AUA's don't try to speak it policy
Robert Nicholson
try to speak any Thai outside of class until 800 hours of study?
That's a very long time before you are allowed to talk Thai.
Andrew Lamb
> try to speak any Thai outside of class until 800 hours of study?
learning. I remember at the time that the AUA no-talk course went
against a lot of what I was learning. I've met three or four people who
have done that course and they all complained about it. They way they
spoke when they complained was revealing too. They always sounded
defeated and resigned, as if that course, regardless of what they may
have learnt from it, had destroyed their enthusiasm for learning the
language. I think no-talk must make it easy for the Thai teachers. No
being dominated or bossed around or otherwise harassed by eager but
clumsy farang learners.
Andrew
Robert Nicholson
before you know if you are learning anything if you folow their
recommendation.
david duryea
I taught English at AUA from 1983 to 1986 (this is in no way a
recommendation of their English program) and was fortunate enough to get
to know J. Marvin Brown, the man behind their Thai teaching method. In
the late 60's he and others published grammar-centered textbooks for
their Thai courses. I studied these for a year.
In the mid eighties Dr. Brown came to believe that the way they were
teaching wasn't really working right and adopted a more natural teaching
method based on how a child learns its first language. From his research
he found that if a student received communicative input just a little
bit above their comprehension level and didn't try to speak or memorize
or parse, then they would experience left brain language learning just
like a kid does. He found that after many hours of listening and
watching the teachers act out situations in Thai the students would
start speaking the language naturally without an accent. I did meet
some students who had studied this way for a long time and their Thai
was impeccable. Whether it was the system or just that they had a knack
for language learning I can't say.
Since I had learned some Thai before and had been speaking it with
my wife I was not an ideal student for the natural method. Getting my
accent right was like trying to straighten an already bent twig. But I
did enjoy taking the natural classes and found that my comprehension
improved by leaps and bounds. I returned and took classes there again
in the summer of 1990 while doing research for a masters degree in
linguistics.
My opinion of their is generally favorable and I found their
teachers to be very dedicated. I enjoyed the classes immensely and
loved the fact that I didn't have to do homework except for listening to
Thais talking in my everyday environment.
The students who felt that they had to know the grammar, take notes,
and have things explained did not like the classes. They were only
comfortable with the way they had studied other languages; grammar-based
learning using the right side of the brain. I personally trusted and
have nothing but the greatest respect for Dr. Brown and his methods. I
also loved the idea that I could just kick back and watch the show that
the teachers put on without the anxiety of having to produce, especially
early in the morning before the caffeine fully kicked in.
I don't think the cost was unreasonable (I paid half price as I was
teaching there), but if you're not willing to relax and trust their
method then it isn't for you. I know that as late as 1990 they were
offering both the natural and the traditional methods. I don't know if
this is the case now.
I hope this late night spaced out rambling sheds some light on your
concern.
David
Jos Flachs
<ste...@shell8.ba.best.com> wrote:
>What are peoples thoughts on AUA's policy that you shouldn't
>try to speak any Thai outside of class until 800 hours of study?
>That's a very long time before you are allowed to talk Thai.
It is.
I've been an AUA student for three years. Every day about three hours.
(Except Sundays). The first curriculum is very well structured. You
learn what you need to start with. However, that course lasts for just
three months. After that, little or no serious structure exists.
I enjoyed going to school, and the teachers are really good. I did
learn quite a bit of Thai. As Thai is a tonal langauge, this system is
useful.
I stopped for various reasons, the two most important ones: far too
much concentration on nouns. I think that is inherent to the system.
Second: I'm not a child. I already speak several languages. I'd like
to know the mechanics and structure (grammar) of the language. That
is a definite no-no at AUA. I strongly disagree with this. One is
forced to speak 'baby talk' far longer than is necessary.
In short: AUA is a very good language school if you can afford the
enormous amount of time required. Expect to be there for at least two
year (full time) or four (part time) EVERY day.
Jos Flachs
World Cruise Travel
Bangkok, Thailand.
--
Replying? Just remove the quotes.
Tonje Kristiansen
speak etc)?
Also - is the first cource (lowest level) always 3 months? I think I have
heard of an 8 week cource - anyone know about this?
Tonje
Tonje Kristiansen
the traditional courses. Does anyone know if they still do???
Tonje
david duryea <dsdu...@cats.ucsc.edu> skrev i artikkelen
<38C9FB56...@cats.ucsc.edu>...
> I taught English at AUA from 1983 to 1986 (this is in no way a
> recommendation of their English program) and was fortunate enough to get
> to know J. Marvin Brown, the man behind their Thai teaching method. In
> the late 60's he and others published grammar-centered textbooks for
> their Thai courses. I studied these for a year.
> In the mid eighties Dr. Brown came to believe that the way they were
> teaching wasn't really working right and adopted a more natural teaching
> method based on how a child learns its first language.
Davina Clampton (Miss)
<ste...@shell8.ba.best.com> wrote:
>What are peoples thoughts on AUA's policy that you shouldn't
>try to speak any Thai outside of class until 800 hours of study?
>
>That's a very long time before you are allowed to talk Thai.
Davina attended one 1 hour class a long time ago.
The words 'rip' and 'off' come to mind.
Luv,
Davina
rod
Thank you David, I've been trying to remember Dr Brown's name for some
time now but the memory failed. I studied at the AUA around 10 years
ago. Like you say, the idea behind the AUA is for the student to
"absorb" the language in a more natural fashion and improve your
understanding of the language. To my
mind that is exactly what the course did - improve understanding.
Learning a language is a two way street and if the learner just happens
to get the spoken Thai out correctly the reply that could come back at
break neck speed bamboozling him as he has never learnt to listen to
the language. AUA makes you listen , so improves understanding.
Another point of the AUA [ Dr Brown] method was that the Thai teachers
spoke
only Thai and the students spoke only English so, in general, no one
made a mistake
when trying to get a message across or replying to a teachers question
[providing you understood the Thai and the teacher grasped the English
of course!]. People can have a two way conversation in their native
language and providing the "understanding" of the other persons language
is good enough there is no need to be able speak it fluently.
AUA, good for helping to understand the language but I felt it didn't
help our
ability to speak Thai properly [or encourage us to "have a go" in the
classroom]. After all, who really want's to learn Thai without being
allowed to try and speak it - can't think of a situation more
"unnatural" myself! That was the main complaint from the students at
the time [and by some of the Thai staff too]. When the time eventually
came for the students to be let loose and attempt to speak Thai on their
own, they were either too scared to do so or tried only to fall flat on
their faces, because there was no previous [serious] attempt to practice
speaking the language or learning the structure. Even kids have a go at
speaking their own [or other] language while absorbing the fundamentals,
and even kids have to learn a language structure.
I can't believe that foreigners to Thailand can learn some of the sounds
associated with Thai e.g. "ngaw ngoo" without some extra help and
tuition other than the "natural" methods offered at the AUA. Reading,
even if it is only the vowel sounds, is a very important step when
learning Thai, as some of the sounds are so alien to the non Thai. One
Thai teacher I knew thought that foreigners to Thailand should spend 3
months learning the tones alone before attempting the language. [ and
looking back to the mess that I made of things when starting to learn
Thai, or judging the by some of the attempts made by new students of my
Thai teaching wife I see her point!]
For what it's worth I was lucky enough to have the time to combine the
AUA with a one to one approach at another school that also took in
reading and writing. Also I spent an age learning how to recognise &
speak the tones properly[ I hope!]. While learning it didn't stop me
"having a go" at the language, but with all the will in the world
whatever method you use to learn Thai it's going to be a long process
and mistakes are inevitably made.
.
The other thing of course is that depending on what sort of group you
have there, the social life can be great! :-)
Rod
david duryea wrote:
>
> Robert Nicholson wrote:
>
> > The concern I have is that you have to pay for 800 hours of study
> > before you know if you are learning anything if you folow their
> > recommendation.
>
> I taught English at AUA from 1983 to 1986 (this is in no way a
> recommendation of their English program) and was fortunate enough to get
> to know J. Marvin Brown, the man behind their Thai teaching method. In
> the late 60's he and others published grammar-centered textbooks for
> their Thai courses. I studied these for a year.
> In the mid eighties Dr. Brown came to believe that the way they were
> teaching wasn't really working right and adopted a more natural teaching
> method then it isn't for you. I know that as late as 1990 they were
> offering both the natural and the traditional methods. I don't know if
> this is the case now.
Johpa
classes do not emphasize speaking in the earliest months. The theory is that
young children listen well before they attempt production. The idea is very
sound but I believe it is in error to totally ignore production when teaching
adults who have much better production capabilities, are far more phonetically
mature, than children.
The structural methods which worked for many for years but bored and failed for
many also, are currently not in fashion in the linguistic world. I am surprised
if AUA has totally given up on Marvin Browns old structural course. My college
Thai professor used it very successfully in his small classes of motivated
students. His students were known to have some of the best pronunciation of
any of the people learning Thai in the US colleges, which there were very few
at the time, well under a dozen total classes.
Happy Trails
Johpa
Jos Flachs
>I thought AUA had both structural classes and "natural" classes. The "natural"
Hi Johpha,
The structural classes have been stopped around 1995-6.
>many also, are currently not in fashion in the linguistic world. I am surprised
>if AUA has totally given up on Marvin Browns old structural course. My college
AUA hasn't given it up, Dr. Brown has. Then, he was never much
interested in the structural appraoch.
Jos Flachs
<ste...@shell8.ba.best.com> wrote:
>The concern I have is that you have to pay for 800 hours of study
>before you know if you are learning anything if you folow their
>recommendation.
The money is not really the issue. When you go to a conventional
school, you have to work a lot harder and pay a lot more. But in the
end, you spent roughly the same amount.
The question is: do you want to spent 800 hours? That is a lot of
time. And... it IS a kind of gamble. Not everybody will be fluent
after the 800 hrs. Then what do you do? Spent another 800 hrs?
Torben Larsen
children do, trying to imitate the sounds from the parents or the
other kids, If you study another language you will eventually find out
which way is the naturel one, In my opinion it is not a rip off, can
you speak any language besides your naturel born language..??
regards Torben
On 11 Mar 2000 05:11:07 -0600, "Davina Clampton (Miss)"
<dav...@nirvana.com> wrote:
>On 10 Mar 2000 01:01:25 -0800, Robert Nicholson
Davina Clampton (Miss)
wrote:
>Khun Davina, the natural approch is a good one
Define 'good'. Most kids don't really master their own language until
somewhere in high school (some never). Most adults don't have 12-16
years to spare to learn a second language. A technique which doesn't
take into account the fact that adults have better structured learning
capabilities than children strikes me at best as miss-guided and
inefficient and at worst a simple rip off i.e. the classes might at
first seem cheap compared to other courses but by the time you have
slogged your way through the preliminaries you have spent more money -
and more importantly more valuable time - than with any other method.
>can you speak any language besides your naturel born language..??
Yes. French and Thai.
French was learned at school on a very structured basis and I would
consider it effective, in fact I had little formal understanding of
tense and conjugation in English until I studied French.
Thai was learned from various books, trial and error , and the
'lingaphone' course (Pom Chue Tom, Nam Sakun Brown, Pen Kon Angrit,
Pen Nak Toorakit etc - although I seem to remember that Khun Oy whose
Nam Sakun I forget was a Lekanukan as opposed to a Lekhanukarini but
I'll leave Joris to sort that one out).
My business over the last few years has relied on me being able to
understand spoken and written Thai. If I had followed the AUA course
I imagine I might be getting to the stage where they would be allowing
me to talk by now and the first word's I would have uttered in Thai
would have been 'tam my boorisat kong pom my mee look ka?' .
Frankly my life isn't long enough for AUA and if I had to sit through
a second hour of 'mee pon la my ary bang' the only understanding I
would likely have come to is why school kids would want to take a
rifle to school and shoot their teachers.
I think AUA admit that their technique is not for everyone. Presumably
they realise that a small percentage of the population have more than
one functioning brain cell and can recognise a rip off when they see
it (and hear it - but of course must never speak it).
Silently,
Davina
trans...@my-deja.com
dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
> Define 'good'. Most kids don't really master their own language until
> somewhere in high school (some never).
I don't agree. They master speaking their mother tongue quite well at
the age of 6 when they start going to school. They have then carried
through the most important education in their lives.
>Most adults don't have 12-16
> years to spare to learn a second language. A technique which doesn't
> take into account the fact that adults have better structured learning
> capabilities than children strikes me at best as miss-guided and
> inefficient and at worst a simple rip off i.e. the classes might at
> first seem cheap compared to other courses but by the time you have
> slogged your way through the preliminaries you have spent more money -
> and more importantly more valuable time - than with any other method.
>
I agree.
I would like to add that nowadays computers and multimedia can work
wonders in language leaning once the right programs have been developed.
Teachers and going to schools will be a thing of the past in language
learning.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Andrew lamb
> learning.
introduced in most western countries in the mid 1800s. At that time most
households did not have any literate or numerate adults, so if they
wanted their children to learn to read and write and do maths they had
to send them to a school because they couldn't teach them themselves.
Materials such as books were prohibitively expensive. Only schools could
afford books / libraries. Now in most (?) countries information is dirt
cheap, writing materials are cheap, and most households contain at least
one adult who can read and write and do maths. One hundred and fifty
years ago there was no choice for parents - If they wanted their
children to learn to read and write and do maths they had to send them
to school because they didn't have the resources to do it themselves.
Now most western households have the resources necessary to teach
children maths and reading.
However, pleasure addicts, and children who have been exposed to too
much tv and video games are unlikely to be able to put up with the slow
process of learning to read and write. There is a pleasure to be gained
from learning to read, the satisfaction of seeing your skills slowly
improve in proportion to the effort you put in, but the slow pleasure of
learning to read just can't compete with the instant high-thrill
gratification of modern children's games and media.
One of the major reasons that western governments introduced compulsory
education was to train the peasant hordes for useful work in an
industrial society, thus warding off the spectre of revolution that had
western governments in fear in those days.
I think two of King Chulalongkorn's major aims in setting up schools
were to pre-empt destructive rivalry from the thai upper classes, and to
help fend off colonialistic enchroachment by the west.
Andrew
trans...@my-deja.com
sae...@image.dk (Torben Larsen) wrote:
> Khun Davina, the natural approch is a good one, another is to learn as
> children do, trying to imitate the sounds from the parents or the
> other kids, If you study another language you will eventually find out
> you speak any language besides your naturel born language..??
>
Please don't use the term "natural born language". Nobody is born with
the ability to speak a language (as you are well aware). It always has
to be learnt somehow. The smartest way is to let one's child play with
other children who are a little older and can speak the language. That's
how it's done usually. The child goes through an educational process
without this being realized. Once one language has been learnt, this
should be taken advantage of when learning another language (like Ms.
Clampton says).
Torben Larsen
wrong, we all probably know I meant mother tongue, since I didnt know
which language was the first one.
I agree with the childrens ability to learn by playing with others is
the smartest.
regards Torben
trans...@my-deja.com
"Tonje Kristiansen" <tonj...@online.no> wrote:
> Does AUA have other cources in Thai than the "natural" one (don't try
to
> speak etc)?
Doesn't sound very natural to me.
trans...@my-deja.com
Classroom education, where you gather a number of pupils around a
teacher - one of the few persons in the village able to read and do math
- in a schoolhouse, was the most cost-efficient way in those days to
disseminate knowledge. The subsequent vast expansion of compulsory
education in the form of schoolhouse teaching probably was due more to
the financial interests of the teaching profession that had emerged
rather than to the actual needs of the society.
The sad thing about compulsory education is that the pupils in the
monocultural environment tend to loose interest in what they are
supposed to learn, no matter how well organized the teaching attempts
are. "Johnny can't read," the hit song goes. The bigger the institutions
get, the more naughty, inattentive, childish and irresponsible the
pupils get.
During recent decades, teachers have tried to make classroom education
more appealing by discarding learning by rote, saying that it is more
important that you know where to find the information than mastering the
information. But in many subjects, not least languages, there are things
you need to learn by rote. Rote learning is embarrassing both to the
teacher and to the student. But by means of a computer with a
multi-media teaching program you can rehearse the same topic a thousand
times over without embarrassment and eventually master it perfectly.
Therefore, and because electronics is getting cheaper and cheaper and
more and more powerful, I think that learning by computer and
multi-media will overtake classroom teaching. It is simply more
efficient.
By replacing schoolhouse teaching by teaching by computers, governments
could save zillions of dollars of the taxpayers' money on their
educational budgets. Schoolhouses will in the future probably be used
mainly as centers for tutors supervising students working individually
by means of computers and for holding examinations under controlled
circumstances and issuing diplomas. Also, they will be used for social
gatherings where you sing the national anthem, do folk dancing, hold
concerts and exhibit works of art.
Admittedly, the emphasis at the moment is on computer games. Throughout
Bangkok you have shops where kids sit in front of video monitors after
school hours and kill aliens and sink warships. Here they learn some
English expressions such as "mission completed," "target destroyed" and
"return to base".
As the Thais believe more in institutions and symbols than in intrinsic
value, the switch to computerized education will probably take place in
Thailand at a relatively late stage.
Tonje Kristiansen
> > "Tonje Kristiansen" <tonj...@online.no> wrote:
> > Does AUA have other cources in Thai than the "natural" one (don't try
> > to speak etc)?
> Doesn't sound very natural to me.
Well, that's the point!
AUA has courses that follows Mr. Brown's theory of learning the "natural"
way - that is, learning not by "studying" the language in a "traditional"
way (what I'm used to), but by...letting it get under your skin over time.
What I've understood, part of the theory is that you are not
allowed/supposed to try to speak thai until way out in the course. I am
asking if anyone know if AUA still have "traditional" language courses
because 1. I have heard they used to have, 2. I would rather take a
"traditional" course. So - can you help?
Tonje
trans...@my-deja.com
don't know anything about AUA's Thai teaching. I know they have a book
on Thai which you can buy at Asia Bookshop or somewhere. I don't know
how the language can get under my skin if I am not allowed to speak - or
try to speak - it. If the teachers speak Thai only, that's always
something because to some extent it forces the students to concentrate
on Thai (provided they don't speak too much English with one
another).But the teachers can't explain the theory about the Thai
language in Thai. Or rather they can, but the students can't understand
it. I wonder if this "natural" course includes learning how to write
Thai.
I have met one student who had learnt English at AUA. Her pronunciation
was good. But I don't know if she picked it up at AUA.
I am convinced that once the right programmes have been designed and put
on CDs and DVDs, the most efficient way of learning languages will be by
means of computers and multi-media.
Johpa
>Please don't use the term "natural born language". Nobody is born with
>the ability to speak a language (as you are well aware)....
>The child goes through an educational process
>without this being realized. Once one language has been learnt, this
>should be taken advantage of when learning another language
Actually we are all born with the ability to naturally learn a language during
our early years but the jury is still out whether we retain that same ability
as the brain matures. The "natural" methods of language learning borrow
heavily from the child's manner of learning (simplified as understanding,
thought, production) but whether adults learn in this manner is still very
controversial. Nonetheless, the natural methods are very effective for
beginning stages for many people.
Happy Trails
Johpa
Barclay Hershey
the AUA in BKK only the "natural" language approach is used for teaching
Thai. I have been told that the AUA branches in ChiangMai teach using
traditional i.e. not "natural" methods, but I can't confirm this. Upon
appraching the 200 hr mark I realized I could understand simple things.
People would ask me if I was hungry, where I was going, or similar common
statements and I could understand them, but since I hadn't practiced
speaking I had no way of answering them. This lead to their believing I
hadn't understood their question. This caused extreme frustration for me.
Regarding the validity of the no speaking rule, my medical anthropolgist
friend and fellow student at AUA, told me that research indicated that
babies don't talk because their vocal cords aren't sufficiently developed.
Specifically, hearing babies of death parents will start babbling in sign
language much earlier than in spoken language even when they have had equal
exposure to both languages; such as from one death parent and one non-death
parent, or a live-in non-death nanny.
Sincerely,
Barclay
trans...@my-deja.com
"Barclay Hershey" <bh...@cornell.edu> wrote:
> I studied at the AUA in BKK during summer '99 for about 200 hours. At
> the AUA in BKK only the "natural" language approach is used for
teaching
> Thai. I have been told that the AUA branches in ChiangMai teach using
> traditional i.e. not "natural" methods, but I can't confirm this. Upon
> appraching the 200 hr mark I realized I could understand simple
things.
> People would ask me if I was hungry, where I was going, or similar
common
> statements and I could understand them, but since I hadn't practiced
> speaking I had no way of answering them. This lead to their believing
I
> hadn't understood their question. This caused extreme frustration for
me.
I'm puzzled. I could teach you that in one hour.
I don't know why people go to schools to learn Thai. Just sit down and
concentrate on THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE THAI LANGUAGE (the original
version) and ROBERTSON'S THAI-ENGLISH DICTIONRY. Have your Thai girl
friend or the man next door talk in the Thai text on tape or computer
sound file. Listen to it over and over again. Imitate it. Learn to say
and write 1,000 Thai words. Then you will soon master the Thai language.
Andrew lamb
> our early years but the jury is still out whether we retain that same ability
> as the brain matures.
and this plays an important part in language learning.
Music and singing in a child's early years can have a big effect on
their language abilities later in life according to some research I've
read.
Andrew
John Sharman
>I don't know why people go to schools to learn Thai. Just sit down and
>concentrate on THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE THAI LANGUAGE (the original
>version) and ROBERTSON'S THAI-ENGLISH DICTIONRY. Have your Thai girl
>friend or the man next door talk in the Thai text on tape or computer
>sound file. Listen to it over and over again. Imitate it. Learn to say
>and write 1,000 Thai words. Then you will soon master the Thai language.
That is very good advice in respect of which I would suggest only the
following few modifications or additions:
1. Do the work on learning the Thai character set and the sounds of
the Thai language before you tackle the Fundamentals of the Thai
Language (5th Edition). An excellent publication but, perhaps, a
little advanced for the absolute beginner.
2. Substitute Sethaputra's dictionary (library edition) for
Robertson's
3. When learning the character set get hold of one of the books
produced for young Thai school children. Typically they contain
exercises to teach the correct method of forming the various
characters; very useful. Most stationers have them for around 20 baht.
--
Regards,
John Sharman
Tel/Fax: [+44] (0)1603 452142
Andrew lamb
> >version) and ROBERTSON'S THAI-ENGLISH DICTIONRY. Have your Thai girl
> 1. Do the work on learning the Thai character set and the sounds of
> the Thai language before you tackle the Fundamentals of the Thai
> Language (5th Edition). An excellent publication but, perhaps, a
> little advanced for the absolute beginner.
Yes. I used "Easy Thai" by Gordon Allison to help me memorize the
characters before I started on Fundamentals.
> 2. Substitute Sethaputra's dictionary (library edition) for
> Robertson's
Well the great thing about Robertson's dictionary is that it can fit in
your pocket when you're out and about in Thailand, and it contains only
the most common and important words. A big complete dictionary like
Sethaputra's can someties have a demoralising effect.
> 3. When learning the character set get hold of one of the books
> produced for young Thai school children. Typically they contain
> exercises to teach the correct method of forming the various
> characters; very useful. Most stationers have them for around 20 baht.
Yes, I did that too.
There's one other thing that I did when learning Thai, and that was to
read aloud from the primary school grade 1 reading books (Manee and Mana
books). If you read with the correct tones your face should start to
ache from moving all those delicate speech muscles in unfamiliar
sequences.I could only last about two pages before my face would ache so
much I had to stop.
I also found the Alphabet Book from the Linguaphone Institute Thai
Course to be very good for learning the spelling / pronunciation rules.
Andrew
trans...@my-deja.com
Andrew lamb <adl...@platypus.net.au> wrote:
> > >concentrate on THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE THAI LANGUAGE (the original
> > >version) and ROBERTSON'S THAI-ENGLISH DICTIONRY. Have your Thai
girl
> I definitely agree with that.
>
> > 1. Do the work on learning the Thai character set and the sounds of
> > the Thai language before you tackle the Fundamentals of the Thai
> > Language (5th Edition). An excellent publication but, perhaps, a
> > little advanced for the absolute beginner.
> Yes. I used "Easy Thai" by Gordon Allison to help me memorize the
> characters before I started on Fundamentals.
I don't think Fundamentals is too advanced for the beginner. But the
best editions to use are the early editions, because in later editions
phonetic transcription has replaced transliteration, which means that
the learner has to learn one more alphabet besides the Thai alphabet.
This isn't really necessary because the learner should pick up the
pronunciation from his Thai surroundings. Phonetic transcription is only
for academics and, after the introduction of electronic recording
devices, not of any practical value in language learning.
The authors of Fundamentals, Campbell and Shaweewongse, should probably,
if they are still around, each be given a medal for their contribution
to the advancement of Thai language proficiency among non-Thais.
>
> > 2. Substitute Sethaputra's dictionary (library edition) for
> > Robertson's
> Well the great thing about Robertson's dictionary is that it can fit
in
> your pocket when you're out and about in Thailand, and it contains
only
> the most common and important words. A big complete dictionary like
> Sethaputra's can someties have a demoralising effect.
Oops! I think Robertson's was English-Thai, not Thai-English. Anyway,
it's the one to use for the beginner because Sethaputra's is too
overwhelming for the beginner. But the learner will definitely need
Sethaputra's at a later stage when he starts deciphering Thai texts.
Before that, the learner should learn to write about 1,000 Thai words.
Otherwise he will not be able to single out the individual words in a
text because the Thais don't make space between words. Also, he should
learn how a Thai dictionary is arranged. It's all explained in
Fundamentals.
Sethaputra's is also available on CD. If using computer, the learner
might as well learn how to type Thai from a program on CD. By the way,
the Thai version of Office 2000 has got a simple English-Thai
dictionary. Problem is you can't copy from it.
>
> > 3. When learning the character set get hold of one of the books
> > produced for young Thai school children. Typically they contain
> > exercises to teach the correct method of forming the various
> > characters; very useful. Most stationers have them for around 20
baht.
> Yes, I did that too.
That's right. Then you learn to write like Thai children do. These
GorGai-KorKai exercise books the learner probably can't get in the
tourist bookshops. He has to go to the real Thai bookshops or
stationers.
>
[clipped]
John Sharman
>In article <38D1F692...@platypus.net.au>,
>Andrew lamb <adl...@platypus.net.au> wrote:
[..]
>> > 1. Do the work on learning the Thai character set and the sounds of
>> > the Thai language before you tackle the Fundamentals of the Thai
>> > Language (5th Edition). An excellent publication but, perhaps, a
>> > little advanced for the absolute beginner.
>> Yes. I used "Easy Thai" by Gordon Allison to help me memorize the
>> characters before I started on Fundamentals.
>
>I don't think Fundamentals is too advanced for the beginner.
No criticism at all intended of TFOTTL (Fifth Edition that is - the
Sixth is rubbish). It's just a question of trying to run before you
can walk. IMHO, if you start in on a book like that before acquiring a
good grasp of the sounds, the tones and the character set, it will be
a partly counter-productive exercise. If you have a native Thai
speaker to help you with every page of your textbook, then fine.
Sadly, I did not enjoy that luxury. The trouble is that as you work
with the book in a language with an unfamiliar set of sounds different
from one's own mother tongue, you cannot help but develop an incorrect
concept of those sounds. That means that you are building upon errors
which will have to be corrected later. OTOH Once you have grasped the
phonetic basics, you have a sound foundation from which to progress. I
have no doubt at all that TFOTTL was greatly enhanced for me because
as I worked my way through it I was memorising correct as opposed to
incorrect pronunciations. If only there were some easy way of learning
the appropriate rhythm patterns for spoken Thai!
> But the
>best editions to use are the early editions, because in later editions
>phonetic transcription has replaced transliteration, which means that
>the learner has to learn one more alphabet besides the Thai alphabet.
Yep, go for the black cover and avoid the mauve cover like the plague.
>This isn't really necessary because the learner should pick up the
>pronunciation from his Thai surroundings. Phonetic transcription is only
>for academics and, after the introduction of electronic recording
>devices, not of any practical value in language learning.
>
>The authors of Fundamentals, Campbell and Shaweewongse, should probably,
>if they are still around, each be given a medal for their contribution
>to the advancement of Thai language proficiency among non-Thais.
ISTR that Danny Speight was trying to track them down some time ago.
Any luck, Danny? To go by the book itself, one would expect not. The
preface to the Second Edition (reprinted in the 5th) is (mis-)printed
as being dated 1862! The first preface was dated 1956, though, so the
authors would be rather venerable gentlemen by now. But you are
certainly right, theirs was a remarkable achievement. Within 500 pages
they packed enough to give any English-speaking Farang a good,
comprehensible and digestible grounding in this wonderful language.
>> > 2. Substitute Sethaputra's dictionary (library edition) for
>> > Robertson's
>> Well the great thing about Robertson's dictionary is that it can fit
>in
>> your pocket when you're out and about in Thailand, and it contains
>only
>> the most common and important words. A big complete dictionary like
>> Sethaputra's can someties have a demoralising effect.
Well, each to his own, but I have never been a great enthusiast for
pocket dictionaries (although at various times I must have bought a
dozen or more of them!) I find that I never use the ones that I have.
If they are physically small enough to justify the description
"pocket" then the print (especially in Thai) is unreadably small and
the text dangerously curt. The only thing I find intimidating about
Sethaputra's is the effort required to lift the volumes! But that is
for home study. For learning "on the road" I prefer home made flash
cards.
>Oops! I think Robertson's was English-Thai, not Thai-English. Anyway,
>it's the one to use for the beginner because Sethaputra's is too
>overwhelming for the beginner. But the learner will definitely need
>Sethaputra's at a later stage when he starts deciphering Thai texts.
>Before that, the learner should learn to write about 1,000 Thai words.
>Otherwise he will not be able to single out the individual words in a
>text because the Thais don't make space between words. Also, he should
>learn how a Thai dictionary is arranged. It's all explained in
>Fundamentals.
Another matter dealt with lightly in TFOTTL is the question of
alternative textbooks. They refer approvingly to "the excellent books
of Cartwright and Eagling" but describe them as "both long-since out
of print". Is anybody familiar with either of these? I do not believe
that I have ever seen them.
>
>Sethaputra's is also available on CD.
I have on CD what appears to be a cut-down version of the Desk
Edition. Is the library addition available on CD? If so, I must
certainly get it.
> If using computer, the learner
>might as well learn how to type Thai from a program on CD. By the way,
>the Thai version of Office 2000 has got a simple English-Thai
>dictionary. Problem is you can't copy from it.
Hmm. I always tend to be wary of v1.00 of any Microsoft product.
Accordingly, on my systems here in the UK I am sticking to Windows 98
(Second Edition) for the time being and Office 97 SR2. however, it is
my intention when in Thailand in a few weeks' time to purchase a new
desktop machine for use there and I shall have to consider carefully
whether or not to go for the Thai version of Office 2000. Is it fully
backward compatible? Any sign of a Thai release of ViaVoice (or any
other speech recognition software that can cope with Thai) yet?
Tommy McGhee
John Sharman <jay...@norvic.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:38d20059...@news.demon.co.uk...
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 04:24:17 GMT, trans...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> >I don't know why people go to schools to learn Thai. Just sit down and
> >version) and ROBERTSON'S THAI-ENGLISH DICTIONRY. Have your Thai girl
> >sound file. Listen to it over and over again. Imitate it. Learn to say
> >and write 1,000 Thai words. Then you will soon master the Thai language.
>
> That is very good advice in respect of which I would suggest only the
> following few modifications or additions:
>
> the Thai language before you tackle the Fundamentals of the Thai
> Language (5th Edition). An excellent publication but, perhaps, a
> little advanced for the absolute beginner.
>
> Robertson's
>
> produced for young Thai school children. Typically they contain
> exercises to teach the correct method of forming the various
> characters; very useful. Most stationers have them for around 20 baht.
John,
I respect your advice above all other's when it comes to farang - Thai
learning threads. My wife bought a video tape in Thailand to teach my 2 1/2
year old to learn the language. Although he stands with his fingers in his
ears and screams "NOOOO" while it's on, I have found it invaluable.
I have constantly read here that the most important thing is to come to
terms with the character set and the script to develop the proper
pronunciation.
I would like to ask if it's possible to learn conversational Thai without
going to these lengths, by purely listening to and imitating the
pronunciation of certain phrases. I have no desire to discuss politics or
the meaning of life while in Thailand, especially in the places I go to
where they don't even speak Thai as a first language. I'd only like to learn
enough to get me by, like I'm sorry I fell asleep in your mother's garden
last night with the dogs and frogs, etc. I understand there is a level of
effort required, but I am also in the midst of some professional learning
and I'd like to find a simple way of learning "enough" Thai, if possible.
Regards,
TMcG
John Sharman
<t...@mcghee7062001.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>John Sharman <jay...@norvic.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:38d20059...@news.demon.co.uk...
>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 04:24:17 GMT, trans...@my-deja.com wrote:
>I respect your advice above all other's when it comes to farang - Thai
>learning threads.
Thank you, Tommy, for that most welcome complement although my
pleasure is attenuated somewhat by noting your admiration (expressed
elsewhere) for the astuteness of Rinpoche :-)
> My wife bought a video tape in Thailand to teach my 2 1/2
>year old to learn the language. Although he stands with his fingers in his
>ears and screams "NOOOO" while it's on, I have found it invaluable.
I have noted many times before that the children of parents with
different mother tongues often exhibit extreme reluctance to learn the
parental language which is "foreign" to the place in which they
normally live. That reluctance seems to be much greater than would be
the case if they were simply learning an arm's length foreign language
with which neither of the parents was familiar. This phenomenon is so
widespread that there must be some good psychological basis for it,
although I cannot imagine what that basis might be. It doesn't seem to
happen in households where the parents habitually alternate between
their two respective native languages in conversation between
themselves.
>I have constantly read here that the most important thing is to come to
>terms with the character set and the script to develop the proper
>pronunciation.
Yes, if you want to really "learn" the language, then I am sure that
that is right. It all depends upon the target that you set for
yourself. If all you want to do is to achieve a level of facility
sufficient to go shopping and move around town in the course of
occasional visits, then the investment of time and effort in acquiring
a thorough knowledge of the building blocks of the language would
undoubtedly be wasted.
For many years now I have had the intention that I shall, some day,
move to live permanently (or almost permanently) in Thailand. Once I
had formed that intention it was obvious to me that there was great
benefit to be had in acquiring a fairly thorough knowledge of the
language. Apart from the obvious implications in terms of
communication with the locals and the ability to acquire information
(at all levels) by reading, there is no doubt that speaking Thai to a
reasonable standard is one of the few ways in which someone like me
can gain a degree of approval and respect so as to elevate one's
status in the hierarchy above the very low "farang" level.
Additionally, it makes it much harder for my wife to take the piss
when chatting to her friends in my presence :-)
>I would like to ask if it's possible to learn conversational Thai without
>going to these lengths, by purely listening to and imitating the
>pronunciation of certain phrases. I have no desire to discuss politics or
>the meaning of life while in Thailand, especially in the places I go to
>where they don't even speak Thai as a first language. I'd only like to learn
>enough to get me by, like I'm sorry I fell asleep in your mother's garden
>last night with the dogs and frogs, etc. I understand there is a level of
>effort required, but I am also in the midst of some professional learning
>and I'd like to find a simple way of learning "enough" Thai, if possible.
Of course that is perfectly feasible and, I would venture to suggest,
that is the course most commonly adopted by farangs who marry Thai
wives without any intention to live and work in Thailand. And it works
fine.
For you, given the target that you state, I would guess that knowledge
of /khOO+ thoot"/ and /mao-/ plus a vocabulary of no more than 500
everyday words would enable you to make yourself clearly understood in
the majority of situations in which you are likely to find yourself.
You will not speak the language eloquently or well (although you will
certainly receive many /phuud" thai- keng'/ compliments) but thus
equipped you should be able to communicate with the Thai people about
as well as an average Pattaya bargirl can talk to her clients - more
than adequate for the purposes in hand.
I have one friend (a Londoner by origin) who has been living and
working in Pattaya for upwards of 15 years. I would guess that his
vocabulary in Thai does not extend to more than 300 words. He makes no
attempt at all at correct tone production and so far as I am aware has
zero knowledge of the Thai character set. But it is enough for him to
get by comfortably. Beyond that he is not interested and why should he
be?
trans...@my-deja.com
"Tommy McGhee" <t...@mcghee7062001.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> John,
>
> I respect your advice above all other's when it comes to farang - Thai
> learning threads. My wife bought a video tape in Thailand to teach my
2 1/2
> year old to learn the language. Although he stands with his fingers in
his
> ears and screams "NOOOO" while it's on, I have found it invaluable.
> I have constantly read here that the most important thing is to come
to
> terms with the character set and the script to develop the proper
> pronunciation.
> I would like to ask if it's possible to learn conversational Thai
without
> going to these lengths, by purely listening to and imitating the
> pronunciation of certain phrases. I have no desire to discuss politics
or
> the meaning of life while in Thailand, especially in the places I go
to
> where they don't even speak Thai as a first language. I'd only like to
learn
> enough to get me by, like I'm sorry I fell asleep in your mother's
garden
> last night with the dogs and frogs, etc. I understand there is a level
of
> effort required, but I am also in the midst of some professional
learning
> and I'd like to find a simple way of learning "enough" Thai, if
possible.
>
> Regards,
>
> TMcG
>
>
I originally had the same idea. I only wanted to be able to say things
like: Please wash my shirts. Please polish my shoes. Please bring my
breakfast. But I got hooked and studied the language thoroughly. It
takes quite some time before you can read the newspapers, but you will
soon be able to read the Thai part of street signs.Many non-Thais can
speak some Thai. Only few non-Thais have taken the trouble to learn to
read and write the language. The writing system is a bit complicated.
The Thai alphabet was not originally designed for the Thai language. It
is a modified version of the Indian Devanagari alphabet.
There is no chance that your son little son can pick up Thai language
from a video tape. Children learn language through playing with other
children. A grown-up can learn something from a video tape.
trans...@my-deja.com
jay...@norvic.demon.co.uk wrote:
[snipped]
> Apart from the obvious implications in terms of
> communication with the locals and the ability to acquire information
> (at all levels) by reading, there is no doubt that speaking Thai to a
> reasonable standard is one of the few ways in which someone like me
> can gain a degree of approval and respect so as to elevate one's
> status in the hierarchy above the very low "farang" level.
> Additionally, it makes it much harder for my wife to take the piss
> when chatting to her friends in my presence :-)
>
in the hierarchy in Thailand. On the contrary, it lowers your status.
You become one of them. Only if you master the Thai language very well
will it eventually elevate your status - and very substantially. The
reason is that with a high degree of bilingual proficiency you often are
able to perform tasks or solve problems that others can't perform
or solve. You can manage much more effectively and economically. This is
of the outmost importance in for example the legal and accounting
professions now to be opened to non-Thais due to WTO-pressure. Thai law
and accounting firms attempting to work internationally have in the past
lost millions of baht on blunders committed by staff with inadequate
language proficiency.
Davina Clampton (Miss)
>The funny thing is that knowledge of Thai does not elevate your status
>in the hierarchy in Thailand. On the contrary, it lowers your status.
>You become one of them.
I agree with the first 2 sentences but not the 3rd. I think the
reasons why it lowers your status are different depending on which
part of society you are dealing with but are never to do with
'becoming one of them'. In the case of typical Bangkok Chinese Thais
the reasons are more concerned with:
(a) Threat. The Thai upper classes seem to live in a cosy little world
behind a Siamese smile that they think is unassailable. When they
perceive a farang is getting under the veneer that holds what is
intrinsically a potentially volatile and fractious society together I
think they get worried - where will it end?. They know they can
subjugate the rural Thais but western influence need to be strictly
controlled. If the masses were to start getting uppity and declaring
western style rights and refusing to toe the Thai Chinese line things
could get ugly (i.e. the ethnic majority could assume control of the
country and the present elite could lose their control and wealth).
(b) Loss of face on the part of the foreigner. Thais are prepared to
consider that a foreigner might be an expert in something and will
suffer them for a short while. When a foreigner sticks around long
enough to learn Thai properly questions are automatically raised. Why
is he here? Either he is a sexual pervert (true in my case) or he has
designs on Thailand in which case refer to (a) above.
>Only if you master the Thai language very well
>will it eventually elevate your status.
I think true to some extent if the language ability is combined with
other highly developed ability. Language alone is unlikely perform
miracles - there are plenty of bilingual Thais. (We are talking true
technical and business fluency here).
>The reason is that with a high degree of bilingual proficiency you often are
>able to perform tasks or solve problems that others can't perform
>or solve.
Please humour me again for offering a different possible reason.
I think the real reason is related to (a) above. With true language
fluency you can cut through the veneer and the bullshit. It's not that
Thai's don't know how to do it properly they just don't for various
reasons and anyone who tries to change things will be met by the
Siamese smile and chosen miss-understanding. With true fluency you can
wipe the smile off their face. I have lost count of the number of
times I have been met by blank faces around a meeting table when I
have been forced to speak in Thai about something they just don't want
to hear and in anger have turned to discuss the subject with the tea
lady to demonstrate to them that I am perfectly aware there is nothing
wrong with my Thai only their brains. It doesn't make me a lot of
friends but people quickly learn not to use the tired old feigned lack
of understanding approach with me.
>This is of the outmost importance in for example the legal and accounting
>professions now to be opened to non-Thais due to WTO-pressure.
News to me. Tell me more please.
______________________________________________________________
Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com
Only $8.95 A Month, - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
John Sharman
>In article <38d3643...@news.demon.co.uk>,
>jay...@norvic.demon.co.uk wrote:
>[snipped]
>> Apart from the obvious implications in terms of
>> communication with the locals and the ability to acquire information
>> (at all levels) by reading, there is no doubt that speaking Thai to a
>> reasonable standard is one of the few ways in which someone like me
>> can gain a degree of approval and respect so as to elevate one's
>> status in the hierarchy above the very low "farang" level.
>> Additionally, it makes it much harder for my wife to take the piss
>> when chatting to her friends in my presence :-)
>>
>The funny thing is that knowledge of Thai does not elevate your status
>in the hierarchy in Thailand. On the contrary, it lowers your status.
I suspect that you and I are considering two very different
situations. It sounds as though you are contemplating a business/work
environment in a large city whereas I have in mind a small up-country
village. In the former context I think that your conclusion may very
well be right. But it is not at all the same /baan" nOOk"/ in a
community in which even the English teacher cannot speak
comprehensible English.
>You become one of them.
Never. No chance. Not ever. If I were to live in Thailand for a
hundred years and learn to speak the language indistinguishably from a
native I would never become "one of them" in their eyes.
> Only if you master the Thai language very well
>will it eventually elevate your status - and very substantially. The
>reason is that with a high degree of bilingual proficiency you often are
>able to perform tasks or solve problems that others can't perform
>or solve.
That is part of it. I already have direct experience of this in a very
minor way. If the local police in my /muu' baan"/ have a problem
(usually a road traffic accident) involving a farang and if they know
that I am there, they usually call me out to act not only as
interpreter but also, in a sense, as mediator. Similarly, about three
or four years ago the village headman told me that henceforth I would
be welcome to attend the formal village meetings which are held from
time to time and that I was at liberty to speak at those meetings if I
wished. I do attend the meetings but have never yet spoken there
because I still feel that it would be presumptuous of me to do so.
None of this implies that I am regarded as "one of them" but it is
indicative that I have attained a degree of acceptance which I did not
previously enjoy. Without my efforts to acquire a rudimentary command
of the language it would not and could not have happened.
> You can manage much more effectively and economically. This is
>of the outmost importance in for example the legal and accounting
>professions now to be opened to non-Thais due to WTO-pressure. Thai law
>and accounting firms attempting to work internationally have in the past
>lost millions of baht on blunders committed by staff with inadequate
>language proficiency.
Are these changes a reality or merely a concept to which lip-service
is paid in the course of discussions? Such an alteration in the rules
is clearly required in the best interests of the country and its
economy but nevertheless the protectionist attitudes entrenched within
the Thai professions are both strong and understandable.
trans...@my-deja.com
dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
[snipped]
> I think true to some extent if the language ability is combined with
> other highly developed ability. Language alone is unlikely perform
> miracles - there are plenty of bilingual Thais. (We are talking true
> technical and business fluency here).
>
There are very few Thais who can speak and write English well. I have
just been looking at the website of a very big Thai telecommunications
company:
http://phonelink.net
Please take a look at it. There are numereous funny language mistakes.
and remember, this is Thai blue chip.
You are right, of course, that for the non-
Thai person, language proficiency should be combined with other skills.
I'm good at bean counting.
[snipped]
> >This is of the outmost importance in for example the legal and
accounting
> >professions now to be opened to non-Thais due to WTO-pressure.
>
> News to me. Tell me more please.
>
>
Now, I may have made a mistake in the question of citizenship of
children of mixed marriages. I'm not going to make another one. I want
to read the original Thai acts on this matter before I say more. Where
in Bangkok can I buy the Thai Government Gazette?
Sithipat Palanandana
must say that he is doing a good job being a grammatical watcher on
articles posted by such as Phonelink, Bangkok Post and etc. I agree that
few Thai people can speak and write English well in term of the ratio (No.
of Thais who can speak and write English well / No. of the population). Now
it's just my curiosity that up to what point he/she can be considered to be
good at writing English. Must it be grammatically correct, understandable,
and complex? I am positive that even some Americans can't even write
English well from what I have experienced.
">The funny thing is that knowledge of Thai does not elevate your status
>in the hierarchy in Thailand. On the contrary, it lowers your status.
>You become one of them."
Does this mean that learning Thai language is useless? Well, as a
pessimistic person who doesn't appreciate anything regarding Thais, the
above quote might be true. What a poor person he/she is by living in some
place where it is not his/her native soil. The intenseness deeply inside is
understandable for the person who live faraway from home and end up with
somewhere he/she is not comfortable with.
Finally, if any wrong grammar is found in this post, please let me know. I
will greatly appreciate as a person who wants to speak and write English
well which will be combined with my Ph.D. knowledge in Civil Engineering.
Davina Clampton (Miss)
>There are very few Thais who can speak and write English well. I have
>just been looking at the website of a very big Thai telecommunications
>company:
>http://phonelink.net
>Please take a look at it. There are numereous funny language mistakes.
>and remember, this is Thai blue chip.
>
Mistakes in English on a web-site or anywhere else are irrelevant.
Thais who have good English would not be wasting their time working on
a web page.
There are countless Thai's with amazingly good English (better than
most of the people who post here). Two of them work for me. If I asked
them to work on a web page they would quit. One of them - a lady
educated in the and of Oz - would tell me to 'fuck off mate'.
I have not looked at the web page but I can guess that the people who
prepared it will be earning somewhere between 15,000 and 25,000 THB
per month (375 to 625 USD). Show me a farang who could (on his own)
produce a web page in Thai with fewer mistakes and would be willing to
work for this kind of salary.
Sithipat Palanandana
trans...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Finally, if any wrong grammar is found in this post, please let me
> know. I
> > will greatly appreciate as a person who wants to speak and write
> English
> > well which will be combined with my Ph.D. knowledge in Civil
> Engineering.
> >
> The last sentence is not in correct English. If you write like that in a
> Ph.D. dissertation to a U.S. university, it won't be accepted. (Not if
> it's Ivy League anyway.) But it would take me some time to explain
> theoretically what's wrong.
>
Thanks for your advice. I hope you can explain theoretically though.
Sithipat Palanandana
still working on my dissertation and trying hard to get it done at the end of
this year.
Andrew lamb wrote:
> > Finally, if any wrong grammar is found in this post, please let me know. I
> > will greatly appreciate as a person who wants to speak and write English
> > well which will be combined with my Ph.D. knowledge in Civil Engineering.
> Dear Dr. Sithipat,
> Although it is easy for most native English speakers to detect
> grammatical errors, it can be very difficult to explain why something is
> wrong, or to give helpful advice on how to fix an error. Detecting
> errors can be done by 'gut instinct' but explaining how to fix them
> takes a lot of specialized knowledge and practise. I worked at
> Chulalongkorn University Language Institute for one year. The Thai
> Ajarns would often have arguments with each other over grammatical or
> vocab points of English. Then they would call in us English 'experts' to
> support their arguments. They were always able to find highly educated
> farang teachers to take *both* sides of their English-grammar/vocab
> disputes. Also in spoken English, it is very rare for anyone to speak
> with correct grammar. Only when reading formal speeches is spoken
> English likely to be completely grammatically correct.
> That said, you have used the word "appreciate" (above) without a noun
> or pronoun after it. It would sound more correct to me if you wrote
> "appreciate it", but my dialect is Australian English, so no doubt
> others on sct will disagree with me.
>
> Andrew
Andrew lamb
trans...@my-deja.com
dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
> Mistakes in English on a web-site or anywhere else are irrelevant.
> Thais who have good English would not be wasting their time working on
> a web page.
>
> There are countless Thai's with amazingly good English (better than
> most of the people who post here). Two of them work for me. If I asked
> them to work on a web page they would quit. One of them - a lady
> educated in the and of Oz - would tell me to 'fuck off mate'.
>
> I have not looked at the web page but I can guess that the people who
> prepared it will be earning somewhere between 15,000 and 25,000 THB
> per month (375 to 625 USD). Show me a farang who could (on his own)
> produce a web page in Thai with fewer mistakes and would be willing to
> work for this kind of salary.
>
What you are saying is that in order to hire a Thai who is truly
bilingual you have to pay a salary of at least 25,000 baht/month. I
am pretty sure there are employees at phonelink who are paid this
amount. And, as you can see, they still can't express themselves
correctly and clearly in written English.
trans...@my-deja.com
Sithipat Palanandana <pal...@charlie.iit.edu> wrote:
> Having read some posts written by this gentleman for the last few
months, I
> must say that he is doing a good job being a grammatical watcher on
> articles posted by such as Phonelink, Bangkok Post
I wasn't really looking for language mistakes in the phonelink web
pages. The phonelink website was mentioned in yesterday's 'database' of
Bangkok Post, and as I needed to send a message to a phonelink
subscriber, I opened the website, I was then overwhelmed by the many
mistakes in the English text. I'm afraid it's typical for
English-language websites in Thailand.
Bangkok Post and other English-language newapapers in Thailand contain
very few language mistakes in the editorial writing. You here have to
consider that the journalists are working against a deadline. The
advertising does, however, contain many language mistakes. The reason
probably is that the newspapers receive the advertising from Thai
advertising agencies and print it without changes.
>
> ">The funny thing is that knowledge of Thai does not elevate your
status
> >in the hierarchy in Thailand. On the contrary, it lowers your status.
> >You become one of them."
>
> Does this mean that learning Thai language is useless?
No, it is most useful. As a visitor you don't get approached by touts
(not necessarily Thai) who want to take you places you don't want to go,
and prices often drop drastically if you can speak Thai. But it takes
many man-hours to really master Thai (and any other language) properly.
So you have to consider what other advantages a full effort entails. Are
you in consonance with the policies of the Thai authorities when you try
to learn the language? Do they attach any importance to it at all?
[snipped]
> Finally, if any wrong grammar is found in this post, please let me
know. I
> will greatly appreciate as a person who wants to speak and write
English
> well which will be combined with my Ph.D. knowledge in Civil
Engineering.
>
The last sentence is not in correct English. If you write like that in a
Ph.D. dissertation to a U.S. university, it won't be accepted. (Not if
it's Ivy League anyway.) But it would take me some time to explain
theoretically what's wrong.
Davina Clampton (Miss)
>What you are saying is that in order to hire a Thai who is truly
>bilingual you have to pay a salary of at least 25,000 baht/month. I
>am pretty sure there are employees at phonelink who are paid this
>amount. And, as you can see, they still can't express themselves
>correctly and clearly in written English.
>
No I didn't say this. 25,000 will get you a basic Thai graduate with
average high school English ability (like the sort that will have
produced the web page you are talking about).
A truly bilingual Thai with a technical degree could be anywhere from
50,000 to 250,000 or more.
Just look at today's Bangkok Post. An accounting degree and a few
years experience could get ring in 100,000 plus as a Financial
Controller. With a CPA and or MBA on top your looking at 150,000 plus.
And that is with just ordinary to good English.
If you add Bilingual on top what is the limit? I don't know.
trans...@my-deja.com
> average high school English ability (like the sort that will have
> produced the web page you are talking about).
>
have made more mistakes.
>
> A truly bilingual Thai with a technical degree could be anywhere from
> 50,000 to 250,000 or more.
>
> Just look at today's Bangkok Post. An accounting degree and a few
> years experience could get ring in 100,000 plus as a Financial
> Controller. With a CPA and or MBA on top your looking at 150,000 plus.
> And that is with just ordinary to good English.
>
> If you add Bilingual on top what is the limit? I don't know.
>
>
16 and 23, 2000. There was only one job for which the salary was
mentioned: 120,000 baht/month or more for a general manager finance &
administration, absolute fluency in spoken and written English and Thai,
at Grant Thornton.
I think ordinary Thai graduates have difficulties in finding employment
for the moment, even at modest salaries. It was easier before 1996 when
Thailand was living on credit from abroad.
______________________________________________________________
Davina Clampton (Miss)
>In article <38dc25d1...@galaxy.uncensored-news.com>,
>dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
>No, a basic Thai graduate with average (Thai) high-school English would
>have made more mistakes.
When I said Graduate I meant University Graduate (as anyone who knows
anything about the subject would have known). I said with average high
school English as not every Thai Graduate will have necessarily
studied English to any extent at University (only if they have majored
in it as part of a languages degree) and thus they will often have
little more English ability than they left high school with - although
it may have been supplemented by having to slog through a few English
scientific/technical texts/journals that might not be available in
Thai
I didn't read the web page so I can't comment on it.
> I have just looked at the classified sections of Bangkok Post for March
>16 and 23, 2000. There was only one job for which the salary was
>mentioned: 120,000 baht/month or more for a general manager finance &
>administration, absolute fluency in spoken and written English and Thai,
>at Grant Thornton.
Thank you. You have as they say hoist yourself by your own petard.
There will doubtless be a few people out there who will have already
read the BGK Post of 23/3/00 and are now fully aware that either you
haven't read it and are assuming you will get away with bull shitting
or you have read it and are simply lying (I suspect the former).
I would imagine that the BGK Post of yesterday will still be in my
office somewhere and I will retrieve it on Monday and give it to you
to electronically to help wipe your arse. If it has already been
thrown out I will quote from the classifieds on Monday (the same
volume of the same types of ads are in the paper every working day).
>I think ordinary Thai graduates have difficulties in finding employment
>for the moment, even at modest salaries. It was easier before 1996 when
>Thailand was living on credit from abroad.
You would be forgiven for thinking so by all the foreign press, but as
I say - read the BGK Post you will soon see what the real status is.
It's there in black and white.
I have been reading your sort of sentiments from frustrated farangs
who can't get a job in Thailand for more than 10 years. It's usually
something like - Thailand will never make it because they don't have
this or that skill (IT is a perennial one) and why don't they do
themselves a favour by opening it up to foreigners, When all the while
Thai's have better qualification and skills than most farangs I have
known - certainty the ones who become attached to Thailand.
Sorry to disappoint but dream on.
>______________________________________________________________
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
trans...@my-deja.com
dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
>
> When I said Graduate I meant University Graduate (as anyone who knows
> anything about the subject would have known). I said with average high
> school English as not every Thai Graduate will have necessarily
> studied English to any extent at University (only if they have majored
> in it as part of a languages degree) and thus they will often have
> little more English ability than they left high school with - although
> it may have been supplemented by having to slog through a few English
> scientific/technical texts/journals that might not be available in
> Thai
>
> I didn't read the web page so I can't comment on it.
>
I think we can safely assume that at phonelink, a Thai blue chip entity,
they have high-salaried Thai university graduates. Yet their
English-language webpages contain many language mistakes. My conclusion
is that high salaries and the holding of a Thai university degree
doesn't necessarily mean that the person is good at English.
> > I have just looked at the classified sections of Bangkok Post for
March
> >16 and 23, 2000. There was only one job for which the salary was
> >mentioned: 120,000 baht/month or more for a general manager finance &
> >administration, absolute fluency in spoken and written English and
Thai,
> >at Grant Thornton.
>
> Thank you. You have as they say hoist yourself by your own petard.
> There will doubtless be a few people out there who will have already
> read the BGK Post of 23/3/00 and are now fully aware that either you
> haven't read it and are assuming you will get away with bull shitting
> or you have read it and are simply lying (I suspect the former).
>
> I would imagine that the BGK Post of yesterday will still be in my
> office somewhere and I will retrieve it on Monday and give it to you
> to electronically to help wipe your arse. If it has already been
> thrown out I will quote from the classifieds on Monday (the same
> volume of the same types of ads are in the paper every working day).
>
Everyone can read the Bangkok Post and its classifieds on
http://www.bangkokpost.net. I prefer the paper version, but today I
opened the electronic version. The first thing that caught my eye was
the notice about an audited circulation of 55,000 copies/day. I was much
surprised as I thought I could remember that the circulation used to be
twice as high. Things must have deteriorated in Thailand.
> >I think ordinary Thai graduates have difficulties in finding
employment
> >for the moment, even at modest salaries. It was easier before 1996
when
> >Thailand was living on credit from abroad.
>
> You would be forgiven for thinking so by all the foreign press, but as
> I say - read the BGK Post you will soon see what the real status is.
> It's there in black and white.
>
Yes, the slogan on Bangkok Post says: "First to tell when Thai Tides
turn"
[snipped]
> Sorry to disappoint but dream on.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Davina Clampton (Miss)
>In article <38db6d69...@galaxy.uncensored-news.com>,
>dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
>
>I think we can safely assume that at phonelink, a Thai blue chip entity,
>they have high-salaried Thai university graduates. Yet their
>English-language webpages contain many language mistakes. My conclusion
>is that high salaries and the holding of a Thai university degree
>doesn't necessarily mean that the person is good at English.
>
Oooh, your'e making me angry now. Yes, yes, yes the company concerned
might well have some high salaried university graduates but you either
have not been reading my posts or you are so caught up in what you
want to believe your mind is incapable of computing the information.
The high salaried graduates need not be either good or fluent in
English and whether they are good or fluent in English or not is
irrelevant AS THEY WILL NOT BE THE ONES WASTING THEIR TIME
WORKING ON A WEB PAGE.
As for 'a Thai University degree not necessarily meaning that the
person is good in English'. Does a Brazilian University degree mean
that someone is good in Hindustani, does a Dutch University degree
mean that someone is good in Spanish, Does a Russian University degree
mean that someone is good in Greek?
A Thai University degree says nothing other than what was studied, If
the major was Electronics then one would expect some knowledge of
electronics. If the major was occupational health and safety then one
would expect some knowledge of occupational health and safety. The
only circumstance in which one would expect the graduate to be good in
English would be if the major was English language. Is it possible for
you to understand this?
>Everyone can read the Bangkok Post and its classifieds on
>http://www.bangkokpost.net.
I had already guessed you had scanned the on-line version and then
puked garbage. I am referring to the Bangkok Post as published in
paper in black and white in Bangkok and the rest of Thailand.
>I prefer the paper version, but today I opened the electronic version.
Yes you are correct. You should start preparing your sorry excuses
because when I get hold of the real thing on Monday I will scan it and
post it here for all to see.
> The first thing that caught my eye was the notice about an audited
> circulation of 55,000 copies/day. I was much surprised as I thought
> I could remember that the circulation used to be twice as high.
> Things must have deteriorated in Thailand.
I have no idea what the circulation is now or was in the past. I will
find out and inform you (and everyone else).
Anything else?
trans...@my-deja.com
dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 19:21:46 GMT, trans...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <38db6d69...@galaxy.uncensored-news.com>,
> >dav...@nirvana.com (Davina Clampton (Miss)) wrote:
> >
>
> Oooh, your'e making me angry now. Yes, yes, yes the company concerned
> might well have some high salaried university graduates but you either
> have not been reading my posts or you are so caught up in what you
> want to believe your mind is incapable of computing the information.
> The high salaried graduates need not be either good or fluent in
> English and whether they are good or fluent in English or not is
> irrelevant AS THEY WILL NOT BE THE ONES WASTING THEIR TIME
> WORKING ON A WEB PAGE.
>
To cool you down, I first wish to say that I am in no doubt that your
overseas-educated Thai employee is fully proficient in English. Being
fully proficient in English, you would not hire someone who was not
fully proficient in English if English proficiency was important. A
Thai-dominated entity in many cases would.
If a commercial entity is well-organized (i.e. if the high-salaried MBAs
are really qualified) the making of the entity's website will not be a
one-man job. Technicians will do the programming. They will here consult
with other employees knowledgeable on the entity's work procedures. If
the webpages are to be in English, somebody - inside or outside the
entity - with proficiency in English will make the text into English.
The final result will then be in perfect English presentable to the
world, even though the technicians may not be able to speak English.
>
> As for 'a Thai University degree not necessarily meaning that the
> person is good in English'. Does a Brazilian University degree mean
> that someone is good in Hindustani, does a Dutch University degree
> mean that someone is good in Spanish, Does a Russian University degree
> mean that someone is good in Greek?
>
> A Thai University degree says nothing other than what was studied, If
> the major was Electronics then one would expect some knowledge of
> electronics. If the major was occupational health and safety then one
> would expect some knowledge of occupational health and safety. The
> only circumstance in which one would expect the graduate to be good in
> English would be if the major was English language. Is it possible for
> you to understand this?
>
No, it is generally expected in most countries that business graduates,
even though English is not their major subject, are proficient in
English as English is the lingua franca of commerce. I know of several
Thai entities that don't export anything, even though they (in my
opinion) have very interesting products with high export potential. Lack
of proficiency in English seems to be the reason.
> >Everyone can read the Bangkok Post and its classifieds on
> >http://www.bangkokpost.net.
>
> I had already guessed you had scanned the on-line version and then
> puked garbage. I am referring to the Bangkok Post as published in
> paper in black and white in Bangkok and the rest of Thailand.
>
[snipped]
>
> > The first thing that caught my eye was the notice about an audited
> > circulation of 55,000 copies/day. I was much surprised as I thought
> > I could remember that the circulation used to be twice as high.
> > Things must have deteriorated in Thailand.
>
> I have no idea what the circulation is now or was in the past. I will
> find out and inform you (and everyone else).
>
The 55,000 present-day circulation figure displayed is probably true as
Bangkok Post is ABC-audited. I would be interested in knowing how much
the circulation has dropped since 1996. As I remember it, the
circulation was over 100,000 at that time.
Changnam
trans...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <38cdd94a...@news1.newscene.com>,> > Define 'good'. Most kids don't really master their own language
until
> > somewhere in high school (some never).
> I don't agree. They master speaking their mother tongue quite well at
> the age of 6 when they start going to school. They have then carried
> through the most important education in their lives.
>
> >Most adults don't have 12-16
> > years to spare to learn a second language. A technique which doesn't
> > take into account the fact that adults have better structured
learning
> > capabilities than children strikes me at best as miss-guided and
> > inefficient and at worst a simple rip off i.e. the classes might at
> > first seem cheap compared to other courses but by the time you have
> > slogged your way through the preliminaries you have spent more money
-
> > and more importantly more valuable time - than with any other
method.
> >
> I agree.
>
> I would like to add that nowadays computers and multimedia can work
> wonders in language leaning once the right programs have been
developed.
> Teachers and going to schools will be a thing of the past in language
> learning.
In making a statement as asinine as that one, it is quite obvious to me
that you know absolutely nothing about teaching or, for that matter,
education in general. In a college that uses multimedia extensively, I
was gratified to hear after explaining the operation of a mechanical
component, a student comment that is was much better to have it
explained by a teacher. As well, I was able to modify the lesson
(on the fly) according to the individual students needs. After being in
education now for twenty years, I find it so frustrating to hear or read
comments that advocate the use of computers and multimedia as the
pancacea for all the ills of education. Differences in learning styles
alone make a mockery of such comments. I have been involved in computers
and multimedia for all of my 20 year teaching career and I am still no
closer to being replaced by computers than I ever was in the past.
In institutions where multimedia is in regular use, the main motivation
behind its introduction has been the cost saving benefits...often at the
expense of learning. Students, as members of the human race, are
gregarious creatures and need the interaction with fellow syudents and
teachers. I feel quite confident in saying that I will have ongoing
employment as a teacher for as long as I require and I suggest that
before you again get involved in education discussions you at least get
10 or 20 years experience in the field.
Changnam
Andrew lamb
> expense of learning. Students, as members of the human race, are
> gregarious creatures and need the interaction with fellow syudents and
Yes, there's some great Russian educational theorist isn't there who
said something along the lines of "no true learning can take place
outside of a human relationship".
> employment as a teacher for as long as I require and I suggest that
> before you again get involved in education discussions you at least get
> 10 or 20 years experience in the field.
I think you're being a bit rough on poor translat558 to say something
like that. How many of us could discuss anything if we had to have 10
years experience first?
Andrew
Changnam
Andrew lamb <adl...@platypus.net.au> wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 21:53:46 +1000, in soc.culture.thai you wrote:
>I'm no great fan of computer-based learning either.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computer based learning. I am
merely aware of its limitations. Computers can be very good at imparting
information, even testing for retention of said information and
providing reinforcement. Where they fail miserably is with "hands on"
practical skills.
Take for example....welding.
Welding is a skill based upon basic theory and practical experience. Let
me assure you that a video clip of a welding demonstration does not even
come within a bulls roar of a teacher demonstrating the same thing.
Firstly there is the lack of "immediacy" with multimedia as the media
centre is usually distant from the classroom/practice area.
Next there is credibility. Students are aware that television is
artificial medium. So why should they accept that the multimedia video
clip they are observing is any different? The teacher demonstrating the
task is proving to the student that it is posible to do it...
Then there is the lack of feedback. The teacher can observe the
students' progress and provide corrections to technique as needed and
not at some distant time in the future.
Students, being human, have mood changes. Can computers and multimedia
programs adapt to the mood swings of student? I don't think so. We'll
need a fair degree of sophisticated programming before that ever occurs.
The teacher can modify the teaching style to take into account any
SLD's that the student might have.
Finally we have the development of a relationship of trust and respect
between student and teacher, essential if learning is to take place.
I am being a bit rough? Watch a well trained and sensitive teacher at
work. I have the pleasure of working with many such teachers. I have yet
to see a multimedia program hold students attentions similarly.
translat558 was not discussing, instead stating an opinion. It was an
opinion based on naivete.
I spent well over a decade learning my craft and a further two decades
passing my craft on to others. I have spent a decade and a half in
higher education as a student learning how to pass on that craft
effectively. Even after all this I still feel unqualified to make a
blanket statement such as "Multimedia will replace teachers". Who knows
what wonders the technological age of the future will endow us with! I
feel safe in making an assertion however, that teachers will not be
replaced by "multimedia" in my lifetime except for the motive of cost
savings. Given the current crop of "bean counting" politicians
interested only in the "bottom line" who are presently running this
country, I have cause for concern. Educational outcomes are not
important to these people, only $$$$$
Changnam
Even in language learning there is absolutely no substitute for human
to human interaction.
>
>Andrew
seanpar
david duryea <dsdu...@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>
> In the mid eighties Dr. Brown came to believe that the
> way they were teaching wasn't really working right and
> adopted a more natural teaching method based on how a
> child learns its first language. ^^^^^^
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
The flaw in this method is that it assumes that adult learning
processes and intuitive ability are the same for adults as they are for
small children. Absorbtion and comprehension of language in such a
natural way is high for children up to about five (many say three), is
less present through age eight or so, then all but disappears by
puberty. This a question of biology, not teaching method.
From puberty on, second language aquisition is more of a cognitive,
mastery process rather than just absorbtion and imitation. With Thai
being a tonal language, farangs function best when learning in small
chucks of conversational mastery and then going out and trying it out.
(It's also more fun, and sometimes slightly embarrassing, that way.) I
mean, cripes!, what are you supposed to do, wait through 20 weeks of
full time study before you tell the noodle stand lady how you want you
lunch prepared, or ask simple directions, or find out where the
restroom is!!!
My introduction to Thai was a 22-hour conversational course at a
private school in Phuket in June 1994, which allowed me to function at
a satisfactory level in the language (eg shopping, transportation,
directions, ordering food, getting to know people, answering all of the
"standard" farang questions, telling touts to bugger off, etc.) This
course cost me B2000 ($80 then.) I don't even want to know what 800
hours of sit-and-listen at AUA would cost, not to mention how boring
and tedious that would be.
Get Eric Allyn's "What You See is What You Say" Thai language book and
dictionary, and go through them with Thai friends every day -- that's
FREE, fun and the best way to learn.
Sean Parlaman
sea...@ksc.net.th
Davina Clampton (MIss)
>I have just looked at the classified sections of Bangkok Post for March
> 16 and 23, 2000. There was only one job for which the salary was
>mentioned: 120,000 baht/month or more for a general manager finance &
>administration, absolute fluency in spoken and written English and Thai,
>at Grant Thornton. I think ordinary Thai graduates have difficulties in
> finding employment for the moment, even at modest salaries.
> It was easier before 1996 when Thailand was living on credit from abroad.
As you are aware after your public passing of wind above I promised to
scan and post the classifieds from Bangkok Post of 23 March 2000,
however I have some bad news and some good news. First the bad news.
When I got to my office I found that the Bangkok Post of 23/2/2000 had
already been thrown out.
Now the good news. Ye Olde Bangkok Post Book Shop at At Narong keep
recent copies of the Bangkok Post and I was able to nip down there and
get a copy of 23/2/2000. So here it is. The attached scans from the
classifieds (page1.bmp, page2.bmp, page3.bmp, page5.bmp) refer to the
page from which the advertisement was scanned. A summary for those
that are not able or can’t be bothered looking at the attached image
files follows:
Page: 3
Company (or agent): Price Waterhouse
Position: Financial Controller
Qualifications: Bachelors+MBA+CPA
Experience: 8 years
English: Good
Salary: 150,000 + car + benefits
Page: 3
Company (or agent): Price Waterhouse
Position: Controller
Qualifications: Bachelors+CPA
Experience: 5 years
English: Good
Salary: 120,000 + benefits
Page: 2
Company (or agent): Quilvest
Position: Investment Manager
Qualifications: Bachelors+MBA+CPA
Experience: 5 years
English: Excellent
Salary: 100,000 up + benefits
Page: 5
Company (or agent): World Trade
Position: Sales
Qualifications: Over 25, smart, own car
Experience: Unspecified
English: Unspecified
Salary: up to 100,000
Page: 1
Company (or agent): Price Waterhouse
Position: Financial Controller
Qualifications: Bachelors+MBA+CPA
Experience: 10 years
English: Fluent
Salary: Unspecified
Page: 1
Company (or agent): Grant Thornton
Position: Country Director
Qualifications: Unspecified
Experience: Unspecified
English: Good
Salary: Unspecified
Page: 3
Company (or agent): Price Waterhouse
Position: Manager - Compliance & Marketing
Qualifications: Bachelors+MBA+CPA
Experience: 5-8 years
English: Good
Salary: Unspecified
Page: 3
Company (or agent): Price Waterhouse
Position: Vice President
Qualifications: Bachelors+MBA
Experience: 10 years
English: Excellent
Salary: ‘Highly competitive + car’
As you can see there are 4 positions in the zone of interest for which
the salary is specified. None of the positions require fluent English
(only ‘good’ to ‘excellent’). There are a further 4 which given the
qualifications/experience required could be assumed to be as much or
more (certainly in the case of the VP from PWC). Only one of these
specifies ‘fluent’ English.
>Everyone can read the Bangkok Post and its classifieds on
> http://www.bangkokpost.net.
As you are presumably now painfully aware I do not refer to the
on-line Bangkok Post. When I say Bangkok Post I mean ‘Bangkok Post’.
It is a newspaper printed and distributed in Thailand in case you are
still having difficulty understanding.
> I prefer the paper version, but today I opened the electronic version.
I think you had better give some further elaboration on ‘today’.
Given that you’re posts make it painfully clear you are not in
Thailand and have spent little if any time here what is the word
‘today’ supposed to convey to people reading this group? That you
normally receive the Bangkok Post but today the dog ate it?
>The first thing that caught my eye was the notice about an
>audited circulation of 55,000 copies/day. I was much surprised
> as I thought I could remember that the circulation used to be twice
> as high. Things must have deteriorated in Thailand.
The only thing I have found so far concerning the BGK Post circulation
is from the Bangkok Post archives which is as follows (quote):
“The Bangkok Post is a member of the Audit Bureau of Circulation, an
international organization based in London which audits and monitors
the circulation’s of newspaper and magazines around the world. By
October 1995, the daily print run had reached 65,000 copies, and
further strong growth is predicted for 1996. The Bangkok Post's
audited circulation since 1990 are 56,750 copies (Jan. - Jun.'97)”
Therefore could you be more specific as to when exactly you remember
the circulation to be twice as much as 55,000 copies? I cannot
continue to help you make an idiot of yourself in public if you don’t
give me more precise data.
Before you do, try applying your mind to the following if you can
bear the headache. (I always like to help my pupils try to work things
out for themselves. I know I am wasting my time but I enjoy it. It’s
a bit like pussy plays with a mouse even though the pussy really
prefers Nautilus Tuna Steak Chunks in Spring Water and has no
intention of eating the revolting mouse).
1. What language is the Bangkok Post written in?
2. Due to 1. above what sort of people are going to read the Bangkok
Post?
3. How many people are there in Thailand?
4. When the economic shit hit the fan in ‘97 who left the country?
5. How many of the 100 million people in Thailand give a dak’s ling
as to whether 50,000 or 100,000 are reading the Bangkok Post?
If you want to know what newspaper most of the Thai people are reading
then read nothing. If you want to know what most of the Thai people
that read a newspaper read then read the Thai Rath. If you want to
know what a tiny and unrepresentative minority of English speaking
people in Thailand read then read the Bangkok Post (unless your dog
has got to it first).
If you ask me to a give a wild, ball park, throw it in the air and
toss it around a bit crazy guess I would imagine that the circulation
of the Thai Rath has not changed much over the last few years but that
the circulation of the Bangkok Post has reduced by roughly the same
number of expats that left (or were forced to leave) the country after
the fall of the Baht made their Bangkok Gin Palaces less attractive to
them (or too expensive for their employers to afford) .
So what does that prove about Thailand?
It proves that jobs that once were the preserve of fat, ugly, stupid,
old, overpaid, under-qualified farangs are now open day for well
qualified capable Thai’s (refer to pages 1,2,3,5 attached). Or that
the new overhead expressway to Chonburi makes Pattaya 2 hours on a
reliable basis (formerly 3-5 hours on a Friday night) or the new
overhead tollway after the stage 1 expressway makes the airport 20-25
minutes (formerly 1-2 hours) or Navanakorn 35-40 minutes (formerly 2-3
hours) or the stage 2 expressway makes Ayuthaya 40 minutes (formerly
2.5-3 hours) or the sky train makes it just about 10-15 minutes to get
anywhere in Bangkok from my house?
You think you have something to teach the Thai’s (in any language)? Go
back to school dingbat.
What you and your like seem to find impossible to compute is that
learning Thai will do nothing for your chances of getting a job in
Thailand and rightly so. Knowledge of Thai per se could get you what?
A job teaching Thai? I suspect that there are 100 million Thai’s
better qualified for that. A job teaching English? I’m afraid not. A
University degree and a BBC accent is all that is required (no
knowledge of Thai) and that will get you from around 20,000-45,000 per
month maximum. If someone in this group wants to claim they are
getting more for teaching English then scan and post a copy of your
salary stub or SHUT THE FUCK UP.
The only other possibility is a tour guide or similar - not legal
since it is a job restricted to Thai nationals only and rightly so - I
even agree that that the dive instructors on Koh Samui/Phuket etc
should be rounded up and sent packing. In any case what would that net
you? 15,000-35,000 a month in the high season?
Translat558, if you want to get a decent job in Thailand here is my
advice:
Get a degree in accountancy or law. Then get a CPA qualification. Then
get an MBA (anywhere will do, they are all equally shit). Then get
10-15 years experience as the CEO of a major international company.
If after all that you are up against someone else who has the same
qualifications as you then you might consider learning some Thai
language - but don’t waste too much time on it - you will probably
lose the job because you’re opponent bribed the jury. And you know
what? Your opponent deserved to win because he/she has better business
acumen than you.
Luv,
Davina
noo...@cwcom.net
(MIss)) wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:31:00 GMT, trans...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>>I have just looked at the classified sections of Bangkok Post for March
>> 16 and 23, 2000. There was only one job for which the salary was
>>mentioned: 120,000 baht/month or more for a general manager finance &
>>administration, absolute fluency in spoken and written English and Thai,
>>at Grant Thornton. I think ordinary Thai graduates have difficulties in
>> finding employment for the moment, even at modest salaries.
>> It was easier before 1996 when Thailand was living on credit from abroad.
>
>As you are aware after your public passing of wind above I promised to
>scan and post the classifieds from Bangkok Post of 23 March 2000,
>however I have some bad news and some good news. First the bad news.
>When I got to my office I found that the Bangkok Post of 23/2/2000 had
>already been thrown out.
>
>Now the good news. Ye Olde Bangkok Post Book Shop at At Narong keep
>recent copies of the Bangkok Post and I was able to nip down there and
>get a copy of 23/2/2000. So here it is. The attached scans from the
>classifieds (page1.bmp, page2.bmp, page3.bmp, page5.bmp) refer to the
>page from which the advertisement was scanned. A summary for those
>that are not able or can’t be bothered looking at the attached image
>files follows:
What a stupid slapper you are....
<plonk>