Talk:Thai script

message: Unicode character U+0E5A ๚ is not defined; googled it and found:  'THAI CHARACTER ANGKHANKHU' (U+0E5A) ... used in combination with U+0E30 to mark end of a verse. here Pawyilee (talk) 18:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it and other symbols to Thai_script#Other_symbols, based on information from Thai wiki pages. Wikky Horse (talk) 23:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unicode character U+0E5A ๚  

message: Obsolete bird's eye ๏ (Thai: ตาไก่, ta kài), officially called (ฟองมัน, fong man), formerly indicated paragraphs, but is now used for that purpose in poetry. I have an example from มติชน ฉบับประจำวันที่ 16-22 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2553 ปีที่ 30 บับที่ 1548 หน้าที่ 59 สุสัปดาห์ 
--สมเด็จกรมพระยาเดชาดิศร th.wikisource
:The end of the verse is marked as shown, not with the character ๚ --Pawyilee (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I did my best to cross reference some sources (official ones and Thai wikipedia) and have updated the wiki. Wikky Horse (talk) 02:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ฺBird's eye ๏ (Thai: ตาไก่, ta kài) 

message: Alphabetic table entry for ญ หญิง yo ying (woman) lists Initial as y and Final as n. Next, Plosives (วรรค vargaḥ) Table lists ญ yá as nasal equivalent of palatal 	จ cà, and for the IAST value in square brackets [ca] and [ña]. The article does not say the IAST value is historical, and corresponds to Spanish ñ as in cañon, English canyon. In Thai and most of Isan, ny has separated into y- initial and -n terminal, but the historical value is preserved among the Nyaw people (Thai/Isan: ไทญ้อ, IPA: tʰɑj ɲɔː) .--15:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nyaw 

message: This is true. --Pawyilee (talk) 13:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ฟ is used as an ending ''only'' in loanwords. 

message: Why is ถนน transcribed as "tha-non" and not "thon-an"? Angry bee (talk) 06:53, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some ambiguous cases concerning implied vowels, but generally if there are three consonants in a row, not starting with a cluster, the insertion is "a-o". Don't ask for logic, it's just a convention. −Woodstone (talk) 11:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

text: I'll give it a go. The inherent vowel always follows the consonant, it never precedes it. Therefore, the split with thon-an cannot be correct, since there is no consonant to give the inherent a vowel. Secondly, inherent a is always the final sound of a syllable, whereas inherent o is always a medial sound, i.e. it can only occur when two consonant signs follow each other, and there is no written vowel diacritic. Although words previously could end with an inherent a that is no longer the case: Inherent a cannot be the last syllable of a word. We therefore end up with Woodstone's simple conclusion: Three consonants in a row give a-o. V85 (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  syllables 

message: I think most will agree that this article is sorely in need of proper referencing. There's this paper from Journal of the International Phonetic Association to start with, but it doesn't seem like any library in Thailand carries it. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: :Copied from Talk:Thai language
Article needs a sub-heading on liquid consonants, which, in the periodic table of consonants below, are those in row 8 and in column 6, with these properties in common.
#"Live" syllables end in one of these, the variant forms of -ัม and -ัย, or a long vowel. All other endings are "dead."
#Those in row 8 columns 1–5 are nasalized versions of the corresponding consonants in row 1, with the seeming exception of column 2. The row 8 character is still a nasalized version of its row one parent in the dialect and name of the Nyaw people, but in most other dialects is usally pronounced /y-/ when leading and /-n/ when ending a syllable; if the character both ends one and begins another syllable in Thai, it is doubled as in ปัญญา intellect.
#Also changing to /-n/ when ending a syllable are ร ล and ฬ; a single ร or ล may end one syllable with /-n/ and begin the next with /l-/. 
# ร when initial in Thai may be a trill consonant or rhotic consonant R, but is usually pronounced as alveolar lateral approximant /l-/. In the Isan language, corresponding words may be aspirated as /h-/. See  Lao script consonant chart: the final character corresponds to the final character of Thai script, but the example word is also Thai but written as ร - เรื่อง.  Five lines up are rōt (car) and rākʰáŋ (bell)  but Thai, Isan and Lao regularly pronounce these words lōt and lākʰáŋ.
BTW,  all rows and and all columns in this periodic table have properties in common.  --Pawyilee (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: PS: Rhotic and non-rhotic accents in Thai makes no sense to me. --Pawyilee (talk) 15:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not quite sure what the intention of table is, nor its origin or its composition, but it seems to me that ก does not belong with ด and บ, but should be with ต and ป, as it shares the "unvoiced" property with the latter. −Woodstone (talk) 13:51, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the originator and its original intention was to go on the back page of all my Thai dictionaries as a guide to placing thumb marks on the edges of pages so I could find entries quickly — no other system works for that, and if you see a Thai using one, you'll find they have a heck of time finding entries. I posted it on this talk page as a convenient way to talk about periodic elements of the 44 consonants (moved down here.)
0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7  	8
1	ก	จ	ฎ	ด	บ	 	   	อ
2	 	 	ฏ	ต	ป	 	   	
3	ข	ฉ	ฐ	ถ	ผ	 	ศษส	
4	ฃ	 	 	 	ฝ	 	ห  	
5	ค	ช	ฑ	ท	พ	ย	   	ฮ
6	ฅ	ซ	 	 	ฟ	ร	   	
7	ฆ	ฌ	ฒ	ธ	ภ	ล	ฬ  	
8	ง	ญ	ณ	น	ม	ว	   	
#Midlle-class consonants, rows 1–5 begin at the back of the throat and work forward to the lips: GAW-JAW-DAW-DAW-BAW. All of row 1 were once Voiced when initial, though you are correct that 1/1 in modern Thai pronunciation is semi-voiced, as is 1/2; you might further object that 1/8 has no voice — but no consonants have voice until a vowel gives it to them, unless they are liquids in row 8 or semi-vowels column 6.  
#Middle-class-consonany semi-voiced when initial, and like row 1, become voiceless stops when final. Rows 1 & 2 take tone markers 0-4 in live syllables; in dead syllables, 0 marker replaces 1 which is not used, nor is 4.
#High-class-consonant equivalents of row one, except for col. 7. 3/7 are crammed in one box with the 3rd having its low-class equivalent in 2/6, (where it functions as a dialectical substitute for its cousin in 2/5.)
#High-class consonants in need of a home; 4/7's low-class equivalent is in 8/5. In live syllables, 0 replaces 4 with 1 & 2 the same a row 1; in dead syllables 0 replaces 1, & 2 remains the same.
#Low-class-consonant equivalents of 3/1–5. All low-class consonants, if used in consonant clusters, are 'promoted' to the class of its partner; otherwise, in live syllables 0 tone marker is mid-tone as for middle class, with 1 & 2 shifted down to replace 2 & 3; 3 & 4 are not used. In short dead syllables, 1 marks the falling tone & high tone by 0; in long dead one allowed is falling, so has 0 tone marker.
#Low-class consonants needing a home: 6/1 equivalent to 4/1; 6/5 to 6/4; 6/2 being a dialectical substitute for its cousin in 5/2 as noted at 3/7(3). 
#Low-class additional consonants: 7/1–5 and 7/7 are mostly used to spell words of Pali/Sanscrit origin with no exact equivalent in Thai,  7/1–5 sound the same as 5/1–5; the sound of 7/6 often replaces that of its cousin 6/6, and has a sister in 7/7 for words in Pali/Sanscrit origin. Except for col.7 and row 8, low class consonants are unvoiced and, if final, end in a stop. Any syllable ending in a stop is dead. Any ending in an unstopped vowel or a liquid consonant are live.
#Low-class liquid consonants, 8/1–5 are nasalized versions of 1/1–5. All of column 6 and 7/7 belong on this row, or better yet, have the same background color if only I took the trouble. As noted in the article, these are also promoted if used in consonant clusters, two special cases being when a silent 4/7 leads, or a silent 8/1 leading 5/6 in only 4 words.
--I have to quit for supper. --Pawyilee (talk) 11:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Well there's the Pali/Sanskrit comparison table already in the article; you understand, of course, that your table, while probably useful, doesn't merit inclusion in the article by itself? Anyway, I don't think liquid consonant is the correct term here (according to the corresponding article, the liquid consonants would be just ร and ล), but it does seem that info on closing consonant sounds is a bit lacking. Closing consonants should probably be expanded under a their own section, with explicit mention of the nine closing consonant sounds (มาตรา แม่ ก กา (none), แม่กก (-k), แม่กด (-t), แม่กบ (-p), แม่กง (-ŋ), แม่กน (-n), แม่กม (-m), แม่เกย (-j) and แม่เกอว (-w)) --Paul_012 (talk) 22:44, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the original Greek definition of liquid consonant did include em and en, and spelling their names that way emphasizes that, when ending a syllable, their sound does not die. Closing sounds do indeed need better explication, but not by me as I would classify /ะ/ as a glottal-stop-consonant. I wouldn't dream of putting that or my periodic table in any wiki'd article but Talk, but my putting it here does mean that I have released my contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL.--Pawyilee (talk) 08:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liquid consonants 

message: Parts of this and the Thai language article overlap, most being discussions regarding phonation. Both articles probably should be rearranged to clearly mark which article the content belongs in. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good luck.--Pawyilee (talk) 08:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlap with Thai language article 

message: Changed mai ya-mok definition to link to Reduplication, which for 3.9 Austro-Asiatic has 3.9.1 Vietnamese and 3.9.2 Khmer, but it is my bedtime so won't be adding 3.9.3 Thai write now. --Pawyilee (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Reduplication equates to the Thai concept of คำซ้ำ, which may or may not use mai yamok. If a section is added to that page, it should concern the concept rather than just the punctuation mark. Reduplication in Thai serves many purposes, e.g. to denote plurality, to generalise, to intensify or de-intensify adjective meaning, etc. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I defer to your greater expertise and will let you do it. --Pawyilee (talk) 03:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  /* Other symbols */ Reduplication 

message: Is there any difference in pronunciation between ไทย and ไท ? — kwami (talk) 04:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they are pronounced the same. The Royal Institute's dictionary lists ไท firstly as an archaic spelling of ไทย—which it defines as the name of the ethnic group, freedom, or person—and secondly as person of power. ไ-ย also appears in certain Pali loanwords which contain or end with -eyya. The ย is redundant but not marked with a thanthakhat (◌์), but may be pronounced in a compound word when joined by samāsa. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:31, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks. I'll add a note to that effect to the article. Since it's the orthography of the name of the language, I think we should mention it somewhere. — kwami (talk) 21:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 
Note [14] has two spellings/tones. Many years ago, I read that English Tai was first coined by a RC priest transferred from Thailand to Yunnan just in time to be trapped by the Great Pacific War [WWII]. The natives he encountered shared Mongkut's opionion of Catholicism, so devoted himself to learning their language and ethnography, and concluded that he should get  the h out and call them Tai people. --Pawyilee (talk) 07:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ไ...ย and ไ... 

message: Phonotactics defines permissible syllable structure, consonant clusters, and vowel sequences by means of phonotactical constraints. Thai has phonotactical constraints, but I don't have a list or reference. --Pawyilee (talk) 14:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: PS: Review my change at Thai_language#Clusters. --Pawyilee (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonotactics 

message: I propose making the following change to the second paragraph
*Consonants are divided into three classes — in alphabetic order these are middle (,) high (,) and low () class — as shown in the table below. These class designations reflect phonetic qualities of the sounds to which the letters originally corresponded in Old Thai. In particular, "middle" sounds were voiceless unaspirated stops; "high" sounds, voiceless aspirated stops or voiceless fricatives; "low" sounds, voiced. Subsequent sound changes have obscured the phonetic nature of these classes.Modern Thai sounds /b/ and /d/ were formerly — and sometimes still are — pronounced /ʔb/ and /ʔd/. For this reason, they were treated as voiceless unaspirated, and hence placed in the "middle" class; these were also the reason unaffected by the changes that devoiced most originally voiced stops. Today, the class of a consonant without a tone mark, along with the short or long length of the accompanying vowel, determine the base accent (.) Middle class consonants with a long vowel spell an additional four tones with one of four tone marks over the controlling consonant:  mai ek, mai tho, mai tri, and mai chattawa. High and low class consonants are limited to mai ek and mai tho, as shown in the Tone table. Differing interpretations of the two marks or their absence allow low class consonants to spell tones not allowed for the corresponding high class consonant. In the case of digraphs where a low class follows a higher class consonant, the higher class rules apply, but the marker, if used, goes over the low class one; accordingly,  and  may be considered to be digraphs as such, as explained below the Tone table. Only low class consonants may have a base accent determined by the syllable being both long and dead.
;Notes 
or start a new Notes section above References. Making this change would also involve changing the "alphabetic order" of the tone table.--Pawyilee (talk) 09:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections being offered, I made the change to the paragraph, but not the table. --Pawyilee (talk) 05:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What alphabet are you using when alphabetising like this: 'middle (,) high (,) and low ('. The Latin alphabet would alphabetise the English words as 'high-low-middle' while the Thai alphabet would alphabetise them as 'กลาง-ต่ำ-สูง'. I would also point out (as is a pet peeve of mine), that the RTGS transcription for พื้นเสียง should be phuen siang. V85 (talk) 19:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm using the alphabetical order of the characters in each family. Families are ordered by how they are formed in the mouth. 
# back: middle class ก;  ข and ฃ are high class equvalents except for voalization;  ค, ฅ and ฆ are low class equvalents of the preceeding high class sounds;  ง concludes this family with a low class nasalized version of intial letter.
# middle: middle class จ;   high class ฉ; low class ช;  ซ, a low class variation due to historical changes from /ch/ to /s/, followed by rarely used  ฌ for which the example word is loaned from Khmer; concluding with low-class ญ, which is still a nasalzied version of the inital middle class family header in the eponymous dialect, but in all others split into the sound of  ย if initial or if final น.
# back of the teeth, and reflecting the retroflex positioning of the tongue in loan words from Pali, a postioning absent in Thai: middle class ฎ and  ฏ; high class ฐ; low-class equivalents ฑ and rarely used ฒ; concluding with nasalized version of family header ณ.
# back of the teeth: middle class ด and ต; high class un-voiced equvalent ถ; low-class equvalents ท and ธ;   concluding with nasalized version of family header น.
# in front of the teeth: middle class บ and ป; high class ผ and ฝ; low-class equivalents พ, ฟ and ภ;   concluding with nasalized version of family header ม.
#slack-mouth low-class family with no middle or high-class equivalents: ย ร ล ว
#split-mouth high-class group with no middle or low class equivalents: ศ ษ ส and ห. The role of the low-class equivalent of  ส is filled by the จ family low class variation ซ, and of ห, in the next family, with low-class ฬ concluding this group.
# whole mouth middle class อ is followed concluding low-class equivalent of the last character of the preceeding high-class group ฮ.
--Pawyilee (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

text: So, as you point out, if you are going to alphabetise the words กลาง สูง ต่ำ, according to the Thai alphabet, the order should be 'กลาง-ต่ำ-สูง', as ส comes after ต in the Thai alphabet. V85 (talk) 19:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You still don't get the point. Thai script is only called an alphabet by convention, so only has an "alphabetical" order by similar convention. The script is ordered by sound, which each sound grouping ordered into middle, high and low class consonants. It is mere coincidence that กลาง begins with ก. In the back-to-front ordering, ต is the second charter in the non-retro-flex dentala, where both the first and second are middle class, while ส is the third of the high-classed sibilant sounds that don't neatly fit into the back-to-front order.  The  พื้นเสียง )or if you prefer, phuen siang) is determined by rules I've been unable to discern. It is a middle sound (or as I prefer, unaccented) only for middle and low class consonants ending in live syllables. The 5 remaining พื้นเสียง are all accented. --Pawyilee (talk) 08:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consonants 

message: In the vowel section where examples of vowel combinations are displayed with the IPA, for any superposed vowel symbol such as ั I was seeing ◌ั◌ (3 circles, empty circle, vowel circle, empty circle). I justified it in my head that this was to show if the first consonant was a true cluster and many other justifications. However, after checking this same wiki on my phone, ofcourse this example appears ั◌ (2 circles) which makes more sense and eliminates all the worries I had. So my question is, is this how everyone is seeing it from a computer, what encoding should I use? I am on windows 8 using chrome, but both chrome and internet explorer show it this way, so is there any resolve to view it how it was intended? 82.20.5.197 (talk) 12:32, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there should be only one or two circles. The first circle represents the initial consonant or cluster of the syllable, and shows the position of the vowel relative to it, which can be before, after, above, below, or a combination of those. The second circle, if present, represents the final consonant(s), to show how vowels symbols can occur in closed syllables. −Woodstone (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

text: Thanks RichardW57, I looked at the discussion there. The problem seems to be that the Thai combining marks combine only with other Thai characters, not spaces, dashes and circles. So in those cases the browser generates an additional dotted circle. However some browsers merge the circles. I tried also a variety of empty boxes, but none combine (I'm using Chrome on Windows). It seems no solution is in sight. −Woodstone (talk) 07:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A workaround may be to use Thai consonants in place of the dotted circles, and make clear in the description that the consonants are serving as placeholders (as in Woodstone's comment in the below section)? --Paul_012 (talk) 09:33, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I really can't understand why this would even happen. Looking at the character map, Dotted circle is one character, then the diacritic marks are other characters which INCLUDE the dotted circle. So why would entering them, for some reason prompt another dotted circle, who decided that was a good idea :P is there any explanation, it should just be treated as a character if used in isolation should it not, like any other? Any explanation of this to help me understand?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.5.197 (talk) 14:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  PS. is there any reason why the acute accent in languages like icelandic do not cause this exact same problem? áéíóú  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.5.197 (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes.  These accented combinations occur in normal languages.  The original idea of the inserted dotted circle was to show that there was a vowel mark or similar which seemed to be lacking a letter.  The whys and wherefores probably belong in the Wikipedia article on the dotted circle, but for the risk that it will be original research.  I've been told that the problem is actually a widespread font error.  I'm going to investigate that claim, for it offers a solution.  If we can't find a cure, I suggest doing something like ก for the first consonant and น for the second, as these letters are not used as vowel symbols.  In the mean time, I suggest waiting.  It's interesting that the Unicode charts are 'not' generating using the sequence of dotted circle character and combining mark - they're really pictures! RichardW57 (talk) 20:28, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thai encoding 

message: I just noticed it seems pretty odd that in the vowel examples you can see a stand alone consonant represents "sara a" and it clearly states in the english that for example ก is KO KAI.
Would it not make more sense in the thai name section to write it as such กอ ไก่? I could be wrong and I am unsure if it is ever written as such, or this is just a usage to explain how it sounds phonetically. Either way if it was an english alphabet and it said letter name... it would go "a" "bee" etc... the acutal spelling of the letter and not just the grapheme.
82.20.5.197 (talk) 18:16, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In Thailand it's always spelled ก ไก่, never with an อ. Also in English it is: A for Apple, B for Ball. (If you intend to edit more, it might be useful to make a WP account, so you have a fixed name). −Woodstone (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay will do :) So basically the กอ is just a phonetic spelling to explain it but is in actual fact never used? It's just strange as some letters standalone such as ธ which could be pronounced as the letter ธอ or the word "he" ธะ. I guess it's just context which dictates it then.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.5.197 (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

text: Actually, in Thai teaching, the vowels are sometimes written with อ as a place holder for the position of  the initial consonant (instead of the first circle in the section above, but not a second one). For example เอ,  อา, อี, อู, เอะ, เอีย (and even ออ). For international use this would be very confusing. −Woodstone (talk) 05:21, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alphabet letter names 

message: "The main difference is that each consonant is followed by an implied short a (อะ), not the 'o', or 'ə' of Thai:"
For one this sentence makes it sound like thai only uses implied O's rather than stating something along the lines of "is followed always by an implied a, unlike thai which can imply both a and o".
Implied ə? I am fairly certain this doesn't exist, assuming the ə is referring to the IPA value ə.
--82.20.5.197 (talk) 21:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pali/Sanskrit 

message: I read that the letter ช, when in a final consonant position, is read as [t̚].
However, in at least one word (เอช), it is pronounced [ɕ], just like its initial position.
OosakaNoOusama (talk) 04:55, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Foreign words sometimes have pronunciations that do not fit in the borrowing language. They will then often form  exceptions to the normal spelling rules. −Woodstone (talk) 07:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of final ช 

message: The Thai Wikipedia article on the character ะ states that this symbol is used for the visarga (अः) in Sanskrit.
OosakaNoOusama (talk) 04:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sanskrit visarga (อะ) 

message: "ๅ" (lakkhangyao) redirects here. But it is not explicitly described here. In the article text, it always appears as part of a vowel. Does it have a function by itself or are some vowels just split up in two characters? If the former, what is its function? If the latter, is there a reason for splitting them up? — Sebastian 02:00, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Each of the ฤๅ and ฦๅ special vowels are actually single graphemes. I'd guess the split originated during the early development of modern Thai typography (i.e. to save space on typewriters). --Paul_012 (talk) 12:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

text: Lakkhangyao is a form of the length mark.  The length mark also appears as sara aa (า), as vertical strokes in sara ii (อี) and sara uue (อื), and as the up stroke of sara uu (อ๊).  It may even appear as part of sara ai malaai (ไ). RichardW57 (talk) 23:52, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of lakkhangyao ("ๅ") 

message: There's been a few attempts to change the origin of this script to the Indus script based on . I don't think this is warranted. The source itself notes that the conclusions it makes are only hypothetical and that the authors "have not a shred of concrete evidence for this." That means it doesn't support addition here. agtx 04:22, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Ogress smash! 04:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indus script 

message: I was thinking of adding an extra column for the Old Thai values of the consonant letters in the table at Thai alphabet#Alphabetic. The extra info would be relevant of itself, but it would also help make heads and tails of the letter–sound correspondences of Modern Thai. Any objections anyone? I don't have any sources at hand now so I'm planning to source that from the rest of this article and from Thai language#History. Uanfala (talk) 20:38, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is a good idea. Modern Thai orthography was standardized as we know it only relatively recently. See this paper about a Siamese letter from 1776, which is late Middle or early Modern Thai, but even then the orthography used now-obsolete ligatures, inconsistent spelling of vowels, different tone markers, etc. The current Thai script was a continued evolution of an earlier script used in South East Asia to write the Siamese/Lao languages. Both the previous script (which continued to evolve into the Lao script) and the innovation of the 13th century were based on the Khmer script of the time. The phonology of both Old Khmer and Old Thai were vastly different than the modern languages. Ferlus' paper "The Origin of the Graph  in the Thai Script" describes many of the Thai consonants' "original" values and from which Khmer consonants they derived as well as the ways existing Khmer letters were modified to represent the Old Thai sounds not present in Old Khmer, such as the velar fricatives /x ɣ/. Also notable is that some Old Thai consonants represented values we wouldn't necessarily expect today. Closer to their immediate Old Khmer origins, Old Thai ผ was /pʰ/, ฝ was /f/, พ was /b/, ฟ was /v/ and บ was "imploded" or glottalized /ɓ/. Furthermore, modern combinations such as หย, อย, หม and หน, which today are used to indicate tone, probably represented now-obsolete sounds--either voiceless or glottalized versions of today's corresponding sounds. To be complete any chart should include all of these values. I recently wrote the article on Middle Khmer and have a list of all my sources, which include many on Old Thai. I will try to find time to post the relevant ones here when I get home from work.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 22:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am against mixing historic data with current data in the main table. It is confusing. It is much better to keep this data separate. −Woodstone (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not trying to be argumentative, but confusing to whom? If it is properly labeled as historical, it shouldn't be confusing to anybody with an average understanding of the English language. Maybe it would be confusing to people who are trying to learn the Thai alphabet to read the language, but this encyclopedia article isn't here to teach people the Thai alphabet. It's here to cover the academic knowledge about the alphabet; the historical evolution of its current form and values is an important part of that knowledge. Adding an extra column to the main table is the most logical (and convenient) way to display the historical values and allows for easy comparison to current values. The alternative is that a separate table/chart could be made, but it would need to be placed in the History section, which currently precedes the introduction and description of the alphabet, so it wouldn't flow well at all.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 00:25, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It would fit better near the "Sanskrit and Pali" section, which also deals with former pronunciations and history. The readers you so easily reject as important, are perhaps the majority. They may just want information about current use of Thai script, not an academic treaty on its history. −Woodstone (talk) 02:33, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

text:  thank you for the papers, I'll have a read and try to compile the table in my spare time in the next couple of weeks. If you have other articles to recommend, I'll appreciate it. Uanfala (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had a look at two papers by Ferlus and they provide the Old Thai values for 15 letters so far. I hope I can fill the gaps using Li's 1977 Handbook of comparative Tai, which I should have access to in the autumn. As for the usefulness of such a table, I don't think it will confuse learners to see the Old Thai pronunciations of the letters. I'm a learner myself and the table here was helping me, and I can say the Old Thai values would have made it much easier to understand and remember the modern tonal rules, which otherwise look a bit disorienting. Uanfala (talk) 13:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

text:  See a slightly different link for the whole of the paper on the 1776 letter. RichardW57 (talk) 02:39, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old Thai values in consonant table? 

message: Is this supposed to refer to a palatal l sound (ʎ)? The naming here is confusing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garfieldnate (talk • contribs) 16:30, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's referring to the Pali ḷ, which is described in that article as representing a [ɭ] (retroflex lateral approximant). Don't know where the "lla" is from. The entire section could use quite a bit of clean up. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "voiced lla" meaning 

message: Has any one got any citable sources for how Sanskrit and Pali either are or are to be written?  The denial of the vulgar Pali orthography is shocking - especially as the article then goes on to give an example.  If no-one can find the references promptly, I am inclined to bring it into accordance with the plain truth and wait for people to find the citable sources. --RichardW57m (talk) 14:25, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this paper by Visudh Busyakul. It describes the development of systems for using Thai script to represent Pali, and how the current system came to be adopted for the printing of the 1893 Tipitaka. More detail of the development is described in the preface of this 2012 "Pali phonetic edition". --Paul_012 (talk) 18:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sanskrit and Pali Orthographies 

message: The cross-referencing system for footnotes is currently broken.  If I can cure it by placing the text for references in the body of the text, rather than gathering it into  and similar, are people happy for me to go ahead and do so?  The template  is now deprecated, and appears to have been broken. --RichardW57m (talk) 13:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixing it wasn't as bad as I had feared.  I just changed .. to ...  The text of the footnotes remains together in the source. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:18, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. I didn't know that  and  can now be placed multiple times on a single page. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:39, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken Reference numbering

message: I've reverted this edit, which asserts that there is a problem with an image in the article. I believe that the proper action in this case is to bring the matter up for discussion here and, optionally, to move the image appearance in the article here for discussion. I've now brought it up here and I'm hoping that an editor who knows something abut the topic will make a judgement ab0ut what further action, if any, is needed. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The flow chart is indeed wildly inaccurate. There's no condition that would lead to a low consonant with a mai ek tone mark to have a high tone (siang tri). Pinging User:Clorox, creator of the image. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:33, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

text: I've done a quick edit to fix the mistake; please adjust the appearance as you see fit. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. Thank you for fixing the flowchart. --Clorox (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asserted problem with image 

message: Sorry for this information, but the word "ก็" pronounced like "เก้าะ ⟨[kɔ̂ʔ]⟩/⟨[kɔ̂]⟩" not "ก้อ ⟨[kɔ̂:]⟩". Because "◌็" is make a short vowel (length), not a long vowel. Juidzi (talk) 04:14, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: While that is regarded as the basis of the word's formation, it no longer reflects actual pronunciation in regular speech. Much like เก้า and น้ำ being pronounced with long instead of short vowels. I'm not quite sure how best to deal with such cases. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: @Paul_12 I'm sure, the vowel "◌ำ, ใ◌, ไ◌, เ◌า" can be short & long length of vowel sounds. But ◌็ is not. Juidzi (talk) 13:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

text: It actually present by a short sound. Juidzi (talk) 13:12, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just a quirk of the language. No one in their right mind would tell you that ก็ is pronounced เก้าะ and not ก้อ in actual speech. (Also, to ping another user you'll have to link to their user page, like this: User:Juidzi. See Help:Notifications for details.) --Paul_012 (talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The word "ก็" 

message: "ฑ" this alphabet/letter, in initial position is have 2 sounds. 1) “[tʰ]” when it appear in a live syllable. 2) “[d]” when it appear in a dead syllable. Juidzi (talk) 03:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This appears to be based on an observation from Kamchai Thonglor's grammar, though your wording isn't accurate. The original observation is that the pronunciation of ฑ as [d] is found in dead syllables, and as [tʰ] in both live and dead syllables. I think there are too many exceptions for this "rule" to be useful. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:50, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the alphabet/letter "ฑ" 

message: One problem I'm having with this article is that it is not clear what the topic of the various section is.  When is it the writing system of the Thai language and when is it the Thai script?  The Thai script isn't only used for Thai, or Thai, Pali and Sanskrit. --RichardW57 (talk) 07:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The focus of the article right now is the Thai script used to write the Thai language. The opening paragraph mentions some other languages that the Thai script can be used for. The latter half of the article goes into Sanskrit and Pali words and transcription used in Thai. All this is contained within a single article because the Thai script is used for relatively few languages. In contrast, the Latin_script (Roman script) has many descendants, so there are articles like Latin-script alphabet to describe that grouping, and then individual articles like Italian orthography, English alphabet, and French orthography to describe the writing systems in those particular languages. I'm not sure if my response helps, and it's also a few years later than your question. Wikky Horse (talk) 21:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the topic? 

message: Hello  I have three suggestions on your recent edit to the "History" seciton of this article.  First, I would make "Sukhothai Consonant Inventory" and "Historical Sukhothai Pronuncation" section headings so they show up in the table of contents. Second, I would change the letter casing to match Wikipedia's manual of style to "Sukhothai consonant inventory" and "Historical Sukhothai pronuncation". Lastly, and most important, your additions are long enough that I think they would be better placed in the Sukhothai script article itself. DRMcCreedy (talk) 15:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: HI, thanks for the comment, I will implement the first two suggestion, as for the third it's more complicated. At this moment there are no pages relating to the sukhothai language other than the sukhothai script. I think it would be improper to put the section within the sukhothai script page due to the representation of the phonemes using the thai instead of the sukhothai script. If such implementation were to happen, then there will be a need to be a second section for the sukhothai script representation, in this there will be diffuculties. This is due to the sukhothai having not been used as a typable script, as a result, there will be quite an amount of work put into making the image file, moreover, the script and researching a correct spelling for the 1300s.  Nicolaus Alden Ashvashchandr (talk) 11:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I figured it was complicated which is why I didn't move your addition myself. I like that it's now under the "Sukhothai language" heading on the Thai script page. Thanks. DRMcCreedy (talk) 17:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sukhothai