ตอน And เมื่อ To Talk About The Past

[withnail]

I looked something up in my Thai grammar book and have become quite confused. It explains that if you want to use the conjunction 'when' you can say ตอน or เมื่อ. For example:

ผมมาตอนเขาไม่อยู่

pŏm maa dton kăo mâi yòo

I came when he wasn't here

ฉันแต่งงานเมื่อฉันอายุยี่สิบ

chăn dtàeng ngaan mêua chăn aa-yóo yê̂e sìp

I got married when I was twenty

There were more examples but basically I asked a Thai teacher at work whether the two words were interchangeable and she said that if in the second example you changed เมื่อ to ตอน that would be OK but that you couldn't change ตอน to เมื่อ in the first example because it wouldn't make sense. This question was passed on to another teacher (and several students) yet nobody could give me an answer as to why this was the case or what the difference in meaning was between the two words.

Any takers?

Withnail

P.S. I'd love to see the looks on their faces if a farang answers this

[HarryHerb]

Just hazarding here, but my understanding of the 2 words is that dton as a noun refers to a period of time (over several hours, days, years, possibly with vague boundaries) e.g. dton dek (childhood), or dton bai (early afternoon). It can also be used as a conjunction to describe a period when - e.g. when I was a child, or, in the first example, '[the time] when he wasn't here'.

Meua seems to be more specific, refering to a particular moment in time, which can often (e.g. when referring to age, as in the second example) be replaced by dton, but not vice versa.

So maybe in the first example using 'meua' would suggest you came at the very second he had popped out, which sounds strange?

Of course, I could be completely wrong... Also, yes, it's a farang explanation, so your teachers may well laugh their heads off!!

[withnail]

It's the best one I've had so far so thanks anyway, even if you are wrong

[HarryHerb]

It's the best one I've had so far so thanks anyway, even if you are wrong

It's the only one you've had so far! Best to wait until the 'big guns' can confirm, I think. I'm kind of curious myself now...

[withnail]

I was counting all the ไม่รู้เหมือนกัน s I got earlier today

[HarryHerb]

I was counting all the ไม่รู้เหมือนกัน s I got earlier today

Ah, yes. Part of the ไม่มี ไม่รู้ ไม่ได้ trilogy of standard responses. Still, I hope someone will be able to confirm in the morning.

[withnail]

OK one of the students at my school who's been trying really hard to help me with this asked a Thai teacher today and this was the explanation that he gave her

อาจารย์ไทยบอกว่า เมื่อ ใช้บอกระยะเวลาไม่เจาะจง

และยาวกว่า

แต่ตอน ใช้เมื่อ บอกระยะเวลาที่เจาะจงกว่า

อาจารย์บอกว่า ตอนเช้า จะบอกว่า เจาะจงกว่า ว่า ตอนเช้าจริงๆ

แต่ เมื่อ เช้า จะบอกว่า ในช่วงเวลาที่ยังเช้าอยู่

Could somebody please comment on this for me please.

withnail

[siamesekitty]

ไม่รู้เหมือนกัน

OK one of the students at my school who's been trying really hard to help me with this asked a Thai teacher today and this was the explanation that he gave her

อาจารย์ไทยบอกว่า เมื่อ ใช้บอกระยะเวลาไม่เจาะจง

และยาวกว่า

แต่ตอน ใช้เมื่อ บอกระยะเวลาที่เจาะจงกว่า

อาจารย์บอกว่า ตอนเช้า จะบอกว่า เจาะจงกว่า ว่า ตอนเช้าจริงๆ

แต่ เมื่อ เช้า จะบอกว่า ในช่วงเวลาที่ยังเช้าอยู่

Could somebody please comment on this for me please.

withnail

So, the teacher's saying that "เมื่อ is used to refer to an unspecified period of time, and is used for longer periods. ตอน is used for definite time periods.

ตอนเช้า is more specific, referring to only in the morning, while เมื่อเช้า is referring to the period of time that is still morning." (Didn't quite get that last bit myself )

Seems to contradict Harry Herb's explanation though , which I had thought to be pretty good, however I haven't had a chance to really think over it yet.

My own attempt at this, which I was thinking about upon reading the OP and before reading the replies, would be that while both mean "when", ตอน might be translated as "at that time", and เมื่อ as "when that time came".

So,

ผมมาตอนเขาไม่อยู่

pŏm maa dton kăo mâi yòo

I came when he wasn't here

I came during the time that he wasn't there.

ฉันแต่งงานเมื่อฉันอายุยี่สิบ

chăn dtàeng ngaan mêua chăn aa-yóo yê̂e sìp

I got married when I was twenty

I got married when I became twenty. (Not literally, as in on her birthday, but as in from all the years of her life, the year she turned twenty was when she got married.)

Again, I'm not a linguist, just using my "feel" in explaining the language, so I may be wrong on some technical aspects

Edited January 22, 2006 by siamesekitty

[sabaijai]

OK one of the students at my school who's been trying really hard to help me with this asked a Thai teacher today and this was the explanation that he gave her

อาจารย์ไทยบอกว่า เมื่อ ใช้บอกระยะเวลาไม่เจาะจง

และยาวกว่า

แต่ตอน ใช้เมื่อ บอกระยะเวลาที่เจาะจงกว่า

อาจารย์บอกว่า ตอนเช้า จะบอกว่า เจาะจงกว่า ว่า ตอนเช้าจริงๆ

แต่ เมื่อ เช้า จะบอกว่า ในช่วงเวลาที่ยังเช้าอยู่

Could somebody please comment on this for me please.

withnail

"The Thai teacher says meua is used to express (tell) a time that is unclarified/undetermined [ไม่เจาะจง] and longer, but tawn [my preferred translit ] is used when speaking of a more clarified/determined time [ระยะเวลาที่เจาะจงกว่า]. The teacher says tawn chao [morning] tells us it's (a) more clarified/determined (time), that is actual morning, while meua chao is spoken when it's still morning."

The teacher's general explanation makes sense, but the example the teacher used strikes me as a little odd. I would say meua chao means 'this morning', which is after all a very defined time period, while tawn chao is a general reference to morning time. You also hear them together, as in meua tawn chao which as far as I know means the same as meua chao yet would be more specific/clarified/defined than tawn chao alone.

When combined with thee/ที่, as in ตอนที่, tawn carries the meaning 'while'. You can see the use of ตอน in your first example as 'while', i.e., "I came while he wasn't here." In this case the ที่ is understood.

Harry's explanation seems clearer to me but I think I see what the teacher is getting at too. Two ways of saying the same thing, I suppose.

[HarryHerb]

My interpretation is that the teacher is explaining a different usage from the one you want!

i.e. when to use 'meua' and when to use 'dton / tawn' to describe a period of time - and that makes perfect sense. In this case, 'meua' is used when the period described is unspecified (ไม่เจาะจง) and longer (ยาวกว่า) eg meua wan nii (yesterday), meua chao (this morning, unspecified). Whereas dton / tawn is used to describe a fixed period of time that is usually shorter - and can also be used to describe time in the future (prung nii tawn chao), whereas 'meua' is usually restricted to the present or past.

But this doesn't really answer your original question, which was about using dton / meua as conjunctions, so maybe you should ask again - good luck!!!!

p.s. apologies for mix of transliteration and thai script, feeling lazy today.

[sabaijai]

Yes when using these as transitionals/conjunctions (whatever you want to call it), then meua is 'when' and tawn/dton is 'while'.

[withnail]

งง

[bannork]

compare: I arrived when he was cooking dinner.

I arrived while he was cooking dinner.

The second example places more emphasis on the action taking place at the time I arrived- he was cooking dinner; it's more specific, ตอน, but it could finish anytime; whilst in the first example he could have been cooking at that time every night, it doesn't emphasize that he was cooking particularly at the moment I arrived, it just happened to be the moment I arrived-เมื่อ

[yoot]

If we consider the meaning of each word;

ตอน – period, stage of time

เมื่อ - when, at the time, by the time that.

We might say that, one is more specific than another.

But in fact, sometimes it’s hard to say which one is more specific than another. It depends on the context and the usage.

เมื่อ is likely used in the written language and ตอน is used in spoken language when either words can be placed in the same sentence or the same meaning.

For examples;

เมื่อฉันอายุได้ 18 ปี ฉันได้ไปต่างประเทศเป็นครั้งแรก (When I was eighteen, I have been abroad for the first time.) This sentence mostly used in written language, as in an essay.

ฉันได้ไปต่างประเทศเป็นครั้งแรกตอนฉันอายุ 18 ปี (I have been abroad for the first time when I was eighteen). This sentence is used in spoken language as in a conversation or written in diary or letter to friends.

ตอนเช้า – morning time. It means any morning time.

- ฉันชอบออกกำลังกายตอนเช้า (I like doing exercise in the morning.)

เมื่อเช้า – this morning ( the morning time of today.)

- เมื่อเช้าฉันไปออกกำลังกายมา (I went to exercise this morning.)

เมื่อเช้าวานนี้ – yesterday morning. This phrase can be used in both written language as in the news and spoken language.

เมื่อวานตอนเช้า - yesterday morning. This phrase is only used in spoken language.

Other examples;

A : คุณแต่งงานเมื่อไหร่ ( When did you get married?)

B : ฉันแต่งงานตอนฉันอายุ 20 ( I got married when I was twenty),

ฉันแต่งงานเมื่อตอนที่ฉันอายุยี่สิบ (I got married by the time that I was twenty)

A : คุณจะแต่งงานเมื่อไหร่ ( When will you marry? )

B : ฉันจะแต่งงานเมื่อฉันอายุ 20, ฉันจะแต่งงานตอนที่ฉันอายุ 20 ( I will marry when I reach the age of twenty ) – For this example, it shows that ‘เมื่อ’ not only be used in the present or past tense.