Learn Lao?

[Richard W]

Wow! So there is Isaan literature out there?

Mostly song lyrics, so far as I am aware. (Songs are the traditional motivation for Tai literacy.)

I thought that Isaan was much less of a tonal language, which was what made me play with the idea of learning it.

The standard model of Lao has six tones. There are five-tone dialects, as the mid class tone A (i.e. no tone mark in etymologically correct Thai spelling) has a tendency to merge with either high class tone or low class tone A. Mid class tone C (i.e. mai tho in etymologically correct Thai spelling) is pronounced the same as high class tone C, and old tone B (Thai mai ek) is normally not split in accordance with the class of the initial consonant.

So we are talking about Lao when you say Isaan?

Yes, Isaan is just a geographical (and political and probably cultural) qualification. The Mekong unites rather than splits.

I need an explanation! I'll try to google Thai dialects.

You could start with the site at http://thaiarc.tu.ac.th/dialect/ if you think your Thai's up to it. The word samples are organised by a Gedney tone box (กล่องวรรณยุกต์), which is basically a arrangement of words by generic consonant class in one axis and ancient tone (essentially equivalent to Thai tone marking) in the other axis.

[Trembly]

I didn't spend all that time learning the Thai alphabet for nothing.

But nowadays the Isan dialect is written in Thai script - using Central Thai phonetic values as far as possible, just to make things doubly confusing.

Wow! So there is Isaan literature out there? I guess Buddhist tracts mainly. I thought that Isaan was much less of a tonal language, which was what made me play with the idea of learning it.

So we are talking about Lao when you say Isaan? I need an explanation! I'll try to google Thai ialects.

In Thailand the Isan dialect / Laotian language is written using Thai script. They don't use central tones to compensate for their own Isan tones at all, but simply convert the value of the Thai tone into their tone :

Example - The word for "wood" in both Thai and Lao is mai （ไม้). In Isan the mai-tho　（ ้ ）tone is pronounced like a heavy downward tone as opposed to the emphatic rising tone of central Thai. Isan speakers spell the word the same but just convert the tones accordingly.

[Richard W]

In Thailand the Isan dialect / Laotian language is written using Thai script. They don't use central tones to compensate for their own Isan tones at all, but simply convert the value of the Thai tone into their tone :

Example - The word for "wood" in both Thai and Lao is mai （ไม้). In Isan the mai-tho　（ ้ ）tone is pronounced like a heavy downward tone as opposed to the emphatic rising tone of central Thai. Isan speakers spell the word the same but just convert the tones accordingly.

I'd like to believe you, but are you sure you aren't just quoting best practice rather than usual practice?

I've been looking through a vocabulary survey of Thai 'dialects', and I see understandable chaos with the tone marks. The survey was done by asking colleagues who could speak dialects for translations of lists of words, and I'm not sure how much follow-up was done. The editing looks uneven, and I don't see a great deal of consistency. Words with the Siamese combination of high class consonant plus mai tho are consistently written with mai ek, which is a reasonable for a low, possibly falling, glottalised tone. Words with the Siamese combination of low class consonant and mai tho (such as ไม้) are inconsistently written with mai ek or mai tho. The author has supplied a tone independently of the Thai writing, so he should have been aware of the inconsistency.

[Trembly]

In Thailand the Isan dialect / Laotian language is written using Thai script. They don't use central tones to compensate for their own Isan tones at all, but simply convert the value of the Thai tone into their tone :

Example - The word for "wood" in both Thai and Lao is mai （ไม้). In Isan the mai-tho　（ ้ ）tone is pronounced like a heavy downward tone as opposed to the emphatic rising tone of central Thai. Isan speakers spell the word the same but just convert the tones accordingly.

I'd like to believe you, but are you sure you aren't just quoting best practice rather than usual practice?

I've been looking through a vocabulary survey of Thai 'dialects', and I see understandable chaos with the tone marks. The survey was done by asking colleagues who could speak dialects for translations of lists of words, and I'm not sure how much follow-up was done. The editing looks uneven, and I don't see a great deal of consistency. Words with the Siamese combination of high class consonant plus mai tho are consistently written with mai ek, which is a reasonable for a low, possibly falling, glottalised tone. Words with the Siamese combination of low class consonant and mai tho (such as ไม้) are inconsistently written with mai ek or mai tho. The author has supplied a tone independently of the Thai writing, so he should have been aware of the inconsistency.

I'm not quoting, I speak as someone who is fluent in Thai, Kam-Mueang and Isan. The first two I've been speaking all my life.

The tone conflations/corruptions that you speak of occur in central Thai more often than they do in Thai transliterations of the other dialects.

There has never been an official Thai transliteration of any other dialects other than Siamese so the written form of the other dialects are still mutating as we speak, however, it is very interesting to note that because the advent of their transliteration is still relatively fresh amidst a climate of high literacy the irregularities are ironed out fairly quickly and there is more consistency. Just have a look at the post-American war Lao script, as an oblong reference.

Edited November 21, 2012 by Trembly

[Richard W]

I'd like to believe you, but are you sure you aren't just quoting best practice rather than usual practice?

I'm not quoting, I speak as someone who is fluent in Thai, Kam-Mueang and Isan. The first two I've been speaking all my life.

But you haven't been writing them all your life! How old were you learnt to write the latter two (or should I count Kam-Mueang twice, once for each script?), and how did you learn?

One reason I ask is that I have read of old minority language orthographies being rejected because they don't accord with Thai orthography, and are therefore too confusing. Presumably this is also why transliteration of Tua Mueang into Thai and Lao script is rejected for writing Northern Thai and Tai Lue respectively.

Ordinary users have attempted to use the conventions of the Thai and Lao writing systems respectively. Both attempts have suffered because 6 tones don't fit into scripts designed for 5-way tone contrasts. Tai Lue solved the problem by using combinations of tone marks. I've seen an attempt to solve the problem for Northern Thai by using parentheses (for the original non-low class with mai tho), but I don't think that solution is widespread.

There has never been an official Thai transliteration of any other dialects other than Siamese so the written form of the other dialects are still mutating as we speak, however, it is very interesting to note that because the advent of their transliteration is still relatively fresh amidst a climate of high literacy the irregularities are ironed out fairly quickly and there is more consistency.

Where can we find these bodies of text?

Lannaworld.com has had some discussions in Kam Mueang in Thai script, but I only find odd snippets there now.

Just have a look at the post-American war Lao script, as an oblong reference.

That was a writing system with an army and censors!

[Richard W]

(Answered separately because of unintelligent forum limit on number of quotation blocks)

The tone conflations/corruptions that you speak of occur in central Thai more often than they do in Thai transliterations of the other dialects.

You seem to be echoing Rama VI's view that tone marks are generally not very important! I suppose that for fluent readers they are generally not so important in connected text.

Perhaps the same applies to using mai tho on mid consonants for both the Kam Mueang tones that correspond to Siamese siang tho. For example, using Thai conventions, Kam Mueang ก้ then corresponds etymologically to both Siamese ก้ and ค่, and the problem also affects ต and ป in the same way. Theoretically the lack of an extra tone mark also affects ด บ อ, but (i) NT Tua Mueang doesn't solve the problem, though Tai Khuen TM does, using extra tone marks, and (ii) I could only find three words in the Maefahluang Dictionary beginning with them that are affected by the lack of an extra Thai tone mark, and in each case the unindicatable tone only occurs so that the two parts of the word rime.

[Trembly]

I never learnt to write Kam-Mueang script, only Thai, which I was taught at home by my mother (an avid reader herself) since I was about 5 or 6 years old, but only started to take an interest when I was around 10 or so.

As far as the point that I'm making about adaptation of standard Thai script for other Tai dialects goes, discussion of Tua Mueang (Lanna script) is a red herring.

"Where can I find these bodies of texts?"

Plenty of Kam-Mueang stuff in this facebook page : http://www.facebook....g.hugsa?fref=ts . Apart from that you're on your own unless you go into my facebook and emails to view all the conversations that I have with my family, friends, colleagues and students in Isan or Kam-Mueang using Thai script. The tones in the Thai script are quite adequate for written KM / Isan and one does not use them as if one is trying to approximate KM / Isan tones to a Thai person, but rather by converting the phonetic value of the tone in Thai script to the corresponding tone in spoken Isan.

"That was a writing system with an army and censors!"

Yes, and it is very consistent with spoken Lao, quite unlike the irregularity riddled relationship between written central Thai and spoken central Thai.

Edited November 22, 2012 by Trembly

[Richard W]

I never learnt to write Kam-Mueang script, only Thai, which I was taught at home by my mother (an avid reader herself) since I was about 5 or 6 years old, but only started to take an interest when I was around 10 or so.

It was writing in dialect that interested me.

The Kam Mueang facebook link is useful. Thank you.

In Thailand the Isan dialect / Laotian language is written using Thai script. They don't use central tones to compensate for their own Isan tones at all, but simply convert the value of the Thai tone into their tone :

As far as the point that I'm making about adaptation of standard Thai script for other Tai dialects goes, discussion of Tua Mueang (Lanna script) is a red herring.

Thinking about it, I realise that Trembly's description covers two rather different processes. I think that what I unimaginatively dub Process A below was meant, but I'm no longer so sure.

Process A is the one that comes naturally to one who knows two different languages with different writing systems but the same script is to have different sets of tone rules - compare English and Spanish. This can be the process one uses if one reads Lao as though it were written in the Thai script with an unusual font. The tone rules are defined so that they generally give the same results as writing the Siamese cognate; the system reveals itself when handling words without cognates or with irregular cognates.

Process B comes about when one writes without trying to give cognates the same tone marks, but just to represent the sounds. A clear example is the Kam Mueang tones, at least in Chiangmai. Five of the live syllable tones and three of the dead syllable tones are 'identified' with the Siamese live and dead tones respectively, even though there are differences. It so happens that this identification matches the historical correspondence from Kam Mueang to Siamese. The fourth dead tone is identified with the Siamese rising tone. For the five identified live tones and three identified dead tones, the writing process goes:

1) Convert to Siamese tone

2) Write using Siamese tone rules

A result of these rules is the markers of Kam Mueang such as กั๋น, กิ๋น, ตั๋ว and ใจ๋.

For Kam Mueang, just writing the Siamese cognate does not work well because of the consonant differences from Siamese. The results of such a system look like literal transliterations from tua mueang.

The tones in the Thai script are quite adequate for written KM / Isan and one does not use them as if one is trying to approximate KM / Isan tones to a Thai person, but rather by converting the phonetic value of the tone in Thai script to the corresponding tone in spoken Isan.

One KM live tone is not identified with any Siamese tone and one dead tone is not identified with any of the three Siamese dead tones. These tones do not occur with tua mueang low class consonants, so using the spelling of the Siamese cognate actually works quite well as far as the consonant goes, and not too badly for distinguishing the tone.

Kam Mueang has the problem that it has six tones on live syllables; I can only presume that the statement that there are no problems means that the problems that there are are too minor to worry about (like the two main values of 'th' and 'ear' in English, or indicating both tone and vowel length in Siamese). For example, in the following line from Sao Chiang Mai: ข้าเจ้าบ่เจื้อแห็มแล้ว, the mai tho on จ has two different meanings - the 6th tone in เจ้า (as in ข้า) and the falling tone in เจื้อ, the northern form of เชื่อ.

Actually, some northerners prefer to write the 6th tone as thought it were the Siamese high tone. This just rearranges the apparently minor issue.

Whether one applies Process A or Process B to '6-tone' Isaan Thai, there are no more problems showing its tones using Thai script than there are in writing Lao in Lao script or Thai in Thai script. There is one issue here that bothers me. Two of the six tones of Lao are:

i) The tone of live syllables with mid consonant and no tone mark ('A2/3 tone').

ii) The tone of live syllables with high consonant and mai tho (in Lao) ('C1 tone').

The Lao script offers no way of indicating the occurrence of the A2/3 tone with a high or low consonant, and it offers no way of indicating the occurrence of a C1 tone with a mid consonant.

Apparently the A2/3 tone (when distinguished from the A1 tone 'rising' and A4 tones 'high') and the C1 tone have similar pitches in a Vientiane accent. However, in most dialects these tones are quite different. Why doesn't Lao have tone marks to handle the possibilities of the A2/3 tone with non-mid consonants and the C1 tone with mid consonants? I don't like the idea that Lao simply aped the Thai tone mark system. Just possibly the issue is solved for Standard Lao by declaring these two tones to be the same tone.

[Richard W]

Example - The word for "wood" in both Thai and Lao is mai （ไม้). In Isan the mai-tho　（ ้ ）tone is pronounced like a heavy downward tone as opposed to the emphatic rising tone of central Thai. Isan speakers spell the word the same but just convert the tones accordingly.

Central Thai tones seem to need heavy qualification. While your description of siang tri is right for nowadays, the 1962 version of siang tri seems to match the(?) Isaan C4 (= low consonant, mai tho) tone! Bangkok tones (apparently live syllables only) of the past hundred years are compared in Kanjana Thepboriruk's Bangkok Thai Tones Revisited.

[farangnahrak]

FYI, just like Thai has multiple dialects, Lao does as well.

I'm fairly fluent in Thai. For my last trip to Laos, I learned how to read Lao, and learned a bunch of Lao words and phrases (not difficult if you speak/read Thai already). The Lao written language is definitely simpler than the Thai written language, in my opinion.

I tried really hard to speak only Lao while I was there. And the locals all loved me, complimenting me on how well I spoke . . . Thai. *

The problem is that although many Thai words are the same as in Lao, the tones are all different. I just can't keep them all straight in my tiny head . . .

Anyway, I personally think central Thai is the most useful to learn, as most will understand you. But even though you speak central Thai, the locals are only going to reply back to you in their local dialect/language. Back in the day, I would ask them to speak to me in only central dialect so I could understand . . . that didn't go very well at all lol . . . they just gave me funny looks and continued with their local dialects.

So, for the OP, my recommendation is to learn both.

[JohnIrish]

To learn Thai or Lao is a very interesting question! I am married to a Thai who lives in Ubon...... everyone there normally speaks "Issan" (lao) but I am learning Thai. Yes.. If I speak Thai to someone they will understand me and speak Thai back. But... just normal conversation between themselves... LAO all the way. I go crazy trying to understand them! I never will understand them speaking Lao if I only know Thai. If I want to fit in... I will eventually need to learn some Lao. The wife told me to learn Thai since everyone can speak and understand it. I still wonder if that was the correct decision. As with you, If I knew Lao I would be happier in her city and be better able to speak with her friends and family.

For your case as you described it, I would recommend you learn Lao. I think it would be better for you to speak and understand 100% of Lao among the village you are in... it will be more fun for you to join in the conversation than for them to have to change to Thai.

Then if you travel... it will be no big deal if the other Thai's only understand 60% of your Lao. Also, many people around Thailand do speak Lao anyway.

My wife will automatically switch between Thai and Lao depending on who she is talking to. My plans are to continue to learn Thai... but I know I will need to eventually switch to some Lao as time goes on. I am not an expert to compare the two languages.... but I do know I would be happier if I did speak Lao.

[Trembly]

Example - The word for "wood" in both Thai and Lao is mai （ไม้). In Isan the mai-tho　（ ้ ）tone is pronounced like a heavy downward tone as opposed to the emphatic rising tone of central Thai. Isan speakers spell the word the same but just convert the tones accordingly.

Central Thai tones seem to need heavy qualification. While your description of siang tri is right for nowadays, the 1962 version of siang tri seems to match the(?) Isaan C4 (= low consonant, mai tho) tone! Bangkok tones (apparently live syllables only) of the past hundred years are compared in Kanjana Thepboriruk's Bangkok Thai Tones Revisited.

I have no rejoiner to your obviously educated posts!

[Trembly]

*rejoinder