How to recognize words in various languages … a magic formula 1

This article;

“‎… Let (K)v(K)v(K) be a computer-place-holder for a word, where (K) is a consonant and v is any vowel.

we can then put all 21 consonants into each (K) and put all vowels and their combinations into v, with v properly defined. [eg 1 v or v.v or no v; only 1 of these. This is because language like Chinese define zero level of vowel, that is no vowels into their consonants.]

Lets then put our alphabet into this placeholder, it will just give us the words. We have lets say 500 possible combinations of which only 10 are real or actual words, in one particular language, then we can run that set of words, in another language, and we will not only find the synonyms but we might see eg “its the same word that has split into different words, lets say, over 1000s of years”.

eg in this article I (have) proved Indian and Japanese word set: samaya, kshyan and kan, jikan, ji, zen, han, kai, koro and kal, kala {or even [kan]+ta = ghanta} etc is the same word, which means time in Chinese-Japanese-Hindi-Odia and what not .. “

Why is Indian word: sakal = morning? I think I have even come across usage such as: asa = morning or asa-kal.

(At-least usa is used for morning, in Indian language sets and asa is used in Japanese. Here you can see how both asa-kal and usa-kal can give rise to sakal. There are other routes how this word sakal can form, eg example 1 sukha+alok, example 2 shukla)

The answer to the above, is to be understood, in 2 steps:

(The answer to Why is Indian word: sakal = morning?)

1. the languages are “read” into Roman. Roman without any particular rules not defined is arbitrary. That is it becomes neutral, devoid of biases from language rules. It unlocks the languages into their neutral forms.

The languages are basically a rule or lock defined to capture particular meanings from a vast arbitrary tract of phonetics and noise. eg roman: t corresponds to 4 locks in Indian Language system and two locks in Japanese. t as in tatami, t as in taberu are the soft t and heavy t in Japanese. But in Indian t as in tumhara, t as in tenis, t as in thoda and t as in beithak are 4 different locks, 2 soft and 2 heavy.

But in Roman they are all but t. Note that English is not Roman. English is simply a hidden phonetics where you know what the lock is, but you do not show it explicitly. eg time is English, but in Indian lock its thaim, with t in thaim same as the t locked in beithak.

2. The inherent phonetics (words) which are same, in case of Japanese and Indian language. Recently I have brought forth the method of analyzing through the Chinese roots which make things far more clearer and shed the actual formula into limelight, if any. [eg how, recently I have explained the terms for fire, day, light, colors, dynasties are all connected: example yan, you, hi as fire.]

The above example of words will show plenty of knowledge. One; it will show us that asa, chou, sa etc are the base word, or phonetics for early, or morning whose origin is to be also discovered in other usage, by comparison between different words, where these syllables are used and across say languages Chinese, Indian and Japanese.

But this is itself used in various other usage. eg asa-gohan = morning meal = breakfast ?Yes it is.

The kal is time in Indian (languages). But according to ur placeholder formula, given at top, (K)v, its actually KvRv where v is any vowel adjustment, to the preceding consonants.

[this is one reason I have said how “Roman mapping has clad our knowledge about what inference we make about language” and how “they haven’t been studied in detail” although we can expect breakthrough knowledge about language and everything, if we can achieve such detail, I am confident many strides in language analysis in this website can be used towards that goal, one example of a stride is how “an alphabet chart is defined“. … will be linked]

So various Indian language forms have allowed various forms of KvRv eg Hindi: Kal, Odia: KaLa.

This is, 1st of all, because; L<>R.

[point 1 above: how language is read into Roman]

So R being the original consonant, shows up in Japanese usage of “time”: KoRo [note how vowels have changed from language to language and how consonants have too, but original is to be recognized therefore “time” = Kv(R, L)v]

This way we can recognize the usable forms of various language and if they match with the selected word in one way or another, through eg alternation of a consonant here and, or a vowel there, then we take into consideration that info and create the word-formula of that word. (eg word formula; Kv(R, L)v)

A NOTE on Complicacy of vowel definitions in Indian Terrain; Note that v = vowel, also has other properties, which lends to further change in language forms. eg Indian systems have inherently allowed for too many dimensions: “Indian Languages” use c0, cv1, cvv2 mixed with c0, c1, cv2. [Note; c0 means a consonant c with zero vowels, cv2 means same with two vowels, eg jee]

where 0, 1, 2 are level of vowel-ness, as there are 3; 0 = quick-accent of the consonant, 1 = single vowel and 2 = double vowel. But depending on how c = consonant is defined in the first place with vowelness, a v will appear or not explicitly. So if c is internally voweled, the extra vowels will appear 1-less. g, ga, gaa will appear as g, ga because now g has an internal vowel a but this is equivalent to g, ga, gaa, this is used in Indian languages presently and is a significant fallacy.

[Indian Terrain; The a vs aa, these are not two levels of vowel a but two different vowels in Indian terrain, a transliteration ploy that has been made to inherit vowel privileges]

But one can not simply define the right from now. One has to study how-to deal with how this has already influenced all our formula so far and appropriate ways to deal with such. 1st of all one must stick to “g is v0”, “ga is v1”  as such is also the case of Japanese, and any other language, by foresight. 

Here in Indian Terrain, one may still have the “(g)+ v-is-0” type. So one has 5 types for a single vowel. There has to be only 5 vowels, So India has actually at-least 5*5 = 25 vowels in each language, according to the computer or any logic device that does this job of mapping between various languages.[1. 5 types, 3 levels of vowel and degenerated vowels a, aa, note “5” because quick-accent or zero-vowel is same for a, aa. 2. 5*5 because each vowel aeiou can follow each type.]

So if Hseun Tsang did a simple mistake of degeneracy (in his language analysis) then that has percolated deep and wide and we must study that now.  Once things can be restored to only 5 vowels, we will see that Japanese, Chinese, Indian languages are actually in someway same language with further alternations; a feature of the language, eg synonyms.]

Now L is alternated to Y, in symbol; N<>Y. [prominent in Mexican]

So this means kal is also kay, kai. lo-and-behold kai is also “time” in Japanese.

Then comes R, L <> N consonant alternation. This means kan is time. Which is why in Japanese jikan means time. Its (jikan) a double usage, of ji = time [also in Chinese] and kan  = time. But I had mentioned recently consonant k is mixed in a special way [in Chinese, Indian, Japanese] as ksh [the x, ksh as a composite consonant]

So this gives us kan, san, han. See how K<>S<>H of the ksh displays in the preceding phonetics, see also this san might have gone to sam with m<>n, so samay = time. But also s goes to j, z so we have zen = time. So we have xan, zen, kan, kshyan etc. This is Chinese-Indian-Japanese base but also extends to all other language that uses such phonetic elements.

Actually may be even in English: ksh+n san, s appears with t often hence s<>t, and this makes tan and through m<>n makes tam, time. [So “they” just recognized the valid formulaic alternations before procreating a bunch of new words in English, some were exact, eg seme: Japanese, shame English, ikou Japanese, ego English and so on.]

Now we got the taste of it; whats involved. “time” = Kv(R/L)v. More generally: “time” = (XKSZJH)v(RLN)v. This is the chemical formula of word “time”. What one remembers is the consonants split at each possibility and add to only the other (cons). eg time = KaN and not KaS unless S is found in the other (cons).

One has to find all possibilities of alternations. So what one does is one takes all consonants and splits them one by one and mix with another consonant, with a chosen vowel. This will create lets say 100 words [depending on how many consonants we chose] and most of them might turn out to be  imaginary words.

Some of them will match actual words found in actual languages.

Then comes the case of multiple languages. One has to then have enough place holder. eg (k)v(k’)v or (k)v(k’)v(k”)v. This, one recognizes, by taking any particular word. eg SaMaY is (S)v(M)v(Y). Also one must recognize the vowelness of all consonants, eg if g is written it might mean ga, before it can be added to another consonant, vowel and any more vowels we can simply have in our place holder.

We can write a software and analyze all the words in the world. One will be amazed what I just found.

words are therefore (k)v(k’)v(k”)v(k”’)vv with each v’s being different in general. () accommodates all possible consonants so why not just put all 21 of them. Then split them individually, in possible pairs, etc. [if our base defines ksh why not split like that? KSHvGv’Cv”v”]

then we have a bunch of imaginary and actual words which we can compare among themselves or between languages to study origin of words.

One comment

  1. Pingback: Comparing Hiragana and Indian alphabet ! « Invariance Publishing House

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s