Thai To English Transliteration (Thai Names And Other Words)

[ajarnyai]

Anyone who has been in Thailand for a while knows that many of the road signs are not spelled correctly. Peoples names, including the most important man in the country, are not spelled in a way that English speaking people will pronounce them correctly. The Bangkok post makes these mistakes daily. I recently was asked to do a voice over for a presentation for my school (I teach English), and the English translation for the script leaves a lot to be desired. This translation was done by the best English speaker at the school, and for some reason, she didn't understand that if you don't spell the directors name right, I won't say it right on the voice over.

I don't blame her, I blame the Royal Institutes transliteration system. I'm sure that they've known for quite some time that it could use some fine tuning, but they seem reluctant to update it. Why? I've done seminars for the MOE at the province level and they we're very interested in learning the system I developed (although it's not complete). Even though they wanted me to teach this new system to all the English teachers in the province, they all thought I was insane when I suggested the government change it's system. I mentioned that PORN does not sound like "pawn" and what it means. I even embarrassed a few ladies whose names ended like that to stress the point. I doubt many of them will change what they teach.

With all the English speakers who currently live here, and governments current efforts to improve English for ASEAN, why wouldn't they start with basic phonetics? Why do so many Thai English teachers who know the limitations of the current system continue to use it? The woman today told me "It's the Thai style of writing in English" That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard since moving here. All I got was a blank stare when I told her that you don't romanize Thai for Thai people, you do it for English speaking people, or am I wrong?. Is the whole purpose of this system to make Thailand look like a modern international place? All style and no substance.

Has anyone ever discussed this with a teacher?

I've attached a document that discusses this in detail and here's link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Thai_General_System_of_Transcription

[DavidHouston]

The original RI document can be found here: http://www.royin.go.th/upload/246/FileUpload/416_2157.pdf

[DavidHouston]

I am a bit confused by your use of the word "transliteration". In fact, the referenced document specifically states that the Royal Institute system is employs sound transcription, rather than transliterations. The following is from the introduction to the document:

"หลักเกณฑ์การถอดอักษรไทยเป็นอักษรโรมานนี้ เป็นการถอดโดยวิธีถ่ายเสียง (Transcription) เพื่อให้อ่านคำภาษาไทยที่เขียนด้วยอักษรโรมานให้ได้เสียงใกล้เคียง โดยไม่คำนึงถึงการสะกดการันต์และวรรณยุกต์"

"These principles of rendering Thai orthography into Roman script employs the methodology of transcribing sounds (Transcription). The purpose is to pronounce Thai written in Roman script in a manner which is close to its [proper] sound. This methodology ignores some Thai spelling conventions such as letters which are marked as not being sounded out and tone marks." (my translation)

BTW, almost everyone would agree that "สุวรรณภูมิ" would not be transcribed as "Suvarnabhumi" if the Royal Institute rules were followed. 1. ว would be transcribed as "w"; 2. ภ would be "ph", not bh; and 3. the final ม would not be written with a final "i".

Do you object to the basic principle or do you object to the specific Royal Institute pronunciation decisions?

Thanks.

[ajarnyai]

I am a bit confused by your use of the word "transliteration". In fact, the referenced document specifically states that the Royal Institute system is employs sound transcription, rather than transliterations. The following is from the introduction to the document:

"หลักเกณฑ์การถอดอักษรไทยเป็นอักษรโรมานนี้ เป็นการถอดโดยวิธีถ่ายเสียง (Transcription) เพื่อให้อ่านคำภาษาไทยที่เขียนด้วยอักษรโรมานให้ได้เสียงใกล้เคียง โดยไม่คำนึงถึงการสะกดการันต์และวรรณยุกต์"

"These principles of rendering Thai orthography into Roman script employs the methodology of transcribing sounds (Transcription). The purpose is to pronounce Thai written in Roman script in a manner which is close to its [proper] sound. This methodology ignores some Thai spelling conventions such as letters which are marked as not being sounded out and tone marks." (my translation)

BTW, almost everyone would agree that "สุวรรณภูมิ" would not be transcribed as "Suvarnabhumi" if the Royal Institute rules were followed. 1. ว would be transcribed as "w"; 2. ภ would be "ph", not bh; and 3. the final ม would not be written with a final "i".

Do you object to the basic principle or do you object to the specific Royal Institute pronunciation decisions?

Thanks.

From Wiki...

Transliteration is a subset of the science of hermeneutics. It is a form of translation, and is the practice of converting a text from one script into another.^[1] For instance, the Greek expression "Ελληνική Δημοκρατία" (meaning "Hellenic Republic") can be transliterated as "Hellēnikē Dēmokratia" by substituting Latin letters for Greek letters. However, "Ελληνική Δημοκρατία" should be transliterated as "Ellēnikē Dēmokratia" without the letter 'h', which is found only in the English rendition of the name, the common equivalent of Greece since: Ελλας → Ellas → Hellas (in English renderings). By modern pronunciation rules, the phrase could be written "Ellinikí Dimokratía".

Transliteration can form an essential part of transcription which converts text from one writing system into another. Transliteration is not concerned with representing the phonemics of the original: it only strives to represent the characters accurately.

I should probably say transcription...... Anyway to answer your question,

I think that "ภ" should be transcribed a "P" like all the other characters that sound like p. Using "PH" is bad cause it always sounds like "F" or "ฟ"

"ด" and "ต" both sound like "D". Using a "T" for "ต" and "ท" cannot be right.

I understand that "ป" "บ" sound different in Thai, but "ป" doesn't sound like P.

"ถ" written as TH is the worst. Is it "Tailand" "Tieland" or "Thighland"

I think they want to differentiate the characters that sound the same, but have different tones. It's like they didn't notice that they are changing the sounds.

I say group the 4 K sounds together, the 4 D's, the 4 S sounds etc. Vowels are trickier, so I can complain too much, but consonants are pretty firm in their pronunciation .

I can understand that mistakes were made a long time ago when this first started, but Thailand has access to professional linguists now, and me who is not. If I can see what they're doing is ineffective with my limited knowledge of Thai, then the experts at RI should be able to see it too. Bangkok Post does nothing, but translate Thai to English everyday, yet they continue to spell things using this flawed system.

It bothers me so much, because my students can't spell, have horrible accents, and when I get on bus, no one can understand where I want to go. It's not my fault you spelled the sign wrong. I can read Thai, but they usually use one or the other not side by side like they do in Japan.

[Peppy]

...you don't romanize Thai for Thai people, you do it for English speaking people, or am I wrong?

Ask yourself: is English the only language in the world written with a Roman-based alphabet?

[Richard W]

I mentioned that PORN does not sound like "pawn"

It does if you speak the Queen's English.

The '-orn' also works quite well when it is used for words ending -ร.

Well, how have you solved the problem? Even if you're only going for a transcription, you need to solve บ v. ป v. พ. The solutions on offer b v. p v. ph (as used 1) in India, 2) Classical Greek and 3) in the International Phonetic Alphabet if you're not finicky enough to go for b v. p v. pʰ), bb v. b v. p (extended pinyin) and b v. bp v. p (some textbooks). I for one am happy to go with the system the Romans and some Greeks used - b v. p. v. ph (Β Π ΠΗ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Greek_alphabet#Additional_letters).

[ajarnyai]

...you don't romanize Thai for Thai people, you do it for English speaking people, or am I wrong?

Ask yourself: is English the only language in the world written with a Roman-based alphabet?

No, not at all, but the road signs, signs for the toilets, food package labels etc. that are not written in Thai are written in English. In schools, the required foreign that uses the Roman alphabet is English. I pretty sure it's for English speaking people.

[Parvis]

...you don't romanize Thai for Thai people, you do it for English speaking people, or am I wrong?

Ask yourself: is English the only language in the world written with a Roman-based alphabet?

No, not at all, but the road signs, signs for the toilets, food package labels etc. that are not written in Thai are written in English. In schools, the required foreign that uses the Roman alphabet is English. I pretty sure it's for English speaking people.

The difference in pronounciation of specific letters (and therefore words) in most languages using the "Roman Alphabet" is close enough to be mutualy understood "phonetically (auditory phonetics)". Whether you are English, German, Spanish etc. etc. etc. - the words "Inglaterra - Deutschland - Italia - Espana - Los Estados Unidos" etc. etc. etc. will be mutually understood (auditory phonetics) - without necessarily knowing the meaning thereof.

Therefore - to claim that romanized Thai is only directed at English speakers - I am pretty sure can only be claimed by an individual speaking only one language namely - English (and therefore have much to complain about).

Edited September 13, 2012 by Parvis

[Neeranam]

It bothers me so much, because my students can't spell, have horrible accents, and when I get on bus, no one can understand where I want to go. It's not my fault you spelled the sign wrong. I can read Thai, but they usually use one or the other not side by side like they do in Japan.

You remind me of me quite a few years ago - I learned to read Thai and thought I knew it all and said pretty much the same as you about the transliteration, especially words like Chatuchack, Kalasin, Khon Kaen etc that I still here foreigners round here saying wrongly.

In France, for example - how should they transcribe Paris for tourists? Paree? just for the benefit of English speakers.

Keep studying Thai and you'll find more answers and acceptance. All Thai buses have Thai writing, don't they? I can recall seeing some air buses in Bangkok with romanized letters but always Thai ones somewhere on the side or front.

[weary]

Anybody seen 'Ple' today?

[ajarnyai]

...you don't romanize Thai for Thai people, you do it for English speaking people, or am I wrong?

Ask yourself: is English the only language in the world written with a Roman-based alphabet?

No, not at all, but the road signs, signs for the toilets, food package labels etc. that are not written in Thai are written in English. In schools, the required foreign that uses the Roman alphabet is English. I pretty sure it's for English speaking people.

The difference in pronounciation of specific letters (and therefore words) in most languages using the "Roman Alphabet" is close enough to be mutualy understood "phonetically (auditory phonetics)". Whether you are English, German, Spanish etc. etc. etc. - the words "Inglaterra - Deutschland - Italia - Espana - Los Estados Unidos" etc. etc. etc. will be mutually understood - without necessarily knowing the meaning thereof.

Therefore - to claim that romanized Thai is only directed at English speakers - I am pretty sure can only be claimed by an individual speaking only one language namely - English (and therefore have much to complain about).

Would it make you feel better if I said romanized Thai was primarily for English speakers.

Thai will be the third language I've learned to read write and speak, which is why I'm even able to notice the issues in this system, my sarcastic friend. To say they romanized Thai with all romance languages in mind is quite ridiculous. They didn't choose to write some of the signs in French did they? The Spanish "R" and "ร" sound a lot alike, but you don't see el baño written above the mensroom do you?

There's no need for that.....

It's more likely that they didn't consider us foreigners at all when developing this system, since they choose different letters for Thai characters that sound the same (with the exception of tone). It's easy to ignore the faults if you already know what the word sounds like in Thai.

The system was revised about decade ago, and now that Thailand is joining Asean and English will be the common language, it's time to revise it again (IMHO), because like I said in the OP the reality is Thai people don't depend on romanzied Thai the English speaking foreigners do.

[Richard W]

... since they choose different letters for Thai characters that sound the same (with the exception of tone).

Can you give an example of this? The only example of character differences I am aware of outside of some Karaoke Thai is a preference for -rn over -n in words ending in ร, and that has nothing to do with tone.

The Karaoke Thai example is the preservation of ho nam, which did surprise me when I first saw it. This seems more a case of not letting characters vanish without a trace, rather than of distinguishing characters.

[ajarnyai]

... since they choose different letters for Thai characters that sound the same (with the exception of tone).

Can you give an example of this? The only example of character differences I am aware of outside of some Karaoke Thai is a preference for -rn over -n in words ending in ร, and that has nothing to do with tone.

The Karaoke Thai example is the preservation of ho nam, which did surprise me when I first saw it. This seems more a case of not letting characters vanish without a trace, rather than of distinguishing characters.

Suvarnabhumi and Phuket Nakhon Rachachasima and Korat

ภ ภ ค ค

ิี I see "I" and "ee" in my students names

things like "Karaoke Thai", advertisements, and Thai names show the most inconsistencies.

My main issue is with

ต= t

ป= p

ถ= th

ภ+ ph

and my favorite one ก= k

ต and ด sound very different in Thai so they change ต to a "t". A "d" wouldn't be a perfect sound but it would be far better than t.

try saying ด then ต then dog

English and Thai share almost all the same sounds, and a standard and more accurate transcription system would make communication easier for both Thais and foriegners.

[Parvis]

In general - sounds like the same argument that was made on different postings some time ago - belittling the efforts of the Royal Institute for its inconsistencies etc. etc. etc. - according to some selfappointed "experts".

All systems - I believe - continue to evolve - hopefully for the benefit of all of us.

One of the "notable examples" that was given in the previous thread - was the many different romanized spellings of "ดินแดง" you may encounter - while travelling along the freeways.

1) Din Daeng - correct for English

2) Din Dang - correct for American English

3) Din Deng - correct for Spanish, Italian, German (they may prefer "a with umlaut").

But in Thai "ดินแดง" will always be pronounced correctly as "ดินแดง".

Perhaps Thai should be romanized - per ajarnyai - by a system yet to be developed - for the convenience of all of us native English speakers - without any inconsistencies for us perfect native English speakers.

P.S.

Ohhh - I forgot to mention - I am not a native English speaker (but I do know how to spell foreigners correctly - ajarnyai).

Edited September 13, 2012 by Parvis

[Peppy]

The main problem with the Royal Institute's system is the lack of indicators for tone and vowel length. The system of romanization itself really isn't an issue, since whatever characters are used to represent whatever sounds are ultimately representing Thai sounds, not the sounds of any other language, and someone who wishes to read romanized Thai will still need to learn how to pronounce the sounds of the Thai language, just as they would with any other language written in the Roman alphabet.

The inconsistencies often seen in proper names are, of course, simply a result of incorrect application of the official system.

[DavidHouston]

Ajarnyai,

Would you consider using Vietnamese Romanized orthography to represent Thai? Vietnam is a member of ASEAN.

[Richard W]

... since they choose different letters for Thai characters that sound the same (with the exception of tone).

Can you give an example of this?

Suvarnabhumi and Phuket Nakhon Rachachasima and Korat

ภ ภ ค ค

They're examples of different letters for the *same* character. However, these are examples of different systems. (Actually, given some of the recent complaints about Phuket, mispronouncing the 'ph' may not be inappropriate.)

ิี I see "I" and "ee" in my students names

The 'ee' is probably best identified as part of the 'slapdash' system - write something you hope an English-speaker will understand.

I've just been reading Rama VI's comments on Romanisation, referenced from http://en.wikipedia....ization_of_Thai . His questions and advice in the final paragraph of "Notes on the proposed system for the Transliteration of Siamese words into Roman Characters" are particularly relevant.

[ajarnyai]

In conclusion, I would like to remind everyone that I started this conversation with some anecdotes, and a question. I never claimed to be a linguist or to know more about anything than anyone else. My ability to type accurately has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I can read Thai well enough and my co-workers know that, but they asked me to read romanized Thai, because I guess, they thought that would be easier for me. Unfortunately, It didn't work, thus my conclusion that the transcription system is used to link English and Thai, and is not as good as it could be. Was "flawed" to harsh? Maybe, but I think there's a link between the usage of this system and Thai student's ability to learn English. So, a little fine tuning would be in order. A lot of effort is used to teach and use English here, so make it (RTGS) complete by starting with a phonetic transcription system that is more accurate.

What was the motivation for romanizing the Thai language? I don't know, but it appears that foreigners are only meant to recognize Thai words, without regard to pronunciation. I guess that's good enough for most people, and only a language buff like myself would be concerned with such trivialities.

Thanks Peppy and Richard W. your last comments and links have cleared things up for me.

Edited September 17, 2012 by ajarnyai

[meadish_sweetball]

Maybe, but I think there's a link between the usage of this system and Thai student's ability to learn English.

More like the other way around. The fact that Thais use a pronunciation helper script based on Thai letters is a big invitation to Thai-ify their English pronunciation.

The vast majority of Thais pay no attention to the RI system of transcription: it is not taught at schools, and if it is taught to government officials (which I do not know, but doubt, given the inconsistencies in signage even within Bangkok, not to mention the provinces) then the teachers have not been successful.

[Richard W]

A lot of effort is used to teach and use English here, so make it (RTGS) complete by starting with a phonetic transcription system that is more accurate.

We tried using a phonetic extension of RTGS on this forum when it was new. We chose RTGS as the basis because everyone should be familiar with it; it is the official scheme for maps. The result has been a complete failure, and I suspect most who post transliterated Thai do not understand this phonetic completion.

An indicator of how it has fallen by the wayside is that Meadish has just transcribed ผงชูรส 'MSG' as 'pong[R] choo[M] rot[H]', when the scheme would have used '[R]phong [M]chuu [H]rot'. It tempts me to just render as phaṅjūrasa and mock the incomprehension. Fortunately, a combination of Thai script and unidentified transcription almost always serve to convey the pronunciation. Or perhaps not fortunately - may be this is why there is no common transcription on this forum.

[Peppy]

...I think there's a link between the usage of this system and Thai student's ability to learn English. So, a little fine tuning would be in order. A lot of effort is used to teach and use English here, so make it (RTGS) complete by starting with a phonetic transcription system that is more accurate.

I think you're confusing "language" and "writing system" here. In order to make use of a language's writing system, you need to know the sounds of the language and how they correspond to the writing system for that language. Whatever characters are used to write Thai, whether they're Thai, Roman, Devanagari, or Cyrillic, they're representing the sounds of Thai, and you need to learn those in order to speak Thai in a way that other speakers of that language can understand. Likewise, if you're teaching English, you need to teach your students how to pronounce the sounds of English, and how those sounds correspond to the language's writing system. (Blendphonics.org has some excellent, free material for doing this, though it's intended for native speakers, so you'll need to adapt it a little to suit your students.)

[meadish_sweetball]

We tried using a phonetic extension of RTGS on this forum when it was new. We chose RTGS as the basis because everyone should be familiar with it; it is the official scheme for maps. The result has been a complete failure, and I suspect most who post transliterated Thai do not understand this phonetic completion.

An indicator of how it has fallen by the wayside is that Meadish has just transcribed ผงชูรส 'MSG' as 'pong[R] choo[M] rot[H]', when the scheme would have used '[R]phong [M]chuu [H]rot'. It tempts me to just render as phaṅjūrasa and mock the incomprehension. Fortunately, a combination of Thai script and unidentified transcription almost always serve to convey the pronunciation. Or perhaps not fortunately - may be this is why there is no common transcription on this forum.

I've resigned to the fact that most people who comment on the site appear to be native English speakers who are unhappy with any type of transcription that does not follow English conventions (as they interpret them). There is no ideal solution for the aspirated/unaspirated distinction. Use 'ph vs. p', and the unsuspecting pronounce 'ph' as 'f'. Use 'p vs. bp' and people scratch their heads at how to pronounce 'bp'. Whatever system you apply, somebody will complain...

[Richard W]

Ajanyai has noted that the debate between final <d> and <b> or final <t> and <p> goes back a long way. For a pure transcription, it does not matter much which is chosen, and as the RTGS has opted for <t> and <p>, I think it better to stick with the decision.

I noticed that all the schemes discussed by Rama VI had <t> for ต and <th> for ถ syllable-initially.

For transliteration, there seems little point in different conventions for initial and final consonants. However, there is then the vexed issue that 5 into 4 doesn't go. If you are happy to use separate schemes for regular Indic loans on one hand and native on the other, then you could go phonetic on native words, but there are enough hybrids to make that an unhappy compromise.

For transliteration of consonants, there are really only two ways to go. One can use the Indian values of the consonants (better Jonesian than Hunterian in my mind), or the Thai values. If one uses the Thai values, one winds up with something similar to ISO 11940 Part 1. (I'm afraid ISO 11940 Part 1 strikes me as something knocked up on a wet afternoon.) The number of different diacritics used could be reduced by tricks such as <gh jh ḍh dh bh> for ฆฌฒธภ. One problem with the Thai values is that they are not convenient for transliterating ancient texts, where one may potentially encounter a mix of Thai, Khmer, Sanskrit and Pali.

With Indian values, the method that does least violence is to write ฎดบ as <ṭ t p> or <ḍ d b> with some diacritic. With the former set, one gets back to the corresponding Indian letter if one ignores the unfamiliar diacritic. (Cambodian speech habits generated initial ดบ from Initial ตป​ in Indic loanwords, e.g. บุตร 'child' from Sanskrit ปุตร /putra/ 'son'.) Griswold appears to cite Rama VI as advocating <ṭ t p> plus diacritic , but that comes from Petithuguenin's 1912 paper, the one which the king wrote that he had not reviewed.

[ajarnyai]

We tried using a phonetic extension of RTGS on this forum when it was new. We chose RTGS as the basis because everyone should be familiar with it; it is the official scheme for maps. The result has been a complete failure, and I suspect most who post transliterated Thai do not understand this phonetic completion.

An indicator of how it has fallen by the wayside is that Meadish has just transcribed ผงชูรส 'MSG' as 'pong[R] choo[M] rot[H]', when the scheme would have used '[R]phong [M]chuu [H]rot'. It tempts me to just render as phaṅjūrasa and mock the incomprehension. Fortunately, a combination of Thai script and unidentified transcription almost always serve to convey the pronunciation. Or perhaps not fortunately - may be this is why there is no common transcription on this forum.

I've resigned to the fact that most people who comment on the site appear to be native English speakers who are unhappy with any type of transcription that does not follow English conventions (as they interpret them). There is no ideal solution for the aspirated/unaspirated distinction. Use 'ph vs. p', and the unsuspecting pronounce 'ph' as 'f'. Use 'p vs. bp' and people scratch their heads at how to pronounce 'bp'. Whatever system you apply, somebody will complain...

I know it's not going to be perfect, but..

If you haven't done so already please read

"Notes on the proposed system for the Transliteration of Siamese words into Roman Characters

In paragraph 1 and 2 the words, English and Cockney are mentioned a number of times. I won't speculate here about who he was talking to or who the committee members were, but I've always believed that the (RTGS) in whatever form is being used compares Thai and English, due to how many sounds are shared between the two and and the choice of characters used. I'll say again that I'm not talking about vowels so much as consonants.

Shortly after the beginning of page [32} there was mention of the letters "T", "D" and "P", "B" . Those comments remind me of how I felt about the current use of those characters. How the committee decided on the system after reading his comments is beyond my imagination, but even from the beginning someone ( not a NATIVE English speaker), but someone who just understands the language, noticed some problems....

What gained from the letter is that even though the RTGS uses English phonology at times.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Thai

It's merely an attempt the change the character set for easier recognition. They want to convert the text like a code and phonetics are almost irrelevant. I can understand why preserving a tradition was chosen over better communication., especially 100 years ago.

The Thais don't notice a link between RTGS and how foreigners pronounce words because they assume we won't be able to speak Thai well anyway.

I maintain that communication would be easier with a few changes, if you assume that the reader is going to use speak these words at some point in there stay here.

[meadish_sweetball]

It's merely an attempt the change the character set for easier recognition. They want to convert the text like a code and phonetics are almost irrelevant

To use an analogy: That's what you get when backwards compatibility (in this case, back to Indic) is deemed more important than the applicability of the system to the most frequent users.

I have nothing against a system that attempts to do this per se; it's just that as everyone can see, it does not work well at all to facilitate communication between your average foreigner and your average Thai.

This issue has been discussed so many times I can not muster up any enthusiasm for the matter. The best advice for those who read this forum in order to learn how to communicate better with Thais, is to bite the bullet and learn Thai script as soon as you can, unless this criterion applies to you:

1 - You are already familiar with IPA from having studied linguistics or a foreign language - in this case, learning the Mary Haas or AUA systems will be relatively easy, and is likely to speed up your initial learning process. (This was true for me).

2 - If you do not know what IPA is, or if Thai is the first foreign language you attempt to learn - go straight to Thai script and learn it well - then you can use Thai-Thai dictionaries for pronunciation advice instead of an IPA-based system.

3 - Speaking rudimentary Thai with a marked foreign accent is all you hope to achieve.

All other transcription systems, to my mind, are next to useless. They are not widely spread, so they will at best just serve as a crutch until you've mastered Thai script. That crutch is probably best applied in the form of a system as close to your native language as possible, unless criterion 1 applies to you.

[ajarnyai]

Maybe, but I think there's a link between the usage of this system and Thai student's ability to learn English.

More like the other way around. The fact that Thais use a pronunciation helper script based on Thai letters is a big invitation to Thai-ify their English pronunciation.

The vast majority of Thais pay no attention to the RI system of transcription: it is not taught at schools, and if it is taught to government officials (which I do not know, but doubt, given the inconsistencies in signage even within Bangkok, not to mention the provinces) then the teachers have not been successful.

When the sounds match, that helper can help a lot, the problem is they substitute Thai sounds for ones they don't have. Like V, Z, R and some U sounds. I noticed this when I first started doing my phonics seminars with teachers. I discussed the techniques they used while I shared some of mine. This is why I think there can be better system to match up the sounds of Thai and English and make students aware that "R" and "ร" do not sound the same. Maybe a discussion of the system is all that would be required. I don't know.......

...I think there's a link between the usage of this system and Thai student's ability to learn English. So, a little fine tuning would be in order. A lot of effort is used to teach and use English here, so make it (RTGS) complete by starting with a phonetic transcription system that is more accurate.

I think you're confusing "language" and "writing system" here. In order to make use of a language's writing system, you need to know the sounds of the language and how they correspond to the writing system for that language. Whatever characters are used to write Thai, whether they're Thai, Roman, Devanagari, or Cyrillic, they're representing the sounds of Thai, and you need to learn those in order to speak Thai in a way that other speakers of that language can understand. Likewise, if you're teaching English, you need to teach your students how to pronounce the sounds of English, and how those sounds correspond to the language's writing system. (Blendphonics.org has some excellent, free material for doing this, though it's intended for native speakers, so you'll need to adapt it a little to suit your students.)

Many Thais use the system at some point, whether they look at the chart or they convert some text based on what they remember from signs and maps. Thai students are taught to spell their names using roman characters during their English classes. It's in this context that I think more thought can be put into how the reader would pronounce these words. Imagine teaching a class about the royal family, and mispronouncing their names, or the name of the school, or the district etc.

I think in this multicultural and soon to be bilingual environment, more thought can be put into reconciling RTGS or whatever system you decide to use, and the people who will use it.

[meadish_sweetball]

Thai students are taught to spell their names using roman characters during their English classes.

According to the individual English teacher's own ideas and shortcomings, rather than according to a system that has been created by experts for the purpose and taught universally to English teachers at all Thai schools, which would be the only way to handle this issue properly. Deciding on the right committee for this purpose will turn into an enormous prestige struggle.

I think in this multicultural and soon to be bilingual environment, more thought can be put into reconciling RTGS or whatever system you decide to use, and the people who will use it.

Oh, I agree, and so does everyone who has any experience of the problems. China, Vietnam and Japan have already introduced perfectly functional and universally recognized romanisation systems for their languages. However, this is Thailand. Most Thais don't care enough.

Head, meet brick wall.

[Peppy]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my previous posts, but there are clearly two separate issues here.

The first is the romanization of the Thai language in a way that is easily accessible to foreigners, whatever language they speak. As has been pointed out, people have been working on this for well over a century without a satisfactory solution in sight, in part because of the idiosyncrasies of the Thai language itself, and in part because of the generally laissez-faire culture of its speakers as regards implementation.

The second issue is, basically, how to teach English to Thai students. The OP has indicated his belief that his students' "terrible pronunciation" is somehow a result of the system of romanizing the Thai language, and it can be cured by "matching up" the sounds of the two languages. In fact, it's quite the opposite: Thai students will best learn how to sound like English speakers by learning the ways in which the languages differ, and a teacher familiar with both languages should make a point of educating them to this end. This means pointing out that "ai" is pronounced as long A, not long I, "ph" is F, not P, "th" is pronounced not like T but like F with the tongue against the front teeth, and so on and so forth.

In addition to the phonics website linked to in my earlier post, the following attached document may be of assistance.

A Contrastive Study of English and Thai.PDF

Edited September 18, 2012 by Peppy

[ajarnyai]

The second issue is, basically, how to teach English to Thai students. The OP has indicated his belief that his students' "terrible pronunciation" is somehow a result of the system of romanizing the Thai language, and it can be cured by "matching up" the sounds of the two languages. In fact, it's quite the opposite: Thai students will best learn how to sound like English speakers by learning the ways in which the languages differ, and a teacher familiar with both languages should make a point of educating them to this end. This means pointing out that "ai" is pronounced as long A, not long I, "ph" is F, not P, "th" is pronounced not like T but like F with the tongue against the front teeth, and so on and so forth.

In addition to the phonics website linked to in my earlier post, the following attached document may be of assistance.

A Contrastive Study of English and Thai.PDF

I, in no way, mean that simply “matching up the sounds” is going to equal proper pronunciation for the whole alphabet. I, of course, spend twice as much time explaining how to make the sounds Thai doesn’t have, instead of having the kids repeat after me. I want to “match up the sounds”, so they have reference when studying at home, since I only get 1 or 2 hours with them per week. V, Z, and R and hard for them, but TH is much harder. I have to change their understanding of the sound, then practice the physical skills.

My main point in all of this is that people often cannot shift between doing things one way, because “that’s just the way it is”, and doing it the right way; even those who are trained for years in "the right way".

My first example was the English teacher. Even though she wanted me to speak certain sounds, she just applied RTGS to the names, and forgot what the Roman characters meant to me. She spent quite some time translating a document for me to read as a voice over (for TV no less) and her mind just shifted to RTGS, instead of her training in English.

Next, are a few things that I hear my students do.

Steak is written and pronounced เสตก and star becomes สตา

Another example is Pepsi becomes แป็บซี่

Those pesky ต’s and ป’s again.

If Thais use the rules of their language to pronounce foreign words when speaking to each other, I have no problem with it. The problem is, Thais are bombarded with the message that certain Thai characters sound like certain Roman ones. Then, here I come, and tell them something different from what they see every day. They get confused or just ignore the new information. They’re in English class, looking at only Roman characters, talking to an English speaking person and I still get เสตก.

I don’t think RTGS is the root cause of my student’s problems, but it certainly doesn’t help. I have adjusted to the fact that PH in romanized Thai sounds like P. I’m in the right environment to do so, Thai students are not in the “PH sounds like F” environment.

Thai students, and teachers think that those characters in question are interchangeable when spoken in either language. I see too much evidence just to ignore RTGS when looking for a cause.

I asked large groups of teachers to write what they thought were the corresponding sounds for B, D, G, P, V, CH……… and most of them wrote what was in RTGS. I later pronounced them all, and they agreed that different characters match better when they paid attention to the sounds.

When they all signed their names at the end of the class, many went back to the old way of writing it. I guess old habits are hard to break…..

Peppy, Thanks for posting that study. I'm sure it will help me on my quest.

[Peppy]

I, in no way, mean that simply “matching up the sounds” is going to equal proper pronunciation for the whole alphabet. I, of course, spend twice as much time explaining how to make the sounds Thai doesn’t have, instead of having the kids repeat after me. I want to “match up the sounds”, so they have reference when studying at home, since I only get 1 or 2 hours with them per week. V, Z, and R and hard for them, but TH is much harder. I have to change their understanding of the sound, then practice the physical skills.

It seems you're already doing the right thing, and you may have to come to terms with the fact that, whatever results you get, you did your best, and that was the best you could do. Most Thai students get around 100 hours a year of English instruction (3 hours a week times 36 school weeks, though it's more in some schools), which works out to at least 600 hours by the end the primary years, and 1200 hours by the end of secondary. Including the three years of kindergarten, most students have upwards of 1500 hours of English classes under their belt by the time they graduate. In theory, 1500 hours of language study should leave a student fluently conversant, able to read books and newspapers, and follow TV shows and movies exclusively in that language with little difficulty. The reality, of course, (and I'm not exaggerating here) is that most senior high school students can't count past 20 in English, let alone hold a conversation or understand a TV show. The Thai education system is in an absolute shambles, and it isn't just English. In the standardized tests given by the education ministry each year, the average test score for the core subjects--math, science, English, Thai, and social studies--is around 30-40%. If your students are doing better than this, that's wonderful, but if they aren't--well, actually teaching them much of anything is tantamount to fighting the whole system, and if you're ready to do that, you might as well just commit yourself to an insane asylum right now and save the hassle down the road.

My main point in all of this is that people often cannot shift between doing things one way, because “that’s just the way it is”, and doing it the right way; even those who are trained for years in "the right way".

It is, of course, the job of the teacher to somehow get their students to understand "the right way". And, of course, it's the job of the students to learn and apply "the right way". You do your job, they do theirs. And if they don't, well, they pass anyway. Teach them what they need to know, and don't think too much about whether they're all actually learning it or not.

My first example was the English teacher. Even though she wanted me to speak certain sounds, she just applied RTGS to the names, and forgot what the Roman characters meant to me. She spent quite some time translating a document for me to read as a voice over (for TV no less) and her mind just shifted to RTGS, instead of her training in English.

Maybe you should have thought about what the Roman characters meant to her, since she's the Thai speaker. Trying to read Thai with English phonology is just as ridiculous as it is the other way round. The writing system is irrelevant. As for mispronouncing names, that's really no biggie. People mispronounce foreign names all the time--if you want to say them properly, you have to learn the sound system of the language the name is from. Of course, with RTGS, when you don't know the context (as in the case of names), it really is sometimes impossible to read it accurately, since there's no way of knowing the tone or vowel length of a given syllable. Again, that's the real problem with it--if you had been familiar with RTGS, and the system also showed tone and vowel length, you'd have had no problem getting those names right. (Assuming you know the Thai sound system well.)

Next, are a few things that I hear my students do.

Steak is written and pronounced เสตก and star becomes สตา

Another example is Pepsi becomes แป็บซี่

Those pesky ต’s and ป’s again.

If Thais use the rules of their language to pronounce foreign words when speaking to each other, I have no problem with it. The problem is, Thais are bombarded with the message that certain Thai characters sound like certain Roman ones. Then, here I come, and tell them something different from what they see every day. They get confused or just ignore the new information. They’re in English class, looking at only Roman characters, talking to an English speaking person and I still get เสตก.

I don’t think RTGS is the root cause of my student’s problems, but it certainly doesn’t help. I have adjusted to the fact that PH in romanized Thai sounds like P. I’m in the right environment to do so, Thai students are not in the “PH sounds like F” environment.

Thai students, and teachers think that those characters in question are interchangeable when spoken in either language. I see too much evidence just to ignore RTGS when looking for a cause.

"Steak" and "star" aren't very good examples here, because the "t" after "s" actually does sound like "ต". But I see what you're saying here, and I agree with you when you say RTGS isn't the root cause of the problem, nor is it helpful for someone learning English. Again, when you're teaching phonics, you have to point out to the students the differences between RTGS and English, and tell them what's what. You know, "This is English. This is RTGS." (While pointing to the whiteboard or holding up flashcards.) Make a point of the fact while both systems use Roman characters, English is used to write English, while RTGS is used to write Thai.

But if we accept that "RTGS isn't the root cause of the problem", well, what is? Surely problems are best solved at their root, and the root of the problem here is Thai students trying to speak English with Thai phonology. It really wouldn't matter if they'd never heard of romanization before, or even if they were totally illiterate, their accents would still be as terrible. A lot of people (not just Thais) seem to have the idea that all languages have the same sounds, and you just have to rearrange them in different ways to get different languages. The problem is that this isn't the case at all. All languages have different sound sets, and to speak a given language, you have to learn the sound set for that language. If you want your students to have better accents, the solution, as I mentioned earlier, is to teach them phonics.

Which brings me back to the beginning of this post: whatever you teach, don't let your expectations get too high. You aren't going to change the RTGS (though it wouldn't make any difference to the students' English ability even if you did), and you certainly aren't going to endear yourself to your fellow faculty members by running around and telling them how to do this and that. Do what you can do, and what's best for your students: teach them phonics.*

* In addition to grammar, vocabulary, and as much conversation practice as class size allows, of course.