ศาลาชุมนุม

[shantee]

I saw some workds with the ห in theory it is the "th" equivalent if linked with English.. but why the romanized = "Naaw" (Eng: cold) with the ห slience?

thanks!

[lumdam]

Inside a Thai Syllable: Part II has a section titled Tone-shifting ‘Leading Consonant’ Clusters that explains the usage of silent ห. You'll also see that some words start with a silent อ, such as อยาก.

[qwert]

Because หนาว have ห (h) sound but อยาก haven't.
You can listen หนาว be หาว, because it is sound between ห and น.
You can listen อยาก be อาก, because it is sound between อ and ย.

[lumdam]

You can listen หนาว be หาว, because it is sound between ห and น.
You can listen อยาก be อาก, because it is sound between อ and ย.

Really? Does the silent consonant change the pronunciation of the initial consonant? I haven't heard of this before, and I can't even guess what a sound between /h/ and /n/ would be...

Or did I understand you wrong‽

[Tgeezer]

You can listen หนาว be หาว, because it is sound between ห and น.
You can listen อยาก be อาก, because it is sound between อ and ย.

Really? Does the silent consonant change the pronunciation of the initial consonant? I haven't heard of this before, and I can't even guess what a sound between /h/ and /n/ would be...

Or did I understand you wrong‽

Interesting isn't it? I read something along those lines long ago and tried to understand it, but now I treat ห as a tone mark, same as อ , and as the RID says ไม่ออกเสียงตัว ห
There is a reason why not หยาก and this might be an attempt to explain that.

[Richard Wordingham]

ห nam is, historically, like the 'h' in 'when', except that the vanishing of the effect on the consonant in Thai is complete, whereas it is still very much in progress in English.

The four hold-outs against the change from อย- to หย- are all common words, and three of them (อยาก อย่า อย่าง) offer mutual support, differing only in the final consonant.

As to the Romanisation with 'h', there is no sound basis for it if based on sound - น่า and หน้า are pronounced the same. Systems based on Thai spelling do show it. Some karaoke transcriptions also reflect ห nam in the transcription.

[qwert]

but now I treat ห as a tone mark, same as อ , and as the RID says ไม่ออกเสียงตัว ห
There is a reason why not หยาก and this might be an attempt to explain that.

You're clever. Just ignore writing from and think ห or อ as tone marks.

Really? Does the silent consonant change the pronunciation of the initial consonant? I haven't heard of this before, and I can't even guess what a sound between /h/ and /n/ would be...

Or did I understand you wrong‽

When speak ห นำ words, they have more nasal sound that make their sound look like ห.
If had anyone didn't care it, but who rule thai writing care it.

As to the Romanisation with 'h', there is no sound basis for it if based on sound - น่า and หน้า are pronounced the same. Systems based on Thai spelling do show it. Some karaoke transcriptions also reflect ห nam in the transcription.

If you were north or esan people you can spell น่า and หน้า with different sounds.
This case is agrument among new generation central Thai people, because them can't spell that words with different sounds.

[Tgeezer]

but now I treat ห as a tone mark, same as อ , and as the RID says ไม่ออกเสียงตัว ห
There is a reason why not หยาก and this might be an attempt to explain that.

You're clever. Just ignore writing from and think ห or อ as tone marks.

I wondered when I wrote 'tone mark' if it would excite comment.
Since there is no such thing as tone mark in English, I need to explain, I mean, any one of the factors which dictate the tone of a word.
I tried and tried to introduce ห นำ in to my pronunciation when I first read of its affect but had no success, and although the argument may still rage on in some circles I just accept that ห นำ has no more effect than to dictate the tone of the word; I am not really clever since I didn't invent this convention.

[tod-daniels]

but now I treat ห as a tone mark, same as อ , and as the RID says ไม่ออกเสียงตัว ห
There is a reason why not หยาก and this might be an attempt to explain that.

You're clever. Just ignore writing from and think ห or อ as tone marks.

I wondered when I wrote 'tone mark' if it would excite comment.
Since there is no such thing as tone mark in English, I need to explain, I mean, any one of the factors which dictate the tone of a word.
I tried and tried to introduce ห นำ in to my pronunciation when I first read of its affect but had no success, and although the argument may still rage on in some circles I just accept that ห นำ has no more effect than to dictate the tone of the word; I am not really clever since I didn't invent this convention.

Quite a novel and EASY approach to take with those two consonants. I dunno about them being "tone marks" but they certainly are "class changers" allowing consonants they precede to adopt the rules of of another class, either อ or ห. Still, I never thought of it like you explained it. I'll bring it up at the next language lesson and see what people think of it.

I hope this doesn't muddy the water for the O/P:
The words which start with what most foreigners learn in private Thai language school as a "silent H", or called in Thai หอ นำ can ONLY have one of nine low class Thai consonants after the ห to be a real "silent H" word.

Those consonants are ง, ณ, ญ, น, ม, ย, ร, ล, or ว. Using ห as the lead character changes these consonants from low class to high class (much like when อ leads ย changing it from a low to middle class consonant for toning purposes). Using ห makes the low class consonants follow high class consonant rules instead of their normal ones. Words which start with the silent ห can have only one of three tones; low, falling or rising.

Like I said, I hope it helped. .. I think what's throwing you off is the "Karaoke" Thai or transcription you're using to read Thai with english letters and symbols. Every school and almost every website has a different "karaoke" system. About the most widely used on is Benjawan Becker's version, as its the most printed for sure.

Good Luck, don't give up. ..

Tod Daniels

[Richard Wordingham]

If you were north or esan people you can spell น่า and หน้า with different sounds.
This case is agrument among new generation central Thai people, because them can't spell that words with different sounds.

Most Isan speech doesn't distinguish between etymologically mai ek words with high and with low consonants.

The Siamese tone merger is pretty old, and Siamese orthography is riddled with low class mai ek words that should (etymologically and by non-Central pronunciation) be spelt as high class mai tho - ฆ่า should be *ข้า, โซ่ should be *โส้ and เฒ่า should be *เถ้า. For expressing Siamese, would you go by dialect tone or Siamese spelling?