463
English better than the lowest level. Finally, the majority of the guides accepted their Thai English
because of the researcher’s explanation rather than their awareness of it.
Implications
The four guides’ oral English implies features of the mesolectal Thai English. Their Thai English
goes higher than the basilectal level as it contains different consonant and vowel sounds, stress, and
tones distinct from Standard English ones. They also created Thai English words in the forms of loan
translation and clipping. Further, they performed six grammatical strategies of Thai English. Moreover,
they utilized a few Thai particles, code-mixing and code-switching, and repetition. These features yield
Kachru’s (1983) four types of lexical transfer based on Indian English – loanwords, translation, shift,
and calques (loan translation) – that can be found in Thai English used by the four guides, especially
the final type. In Kachru’s (1983) code-mixing, two strategies of the insertion of local languages into
English expressions – unit insertion (noun phrases and verb phrases) and sentence insertion (later
related to code-switching) – are found in this study. Phonologically, the remaining segmental and
suprasegmental features of the four guides are in line with Platt et al (1984: 30-45)’s New Englishes;
vowel and consonant sounds by New Englishes users occur because of the articulation of their first
language speech patterns. In terms of stress and tones used, they yield the feature of speech rhythm
and discourse intonations in English uniquely expressed by New Englishes users (Platt et al, 1984, pp.
132-140). Though the use of a Thai particle appears at the textual level, it fits into the framework, via
using L1 particles in English speech because of adding new tunes (Thai intonations) into English.
Grammatically, the six types are not directly addressed by Platt et al (1984), but their examples yield
all syntactic features of New Englishes users – plurality, quantifiers, pronouns, adjectives, word order,
tense and aspect, negation, BE, and actives-passives. Finally, the use of repetitive style is also
supported by Platt et al (1984, p.114), especially because of a feeling of intensity. Only the lexical
strategy ‘clipping’ is not directly in line with Kachru’s (1983) and Platt et al’ (1984) studies, but it could
be considered another feature of Thai English because the guides (and other Thais) addressed this term
in English, both in their Thai and English communications.
Compared to previous studies, the guides’ phonological features are not directly related to
those found in previous studies, but some examples under fricatives and affricates were uniquely
uttered by L2 Thai English speakers. Further, these guides’ English stress and tone depicted Thainess
articulated by those Thai speakers (Rogers, 2013). Morphologically, examples of loan translation and
clipping strategies used by the four guides are not found in any studies in Thai English lexis, but the
two strategies are used by characters in Thai English fiction (Bennui, 2013b). Syntactically, four Thai
English grammatical strategies used by the four guides are similarly found in the omission of the
copula-be used by the mesolectal speakers of Singapore English (Chew, 1995), in a dynamic use of the
static verb ‘see’ by the mesolectal Pakistani English speakers (Rahman, 1990), in overgeneralization and
transfer from L1 (literal translation) used by Thai tour guides of pidgin English in Bangkok (Nucpad,
2000). Textually, only Guide A used the Thai particle ‘krab’ in an English expression which is accepted
as a Thai English addressing term in Macquarie Dictionary (Bolton, 2013). This is also similar to the
mesolectal speakers of Singapore English who employed the particle ‘lah’ (Lian Chew, 1995).
Secondly, the three guides utilized code-mixing in terms of unit insertion, thus this is in line with the
mesolectal Malaysian English speakers who use code-mixing in the light of lexicalization (Thirusanku &
Md. Yunus, 2012). This also supports what Seeha-Umpai (1987) examines; the four guides employed
Thai-English code-switching via their intragroup (local tourists) and intergroup (foreign tourists)
