rajah hotel in bangkok

I often see English-speaking people adding "h" into words when
it does not change the pronunciation at all, and it adds nothing...
and it's certainly not to make it "correct spelling". For example,
its so silly to see people writing "Khorat" (Why bother typing the
extra letter?:. I even see people writing "Khatoey". For that matter,
I don't see why we even have 2 t's in pattaya....Why not just Pataya.


In article , Chris Blunt
wrote:
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.

come to that....they should spell the river as jow praya ....not
chowpraya....never seen it that way though...

"Chris Blunt" wrote in message
...
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 14:50:44 GMT, (att22) wrote some stuff
about " Baht vs. Bath. ( rajah hotel in bangkok)", to which I would
like to add the following:

For example, its so silly to see people writing "Khorat" (Why bother typing the
extra letter?:.

Because the K in Khorat is a 'hard' K. Not like the K in the Thai word for
chicken. (Kai)

I even see people writing "Khatoey".

That's just silly. K in Katoey is exactly like the K in chicken. Actually
something could be said for 'Kratoey' though.. In thai apparently both are
allowed, with or without the extra r.

For that matter, I don't see why we even have 2 t's in pattaya....
Why not just Pataya.

Because it's pronounced /Phat tha yaa/

Then again a good percentage of the foreign population in Pattaya says
something like "petteye" I thikn if you live somewhere you should at
least be able to pronounce where you live correctly.

Note that this is not just Pattaya residents being particular uncultured, I
wouldn't want to feed all the foreigners in Chiang Mai's San Kamphaeng distict
saying they live in "Senkepeng".

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.

Yet mostly the J-jaan sound is translated with Ch, so it would merely be
consistent to do this fom Jomtien also. (Personally I think J should ALWAYS
be used for J-jaan, but then who am I). Also note that many tourists from
French origines end up pronouncing Zyom-chien (as in dog). I would write
Jomthian I suppose. Note that an old transliteration of Chiang Mai was Chieng
Mai. This finally almost died out, fortunately.

Anyway, we can (and have in the past) debate on this indefinitely. There
are as many ways to stranscribe as there are people. Times two.

Cheers,
Chanchao

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.

Actually with the "implied" vowel it should probably be something like
"Pat-Ya".

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.

If the reader understood what was being said, then the transliteration
was good enough.