A passing remark on the status of my thoughts on language theory. Reply

How language evolved? Its a mixing. What does it mean? Take example of floods. Why flood occur? There is river. Its basically a riverbed or a channel + flow of water. The channel is almost same for longer period of time. But there is ice on mountains which is melted by Sun’s fire and flows into the river. The flow of water is arbitrary. And there is not enough place holder for that water. Things get mixed up. Whats mixing? In flood a monkey sits on the favorite couch you had purchased for yourself last Christmas. And you have to share a place with a cobra. Because the house and tree got mixed up, by the flood.

Similarly there are conceptual underpinnings or place holders or rules in language. And they get arbitrary amount of usage flux, of the linguistic objects and the place holders no longer suffice. Things get mixed up. We find that Chinese, Japanese and Indian have gotten mixed up. This is also the basis of Indo-European Theory of language. All language got mixed with all others. But there is inherent similarity and new RULES. What are these rules, If in modern context we can reformulate the we have for ourselves and future made a safer language privilege. We won’t lose ourselves in myriad dark alleys of verbal reality. Of-course who does not agree sometimes silence is gold, but we will soon run out of it. Then what to speak?

Despite of the fact that Japanese originated from Chinese what makes it so close to Indian in phonetics. The conceptual underpinnings are totally different but the similarity of phonetics is mindfully similar. I will give examples, but before that: why Kim and Jim look so similar? Because they come from same parents: Tom and Angeline. Their personality is different but their appearance attributes are not. So when internal underpinnings are not visible the appearance goes closer to similar if derived from same or similar parent linkage.

(But I am not saying same thing about language like say: Korean, there might be something some underpinnings and external attribute maker that keeps them slightly off, but then at the level of most fundamental quantum everything comes from everything else and goes into such in some way or other)

There are tons of examples as I have discovered in last 3 years. (and some eg in 2005) see how whats asa in Japanese is usa in Indian: morning. see whats koro in Japanese is kaala in Indic: TIME. (because o/aa and l/r etc) But when spoken amply clear they are the same word, practically.

Again as I have discovered couple yrs ago or less, all PHONETICS are merely a sun-fact/attribute/philosophy. That is, within the same language they all split from previous base of phonetics in a way so as to retain their meaning of: Sun, in some way or other. eg California is shoulya+purna or kaala purna (the complete or transcedental sun) The reason why phonetics when mixed, still retain arbitrary linkage to the parentage and produce coincidental amount of Cognates or even the exact same word. Its like Particle Physics, if one particle got mixed, through that all particles did. So Language as I understood in preceding years is a Language Mixing Theory. We get all sorts of combinations or elements in their simple and conjugated forms then only can we RECONSTRUCT the underlying scientific theory. Such a theory has never been accomplished. In other words anything we know or claim as complete truth eg Sanskrit being mother of all language or Greek is this or that are merely void of any truer content.

So when we add asa+koro its still close to usa+kaala. That is to higher conjugated level of phonetic elements (read super-syllable-level) different language can retain the exactness of linguistic objects. A fact which makes it much more interesting to study to know exactly how different are our languages, perhaps they simply sprang from each other. That is if Japanese originated from various tracts of Chinese, so did Indian languages. The underlying conceptual pinning as exist today may be offset in this way or that way but most similarities are preserved by the nature of parentage. Also the external attributes could be offset because of place holder rules being evolved in present context but all this can be studied quite effectively.

Science is a game of reconstruction. Taking the missing parts and finding a “complete” picture.

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