|A fact from Six-hour clock appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 20 July 2004. The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know Wikipedia:Recent additions/2004/July.||
I don't understand the statement: "However most commonly used nowadays is a combination of the traditional six hour counting with a twelve hour counting, thus the numbering of the hours of the second and fourth quarter starts from 7 instead from 1."
That combination produces, in fact, a 12-hour clock. So what makes it a combination rather than a replacement?
Unless the only distinction is one of terminology for the hours, and if it is, then the article should state that.
TimBovee 21:18, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
My Thai wife also says: the list is wrong! "nɨng mong chaw" means 7am and not 8am. Going on with the counting 8am = sᴐng mong chaw, 9am = sam mong chaw, 10am = si mong chaw, 11am = ha mong chaw. Please check your article. Tom 19 Jul 2004
- Your wife's right. ;) I've fixed it to the best of my understanding, and tweaked the romanisations. Markalexander100 00:44, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
You might want to add that one left over from the pre-1901 system is Song Yaam สองยาม that denotes midnight; also that the six hour clock is *only* used colloquially nowadays. 1 - 5 mong chaw is used less, 6 mong (6am) - 11 mong is perfectly understandable and is prone to less confusion; however this does not applys to "thum" or evenings, 7pm = 1tum and so on.... --Bobbagum 16:18, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Done. Markalexander100 01:44, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
"7 am jet mong chao เจ็ดโมงเช้า" doesn't seem correct. I believe it is rather nueng mong chao (หนึ่งโมงเช้า) or simply mong chao, the หนึ่ง being omitted in the same sense as bai mong บ่ายโมง.--Paul C 14:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Pronunciation of early morning hours "ti" is misleading 
If you say "ti neung" it means "first." If you want to say one in the morning, you must say "dtee neung."
The initial consonant in that word is called "dtau dtau" in the Thai language. It is definitely not the same as a "t" sound. You make the sound by putting your tongue between your front teeth and making a sound somewhere between a "T" and a "D."
The author of the Thai language page made the same mistake regarding dtau dtao.
- It's not a mistake- it's a consequence of transliteration. 'Dt' looks like a consonant cluster, and so is also unsatisfactory. HenryFlower 18:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia uses the Royal Thai General System of Transcription (RTGS). So ท (thahan) (as in Thai for first) is spelled "th", while ต (tao) (as in Thai for strike) is spelled "t". There are tourist language guides that use "t" and "dt" instead, but that is in no way a standard trancription and almost never used in Thailand itself. −Woodstone 19:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
The article seems a little confused, offering two versions of the time without explanation of the difference.
Lived in Thailand for eight years. Regionally and from person to person, Thais choose to say the time in different ways, and then write it in another. There's 4 systems and they can pick and choose to mix them in a single sentence.
However the most common method seems to be the list on the left with a few modifications. 4 in the afternoon is always considered 'yen' in everything I've read. However I've frequently heard Thais use 'bai' in conversation so is thus interchangeable in conversation. The list on the left list 7 in the morning onwards with 'chao' and the list on the right without. Actually it's purely optional to the speaker. Finally Thais most commonly ~(and irrationally) use 'jet mong [chow]' on the first list never 'neung mong [chow]' then go on to 'song mong [chow]', weird but if you don't believe me just listen.
Lastly the criticism about 't' in the 'ti' below is correct. But also the vowel is wrong too. There is no word 'ti' (unexasperated 't' followed by short 'ee' vowel) in the Thai language.
There is however the word 'thi' (exasperated 't' followed by short 'ee' vowel) meaning 'st/nd/rd/th' ect in Thai.
Correctly what should be used is 'tee' (unexasperated 't' followed by long 'ee' vowel)
Paul 19 November 2007
Literal translations 
Taking another look at the article, I have to argue against the literal translations. Apart from looking stupid, they don't add anything to the article. Even worse, they give a false impression of the meanings of the terms, since ตี, โมง and ทุ่ม simply mean o'clock (in the six-hour sense), not the sounds of various timekeeping devices in the past. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Before this turns into an edit war 
If one did actually look for the words ตี, โมง and ทุ่ม in the dictionary, they would find that the Royal Institute's dictionary defines them, when treated as nouns, as "the traditional timekeeping system for night after midnight / daytime / the first six hours of night". Yes, ตี is also a verb meaning "to hit", โมง is also a kind of plant, and ทุ่ม also means "to throw something heavy". But even though it may be reasonable for one to suspect those terms to be related, it is impossible to rationally deduce that they actually are. There are a plethora of homographs in the Thai language, and if one was to claim that all of them mean the same thing, they would be thinking unreasonably.
The claim that they are dictionary words only supports their translation as "o'clock", per the definitions given above. Yes, their origins have been explored and citations could be provided if one cared to, but even then, they should be treated as the origins of those terms, not as their definitions, because, as stated, their current definitions are as timekeeping words.--Paul_012 (talk) 22:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- They do not all mean just o'clock. They are each a distinct flavour of o'clock. The essence is that the specific term used makes the meaning of each of the four six-hour blocks unambiguous. If you translate ti, mong and thum (and yen) all by "o'clock", the distinction is lost and the translations become meaningless and thus invalid. That in a wider sense they all mean o'clock is obvious from their use in the table and adds no information. I had looked them up to make sure. −Woodstone (talk) 08:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Here's a good reference (in Thai) 
Thongprasert, Chamnong (1985), "ทุ่ม-โมง-นาฬิกา (Thum-Mong-Nalika)", ภาษาไทยไขขาน (Thai Unlocked), Bangkok: Prae Pitaya Press, pp. 229–237. Covers most aspects this article deals with. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)