Jump to content

number in thai


wilkis333

Recommended Posts

1) 3.5% = sum zuuk haa %

2) 2008 = ๒๐๐๘

Can you explain how you get 'z' in a Thai word.

I've never seen a year AD expressed in Thai numerals. On the other hand, expressing a year BE in Western Arabic numerals is commonplace. I'm sticking to 2008 = ๒๕๕๑.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

พ.ศ. [por sor] is BE.

Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard [M]phaw [R]saw. I'm just used to hearing it in full - [H]phut[M]tha[L]sak[M]ka[F]raat. It's one of those long words that just trips off the tongue, like [H]rat[M]tha[M]mon[M]trii = 'government minister'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 3.5% = sum zuuk haa %

2) 2008 = ๒๐๐๘

Can you explain how you get 'z' in a Thai word.

/z/ isn't that far from /tɕ/, so it's not unreasonable in a personal, informal system. (If the writer is, say, a German speaker, then "j" wouldn't make sense.) I'd be more concerned about the vowel in sum, the terminal consonant in zuuk and the inconsistent vowel lengths. But apart from that (and not indicating tone) it's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 3.5% = sum zuuk haa %

2) 2008 = ๒๐๐๘

Can you explain how you get 'z' in a Thai word.

I've never seen a year AD expressed in Thai numerals. On the other hand, expressing a year BE in Western Arabic numerals is commonplace. I'm sticking to 2008 = ๒๕๕๑.

Will this help ? ( . ) = จุด = jut

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 3.5% = sum zuuk haa %

2) 2008 = ๒๐๐๘

Can you explain how you get 'z' in a Thai word.

I've never seen a year AD expressed in Thai numerals. On the other hand, expressing a year BE in Western Arabic numerals is commonplace. I'm sticking to 2008 = ๒๕๕๑.

Will this help ? ( . ) = จุด = jut

Just listen smile.png

http://www.thai-language.com/mp3/E131194.mp3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 3.5% = sum zuuk haa %

Can you explain how you get 'z' in a Thai word.

/z/ isn't that far from /tɕ/, so it's not unreasonable in a personal, informal system. (If the writer is, say, a German speaker, then "j" wouldn't make sense.) I'd be more concerned about the vowel in sum, the terminal consonant in zuuk and the inconsistent vowel lengths. But apart from that (and not indicating tone) it's fine.

Perhaps it's some weird Burmese accent, transcribed in English slapdash. We then get loss of vowel length, collapse of final stop distinctions, and the replacement /tɕ/ > unaspirated followed by voicing. Two aspects counter that idea:

  • Burmese now has a new /tɕ/, sometimes transliterated <ky>.
  • Original Burmese /s/ became /θ/, original /tɕ/ then became /s/, and original /ky/ (American notation) became /tɕ/.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...