“You must be the change you want to see in the world.” ~ Mohandas K. Gandhi
There are two main purposes for this aggregation of language information: 1) for my own quick-reference use (as is the case with my other aggregations, and 2) to radically reduce online research time for any interested people who happen to stumble across this website. By making these kinds of aggregations, I don't have spend nearly as much time searching for information which I might have forgotten to archive in my system of folders, files and bookmarks.
According to Phonetics: The Sounds of Language, by Michael Dobrovolsky and Francis Katamba, "a very wide range of sounds is found in human language (600 consonants and 200 vowels, according to one estimate)." That's a lot of sounds!
According to Wikipedia, "Although the IPA offers over 160 symbols for transcribing speech, only a relatively small subset of these will be used to transcribe any one language. It is possible to transcribe speech with various levels of precision. A precise phonetic transcription, in which sounds are described in a great deal of detail, is known as a narrow transcription. A coarser transcription which ignores some of this detail is called a broad transcription. "
There have always been criminals in the world, those who believe they are entitled to treat other people in ways they themselves would not want to be treated. One such pecking-order system where (person or) Group A (let's call them the "ruling class", the "political class", and/or "government psychopaths" arguendo) wants to control (person or) Group B (let's call them the "productive laboring classes" arguendo), ostensibly so A can steal B's labor, has often been called "feudalism". A recent example of it (and the astounding arrogance behind it) surfaced when MIT Economics professor, Jonathan Gruber, one of the chief architects of Obamacare, said in effect they had to lie to the American people because laboring-class American people are too stupid to do what's best for them.
Humans tend to think in language, so Group A has always understood that if they can control Group B's use of language, A can control the thoughts and belief systems of B for the personal financial benefit of A. Let's look at it.
Take the word "tree" as an example. It's pronounced "tr(long e1 sound)". That a combination of the "t" sound, the "r" sound, and the "(long e1)" sound. So, if you are trying to use language to control other people, which of those sounds should be "legal", and which of them should be "illegal" and/or "taboo"? I like to think of words as units of measurement of human ideas/thought. As such, words should be as simple, accurate, and precise as possible so inter-human communication can be as simple, accurate, and precise as possible. Criminals are the ones who don't like simple, accurate, precise and clear communication, because that makes their "job" (of ripping you off) more difficult.
Wait a second, it gets a lot more interested and complicated. The word (and its sounds) "tree" only conveys the idea/s it conveys in the language known as "English". In French, the word "tree" is "arbre", in Spanish "árbol", in Czech "strom", in Afrikaans ""boom", in Swedish "träd", etc, etc. So which of those sounds the human mouth is capable of producing should be "legal", and which should be "illegal" or "taboo"?
Let's take one of comedian George Carlin's famous "7 Words" as an example of the short-sighted and arrogant stupidity of A trying to control the language of B. Let's take the word "shit". Unfortunately, it has many different uses and connotations. It's most common use can be expressed with synonyms such as "excrement", "manure", "dung" "droppings", "scat", etc. So which of those sounds the human mouth is capable of producing should be "legal", and which should be "illegal" or "taboo"? Why should "shit" be obscene, but "excrement" is acceptable, when the former has one syllable and the latter three syllables? Consider these two sentences: 1) Rats! I stepped in a pile of cow "shit". 2) Rats! I stepped in a pile of cow "excrement". Which should be "legal", and which should be "illegal" or "taboo"? And what what is the logic behind such reasoning? I can't see it -- EXCEPT to allow A to control B for A's personal financial benefit.
It gets even sillier. It's only bad to say the word "shit" if your are talking to an English-speaking person, because the French word for "shit" is "merde". So if you're talking to a French-speaking person, s/he wouldn't understand the word "shit"; it would be gibberish. It would only be bad to say "merde", which, of course, would be gibberish to the English-speaking person. Cool, huh?!
To lovers of logic and common sense, it very quickly becomes obvious that A doesn't try to control the language of B so humanity can build ships to travel space at speeds in excess of the speed of light. A tries to control the language of B to confuse B, obfuscate otherwise clear communication, and control B "politically" and steal B's labor and property in ways so subtle, devious and deceptive that B (labor) is too marble-count-challenged and ignorant to be able to perceive.
Language-based tyranny is ultimately implemented via the invention and use of wannabe-clever manipulation-based words designed to have opposite meanings -- words such as "God", "law", "government", "religion", "money", etc. The key to understanding these obfuscatory dual-purpose (i.e. good-evil words) is being able to recognize the difference between when they are used to mean self-ownership and when they are used to mean feudalistic "government" ownership/control over B by A.
RECENT VIDEOS, BLOGS, ARTICLES, COLUMNS, AND STATEMENTS:
: See John's Twitter for one of the web's most eclectic mashups of interesting real-time news articles. I surf the web for interesting real-time news stories and informative tidbits so you don't have to.
George Carlin on soft language - YouTube video
GRUBER: "Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage." - YouTube video
George Carlin - Language complaints at American Press Club - YouTube video
Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology - YouTube video
1. I have not yet found a Linux-supported dictionary which has the phonetic symbols. When you try to use a Windows-supported symbol, it just shows up as "?".
Under construction . . .ShareThis