The course of true loyalists never did run smooth: Critical discourse analysis of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms in Thai school textbooks

Abstract

This article discusses the relationship between the use of the Chinese historical novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms, in Chinese 三国演义 (Sanguo Yanyi) and in Thai สามก๊ก (Sam Kok), as a Thai textbook and its contribution to the realignment of royal-nationalist ideology in the context of Thai society. By emphasizing historical conditions and linguistic practice within the framework of Critical Discourse Analysis, the article argues that the Romance of the Three Kingdoms or Sam Kok has been employed to reinforce Thai state ideology in forming Thai citizens. The text also reflects the changing moral focus that the Thai state and ruling elites want to inculcate in their youth under different circumstances. In this light, the analysis of the persistence of its episodes in Thai school textbooks helps readers gain a new understanding that has not been explored in previous studies.

Keywords:

• Romance of the Three Kingdoms
• critical discourse analysis
• Thai Linguistic
• Thai Textbook
• royal-nationalism

1. Introduction

The study of translation and localization of classical Chinese literature in Southeast Asian countries has been popular for many decades. It is also a research topic that various theories and multiple contexts were used to analyze the complex nature of reading experience and textual dissemination in the region. One of the seminal Chinese literature that has been interesting among scholars of Southeast Asian studies is the story of warfare and warlords in the late Han dynasty, the early 2nd century, called 三国志 (Sanguo Zhi), or Records of the Three Kingdoms. Originally, it was compiled in AD 429. Then, many centuries later, Luo Guanzhong (1280–1360) was the Chinese writer who first authored the historical novel based on the record with the cohesive version entitled Sanguo Yan Yi (Romance of the Three Kingdoms in English translation) in the mid-fourteenth century. It was ranked as one of four “masterpieces” created during the Ming Era (Reynolds, 1996). The Romance of Three Kingdoms has been translated into more than 10 other languages around the world (Panyanontachai, 2007), and has also been modified under the political and cultural context, including the usage of this literature to serve political ideologies, in nations where Chinese immigrants settled abroad. It is a process of localization of classical foreign literature both to serve the vernacular taste and political utilization.

In the case of localizing Romance of the Three Kingdoms or “Sam Kok” in Thai society, the text has been translated since the late 18th century due to the request of the first king of the Chakri dynasty. King Rama I (r.1782 – 1809) appointed Chao Phraya Phra Khlang (Hon) as the director of the interpretation of the fiction for official advantages (Reynolds, 1996, p. 116). Since then, Sam Kok, Sanguo’s transliterated name in Thai, became widely known to readers after it was included in secondary school in 1905. King Rama VI established the Literary Society in 1914 and gave it the mandate to find outstanding works. Sam Kok received the title of “collected tales” exemplar.

According to Prince Damrong Rajanubhab, a half-brother of King Rama V, who is praised as the father of Thai history (Dejpawuttikul, 2022, 36), the translation of Sam Kok would be useful in conducting the affairs of the state. The text and its content were used “as a model for the public behavior of rulers, counselors, and soldiers (Damrong Rajanubhab, 1928). From the official origin of the Thai version in the early Bangkok period, many editions of this literature have been replicated, enlarged, reinterpreted, or transformed to tell stories in a new way such as the Wanipok edition (Ya-Khop (pseud.), 1977), Cao Cao, the Forever Prime Minister edition (Pramoj, 1987), and the Honhuai edition (Honhuai (pseud.), 1952).

Sam Kok has been included in textbooks due to their wide popularity. Basically, Thailand’s curriculum has used well-known classical literature as students’ lessons. The high school curriculum’s 1981 course (revised in 1990) demanded that learners comprehend the value of literature as a heritage culture (Department of Academic Affairs, 1990), for example, Thai Ramayana, and Maha Vessantara Jataka poems. They have been emphasized on the basis of literature analysis, contents, and writing style.

In the case of Sam Kok, the text was used as part of teaching Thai language since the reign of King Rama V (Reynolds, 1996, p. 118). However, the selection of literature as part of textbooks is not specified in the curriculum. That is the curriculum allows publishers to freely select literature but subject to certain criteria. The Ministry of Education is the main agency for the preparation of textbooks. In the case of private publishers being producers, they must be certified by the Ministry of Education. Therefore, the selection of literature in the form of classes is carried out according to the methods of this Ministry.

Although the Sam Kok is all about warfare or plotting for power, this literature was included in the textbook for the high school curriculum in 1981. It appeared in the course T032, History of Literature 2, which was a course that required students to choose to study (Department of Academic Affairs, 1981). The selected episodes are the episode when Zhao Yun broke through the army to receive Liu Shan, which values bravery, the episode in which Cao Cao breaks the navy, which values unity, and the episode in which Lu Ji steals an orange and gives it to his mother to give gratitude (Tansakul, 2015). However, the Sam Kok in textbooks is only the Hon version.

In 1990, all levels of National Education’s curriculum were revised (Department of Academic Affairs, 2002). Later, the Ministry of Education announced the use of the Basic Education Curriculum 2001 along with the Wannakhadi Wichak (Thai Literature Appreciation) series for the basic Thai language subject. Consequently, unlike the elective courses in previous curricula, this series of textbooks has been a compulsory text from the government since the 1990s. Sam Kok was retitled “Guan Yu Goes to Serve with Cao Cao” for Mathayom 6 (Grade 6) and was utilized until the 2008 Basic Education Core Curriculum.

Studies on Sam Kok have been conducted over the past four decades, however, there hasn’t been much attention devoted to Sam Kok in Thai textbooks. It goes against the growing significance of Sam Kok in high school textbooks, which have been done by modifying episodes and content to express political implications and responses to political ideology in response to shifting circumstances. In this regard, the main research questions of the article include, firstly, how shifts in state ideology and the political environment affect the content of textbooks about Sam Kok. Secondly, how does Sam Kok‘s language strategy and content align with the political ideology that the Thai government seeks to inculcate in young people? To answer both questions, the researchers consider Sam Kok‘s episode “Guan Yu Goes to Serve with Cao Cao” as a crucial text that shows attempts by conservative elites and Thai educators to position the relationship between the monarchy and the Thai people as superior to other political actors within Thai democratic regime.

2. Literature review

According to the recent survey of the research on Three Kingdoms literature or Sam Kok conducted in Thailand between 1966 and 2018 by Tongdaeng (2022), there are 55 academic works that can be grouped into 9 areas. Interestingly, 13 works were found in the political science and military fields. The number of studies from Sam Kok tends to grow with time and reflect its impact on Thai culture and knowledge.

Nonetheless, there aren’t many significant literary and linguistic analyses of Sam Kok. Reynolds (1996) most important study revealed Sam Kok‘s ubiquity in Thai literature. It has led to numerous Sam Kok editions, or it is a recently composed work of literature that draws inspiration from Sam Kok‘s concepts or well-known characters.

Sam Kok‘s text had a very restricted dissemination before printing technology reached Siam in the 1830s. Even still, the romance is intriguing since it is written in prose at a time when verse was still the dominant literary form. The elite’s historical awareness in the late 18th and early 19th centuries was greatly influenced by these Thai prose narratives. They immediately possessed political knowledge regarding the various ethnic groups. As a result, the historical romances closely resembled how they actually operated. The manuscript copy that was used to publish the romance in Siam in 1928 was discovered among the belongings of Princess Worasetsuda (1828–1907), who was well-known for her academic and teaching abilities, indicating that the work was considered canonical in the upbringing of the nobility. The main lesson to take away from the popularity of Sam Kok is that, just as its Chinese-language predecessor served as a signaling tool in East Asian countries within China’s orbit of influence, the romance in Thai language was Thai-ified. Sam Kok was printed for the first time at a press owned by Bradley. There were several translations of Chinese chronicles produced between King Rama IV and King Rama VI’s reigns. It might be argued that customers find reading essays to their satisfaction. Another consequence is that the work can be translated by multilingual people. Senior aristocrats who had ties to the Chinese immigrant community, such as the Bunnag family, served as patrons. Reynolds alleged that the Three Kingdoms story became well-known through oral transmissions before it was printed. This story encouraged secondary orality, which enabled readers to disseminate knowledge of the Three Kingdoms (Reynolds, 1996).

However, Tansakul (2015) discovered that Sam Kok‘s popularity in Thai society was not just attributable to Hon’s version. Sam Kok became widespread among public readers when new writers adapted this story according to Thai socio-political situations in 1937. The reproduction of Sam Kok was turned into a book that outlines modern management concepts when the economic crisis of 1997 struck. During this difficult period for Thailand, some publishers utilized the Three Kingdoms as a lens through which to analyze Thai politicians.

Dilokwanit (1984) and Sikkhakoson (2006) conducted their studies on the translation of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms into Hon’s version, which was not a translation that preserved the original’s language expressions. Because it had been altered to conform to society and culture, including adjustments in composition tactics to conform to Thai literary traditions. This alteration, however, had a good impact on the Three Kingdoms since it made the content simpler to comprehend for Thai readers.

Political science research has also been done on Sam Kok as well. Chantarawong (1989) observed that the translation of the Three Kingdoms during the reign of King Rama I may have had the intention of legitimizing the enthronement. Regarding literature, the researcher enjoyed comparing the Three Kingdoms in each edition, as well as character representations and the translation’s history. Linguistics scholars selected to study traditional languages and compare Thai and Chinese cultures as well as other languages. According to Sartraproong (1998), the key political inference was that only charismatic and wise people had the right to rule, which diminished the significance of the Ayutthaya royal family’s succession and encouraged the coronation of King Rama I. The Three Kingdoms was a portion of the political activity that occurred under King Rama VI. It focuses on indirect socialization rather than the coercive use of authority that the Three enacted laws did. The Three Kingdoms was translated not only to modernize older literature but also to provide legitimacy for the emerging elite of the period.

There is, however, no study of Sam Kok as a textbook, domestically or internationally, that conveys state ideology in the context of contemporary Thai society. It is the crucial research gap on the significant topic both in terms of textbook studies, linguistics, and intellectual history itself. Within this circumstance, the researchers focus on the shifting historical and political context of Thai society from the 1980s to 2010 and analyze Sam Kok in the Thai textbook through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).

Before the researchers move to the next section, it should be informed here that CDA is the theory for analyzing discourse via linguistic and social knowledge to expose power, ideology, inequality, and so on, by using language transmitted through the text and social context, therefore, CDA will lead to a new interpretation of Sam Kok in Thai textbooks, which explain the state’s intention to inculcate ideology in youngsters.

Fairclough (2010) proposed that CDA has three dimensions, namely description, interpretation, and explanation. The description is text analysis. It is the formation of meaning through both verbal and nonverbal language. Next, the interpretation is the process of discourse practice, such as evaluating the implications and ideologies that are lurking in the text’s depths. Finally, the explanation investigates the interaction of a medium or text and language, as well as the sociocultural context in which the text emerges. It addresses the language evolved by cultural society, and the relations of language and media that lead to ideologies and power relations. This CDA-based study of the Three Kingdoms attempts to clarify the factors for changing the episode from other episodes to Guan Yu serving with Cao Cao in a Thai textbook since 1997 and the reasons for continuing to use this episode in regard to the context of Thai political history.

As a research framework, Critical Discourse Analysis has been utilized for analyzing various forms of ideology embedded in textbooks. In the case study of Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries, the fascinating studies include Matni’s (2022) comparative research on good boy discourse in Thailand and Malaysia. Thai good boy discourse centered on the monarchy, whereas Malaysia valued Islam. Furthermore, the Thai textbooks placed a greater emphasis on seniority than the Malaysian textbooks. The Thai “Good Boy” discourse was associated with the 12 values of government, however, the aforementioned discourse in Malaysian textbooks was related to Islamic beliefs.

Additionally, there is research that examines social and political literature using CDA. Khajavi et al. (2020) studied the 2012 election campaign speeches of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. CDA showed common strategies in the speeches, most notably positive self-representation, others’ negative representation, legitimization, delegitimization, and persuasion. Obama frequently focused on evoking the myth of the “American dream”, whereas Romney mostly used the others’ negative representation strategy. In conclusion, Obama was successful in implementing and conveying his message through rhetorical devices.

Nigatu and Admassu (2023) studied critical discourse analysis elements in Abiy Ahmed’s second inaugural speech. The study revealed that discourses were used to construct unity. His speech was designed to show unity ideology. Furthermore, Abiy persuaded the audience and maintained authority over them by drawing on historical examples as unifying rhetorical strategies.

CDA emphasizes the analysis of linguistic strategies, discourse practices, and sociocultural practices. Research issues concern the use of power, inequality, and political ideologies that are produced and disseminated through discourse. CDA sheds light on the shifting ideological meanings of Sam Kok texts in the context of modern Thai politics, with particular attention paid to the metaphorical definition of family ties in the definition of legitimate power ownership.

In the next section, the researchers provided a historical analysis of how and why Sam Kok has been adapted as a Thai textbook. By doing so, the primary sources examined in this study consist of the Sam Kok text in the Wannakhadi Wichak textbook series for Thai students of Mathayom 6 (Grade 6), as specified in the 2008 Basic Education Core Curriculum. The researchers’ main focus was on examining the emergence of the discourse of royal-nationalism and the status of the Sam Kok text within the changing political and cultural context that linked to the increasing power and legitimacy of the Thai monarchy. The researchers employed the definition of royal-nationalism according to Thongchai Winichakul, a prominent Thai historian, who stated that “royal nationalism is a nationalism defined by loyalty to the monarchy (Winichakul, 2006, p. 584).” Additionally, the study aimed to analyze the evolving values that can be discerned from the changing Sam Kok‘s episode.

2.1. Sam Kok text in Thai political context

The addition of Sam Kok into secondary school textbooks in Thailand is not solely connected to the significance of Sam Kok within the history of Thai literature, but also to the broader landscape of development of royal-nationalist ideology in Thai politics. It can be argued that the utilization of classic literature is a crucial path in constructing Thainess through teaching Thai literature. In this regard, selected classic literature inevitably relates the ambition of Thai ruling elites in the making of their ideal citizen.

Since the 1980s, Sam Kok has been officially included in Thai textbooks. Despite the fact that it deals with conflict or plotting for dominance. The above decade coincided with the enactment of the 1978 Primary Education Curriculum, 1978 Secondary Education Curriculum, and 1981 High Education Curriculum. However, it conjectured that Thai textbook possibly included Sam Kok prior to the 1980s. It most likely happened following the Royal Institute’s 1927 settlement (Chanchalerm, 1952).

Within the context of the mid-1980s which Thai monarchy was rising to be the dominant actor in Thai politics after the decline of its challenger: the Communist Party of Thailand (Baker, 2022, pp. 265–268). There is supportive evidence indicating that the text titled History of Literature 2 (Th032) which was employed as an elective course, contained Sam Kok’s text (Department of Academic Affairs, 1981). The significant episodes included are the story of Zhao Yun breaking through the army to receive Liu Bei’s son—Liu Shan who will be his heir, the episode on Cao Cao breaking up his navy at Chi Bi (the Red Cliff), and the story of Lu Ji, who is Sun Quan’s officer, stealing oranges to give to his mother. All episodes mainly focused on the quality of bravery, gratefulness, and unity. It is clear to see that each episode had a distinct characteristic of ideology and virtue that the Thai state and its ruling groups intended to convey to students.

The reformation of Thai language textbooks had been emphasized by the elite educators and the Ministry of Education. In 1990, after curriculum revisions at all stages, the curriculum was dismissed due to its incapacity in preparing students for the rapidly changing world (Department of Academic Affairs, 2002). The Ministry of Education therefore announced the Basic Education Curriculum 2001 along with the use of the Thai literature appreciation set in the fundamental Thai language subject for content 5 (literature) which was a basic subject. The usage of this textbook was enforced by the government. In fact, Thai students could not select a reading text based on their needs as it was an elective subject in the previous curriculum.

Since then, Sam Kok was basically featured in this secondary six textbook. However, within the situation of the economic crisis of 1997 and raising questions about the value of Thainess and anti-globalization in the Thai public sphere, the Sam Kok episode in the Thai textbook was changed to “Guan Yu Goes to Serve with Cao Cao” for 2008 curriculum and has been utilized up until now. Through the image of Guan Yu, the primary character, the textbook highlights the values of gratefulness, loyalty, honesty, and devotion, especially Guan Yu’s fidelity to Liu Bei, a Han Dynasty member. In addition to being a sworn brother of Liu Bei, Guan Yu’s intention to only be the servant of Emperor Xian of Han (Liu Xie) was emphasized as well. Thus, these key themes constitute the principal concepts that the state desires to subtly instill in youths in order to foster loyalty to the monarchy. It can be said that all expected qualities of Thai citizens after the mid-2000s were personified through the character of Guan Yu in Wannakhadi Wichak.

Moreover, the modification of Sam Kok‘s episode in the textbook occurred in the context of the state’s ideological and political shifts during Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra (in office: 2001–2006) who had the significant role of enhancing the popularity of Thai monarchy and royal-nationalist ideology under the reign of King Bhumibol or in Thongchai Winichakul’s term: hyper-royalism (Thongchai 2016). It could be said that the hyper-royalism phenomena were the new critical point to understand the changing of Thai public sphere and Thai intellectual history. Due to the novelty of this phenomenon within Thai culture, it is imperative for the researchers to furnish more elaboration in order to enhance comprehension of the intellectual context surrounding the reception of the Sam Kok text, which serves as a reflection of political and ideological transformations in Thailand.

Even though the Thai monarchy succeeded in the establishment of the absolutist state since the late 19th century, the Chakri monarchs had little leverage after the 1932 revolution. At that time, the People’s Party abolished the old regime and brought ordinary people—those who were not part of the royal family—to participate in Thai politics, not only as state servants. Considered the inception of Thai democracy, the royalists attempted but were unsuccessful, to retake power during the brief 15-year tenure of the People’s Party regimes. However, the royalists eventually retaliated in November 1947, working with the military to stage a coup that restored their authority and drove the People’s Party’s surviving leaders into exile. The start of King Bhumibol’s reign corresponded with the royalists’ comeback to the political scene.

Since the mid-1970s a growing number of urban bourgeoisie started to oppose military rule which led to their shifting perception of King Bhumibol as a democratic king. The 1973 popular movement against military authority was a turning point for royalist democracy. When the protesters were being attacked by the military and police on October 14, the royal family quickly appeared in public to give them permission to seek safety within the palace grounds. The king’s action left a lasting impression of him as a democratic monarch with the utmost moral authority over all political forces. It is a popular democracy ruled by a monarch. This monarchy’s image was strengthened by the political conflict between the junta and the protest in 1992 in which King Bhumibol took the role of final arbiter to solve the conflict (Baker, 2022, pp. 274–278). The monarch’s moral authority climbed to the apex, while the military and elected governments’ credibility declined. By using television to convey the message, this occurrence helped to create a royal-nationalist ideology among the people. The monarchy was raised above the convoluted political structure to the position of supreme moral authority by the king’s action to put an end to all conflicts and bring back the unity of the nation.

In 2001, Thaksin was elected Prime Minister, coinciding with the announcement of the 2001 curriculum and the change of the episode of Sam Kok to “Guan Yu Goes to Serve with Cao Cao”. The most important royal event held in Thaksin’s government was the 60th anniversary of the accession of King Bhumibol on 9 June 2006. Royal families from all over the world were invited to this event. In front of the Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall at Dusit Palace, King Bhumibol emerged to greet the populace. There had been widespread broadcasts of royal ceremonies and royal duties throughout his reign. It reinforced the high status of the king as the centrality of Thai citizens. At the same time, several economic and social policies initiated by Thaksin—particularly those related to the revival of the Thai economy, suppression of narcotics, universal health coverage, and stopping the spread of avian influenza—made him highly well-liked. This reached the so-called policy for “grassroots” and enhanced Thaksin’s reputation.

However, when Thaksin was elected for a second term in a landslide in 2006. A political conflict between Thaksin and the royalists and military commanders in the second half of the 2000s resulted in the creation of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) (Askew, 2010, pp. 36–42; McCargo, 2009, p. 7; Nostitz, 2012, pp. 33–8). Up until they were able to establish the prerequisites for lawful military engagement in politics, they vigorously protested against the government (Pathmanand, 2008, p. 125). The PAD group proposed the idea of loyalty to King Bhumibol in order to mobilize people and turn the opposition into anti-monarchy. The discourse of Thaksin’s disloyalty to the monarchy and his ambition to control the military was countered by Gen. Prem Tinsulanond, a former Thai Premier and the head of privy council, who said in 2006, shortly before the coup, that “In horse racing they have the stable, and the owner of the stable owns the horse,” and “The jockey comes and rides the horse during the race, but the jockey does not own the horse” (Mydans, 2019). In this political situation, Thaksin’s image can be compared with Cao Cao who tries to take over Emperor Xian of Han’s power. That is both Thaksin and Cao Cao are interpreted as the Prime Minister who attempt to control the emperor/monarch, particularly in Today’s social media (Raithuanlom, 2023; Workpoint News, 2018).

Throughout a series of political demonstrations and ideological conflicts from the late 2000s to the early 2010s, Gen. Prayut Chan-o-cha’s coup against Yingluck Shinawatra, Thaksin’s youngest sister, took place in 2014. He presented 12 Thai values, the most crucial being loyalty to the nation, religion, and king. He directed OBEC to include the 12 ideals in teachers’ lesson plans in all schools across the country. Thus, despite changes to the curriculum in 2008, this episode of Sam Kok has remained to be used to impart these concepts to youngsters through education.

However, the Thai political context drives ideology cultivation in the opposite way. Some part of the supporters of the anti-Thaksin movement have changed their stance to support majoritarian democracy and condemn the coup (Lertchoosakul, 2019), as well as criticizing the strict application of Section 112, a provision that protects the king and has penalties as severe as criminal proceedings. As a consequence, instilling the loyalty ideology was not as successful as intended. Youth can acquire information from a variety of platforms and raise questions regarding government activities as well as the monarchy and political roles.

3. Language strategies and discursive practice in royalist Sam Kok

Sam Kok had a process of production according to discourse practices, wherein the text presenters were divided into two categories. Firstly, the major text presenter was OBEC. Its status is responsible for basic education management in accordance with the Ministry of Education Administration Act 2003 (Office of the Council of State, 2003). As an outcome, OBEC has the authority to pick literature for usage in textbooks in basic Thai courses at all levels, alongside textbooks certified by the Ministry from commercial publishers. Furthermore, the literature must respond to the aforementioned curriculum’s vision. From these factors, OBEC can manage the contents that are conveyed to students while limiting the involvement of other organizations wishing to distribute literature in textbooks.

Secondly, the minor text presenter was Hon, a member of the governing class. However, he was under the royal authority of King Rama I, who adjured to Hon as the director of Sam Kok translation. This translation was intended to be an art of war for nobility at the time. It might be said that the status of the minor text presenter overpowered the autocrat’s discourse practice. The text presenters used Wannakhadi Wichak as a platform for the dissemination process. Likewise, Ministry of Education regulations encouraged the diffusion of the text to a larger number of students.

The two sections of the language analysis of Sam Kok in Wannakhadi Wichak were the introduction from the textbook’s author, and the text analysis of Sam Kok, the episode “Guan Yu goes to serve with Cao Cao”. The analysis concentrated on the language strategies, which were associated with the loyalty ideology, and other strategies that underscored the significance of this literature.

Wannakadi Wichak had an introduction to the literature. “Referencing” was utilized in Sam Kok‘s introduction, and it varied depending on sociocultural factors. For instance, “Chao Phraya Phra Klang (Hon)” was mentioned with the rank of nobility. “Chao Phraya” and the position “Phra Klang”, referring to the harbor department’s minister. Additionally, “Hon” was the author’s name. The referencing above revealed that the text presenter, or OBEC, eulogized Hon as having greater status. One might infer from another direction that the royal title was normally used by the Thai nobility system. Parentheses were employed with “Hon” to emphasize whom the text presenter aimed to convey. Nevertheless, Siam had not yet promulgated surnames when Sam Kok was translated. The word “Hon” was specifically adopted to identify and distinguish the person because the title “Phra Klang” can apply to another person performing the same task.

The lexical strategies were discovered in the verb forms for expressing the relationship between communicators, such as “eat,” (กิน) “see,” (เห็น), and “ride” (ขี่). They were spotted in the event that Cao Cao was kind to Guan Yu and gave him a Red Hare horse. The three preceding verbs were common verbs, showing that the author addressed Cao Cao and Guan Yu as individuals, regardless of their standing as Chinese nobles or divinities. As a consequence, these issues were tied to social and cultural differences.

The modification strategy was also used in the introduction, which involved the use of extension words, such as “Literary style of Sam Kok was better than other stories because it was well worded and arranged, making it simple to read and understand” (สำนวนหนังสือสามก๊กดีกว่าเรื่องอื่น ด้วยใช้ถ้อยคำและเรียบเรียงความเรียบร้อยสม่ำเสมอ อ่านเข้าใจง่าย) (OBEC, 2019, p. 47). This passage supported Sam Kok’s positive meaning, as the text presenter aimed to generate a perspective that this literature was prose, so it was easy to read and utilize good language expressions. Other examples such as “Sam Kok used appropriate language both in sentences and expressions” (หนังสือสามก๊กฉบับนี้ใช้ภาษาได้ดีทั้งรูปประโยคและสำนวน) (OBEC, 2019, p. 47), and “I read and thought it was well-written because it was compact” (ข้าพเจ้าอ่านแล้วก็ว่าแต่งดี เพราะแต่งกะทัดรัด) (OBEC, 2019, p. 47). The example utilized “well-written” (แต่งดี), which was the perspective of Phraya Anuman Rajadhon. He was a Thai language expert, making the textbook’s introduction more credible and recommending to those under the discourse that Sam Kok was chosen by the Ministry of Education as the episode to be studied.

The introduction also employed presuppositions to imply that other events preceded or served a purpose behind the text. For example, Prince Damrong Rajanubhab expressed his views once again that…” (OBEC, 2019, p. 47). This passage contained an indicator “again” (อีก) implying that the occurrences of Sam Kok’s viewpoints by the prince were events that recurred (Levinson, 1983). “Guan Yu was still loyal to Liu Bei” (กวนอูก็ยังแสดงว่าภักดีต่อเล่าปี่เหมือนเดิม) (OBEC, 2019, p. 50). Cao Cao believed that good care for Guan Yu would make him more loyal to Cao Cao. It was represented in “still” (ยัง) indicator. Whereas the word “still” underlined Cao Cao’s thoughts that it didn’t have to happen that way. The loyalty ideology is amply supported by the presuppositions.

The last strategy was narrative. It was used to present story events chronologically hence, the temporal and continuous linking unit can be found, such as previously, afterward, and so forth. The usage of narratives in “An Overview of Sam Kok,” which was a summary of Sam Kok from the beginning to the end, was unearthed in the Sam Kok introduction as follows: “When Emperor Liu Xie ascended to the throne in the next land, he appointed Dong Zhuo as viceroy, and Lu Bu, Dong Zhuo’s adopted child, was the greatest soldier…”¹ The temporal and continuous linking unit from this instance was “when” (เมื่อ) and “next” (ต่อมา).

This section was the text analysis of Sam Kok, the episode “Guan Yu goes to serve with Cao Cao”. This part was focused on the language strategies used in Sam Kok’s text in Wannakhadi Wichak. It had verb forms that more clearly emphasized the discourse. The finding occurred in Emperor Xian’s usage of royal verbs such as “see” (ทอดพระเนตร) and “speak” (ตรัส), which revealed social status through language as in the sentence: “Emperor Xian saw Guan Yu wearing a bag of beards and asked…” (พระเจ้าเหี้ยนเต้ทอดพระเนตรเห็นกวนอูใส่ถุงหนวดดังนั้นจึงตรัสว่า…) (OBEC, 2019, p. 71).

Additionally, there was a name and naming. Although the titles of characters like Liu Bei, Cheng Yu, Guan Yu, and Cao Cao were contained in the text, the names and naming that reflected their roles were additionally found. Consider the following example: “Cao Cao’s army had arrived, so the messenger on horseback rushed to Xuzhou City and informed Sun Qian” (ฝ่ายม้าใช้รู้ว่าโจโฉยกมา จึงรีบไปเมืองชีจิ๋วบอกเนื้อความแก่ซุนเขียนว่า บัดนี้กองทัพโจโฉยกมา) (OBEC, 2019, p. 59). The messenger on horseback referred to someone who rode a horse for service or a quick messenger. It conveyed the social class notion that “maids” (ม้าใช้) had a lower status. Furthermore, the words “a messenger on horseback” or “horse (was) used” may be considered in deep structure according to transformational grammar (Chomsky, 1995). “Horse” refers to a person. The sentence was written in a passive voice in the deep structure; however, the surface structure reduced the sentence to the word status as an example. This case demonstrated that the author did not directly name minor characters; instead, they were identified by functional words. As a result, the readers grouped the characters according to whether they were major or minor characters.

Humans utilize the “system of address” to demonstrate how they interact with one another (Angkapanichkit, 2008). Terms of address were shown in the instances following. “Why didn’t you save your life for Liu Bei?” (เหตุใดท่านจึงไม่รักษาชีวิตไว้คอยท่าเล่าปี่) (OBEC, 2019, p. 64), and “we initially asked if you wanted to persuade or not. You refused” (เดิมเราถามว่าจะเกลี้ยกล่อมหรือ ตัวว่า หามิได้) (OBEC, 2019, p. 64). This message was a conversation between Zhang Liao and Guan Yu. Meanwhile, Zhang Liao convinced Guan Yu to ally with Cao Cao. Early on in the dialogue, Guan Yu addressed Zhang Liao with “you” (ท่าน) as well, but when he did not comprehend the goal of the negotiations, Guan Yu became enraged and altered his address. The term “you” or “ตัว” in Thai was used to denote the initial decline in esteem. The word “ตัว” signified “body,” but it could also be used as a second-person pronoun (Yuttapongtada, 2012). It is more informal than “ตัว”. The word’s usage corresponded to social, cultural, and communicative situations, which ultimately resulted in pronoun alterations.

Negation provided a sense that something had transpired previously. The text presenter sought to express an idea in response to earlier occurrences or as an opponent to the initial idea. Here’s an amusing example: “But the point that Guan Yu knew where Liu Bei was, he did not bid farewell before going to see Liu Bei. Cao Cao declined by shaking his head” (แต่ข้อซึ่งกวนอูรู้ว่าเล่าปี่อยู่แห่งใด มิได้ลาเราก่อนจะไปหากันนั้น โจโฉสั่นศีรษะไม่ยอม) (OBEC, 2019, p. 66). This message rejected the presupposition of Guan Yu’s last offer. The offer was that Guan Yu immediately went to see Liu Bei upon knowing Liu Bei’s whereabouts. This passage perfectly describes Liu Bei and Guan Yu’s relationship.

The Sam Kok text also used speech acts. A directive speech act was found in seducing Guan Yu by Zhang Liao. Zhang Liao convinced Guan Yu to pledge loyalty to Cao Cao by mentioning three consequences if he refused. Firstly, Liu Bei, Guan Yu, and Zhang Fei were blood brothers. Even though they were not born on the same day, they agreed to die on the same day. Hence, if Guan Yu fought with Cao Cao, he risked losing his life. It would also be detrimental to Liu Bei. Secondly, Liu Bei delegated responsibility for his family to Guan Yu. If Guan Yu died, Liu Bei’s wife would be distressed. Finally, Guan Yu was a skilled person. He would help Liu Bei preserve the country in the future if he saved his life.² Guan Yu also asked Cao Cao to make three promises: to become servants of emperor Liu Xie, to treat both sisters-in-law fairly and without harm, and to go and find Liu Bei when he knew where Liu Bei was.³

The first agreement entered into by Guan Yu exemplifies the loyalty ideology, since it demonstrates the characters’ unwavering devotion to the monarchy, despite Cao Cao’s dominant position of authority during that period. It is similar to the second and the last agreement. The text highlights the paramount importance of Guan Yu’s resolute loyalty towards Liu Bei, a significant aspect that is intricately linked to Liu Bei’s societal standing as a prominent figure within the Han dynasty. The text presenter expressed their perspectives in alignment with the ideas offered in the introduction to Sam Kok.⁴ This opinion clarifies the conceptual framework of loyalty ideology.

Likewise, former prime minister Prem Tinsulanonda expressed his view regarding the monarchy’s authority. To underscore the monarchy’s status as a supreme authority that Thai citizens ought to defer, he drew a parallel between politicians and jockeys, contrasted with the monarch owning horses (Mydans, 2019). While not explicitly bestowed with authority by the constitution, the king’s status was significantly elevated through social culture, particularly the prevalence of living god beliefs.

The narrative, the last strategy, was taken from the Yu Rang parable that Zhang Liao had narrated to persuade Cao Cao to accept Guan Yu’s request. Guan Yu and Yi Yeong were similarly characterized by their loyalty. Cao Cao immediately acquiesced to Guan Yu’s condition afterward.

The language used and the process of production affected the consumption of discourse. The primary stage was the propagation or prominence of Sam Kok. The discourse consumer was the Ministry of Education, who expected Sam Kok to reward the intent to produce citizens the government needs through education. The secondary stage was the spread of Sam Kok, “Guan Yu Goes to Serve with Cao Cao”, in the Thai textbook. The discourse consumers were students in basic education who were under the discourse authority established by the Ministry of Education and fulfilled the government’s ideal citizenship.

4. Conclusion and discussion

The primary aims of this research were to investigate the evolving ideology of the state and its impact on Thai politics, specifically in relation to the portrayal of Sam Kok in Thai language textbooks. Additionally, this study sought to assess the linguistic elements employed and the production process of this literature, with a focus on how it facilitates the dissemination of political ideology. To this effect, the data were collected from a specific episode titled “Guan Yu Goes to Serve with Cao Cao” in Wannakhadi Wichak, in accordance with the Ministry of Education’s present curriculum. The researchers employed the theoretical framework of critical discourse analysis, as outlined by Fairclough (2010).

Loyalty was the main virtue conveyed by Guan Yu as the main character. Although Sam Kok has been included in textbooks since the 1980s, it was transformed into an episode when the curriculum was unveiled in 2001, and it is still utilized today in relation to political shifts that occurred starting with the Thaksin government. This is also pertinent to the historical political context that sought to enhance the stature of the monarchy. Consequently, Sam Kok in the textbook served as a medium via which this ideology was communicated to Thai students.

Fundamentally, Zhao Yun, Zhuge Liang, and Guan Yu are Sam Kok‘s most well-liked characters among Thai readers. However, in the realm of contemporary Thai politics, Guan Yu has undergone a metamorphosis from the Chinese god of war who signified loyalty and righteousness to representing allegiance to the monarchy/emperor via the conceptualization of royal legitimacy and familial connections. In this regard narrating Guan Yu’s story is the way to define true loyalty.

Despite being considered as a capable leader, Cao Cao was seen unfavorably as a potential threat to the Han emperor. Understandably, Cao Cao’s dictatorship is comparable to Thaksin’s. Guan Yu, in contrast, is represented as a genuine Thai people who demonstrates fidelity to the monarchy. Guan Yu was thus shown as a symbol of a true loyalist/royalist to the monarchy. Even though the virtue of loyalty is formerly mentioned in other Sam Kok episodes, given that Wannakhadi Wichak selected Guan Yu as a main hero provided the moral ground for the crucial query: who should get true loyalty from Thai people.

Hence, apart from being regarded as a literary classic and included in teaching Thai literature to foster students’ appreciation, the Hon edition of Sam Kok has also been chosen as a political text in contemporary Thai society.

Author contributions

1. Bhasrvarin Iamsa-ad (First Author): conducting preliminary research, primary source and data collection, literature review, revising the manuscript, analyzing linguistic issues and CDA section

2. Thanapas Dejpawuttikul (Co-Author): developing the historical framework, providing materials, literature review, constructing and refining the main argument, revising and editing the manuscript

3. Radchadaporn Tantasit (Corresponding Author): co-ordinator and correspond with the journal editor

4. Meechai Iemjinda (Co-Author): analyzing literature issues and CDA section

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2023.2290783

Additional information

Funding

This article is part of the research project ‘Critical Discourse Analysis in Thai language textbooks’. It was supported by the Center of Geosocial and Cultural Research for Sustainable Development, Walailak University [WU66258].

Notes on contributors

Bhasrvarin Iamsa-ard

Bhasrvarin Lamsa-ard holds a Bachelor of Education in Thai Language with First Class Honors from Silpakorn University, a Master of Arts in Thai Language from Kasetsart University, and a Doctor of Philosophy in Thai Language from Kasetsart University. Bhasrvarin Iamsa-ard was appointed as a government educator subsequent to the completion of her undergraduate degree. She dedicated five years of service to the government while concurrently pursuing further academic pursuits. After resigning from her government position, she decided to pursue her Ph.D. and subsequently secured a full-time lecturer role at Silpakorn University’s Department of Curriculum and Teaching Methods, specializing in Thai language instruction. Afterward, she moved to Walailak University’s Department of Education, School of Liberal Arts, to assume a position as a lecturer. During her time there, she received individual research funds. Bhasrvarin Iamsa-ard’s academic interests encompass various language domains, such as semantics, historical linguistics, conceptual metaphor, critical discourse analysis, and modern education. She anticipates that the field of linguistics will contribute to the improvement of Thai language training.

Notes

1. In Thai: “ในแผ่นดินต่อมา เมื่อพระเจ้าเหี้ยนเต้ขึ้นครองราชย์ ได้แต่งตั้งตั๋งโต๊ะเป็นมหาอุปราช และลิโป้ บุตรบุญธรรมของตั๋งโต๊ะเป็นทหารเอก” (OBEC, 2019, p. 49)

2. In Thai: “ประการหนึ่งซึ่งท่านสาบานไว้กับเล่าปี่ เตียวหุยประการหนึ่ง ท่านจะได้อยู่ปฏิบัติรักษาพี่สะใภ้ทั้งสองมิให้เป็นอันตรายสิ่งใดได้สองประการ อีกประการหนึ่ง ตัวท่านก็มีฝีมือกล้าห้าญมีสติปัญญา จะได้คิดการทำนุบำรุงพระเจ้าเหี้ยนเต้ให้ครองราชสมบัติสืบไป ข้าพเจ้าเห็นว่ามีประโยชน์สามประการฉะนี้ จึงเตือนสติท่านให้ดำริดูจงควร” (OBEC, 2019, pp. 65–66)

3. In Thai “เราจะขอเป็นข้าพระเจ้าเหี้ยนเต้ประการหนึ่ง เราจะขอปฏิบัติพี่สะใภ้ทั้งสอง แลอย่าให้ผู้ใดเข้าออกกล้ำกรายเข้าถึงประตูบ้านได้อีกประการหนึ่ง ถ้าเรารู้ว่าเล่าปี่อยู่แห่งหนตำบลใด ถึงมาตรว่าเรามิได้ลามหาอุปราช เราก็จะไปหาเล่าปี่ แม้มหาอุปราชจะห้ามเราก็ไม่ฟัง” (OBEC, 2019, p. 66)

4. In Thai: “กวนอูเป็นคนที่สามิภักดิ์ต่อเจ้านายด้วยจิตใจที่มั่นคงแน่วแน่ เมื่อจะกระทำการใดก็จะคิดถึงประโยชน์ต่อเล่าปี่เสมอดังจะเห็นได้จากการที่กวนอูคุ้มครองดูแลภรรยาเล่าปี่อย่างดีตามที่รับคำสั่งไว้” (OBEC, 2019, p. 53)