ศาลาชุมนุม

[Pirin]

คนที่เรียนภาษาอังกฤษทั้งหลายต่างก็มีความสามารถไม่เท่ากัน แล้วอาจไม่เข้าใจทุกสิ่งที่อ่านเช่น เมื่ออ่านประโยคที่มีคำเชื่อมว่า 'for example" บางคนจะไม่แน่ใจว่าคำนี้มีหน้าที่อะไร เพราะว่า for example ต้องมีประโยคมาข้างหน้าซึ่งเป็นประโยคหลัก

2. “Learners or English would have various degrees of difficulty depending on their familiarity with English.’
3. “For example” implies that there is something preceding this part the lack of which may cause learners to question “for example”.

=>
This is beautiful. I just edit it so that it will sound formal or academic.

"คนที่เรียนภาษาอังกฤษทั้งหลายต่างก็มีความสามารถไม่เท่ากัน แล้วอาจไม่เข้าใจทุกสิ่งที่อ่านเช่น เมื่ออ่านประโยคที่มีคำเชื่อมว่า 'for example" บางคนจะไม่แน่ใจว่าคำนี้มีหน้าที่อะไร เพราะว่า for example ต้องมีประโยคมาข้างหน้าซึ่งเป็นประโยคหลัก"

=>
"คนที่เรียนภาษาอังกฤษ(ทั้งหลาย)ต่างก็มีความสามารถไม่เท่ากัน และอาจจะไม่เข้าใจสิ่งที่ตนอ่านอย่างครบถ้วน เช่น เมื่ออ่านประโยคที่มีวลี 'for example" เป็นตัวเชื่อม บางคนอาจจะไม่แน่ใจว่าวลีนี้ทำหน้าที่อะไร เพราะว่า(วลี) for example จะปรากฏได้ก็ต่อเมื่อมีประโยคอื่นปรากฏก่อนหน้าเป็นประโยคนำ"

[Tgeezer]

ขอบคุณ Pirin

นักเขียนสำแดงออกมาวลีว่า for example ให้เห็นเพื่อเชื่อมประโยคแรกกับประโยคที่สอง ใช่ไหม

ขอให้คุณ ก้าวข้ามรับปีใหม่อย่างมีความสุกและสุกภาแข็งแรงครับผม

[Pirin]

ขอบคุณ Pirin

นักเขียนสำแดงออกมาวลีว่า for example ให้เห็นเพื่อเชื่อมประโยคแรกกับประโยคที่สอง ใช่ไหม

ขอให้คุณ ก้าวข้ามรับปีใหม่อย่างมีความสุขและสุขภาพแข็งแรงครับผม

ขอบคุณมากค่ะสำหรับคำอวยพร และถ้านับวันนี้เป็นแรกของช่วงเวลาใหม่ ๆ ก็ขอให้วันนี้และวันต่อ ๆ ไปเป็นช่วงเวลาแห่งความสุช สดชื่น แข็งแรงทั้งกายและใจของคุณ(และทุก ๆ คน)ค่ะ

Before discussing your ability in interpreting English (and Thai) texts, I would like you to listen to a lecture by Professor Paul Bloom in the link below (in case you have time).

Please feel free to guess why and how I watched (and listened to) his lectures.

How Do We Communicate?: Language in the Brain, Mouth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf9tlbM ... 1F&index=6

[Tgeezer]

it is quite interesting telling students about language but by explaning that it is inherent it makes one wonder why it is done. I assume that it is to create more linguists who can in turn give more lectures and continue the cycle. However it was entertaining , I was interested in the statement that some languages don't distinguish between L and R. Some Thai people don't roll their ร and some English speakers don't realize that R is not ร . Incidentally do you know of any languages which has the order subject-object-verb? John Bill hit.

[Richard Wordingham]

Incidentally do you know of any languages which has the order subject-object-verb? John Bill hit.

That's the old northern Eurasian word order. It's still retained in Indo-Iranian (e.g. the Three Refuges in Pali), Turkic, Japanese and Burmese, though there may be some Turkic or Indo-Iranian exceptions. See WALS for maps.

[Pirin]

it is quite interesting telling students about language but by explaning that it is inherent it makes one wonder why it is done. I assume that it is to create more linguists who can in turn give more lectures and continue the cycle. However it was entertaining , I was interested in the statement that some languages don't distinguish between L and R. Some Thai people don't roll their ร and some English speakers don't realize that R is not ร . Incidentally do you know of any languages which has the order subject-object-verb? John Bill hit.

It seems that you start to be interested in the ideas he presents.

To tell you the truth, I watched the lectures of this professor and that of Professor Steven Pinker (in the link below) to improve my listening skill in English.

In this case, you might see everything I need to have so that I will understand their lectures. Then what about your situation? What can help you understand the sentence ยิงลูกลักไก่ found in a Thai dictionary.

.....

Steven Pinker: Linguistics as a Window to Understanding the Brain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-B_ONJIEcE

[Tgeezer]

Too much for me Richard. I have a schoolbook at home which as I remember, has ผม เพื่อน รถ ขาย with all the 'possible' ways of combining them to make a sentence. I posted it here because some of the combinations I could not make sense of but there was no interest.
ผมขายรภเพื่อน เพื่อนขายรถผม รถผมเพื่อนขาย รถเพื่อนผมขาย are standard Thai, I think because S-V order is pereserved, but there were more which it was claimed made sense.
The fact that there were other combinations which I couldn't see makes me wonder if English grammar was adopted in order to make sense of English.

[Tgeezer]

it is quite interesting telling students about language but by explaning that it is inherent it makes one wonder why it is done. I assume that it is to create more linguists who can in turn give more lectures and continue the cycle. However it was entertaining , I was interested in the statement that some languages don't distinguish between L and R. Some Thai people don't roll their ร and some English speakers don't realize that R is not ร . Incidentally do you know of any languages which has the order subject-object-verb? John Bill hit.

It seems that you start to be interested in the ideas he presents.

To tell you the truth, I watched the lectures of this professor and that of Professor Steven Pinker (in the link below) to improve my listening skill in English.

In this case, you might see everything I need to have so that I will understand their lectures. Then what about your situation? What can help you understand the sentence ยิงลูกลักไก่ found in a Thai dictionary.

edit: In ลักไก่, must you be successful? Both feint and bluff can be tried but don't always work.
.....

Steven Pinker: Linguistics as a Window to Understanding the Brain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-B_ONJIEcE

Sorry Pirin, I have only now noticed you post!
I answered the ลักไก่ 'take a chicken' question earlier, Football, taking a kick at goal but deceiving the goalkeeper in direction. I am working on it, maybe 'feint' is the word for football and for gambling at cards I would say it is to 'bluff'.

[Pirin]

When saying things to others, writers assume the reader to know lots of things, don't they?

In the following sentence (in English) found in National Geographic (Angkor), native speakers of English might not think about what the writer assumes the reader to know so that the reader will understand the sentence. As for learners of English, it does take time and lots of practice to gain enough knowledge and insights.

Please feel free to give an explanation about what can help learners of English understand this sample sentence either in English or Thai.

"The most extensive urban complex of the preindustrial world, Angkor stretched across an area the size of New York City.

[Tgeezer]

When saying things to others, writers assume the reader to know lots of things, don't they?

In the following sentence (in English) found in National Geographic (Angkor), native speakers of English might not think about what the writer assumes the reader to know so that the reader will understand the sentence. As for learners of English, it does take time and lots of practice to gain enough knowledge and insights.

Please feel free to give an explanation about what can help learners of English understand this sample sentence either in English or Thai.

"The most extensive urban complex of the preindustrial world, Angkor stretched across an area the size of New York City.

I don't know that I can be of any use but I will try.
There are two sentences both describe Angkor using different criteria.
1 Angkor was the most extensive urban complex of the pre-industrial world.

2.Angkor stretched across an area the size of New York City.
One subject ,two sentences , two verbs - was and stretched.

These two descriptions have been combined by leaving out the subject verb of the first sentence and inserting a comma.
The largest city of the time, Angkor stretched accross an area the size of New York City.
1. John was the fattest in class before gym was compulsory.
2. John needed as many seats as two people.
The fattest in class, John needed as many seats as two people.