Jump to content
BANGKOK 19 November 2018 05:49
bluesofa

Poster translation

Recommended Posts

This is regarding the black leopard/panther that was killed in Kanchanaburi recently.

In an article in The Nation I saw an image of a poster that someone had made, showing a black panther, and next to it  อย่าให้ผมต้องตายฟรี  which I’d translate as “Don’t let me die for nothing”.

 

My query is regarding the use of ฟรี. I usually think of it as “free”, Thai language using the English word.

Out of interest is there a single Thai word that could be used instead - without having to use a long phrase?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Don't let me die for nothing, die in vain. อย่าให้ผมต้องตายโดยไร้ประโยชน์. But it doesn't quite fit does it? 

I think that ฟรี means 'free'  'without cost' . Since to die the animal had to be killed then there is a killer. The poster is addressed to society, the killer is the one who freely did the deed. The question is what would be the opposite of free? Punishment? อย่าให้ผมต้องตายโดยไร้การลงโทษ 

Does that work, or should we accept that this is a protest against the death and leave it at that? 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply tgeezer.

 

Yes, it is a protest about the death. Politics aside, as I said I was interested if there was an alternative word in Thai instead of the imported English word.

However, in this instance I do think it would be better to stick with the original wording on the poster.

Thanks again for your suggestions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, digbeth said:

ตายเปล่า 

Yes. Actually that did enter my mind originally, but I didn't know if it was grammatically correct - I do struggle with Thai grammar.

I looked in my Thai-English dictionary, but it wasn't listed. I asked my wife, who understood the word immediately. Thanks for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My method is to study Thai.   I use longdo which has examples of English equivalent words and Thai definitions and I often have difficulty.  

Take เก้อ as an example, NECTEC (the name of the source.)

(ADV) vainly, uselessly, syn *เสียเวลาเปล่า *

Example: วันนี้ผมรอเก้อ เพราะเธอไม่ได้กลับมากับรถของมหาวิทยาลัย Thai definition: รู้สึกผิดคาดผิดหวัง .The RID has similar definitions founded on  embarrassment and being out of step. 

So we see that Thais think that vainly, uselessly,  is to be dissapointed! 

Our translation would be "I waited in vain because .... "

whereas if you read the Thai definition you hear "I was disappointed...." .  Now here is the 'kicker' I have just checked with an English speaking native speaker and I am completely wrong! 

ตายเก้อ ตายเปล่า ตายฟรี all mean about the same;  die wastefully. 

How to find out? Simply google เก้อ -English . 

So its goodbye to grammar for me, just substitue the English and Thias should understand.

* this is what เก้อ actually means to the average Thai: waste of time achieving nothing. 

In the example there is too much information: เธอ showing affection, รถมหาวิทยาลัย lack of a car and school , showing possible age group, both of which 'colour' the translation. . 

It should 'have read' (or 'of read' depending on your age) รอเก้อเพราะคุณ ไม่มา 

The probelm occurs when we have คำซ้อน like เก้อเขิน  which comes from the Thai definition but looks like คำประสม becuase เก้อ has changed. My interlocator says that it is nothing to do with เก้อ it means that you are embarrassed! 

I know that my post is rambling but it accurately reflects my process and I think shows that Thai can only be learned by rote, the grammar if it ever existed, is known to only a few.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Briggsy said:

I use เก้อ. It is probably wrong.

ตายเก้อ This phrase/word I also asked my wife about. When I said it she understood this one as well and didn't seem to think it odd. So that one passed the wife test too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tgeezer said:

My method is to study Thai.   I use longdo which has examples of English equivalent words and Thai definitions and I often have difficulty.  

Take เก้อ as an example, NECTEC (the name of the source.)

(ADV) vainly, uselessly, syn *เสียเวลาเปล่า *

Example: วันนี้ผมรอเก้อ เพราะเธอไม่ได้กลับมากับรถของมหาวิทยาลัย Thai definition: รู้สึกผิดคาดผิดหวัง .The RID has similar definitions founded on  embarrassment and being out of step. 

So we see that Thais think that vainly, uselessly,  is to be dissapointed! 

Our translation would be "I waited in vain because .... "

whereas if you read the Thai definition you hear "I was disappointed...." .  Now here is the 'kicker' I have just checked with an English speaking native speaker and I am completely wrong! 

ตายเก้อ ตายเปล่า ตายฟรี all mean about the same;  die wastefully. 

How to find out? Simply google เก้อ -English . 

So its goodbye to grammar for me, just substitue the English and Thias should understand.

* this is what เก้อ actually means to the average Thai: waste of time achieving nothing. 

In the example there is too much information: เธอ showing affection, รถมหาวิทยาลัย lack of a car and school , showing possible age group, both of which 'colour' the translation. . 

It should 'have read' (or 'of read' depending on your age) รอเก้อเพราะคุณ ไม่มา 

The probelm occurs when we have คำซ้อน like เก้อเขิน  which comes from the Thai definition but looks like คำประสม becuase เก้อ has changed. My interlocator says that it is nothing to do with เก้อ it means that you are embarrassed! 

I know that my post is rambling but it accurately reflects my process and I think shows that Thai can only be learned by rote, the grammar if it ever existed, is known to only a few. 

 

You are a lot more advanced at working it all out than I am.

 

Your comment about "if the grammar ever existed" seems to me, quite an understandable thing to say, as my impression is that a lot of normal Thais often aren't sure between themselves about the correctness of how they speak.

 

I don't know if that makes sense?

edit: A bit like the two phrases I asked my wife about. I couldn't find them in the dictionary, but even though she understood them, I wouldn't know if they were regularly used?

 

Edited by bluesofa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bluesofa said:

I wouldn't know if they were regularly used?

This is where a high volume of practice comes in, both written and spoken, whilst being cognitively engaged (just invented that phrase) in relation to phrases and words and syntax you don't fully understand. i.e. making a mental note and then looking it up later or possibly using check questions at the time, such as, "Do you mean.....?" and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sponsors
×