company message and processes (and their ability to be controlled and exploited by The Company). So it would appear that not even passable English skills are core to being able to succeed in business in an English speaking country.

I have met quite a number of (educated) Thais who have taught themselves English, or learnt through short courses for University. Sure their gramma is usually pretty average, and sometimes it takes a bit of work to understand some more abstract concepts. Phone conversations (which exclude non-verbal communications) are difficult, but I do not see their level of English dramatically reducing their employability.

Further, with 70 million people, Thailand has a massive domestic market, that will always be addressed in Thai, and the workforce has limited exposure to foreigners. Tourism is only 6% of GDP, and even then, not all of those people are ‘customer facing’ and require good English skills.

Last point. My brother is a highly educated medical professional, and speaks much closer to ‘The Queen’s English’ than my less educated, bogan, Aussie drawl… He lives in Hong Kong, and The Chinese and Filipino staff find him more difficult to understand than the accent rich speech of his colleague from County Cork in Ireland… which English will we teach the Thai’s???

Cheers,

Daewoo

I agree that their English language ability need not be perfect. Of course, there's no good reason not to strive for perfection.

The multinational scene in Thailand is not too terribly developed although it is getting better. I think that other than for what are essentially sales roles to the Thai local market, multinationals probably often find it difficult to find suitable Thai employees at various levels of the corp, so I think the number 1 benefit of English language ability will not immediately be new job prospects. I think the biggest immediate benefit will be a nation of young people who now have a completely new world of information and knowledge opened to them. It will augment their education in ways the Thai state cannot simply hope to accomplish in the near future.

Oh, we shall teach them the most appropriate English -- American English. The English of the most companies and most people. Not that Southern stuff but more like New Hampshire English.