The origin of the graph b in the Thai script

HAL Id: halshs-00922729

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00922729

Submitted on 8 Jan 2014

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- entific research documents, whether they are pub- lished or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

The origin of the graph b in the Thai script

Michel Ferlus

To cite this version:

Michel Ferlus. The origin of the graph b in the Thai script. Abramson, Arthur. Southeast Asian Linguistic Studies in Honor of Vichin Panupong, Chulalongkorn University Press, pp.79-82, 1997.

�halshs-00922729�

Centlo National de [a Recherche Scienlifique, Paris

It

is now a

well

acceptcd fact that the Thai script originated Aom a type

of

ancignt Khmer script. This borrowing took plaÇe

by

the

XIIIth

century, at tho latest, because

the scrip

used

in the most

ancient

text known in a Thai languagg the

famous Ramgamhæng stele etgraved around 1300

AD, is

considered as ao

innovatior or

the basis of a previous script.

The Khmer

writiog

system was adapted

to Thai in

a very simple way. Wheû the phonetic unit was the same

in

the both languages, the Khmer graph was tâkgn without

any modification to tanscribe the

same sound

in ^Thai. For

example,

the

graph tanslitterated by

t

and pronounced

k in

Khmer was taken to transcribe Thai

L

^(today

spelled a).

In

t1le same way, the Khmer

$aph

translittelated ,kü was take[ to transcribe Thai

kh (oday

spelled tt). The Khmer graph translitterated

g

ând prcnounçed

g

(today

k)

was taken

to

transcribe Thai

g

(today pronounced kÀ and spelled

n). But

when a phonetic

unit in

Thai was not represented

in

Khmer, the

$aph of

^{a similar sound was}

taken and modified. The Khmer

gaph t

^{was modiûed}

^to]Kl,

^to transcribe the aûcient Thai non-voiced dorsal fricative _2tr (today pronounced

kù

and spelled 1l

in

the alphabet

chat).

In the same way the Khmer graph g was modified

to

G to transcribe the arcient

Thai

yoiced dorsal

fricative y

(today plonounced

kt

and spelled

n in the

elphabet chart)... The gaphs

Kâ (1)

and G

(n)

arc now obsolete and have been replaced by ftà (1|) and g (çl) iû lext orthography.

Thai

(regular

graphs)

^{(modified graphs)}

kk ft n ^k

ti kh k l kn Kh "t x>kn g g>k g n g>kn G n y>kt

In

spite

of

somc modifications

in

the forms

of lette$

over the centuri€s, the relatioû betwegn the regutar graphs and thsir derived forms has been preserved

until

today and is

qüte

clear in the modem Thai script.

On the basis

of

zuch examples,

it

has beer somevr'hat hastily concluded that every

gaph of

the Thai script derived

from

a homologous one

in

the Khmer script. That is true

for

ahrost

all of

the alphabet,

but for

the

græh

à, the so-called

plcr ptram

(r.{), the relation

with

its supposed model

in

ancient Khmer script seems to us spufious. For the purpose

of

our demorstration we shall compare the ancient Thai gaphs for

pà (tl)

and â

(t{) in

Sukhothai style (Songvitaya

l98l)

aod Faklûam style (Vimonkasem 1983)

Southeast

Asiai

Linguistic Studies in Honow

ofvichin

Panupong, edit€d by Arthur S.

Ahamson, Chulaloûgkom University Press. 1997.

80 FERLUS

with

those

in

Pallava script and

in

ancient

Klmer

scripts, Preangkorian (Grawengkij

l98l)

^and Angkorian (Phirunsam

l98l).

ph

U

fo i.r l, il rJt9

^s.,J

,4

A

simple examination

of

the both gaphs

p,

and ô shows us

üat

for

pà

the Thai graph is clearly derived from the Khmer protoqpe, while

for

ô the forms

of

the Khmer and Thai graphs arc

loo disimilar to

be considercd as related.

In

ancient Khmer, the graph

b

was rarely used (Jacob 1960) because,

in

^general, the graph

ÿ

was used to transcdbe the arcieot ^phoneme

b

as

well

as

v

^(Ferlus 1993). This

is

due

to

the fact

that the

Indians

who

introduced Sanskrit

cultule to

anciant Cambodia pronounced Sanskrit

ÿ

as

b but

kept the

two

distinct

in

Sanskrit texts. WTen the Pallava script was adapted

to

âncient

Klmel

the

gaph ÿ

was taken

to

aanscribe

the two

Khmer phonemes

v

^and

b,

which

let to

ambiguity, as the graph à was rarely used.

Until

the

xlth

century the graph ô, mostly used

in

sanslsit,

is

mquestionably

of

Pallava t)?e,

but from this

period

a new form of

ô, presumably

borowed fiom Mot

script, was intoduced.

b

o

Pallava Khmer

heangkoriaü Angkorian Thai

Sukhothai Fakkham moderrl

clô{2m rru ^znj

w

ÿi

before

xlth

c.

from

XIth

c.

C' ^CJ Cf

ôn

Where does the Thai

gaph

_{ô come}

fiom

? Before any answer one must remember

a

^peculiar consonantal

shift in

ancient

Khmq. At an

unknown date,

the labial

and æical non voiced

initial

^{plosives were} glottalized, that is

p > 6

and

t ^> 4 ^while

^the

gaphs remained unchanged. As a result, in the Thai script the graphs

p ard

t repres€nt the anciert preglottalized initials 6 and

d

(today lJ and n), while the initials

p

and

t

are ûallscribed

by

modified forms

of

the same gaphs (today

!

^and

n). Wlen

the ancient Thai people borro,,ÿed the Khmer script ard,

with

a remarkable precisioû, _adapted

it

ûo

their own language, they used the

gaph

ÿ for the sourd

w,

approximately restoring ils origiûal value

in

^Sanskrit. They then needed ûo create

a

new ^graph

to

tmnscribe the sound

b,

for \rhich no letter was available in the ancient Kbmer system. Our hypothesis

is that this à

was made

by

doubling

the

^graph

p, _the

sound

b

^being phonetically sufûciently close to 6

(w

tten p) to suggest such a derivatiou.

p\J

⁶

à U +U >Irub

Later,

this

new

gaph â

was modified

to B to

transcribe

v

(today pronounced

f

^and

spelled r,l) while pà was modified to

Pi

to traNcribe

f

(today sp€tled Âl).

In

the fottowing chart

wç

show and ^ma.ke explicit the evolution

of

the graphs ^p]1

p

ô vand their derived forms since Pallava script to modem Thai.

Pâllâvâ

âncient

Klmer

ancient

Thai

modem Thai

ph tJ t0

^po

p

Bl

^po

P.l f U6 tJp upL

ÿ'1 f

lca

Ofi ^u

B

OO v/b

^v

pr

f

6

p

b

U

,C _U

;

ry$

b

ph Ph

p P

U ^p>6 îJ

o

ô

One could note that

it

would be more accute ûo

tanlitterate

â as

Æ

but to avoid useless complications the traditional traNlitteration is preserved.

Finally, we believe that this study is another illusaation

of

the importaûce

of

using both epiglaphic and tinguistic eüderces, in paxticular historical phonetics,

in tlle

study

ofüe

evolution

ofwriting

systems.

82

^FERLUS

REFERENCES

Fe

us, Michel (1993). Essai de phonétique historique du khmer. Mon-Khmer Sndies

XXI:

57-81.

c,rawellgù, Sai,,ud ⁽ I 981). ^'Ihe

Prc-angkofiü

Scnpls. M.

A.

thesis, Silpakom University, Bangkok [In Thai].

Jacob, Judith

M.

(1960). The Structure

ofthe

Word in Old Khmer.

Bulletit ofthe

School

of

Oriental and

Aûicaû

Studies 23i 351-68.

Phirunsam, Suntarce (1981)- The Angkoriaû Khmer Scripts.

M.

A. thesis, Silpakom University, Bangkok

[n

^Thai].

Songvitaya" Anaû (1981).

the

Charucteristics of the Sqipts aûd theb

Uhogaphy in

Sukhothai Incriptions.

M.

^{A. thesis,} Silpakom

Univeffity,

^Bangkok. Un Thail.

Vimonkasem, Kannika (1983)- The Script "faLkhaû" iû Ltsciptioùs

ofNorthem

Thailand. M-

A.

tbesis, Silpakom

UdveBity,

Bangkok. _Un Thail.

Mise àjour, ^{oct. 2013}