The role of English as a medium of communication especially in the academic domain has been accelerated. This is reflected in the growing number of English language academic journals in non-English dominant countries such as: China, India and Spain (Ren and Rousseau 2004; Xian 2006). Similar to other peripheral countries, Thailand is no exception. This situation results in competition between the national language and English. This present study compares the language choice of academic papers published in Thai national journals in two major fields: science, and its counterpart, humanities and social science. The data collection includes a corpus of 663 articles published in 2005 and in 2015, specifically 346 from Science and 317 from Humanities and Social science. We have hypothesized that English plays a more significant role in scientific journals compared to those in Humanities and Social science. In addition to the language choice in Thai academic journals, a questionnaire was also distributed to 73 respondents to investigate the language ideology of Thai scholars in choosing a language for their manuscripts. The result reveals that many Thai scholars choose English in writing manuscripts due to the lack of technical terms in their field in Thai whereas some of them prefer Thai due to the publication process and the Thai readership orientation.
This paper discusses the ways Thai teacher trainees of English conceptualize their language choices inside the classroom, the affordances and constraints this creates for their learning and how it affects their identifications as teacher trainees. Drawing on data from a longitudinal ethnographic study in central Thailand, this paper describes how language choice functions as a ‘technology of talk’ (Jones 2016) that creates both affordances and constraints for our social interaction and the ways our identity is negotiated in social interaction in the classroom. It demonstrates that language choice, in societies in which our literacy practices are increasingly mediated by digital technology, is not only conceptualized through discourses on the situated appropriateness of literacy practices in the classroom, but also influenced by an extended network of digital literacy practices students engage outside the classroom. These digital literacy practices afford new ways of expressing, doing and saying in languages that are otherwise scarcely accessible outside the classroom. Engaging in these practices constructs networks of widely dispersed literacy practices forming intricate nodes between both online and offline sites and gradually permeate traditionally bounded spaces such as the classroom.
When learning a foreign language, it is important to learn how to spell accurately as it is crucial for communication. To spell Thai language accurately is challenging for both native and foreign learners of Thai. However, studies that address spelling errors made by foreign learners of Thai are rare. The purpose of this paper is to analyze patterns and causes behind spelling errors made by Chinese students learning Thai as a foreign language. Data was taken from thirty Chinese students who took part in a Thai language composition writing and dictation task. The results suggest that the main spelling problem for Chinese students is spelling Thai vowels (37.5%), followed by initial consonants (20.7%), final consonants (20.4%), unpronounced letters (18.0%), tone markers (2.2%), and others (1.2%). In terms of underlying causes of spelling errors, irregularities in Thai language and interference from Chinese phonology are the two main causes for their spelling errors. Moreover, carelessness, differences between the Chinese and Thai writing systems, and influence from Thai native speakers also account for some of the spelling errors produced among the Chinese students.
The purpose of the present study is to examine language choice on the radio in asean countries. The focus is on English and national languages, the two most important languages in those countries. A review of related past studies did not provide an answer to the question that we were interested in; i.e., which language is chosen for radio broadcasts in asean countries between the national language, which is the language most people understand and signifies national identity, and English, which is the lingua franca of the region and an international language? Data was taken from a sample of programs broadcast by radio stations in the ten asean countries. The results show that Singapore ranks the highest in using English in broadcasting (50% of all the programs), while Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar and Vietnam rank the lowest in using English (0%) but highest in using their national languages (100%). Code-switching between the countries’ national languages and English is found in five countries listed from highest to lowest as: the Philippines, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia and Thailand. Code-switching is absent in Malaysia, Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. We conclude that despite the importance of English in the asean community, most asean countries prefer to use their national languages in radio broadcasting.