rajah hotel in bangkok

stayed here for 2 nights on january 2004. very helpful staff. price
800 bath including breakfast. will cost you 400 bath for checking out
at 21:00. very useful if you have a midnight fly back home.
it is near to a "seven" convenience store where you can order take
away food + drinks. will stay in the same hotel if back to bangkok. i
recommand this hotel.

why pay good money for a good hotel and then eat crap food in 7/11?

Kris



On 2 Feb 2004 21:14:49 -0800, (mai_paris) wrote:

stayed here for 2 nights on january 2004. very helpful staff. price
800 bath including breakfast. will cost you 400 bath for checking out
at 21:00. very useful if you have a midnight fly back home.
it is near to a "seven" convenience store where you can order take
away food + drinks. will stay in the same hotel if back to bangkok. i
recommand this hotel.

800 baths? 400 baths? You mean "baht"?

In article ,
(mai_paris) wrote:
stayed here for 2 nights on january 2004. very helpful staff. price
800 bath including breakfast. will cost you 400 bath for checking out
at 21:00. very useful if you have a midnight fly back home.
it is near to a "seven" convenience store where you can order take
away food + drinks. will stay in the same hotel if back to bangkok. i
recommand this hotel.

No, he means Turkish Bath.

"ab" wrote in message
...

800 baths? 400 baths? You mean "baht"?


In article ,
(mai_paris) wrote:
stayed here for 2 nights on january 2004. very helpful staff. price
800 bath including breakfast. will cost you 400 bath for checking out

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:54:36 +0500, "mush97" wrote some
stuff about " rajah hotel in bangkok", to which I would like to add the
following:

800 baths? 400 baths? You mean "baht"?

Allow me to vent a little: EVERYONE is guilty of hideous inconsistancies when
transcribing Thai into English (Latin) characters. "Bath" is no better or
worse than other commonly accepted (mis)spellings. You can even argue that
"Bath" is pretty consistent because Th-tahaan is usually transcribed as 'th'.
That it appears here at the end of a word you may not make this any different
in the opinion of the transcriber; fair call. Also note that there is no
sight of any 'h' or anything else in between the A and T sound in the Thai
word Baht. What it does there, or who put it there, noone knows?? R's also
have a way of popping into words for no apparent reason. So why not "Bart" or
"Bhat" or "Baat".

You might as well argue that the common transcription "Pattaya" is actually
very wrong. (Should perhaps be "Pathaya", "Patthaya" or something else.) Note
that this "Patthaya" actually appears on a few road-signs.

There's no point in arguing over someone's choice of transcribing a word,
because it's a mess anyway. And if Thais apparently don't care about writing
Pattaya on the first sign and Pathaya on the next, then why should we.

I drive past signs saying "Lampoon" "Lamphun" "Lumphun" "Lampun" every single
day and they all refer to the same place. So who cares about bath, baat,
baht? Thais obviously don't.

Cheers,
Chanchao

I find that the spell checker automatically turns baht to bath. maybe that
is why it is spelled like that. it's certainly part of the reason as I have
often let the spell checker have it's way when I have spelled it "baht". The
reason for "baht" would be to try and make the vowel long and to try and
bring the tone to low. the English "bat" really doesn't come out right.


"Chanchao" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:54:36 +0500, "mush97" wrote
some
stuff about " rajah hotel in bangkok", to which I would like to add the
following:

800 baths? 400 baths? You mean "baht"?

Allow me to vent a little: EVERYONE is guilty of hideous inconsistancies
when
transcribing Thai into English (Latin) characters. "Bath" is no better or
worse than other commonly accepted (mis)spellings. You can even argue
that
"Bath" is pretty consistent because Th-tahaan is usually transcribed as
'th'.
That it appears here at the end of a word you may not make this any
different
in the opinion of the transcriber; fair call. Also note that there is no
sight of any 'h' or anything else in between the A and T sound in the Thai
word Baht. What it does there, or who put it there, noone knows?? R's
also
have a way of popping into words for no apparent reason. So why not "Bart"
or
"Bhat" or "Baat".

You might as well argue that the common transcription "Pattaya" is
actually
very wrong. (Should perhaps be "Pathaya", "Patthaya" or something else.)
Note
that this "Patthaya" actually appears on a few road-signs.

There's no point in arguing over someone's choice of transcribing a word,
because it's a mess anyway. And if Thais apparently don't care about
writing
Pattaya on the first sign and Pathaya on the next, then why should we.

I drive past signs saying "Lampoon" "Lamphun" "Lumphun" "Lampun" every
single
day and they all refer to the same place. So who cares about bath, baat,
baht? Thais obviously don't.

Cheers,
Chanchao

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:15:06 +0700, "bob" wrote:

I find that the spell checker automatically turns baht to bath. maybe that
is why it is spelled like that. it's certainly part of the reason as I have
often let the spell checker have it's way when I have spelled it "baht".
The reason for "baht" would be to try and make the vowel long and to try
and bring the tone to low. the English "bat" really doesn't come out
right.

Thai are capable of pronouncing the English word "bat" exactly as
"bat", actually being pronounced by the Brits as "bath" which differs
from the pronounciating "bahth" which is written in English as "bath".

Jac.

I guess they are capable as human beings to pronounce bat as bat (as in
vampire bat) but the Thai language cannot handle the word as it sounds in
English.

"¬Ò¤ Í;à¾ÍÐã" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:15:06 +0700, "bob" wrote:

I find that the spell checker automatically turns baht to bath. maybe
that
is why it is spelled like that. it's certainly part of the reason as I
have
often let the spell checker have it's way when I have spelled it "baht".
The reason for "baht" would be to try and make the vowel long and to try
and bring the tone to low. the English "bat" really doesn't come out
right.

Thai are capable of pronouncing the English word "bat" exactly as
"bat", actually being pronounced by the Brits as "bath" which differs
from the pronounciating "bahth" which is written in English as "bath".

Jac.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:07:26 +0700, Chanchao
wrote:

You might as well argue that the common transcription "Pattaya" is actually
very wrong. (Should perhaps be "Pathaya", "Patthaya" or something else.) Note
that this "Patthaya" actually appears on a few road-signs.

There's no point in arguing over someone's choice of transcribing a word,
because it's a mess anyway. And if Thais apparently don't care about writing
Pattaya on the first sign and Pathaya on the next, then why should we.

Last time I was in Jomtien, I saw a couple of signs where it was spelt
"Chomtien". First time I'd noticed it spelt that way.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:35:21 +0700, "bob" wrote:

I guess they are capable as human beings to pronounce bat as bat (as in
vampire bat) but the Thai language cannot handle the word as it sounds in
English.

Sorry. I was referring to the pronounciation of the "t" at the end of
the word "bat" and not to its specific sound in English. Lets try a
word with a different sound. In Dutch people write "kat" but if you
listen very very carefully Dutchies do pronounce "kath", never "kat".
Thai people did learn how to pronounce "kat" exactly as it is written.

Jac.