What is Thai Culture Exactly. - Page 8 - Ajarn Forum

MisterStretch · 2nd August 2008, 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by BerryGoose

how about the English language which you all are so fond of telling us Americans that you invented. Hate to to tell you but it's Germanic in it's roots.

Yes, linguists agree to that and I don't hear any Americans claiming differently. I do hear an awful lot of Brits do so, though. "It's English and we're from England. We speak correct ENGLISH."

While Germanic in it's roots (we're talking ethnicity, not nationality) with other influences, the horrible grammar structure we have can be blamed on a British clergyman who wrote the first grammar primer using Latin as his template. Arrrrrrrrgh!

Quote:

Originally Posted by BerryGoose

But why is that different than what the bashers here are saying about what the Thais have adapted?

Uh, what bashers would those be? I read the whole thread yesterday and bashers are at a minimum on this one. It's an interesting discourse on influences that shape and define a culture but I don't recall any bashing going on.

robitusson · 2nd August 2008, 10:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterStretch

the horrible grammar structure we have can be blamed on a British clergyman who wrote the first grammar primer using Latin as his template.

Latin grammar and English grammar are distinctly different. If English was based on Latin grammar ,we would be conjugating verbs and declining nouns.

Lor Ling · 2nd August 2008, 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by BerryGoose

how about the English language which you all are so fond of telling us Americans that you invented

I'm English. I've never made such a claim.

Stop generalising.

All people who generalise are cnuts!

Johnh · 2nd August 2008, 11:14

Cultures can be "understood as systems of symbols and meanings that even their creators contest, that lack fixed boundaries, that are constantly in flux, and that interact and compete with one another"

The point about this thread is not to simply post personally experienced anecdotes of ours or other peoples lives as finite and definable examples of this (or any) culture, but, rather, to try to understand the symbolic value system such behaviours exist within.

Is all human activity simply a response to the society we live within, or does society as an organic and collective experience stimulate and create such behavioural patterns?

The following two examples provide an opportunity to look at this conundrum.

We see a man driving a moped.
We see a man driving a moped with a women and two children as passengers.

If we see the lone moped driver, do we judge that him to be a responsible and sensible individual who is showing appropriate concerns for his family by his altruistic actions?

No, because we do not even think about it in any sense of the word.

If we see a group of four people on the moped, do we consider the driver to be irresponsible and unconcerned regarding the group's safety?

Yes, because we judge him to be ill educated in any sense of the phrase, ignorant of safety concerns and unconcerned by any possible accident, injury or death.

We ignore any possible reason as to why he is driving with three others and, based apon our own cultural references and societal norms, assume the worst. We then pass a moral judgement.

The bottom line is this, we simply don't know, but still insist on second guessing other peoples reasons for doing things, while making, what we consider to be, morally sound assumptions regarding another's person's behaviour.

So, are we cogently responding or reacting to a different perception of the received culture, or are we messengers from our own cultures trying to pass on our understanding and uses of right and wrong, coupled with our sense of moral (self) righteousness?

jonny danger · 2nd August 2008, 11:25

Quote:

assume the worst. We then pass a moral judgement.

..and? To pass a moral judgment is all we can do. What I want to do is kill them .. before they kill me or my family. If they want to kill themselves let them. Problem is they just about always take someone with them. Is my culture better than theirs? Yes.

Your comment, IMO, is right on and well written, but it's cultural anth 101. I think it's a given: Whomever has no concern for his own life or the life of others is .. er, um.. STUPID! Sure, it's part of his culture to be stupid. Should I respect that?

kikiat · 2nd August 2008, 12:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnh

The following two examples provide an opportunity to look at this conundrum.

We see a man driving a moped.
We see a man driving a moped with a women and two children as passengers.

If we see the lone moped driver, do we judge that him to be a responsible and sensible individual who is showing appropriate concerns for his family by his altruistic actions?

No, because we do not even think about it in any sense of the word.

Actually, whenever I see parents bringing their kid(s) to school on the motorbike instead of having the kid drive by him/herself, I do think : "thank god there are still plenty 'responsible' parents around"

but for the policeman who is stopping traffic in front of a school to let all the under aged kids without helmets and 3-4-5 people on a motorbike join traffic, I think : "Un-fookin'-believable, retarded fookin' culture here, fookin' ell"

same goes for policemen who brake rules they're supposed to be enforcing (or breaking them whilst enforcing them

)

MisterStretch · 2nd August 2008, 13:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by robitusson

Latin grammar and English grammar are distinctly different. If English was based on Latin grammar ,we would be conjugating verbs and declining nouns.

Quote:

'Present-day conceptions of "correctness" are to a large extent based on the notion, prominent in the 18th century, that language is of divine origin and hence was perfect in its beginnings but is constantly in danger of corruption and decay unless it is diligently kept in line by wise men who are able to get themselves accepted as authorities, such as those who write dictionaries and grammars. Latin was regarded as having retained much of its original "perfection."... When English grammars came to be written, they were based on Latin grammar, even down to the terminology... The most important eighteenth century development in the English language was its conscious regulation by those who were not really qualified for the job, but who managed to acquire authority as linguistic gurus'

English Grammar

robitusson · 2nd August 2008, 13:25

Right so the terminology is the same. The technicalities and uses of the grammars of the two languages are totally different. 6 years of chanting verb conjugations in school taught me that.

It's like the way the word "I" changes to "me", when it's used in the accusative. Latin does that for every noun in every declension.

Anyway, sorry....

jonny danger · 2nd August 2008, 13:35

That's good ^. In Spanish I is excluded unless you want to draw attention to yourself, and just about everybody doesn't want that. Also in Latin and all Romance languages, I believe, the me/ he/she/it/they/we, is used as a reflexive which means something more like: action is directed to this person/these people. Romance languages have it all over English, IMO.

Cognitive anth is the study of how a language limits the world view of its speakers; no word to explain or express an idea, phenomena, or condition = the idea, phenomena, or condition doesn't exist. I keep asking my Thai teacher mates in the smoking room, what is the word for an alcoholic? Kee mao, drinks a lot; laong deng, down and out (correct me if I'm wrong, please). Therefore I'd assume alcoholism defined as a medical condition isn't recognized.

columbia · 2nd August 2008, 14:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnh

We ignore any possible reason as to why he is driving with three others

I feel many of us do nothing of the sort. I've got nothing against a person riding with multiple passengers. If that's their only form of transportation then neither I nor any person on this earth has the right to judge them. If they're riding in a safe and considerate manner they can have the kitchen sink and a dancing elephant on board for all I care.

Now if that same person and his passengers (which happens on a daily basis) pull out of a junction in front of my car causing me to brake heavily, overtake coming towards me causing me to swerve and go through a red light causing me to nearly hit them then yes, I will judge them. Because they're fucking morons with no thought for anybody apart from their own selfish selves.

SageAndOnion · 2nd August 2008, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by robitusson

we would be conjugating verbs

So you don't conjugate verbs in English then? I am, you am, he am, they am...is that how you speak?

LeedsLeedsLeeds · 2nd August 2008, 15:42

Cor blimey Sage, have you ever considered taking up teaching?

columbia · 2nd August 2008, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by robitusson

declining nouns.

Sort of like "Not tonight helicopter. I've got a headache."?

robitusson · 2nd August 2008, 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by SageAndOnion

So you don't conjugate verbs in English then? I am, you am, he am, they am...is that how you speak?

Everything has to spelled out for you. I meant conjugating the verbs the same as in Latin (here I am refering to the post wherein I mentioned the obviously oh-so-confusing matter) which we don't do in English (by Englishhere I mean the English language.)

Maybe I could say it like this: verbs in English and Latin - not work same.