How to recognize words in various languages … a magic formula

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.

The meaning of ishan

azuma > asuma > asuna > isuna [of isu, of God, light, sun, fire, existence, rightfullness, person] this isuna is then isana. So what east in Japan is north-east in India if that has to be firmly used say 1500 years ago with their phonetic variations over this time not-with-standing.

If you want to see what Indian alphabet system is all about

ନା N+aa = Naa [or Na if N is vowleness_1 also written as N+a-bar in Hepburn]

ହିଁ iHn [i-vowel or as I said i-f’la, i-don + H-consone + n-special, n is a bowl witha dot or simply dot on top of consones or vowles, on top always, or top-right as a small-circle. This special-n is called anusar and the bowl-dot called chandra-bindu, chnadra=moon, bindu=dot/point] One must avoid special-m also represented through these same symbols. Its a fallacy. Since you have m-n alternation it does not mean you introduce the m-f’la or m-matra or m-dons into the alphabet. This has come up because there is no strict sense in Indian alphabet …