Parse Please

[Mole]

I still don't understand how you manage to conclude to be "me" for both ให้

คุณจะให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้ฉันหรือเปล่า

Don't you see how absurd this question really is??

Even in English it would be weird.

Do you want me to book the room for me or not?

But whatever man, as I said earlier, the original sentence is PERFECTLY clear who's doing what for whom. However, you still manage to not properly understand such an elementary sentence.

It's makes your own comment about impaired ability to understand Thai quite ironic.

Edited January 28, 2013 by Mole

[Mole]

Just want to add that in order for the original sentence to be completely correct including any missing pronouns/nouns:

ให้โทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้หรือเปล่า

คุณจะให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้คุณหรือเปล่า

alternatively

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้คุณหรือเปล่า

I can't think of any other way for this sentence. A Thai would also automatically understand it like this.

Edited January 28, 2013 by Mole

[Richard W]

I still don't understand how you manage to conclude to be "me" for both ให้

คุณจะให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้ฉันหรือเปล่า

Don't you see how absurd this question really is??

Even in English it would be weird.

Do you want me to book the room for me or not?

If I transpose it from American English to British English and remove the superfluous 'or not', I get, "Do you want me to book the room for myself?". That does not seem weird, though it does suggest an argument is imminent.

However, to repeat what I said in Post 16 and TommoPhysicist appears to endorse, but without my colour-coding

However, TommoPhysicist is vehemently convinced that the structure is

(₁[คุณ](₃[จะ]ให้(₄[ฉัน]โทรศัพท์จองห้องพัก)₄)₃)₁(₂ให้หรือเปล่า)₂

In this analysis, the question marking part repeats the main verb.

The most literal idiomatic translation of his interpretation would be, "You want me to phone and book the room? Do you want me to or not?"

[Ratsima]

When I asked my wife about the use of ให้ in this sentence, she suggested it might be better understood if the sentence were altered to be: Do you want me to call and book a room for Pim (or not)?

[tgeezer]

So there are two questions which Tommy Physicist made one. Shall I book a room? and for whom shall I book? . Not such a basic language. Does that explain the second ให้? I have analysed so much the words have become meaningless.

[Mole]

The fact that there are two ให้ in the sentence, 1 ให้ is for one person while the other ให้ is for another. There is simply no way to interpret that line to be your own room simply because of the two ให้. The second ให้ must be changed to ของฉัน or simply just ฉัน to specify it's my room. Or if the second ให้ wasn't there, then the question would be open to whose room it is.

Now the OP has revealed that the room wasn't for him, but somebody else named Pim พิม

This means the original sentence would be:

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้เขาหรือเปล่า

or

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้พิมหรือเปล่า

The meaning is still somebody else's room and not my room.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mole

[Mole]

Alternatively if one would insist in using two ให้ in the sentence, it must be written as

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้ฉันเองหรือเปล่า

in order for it to mean I book my room.

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้ฉันหรือเปล่า

simply wouldn't be correct.

This would be comparable to the difference of

Do you want me to book the room for myself.

and

Do you want me to book the room for me.

However since the original sentence doesn't mention any ฉัน or ฉันเอง, there is no doubt that the room isn't for myself, but somebody else. Otherwise as I said, one would drop the second ให้

[Richard W]

Mole, you are the only one who has suggested that one might interpret interpret the second ให้ as meaning that the room was for the speaker (Ratsima's wife in this instance). The alternative interpretation offered, which we now know was not correct in this particular instance, was that the main verb was being echoed in asking the question. It would be helpful if that could be confirmed to be ungrammatical.

[Richard W]

So there are two questions which Tommy Physicist made one. Shall I book a room? and for whom shall I book?

No!

I offered an idiomatic translation. The literal translation as TommoPhysicist saw it would be, "You want me to phone and book the room. Do you want me to or not?", but this does not preserve the meaning. The literal translation of the intended meaning, as confirmed by Ratsima's wife, is "You want me to phone and book the room for you. Or not?", which is not idiomatic English.

[Ratsima]

So, where do you go to learn how to generate idiomatic Thai?

If I wanted to say, "Do you want me to call and book a room for you?" in Thai, I would have no idea where to begin.

The idiomatic Thai bears no resemblance to the idiomatic English.

[Mole]

Mole, you are the only one who has suggested that one might interpret interpret the second ให้ as meaning that the room was for the speaker (Ratsima's wife in this instance). The alternative interpretation offered, which we now know was not correct in this particular instance, was that the main verb was being echoed in asking the question. It would be helpful if that could be confirmed to be ungrammatical.

In this case one would not have used the first ให้ having the only ให้ at the end could be interpreted as a question to be allowed to do or not.

โทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้หรือเปล่า

The first ให้ would already mean as a question to be allowed to or not, so the second ให้ does not mean to repeat the first question but means for someone.

Thai may be "repetitive" when it comes to asking questions. But it does not involve in repeating the exactly same question word.

Maybe if I use this basic example, you will see that with 1 or 2 ให้ the meaning will change:

ให้โทรให้ไหม (คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์ให้คุณไหม)

Do you want me to call for you (or not)?

โทรให้ไหม (คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์ให้คุณไหม) [This would be the usual way to say it, rather the one above with two ให้]

Do you want me to call for you (or not)?

ให้โทรไหม (คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์ไหม)

Do you want me to call (or not)? or Can I call (or not)?

"Or not" is of course redundant in English, but in Thai one must use ไหม in order to make this a question, which may seem like repetitive for you, but this is just how Thai works.

ให้โทรให้ and ให้โทร wouldn't be a question.

What I have marked in red is usually omitted when it's spoken in Thai and as you can see it's in fact a majority of a fully grammatically correct sentence.

Despite of this, the meaning is perfectly understood by a Thai in exactly the manner I've written fully.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mole

[tgeezer]

So there are two questions which Tommy Physicist made one. Shall I book a room? and for whom shall I book?

No!

I offered an idiomatic translation. The literal translation as TommoPhysicist saw it would be, "You want me to phone and book the room. Do you want me to or not?", but this does not preserve the meaning. The literal translation of the intended meaning, as confirmed by Ratsima's wife, is "You want me to phone and book the room for you. Or not?", which is not idiomatic English.

To a third party, I say that there are several possible answers, "No thanks", "Yes, but for Pim." and "Yes please" . This is school boy logic, as a third person I would assume they both knew who wanted a room, and would expect to hear. ไห้ or เปล่า . This is what Tommy Physicist saw as a possiblility discounted by two Thai sources, the answer ให้ is the first ให้.

Which brings us nicely back to the original question why bother with the second ให้

I see that Mole has posted and I don't think my post contradicts his.

[meadish_sweetball]

So, where do you go to learn how to generate idiomatic Thai?

Idiomatic language is learned by listening and reading, and then parroting, the structures you get from native speakers. It can not be learned through the application of grammatical rules. You listen and copy, and use trial and error, gradually arriving at something that increasingly starts to resemble idiomatic Thai.

This is how we learn our mother tongue, too. Typical one-, two- or three-year-olds have little conscious idea about grammar, but parrot what they hear and adjust for feedback until they arrive at something that is a comprehensible version of their mother tongue. Through this process, general grammatical rules are (sub-consciously, for most people) extracted.

[Mole]

If you use my above example and interpret it as:

ให้โทรให้ไหม (คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์ คุณให้ฉันทำไหม)

Do you already see that there is something not correct with this interpretation?

ให้โทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้หรือเปล่า

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์จองห้องพัก ให้ฉันทำหรือเปล่า

I'm sorry to say that there's no way a Thai would have understood it this way.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mole

[Ratsima]

So, where do you go to learn how to generate idiomatic Thai?

Idiomatic language is learned by listening and reading, and then parroting, the structures you get from native speakers. It can not be learned through the application of grammatical rules. You listen and copy, and use trial and error, gradually arriving at something that increasingly starts to resemble idiomatic Thai.

Assume, for the purpose of this discussion, that I am deaf and aphasic. When I listen to spoken Thai I hear no words at all; just an unintelligible buzz.

Reading is a different story. Where can I find written, idiomatic Thai?

[Ajaan]

So, where do you go to learn how to generate idiomatic Thai?

Idiomatic language is learned by listening and reading, and then parroting, the structures you get from native speakers. It can not be learned through the application of grammatical rules. You listen and copy, and use trial and error, gradually arriving at something that increasingly starts to resemble idiomatic Thai.

Assume, for the purpose of this discussion, that I am deaf and aphasic. When I listen to spoken Thai I hear no words at all; just an unintelligible buzz.

Reading is a different story. Where can I find written, idiomatic Thai?

Befriend a bunch of Thais on Facebook and watch them converse in text with each other.

[Ratsima]

Befriend a bunch of Thais on Facebook and watch them converse in text with each other.

Fine idea. I do have some Thai friends on FB....

[tgeezer]

So, where do you go to learn how to generate idiomatic Thai?

Idiomatic language is learned by listening and reading, and then parroting, the structures you get from native speakers. It can not be learned through the application of grammatical rules. You listen and copy, and use trial and error, gradually arriving at something that increasingly starts to resemble idiomatic Thai.

Assume, for the purpose of this discussion, that I am deaf and aphasic. When I listen to spoken Thai I hear no words at all; just an unintelligible buzz.

Reading is a different story. Where can I find written, idiomatic Thai?

It hasn't worked for me in this case but I don't think that people make up roles and meanings for words universally, what they say resembles grammar.

I stll wonder about the final ให้ just as you did once because I can't see what it means.

Examples of the use of ให้

= มอบ: ให้ชอดอกไม้เป็นรางวัล.

=สละ: ให้ชีวิดเป็นทาน

=อนุญาต: ฉันให้เขาไปเที่ยว

=เป็นคำช่วยกริยาบอกความบังคับหรืออวยชัยให้พรเป็นต้น ( ให้ in this explanation means มอบ I think) : แม่บอกให้ลูกไปนอน and แต่งตัวให้สวย ๆ นะ or ขอให้เจริญรุ่งเรือง and ขอให้เดินทางโดยสวัสดิภาพ

Which of these is the final ให้ ?

Sorry to appear so dense, I expect To be wrong, so just tell me the accepted meaning.

[Mole]

The meaning equals สำหรับ or เพื่อ or English "for".

ฉันทำสำหรับคุณ

ฉันทำเพื่อคุณ

ฉันทำให้คุณ

all have the equal meaning

What the original sentence in a nutshell says is:

ไห้ฉันโทรไห้คุณไหม

in other words it means

คุณต้องการให้ฉันทำการกระทำนี้สำหรับคุณไหม

[Mole]

If you insist in getting it to match one of the meanings in your list it would be kinda like มอบ since the meaning is

ฉันทำให้คุณ = ฉันทำมอบให้คุณ

However, in this case it is not a tangible which is given but an action. So an action is done and given to you. In other words an action is done for you.

in case of a question which contains two ให้ the first ให้ would mean to allow อนุญาต

ให้ฉันทำให้คุณไหม = คุณอนุญาตให้ฉันทำมอบให้คุณไหม

In all my previous examples where I've written ต้องการ it can be replaced with อนุญาต with almost the same meaning.

คุณต้องการให้ฉันโทรศัพท์ให้คุณไหม = คุณอนุญาตให้ฉันโทรศัพท์ให้คุณไหม

คุณต้องการให้ฉันคุยโทรศัพท์เพื่อคุณไหม

คุณต้องการให้ฉันคุยโทรศัพท์สำหรับคุณไหม

I have now added the word คุยโทรศัพท์ so there is no doubt that it is about the action of calling and not a tangible telephone.

ให้โทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้หรือเปล่า

คุณต้องการให้ฉันคุยโทรศัพท์จองห้องพักให้คุณหรือเปล่า

Edited January 30, 2013 by Mole

[tgeezer]

Sorry to be so slow, I have lost hours of replies thanks to the touch screen of an iPad and the hair trigger on my laptop keyboard. What ever happened to the 'are you sure you want to leave this page?'.

The initial discussion was about who the room was for, now we are on the same wavelength, and it is who is acting for whom. Not so far away from what Tommy physicist thought; that there was only one question; "who will book the room".

I am happy with that ทำให้คุณ I can live with becuase we use it so much, but as an impish schoolboy I can still ask ทำให้ผมทำอะไร

The speaker is asking if you want them to act as ผู้แทน. ให้คุณ ให้พิม either person could be the one who would normally do the job.

The thing is you can parse it any way you like, it doesn't matter to a third person who the room is for, the basic question ให้ผมทำให้คุณหรือเปล่า from which the pronouns can be ditched is all that matters.

Edit: I am quite happy with the first อนุญาต because of ให้คุณ if it were สั่งให้ it doesn't need ให้คุณ right? But perhaps, who knows? room for you!

Here we go again!!

Edited January 30, 2013 by tgeezer