28-02-2026, 02:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 28-02-2026, 05:23 PM by Jorge_Stolfi.)
(28-02-2026, 08:48 AM)ReneZ wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Something seems to have gone wrong with the Thai version. What I see is a phonetic rendering of the original Chinese.
I confronted GAI with your assessment, and it admitted that its text is basically a syllable-by-syllable translation of the Chinese text, with no attempt to follow Thai grammar. It offered the following alternative as a more "Thaified" version that still retains the overall structure of the Chinese entry:
SEE REVISED VERSION IN You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Does it make more sense?
GAI claims that all Thai medical books older than a couple of centuries were lost, so there are no samples from the 1400s that could serve as models. Is that true?
All the best, --stolfi

