Tone Markers and your experiences learning when there are no Markers

[Kellynch]

Is there a rule or guidance for when tone markers are actually used? Also, I understand the basic rules of what tone to use when there aren't markers ie Consonant class, live/dead syllable and length of vowel. I'm wrestling with it and I'd be interested in how others have tackled it to make it easier and quicker to work it out. Or is it just a case of seeing the word so many times that you know it automatically after a while? As an analogy, when learning the consonant class, I learned the High and Mid classes as there were less of them and everything else is low class.

[Richard W]

If your problem is that you can't remember the tone of words, then the only rules I can give are that:

1) Syllables ending in /p/, /t/ or /k/ very rarely have tone marks, and they're optional in the main class of these that do.

2) Tone marks are generally optional in loanwords from English.

3) Pali/Sanskrit words, with rare exceptions, don't have tone marks.

The exceptions to Rule 3 are syllables ending in silent ห์. If the preceding vowel is long, the syllable usually has mai ek, and then the tone mark may affect longer forms, e.g. เสน่ห์ and เสน่หา.

If you do know the tone of words, there are again only three rules I can think of. The first is that one doesn't use a tone mark if it isn't needed to show the tone. Thus สิบ นก เหตุ and and มาก need and have no tone mark. The second is that, given a choice between showing shortness or showing the tone, Thai chooses to show the tone. (Thai orthographic rules prohibit writing tone marks above maitaikhu.) The third is Rule 2 above.

[AyG]

1) Syllables ending in /p/, /t/ or /k/ very rarely have tone marks, and they're optional in the main class of these that do.

2) Tone marks are generally optional in loanwords from English.

3) Pali/Sanskrit words, with rare exceptions, don't have tone marks.

(i) How can tonemarks be "optional"? They're either not required (i.e. the word spelled without tonemarks produces the correct tone), or they are needed to modify the tone.

(ii) The current standard is that new loanwords from English will not have tonemarks (even though the spelling may not reflect Thai pronunciation). However, older ones will. Tonemarks are not optional; there is an official, correct form for each loanword.

[DtemJai]

I’ve to agree with you, as it sounds right…to pronounce Thai and English words consistent to their rules, can’t recall the rules myself, stuck in my head for a so long time. Reading Thai are so boring, except subtitles in an English movie TV’s, signs, which I do read with enjoyment whenever possible. Tell your g/f or wife to pronounce “Thai News Hour or Carrefour” [super-market].

[Richard W]

(i) How can tonemarks be "optional"? They're either not required (i.e. the word spelled without tonemarks produces the correct tone), or they are needed to modify the tone.

This statement contradicts (ii) below!

(ii) The current standard is that new loanwords from English will not have tonemarks (even though the spelling may not reflect Thai pronunciation). However, older ones will. Tonemarks are not optional; there is an official, correct form for each loanword.

Not all loanwords are officially recorded as Thai. Therefore, one cannot simply look up the preferred spelling in the RID.

The rule has remained that tonemarks are only used on English loans where needed to avoid confusing the reader. The optionality comes in deciding when it is necessary.

[kriswillems]

Hi Kellynch

I feel like you're trying to find a shortcut around the tone rules.

If you know the tone rules, you would know when to write and not write a tone mark (at least, if you can remember the pronunciation). There are very few exceptions.

I think you'll be disappointed, but I think for a foreign language learner of Thai, learning the tone rules is by far better/easier than trying to remember how each word is written.

Edited August 24, 2013 by kriswillems

[Richard W]

I think you'll be disappointed, but I think for a foreign language learner of Thai, learning the tone rules is by far better/easier than trying to remember how each word is written.

Except that for a falling tone on a live syllable, you have to remember or, like many Thais over the years, plump for the percentage guess of mai ek.

[DavidHouston]

I think you'll be disappointed, but I think for a foreign language learner of Thai, learning the tone rules is by far better/easier than trying to remember how each word is written.

Except that for a falling tone on a live syllable, you have to remember or, like many Thais over the years, plump for the percentage guess of mai ek.

I don't understand, Richard? Please provide some examples. Thanks for all your insights.

Edited August 24, 2013 by DavidHouston

[Kellynch]

Hi Kellynch

I feel like you're trying to find a shortcut around the tone rules.

If you know the tone rules, you would know when to write and not write a tone mark (at least, if you can remember the pronunciation). There are very few exceptions.

I think you'll be disappointed, but I think for a foreign language learner of Thai, learning the tone rules is by far better/easier than trying to remember how each word is written.

Hi,

I'm grateful for what you say. When you say I'm looking for a shortcut, then perhaps I asked the question in the wrong way. I'm not criticising the language, I know that some words have a marker and what that tone means; and when it doesn't have one then what tone to use. I dare say I will gradually get to know what words have them and those that don't, but I've just been wondering, is there a general rule of thumb of when a word has a marker and when it doesn't. You mention that if I know the tone rules then I would know when to use and not use a tone mark. Up to now, the books etc I'm reading tell me what tone to use when a marker is actually used and when they're not used when reading a word. I haven't come across anything..... yet, that tells me if there's a general rule of thumb of when/why a marker is actually used; some people have mentioned about the adoption of foreign sounding words. If I can use English as an example, the 'ph' has the sound of an 'f' unless it's something like the word 'Phi'. The use or non-use of tone markers is great for input but it's more difficult for say writing. At this stage of my learning, I may know how to say a Thai word and perhaps even the consonant and vowel, but if I want to write it down then should I use a tone marker or not? Is it just a case of experience? The word (send - ส่ง shows the low tone marker for the initial high class consonant). The word ( want - อยาก doesn't show the marker). I understand how the rule works to know that อยาก has a low tone, but I'm curious as to why they didn't put a tone marker in.

[Richard W]

The spelling of อยาก is a matter of history in two ways. The first is the retention of original อย- rather than modern หย-. The second is that the Thai tone system was originally simpler, and the consonants were more complicated. There were originally three different tones for live syllables, and dead syllables had no tone contrast. Thus only two tone marks were needed - mai ek for the second commonest tone, and mai tho for the least common tone. Tone marks were not used on dead syllables. The voicing contrast on the initial consonant then moved to the centre of the syllable, splitting the original tones, and giving rise to the three-way classification of Thai consonants.

After this change, not all combinations of initial consonant sound and possible tone were covered, so then two new tone marks (mai tri and mai chattawa) were added and the missing combinations on dead syllables were resolved by adding tone marks to them. As the regular phonetic developments lead to dead syllables with high and middle initial consonants having low tone, there is no need to add a tone mark to indicate the low tone.

Thai has not retained the 6-way tone contrast on live syllables; ไม่ 'not' and ไหม้ 'burn' are both pronounced with the falling tone. If Thais can't remember which way to spell a live syllable with the falling tone, they have to guess. The guess most likely to be correct is to guess mai ek, and this guessing has resulted in some non-etymological tone marks in the standard spellings. For example, the historically correct spellings of โซ่ and เฒ่า (as in the letter names) would actually be *โส้ and *เถ้า, as seen in the Lao and Northern Thai scripts.

[Kellynch]

Richard - I just want to say 'Wow', just the ticket. Many thanks.

[AbeSurd]

Hi Kellynch

I feel like you're trying to find a shortcut around the tone rules.

If you know the tone rules, you would know when to write and not write a tone mark (at least, if you can remember the pronunciation). There are very few exceptions.

I think you'll be disappointed, but I think for a foreign language learner of Thai, learning the tone rules is by far better/easier than trying to remember how each word is written.

Hi,

I'm grateful for what you say. When you say I'm looking for a shortcut, then perhaps I asked the question in the wrong way. I'm not criticising the language, I know that some words have a marker and what that tone means; and when it doesn't have one then what tone to use. I dare say I will gradually get to know what words have them and those that don't, but I've just been wondering, is there a general rule of thumb of when a word has a marker and when it doesn't. You mention that if I know the tone rules then I would know when to use and not use a tone mark. Up to now, the books etc I'm reading tell me what tone to use when a marker is actually used and when they're not used when reading a word. I haven't come across anything..... yet, that tells me if there's a general rule of thumb of when/why a marker is actually used; some people have mentioned about the adoption of foreign sounding words. If I can use English as an example, the 'ph' has the sound of an 'f' unless it's something like the word 'Phi'. The use or non-use of tone markers is great for input but it's more difficult for say writing. At this stage of my learning, I may know how to say a Thai word and perhaps even the consonant and vowel, but if I want to write it down then should I use a tone marker or not? Is it just a case of experience? The word (send - ส่ง shows the low tone marker for the initial high class consonant). The word ( want - อยาก doesn't show the marker). I understand how the rule works to know that อยาก has a low tone, but I'm curious as to why they didn't put a tone marker in.

You probably know this already, but just in case: tone applies to syllables, not words.

[Kellynch]

Yup, I stand corrected, that's what I meant.