NO LANGUAGE REMAIN IN ONE STATE

Prof Maqsood Hasni   Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:05 pm GMT
NO LANGUAGE REMAIN IN ONE STATE

With respect to the construction and formation of alphabet, it is commonly said that the language has no many structural dimensions. The determination of alphabet with respect to writing (Composing) is not correct. The writing that is taught abides by fixed and limited lines or rules. But sometimes, it becomes impossible to follow the lines or rules as a whole. For example, a soldier is passed through the full training of military rules verbally and practically with the expectation that using these rules he would fight against enemy and save himself. But there is nothing as foolish as this thing is. No doubt, all the rules learnt in the training would help in fighting strategy but they cannot guarantee success. In the battlefield a soldier has to do his task according to chance and condition of the field.

The case of languages is not different from it. The learnt linguistic system and the way of writing are cooperative in writing and speaking. While speaking, the proposed linguistic system and the way of writing become worthless and meaningless. Here only the regular idiom is used and along with it, the present need is kept under consideration. I very keenly tested and studied a lot of hand writings written with hand, checked them according to the suggested and fixed lines. But the letters did not remain limited to any rule. A,c,d,e,f,g,h,I,j,k,m,n,o,p,q,r,t,y followed no system of lines. The same condition can be seen with the languages of Sub-continent. Arabic and Persian are also not exceptions.

In English, some letters didn’t give the same sound e.g., but, put, university, umbrella, is, seen etc. In many other languages the condition is the same.

In different passions and conditions, the sound of letters change. Or they become quite different from each other.

In these passions and conditions, the instruments of sound and the helping instruments of sound e.g. throat, palate, checks, nose, tongue, mouth, bronchitis, lungs don’t remain in their exact position because they ever possess the capacity of shirking and stretching. In order to clear the matter, it seems necessary to offer a few situations and conditions:

A
1- In rage the sound become heavy
2- In grief the sound becomes feeble and weak
3- In anxiety the sound becomes deranged and unbalanced
4- In illness the sound breaks
5- When there is some matter with the mind, tone
and pronunciation are changed because some passion is
related with each matter
B
1- Usual and good mood, the sound remains balanced
2- While laying in usual and good mood, the sound expends. While
taking a turn, the sound shrinks. Such changes can be guessed with an extreme consideration.
3- Some people are habitual of speaking while sleeping. Their talks
are usually not understood. Its reason is that the position of instruments of speaking is changed. Secondly, in the absence of conscious effort, the arrangement of words, the stressing and non-stressing of syllabi don’t remain under the accepted system of grammar.
C
1- While walking, sound makes a circle and the addition of “N” is
made to the words/sounds
2- While running the sound disperses
3- In running, leaping with rage the sound not only depresses
but also divided into odorless pieces
4- In running and leaping with joy, the function of nostrils increases

D
1- Distance and opposite direction make the sound unclear
2- The change of direction disturbs the balance
of the sound and many forms of dispersion are created
4- In anger or in joy the tone and pronunciation are changed
5- Tone and pronunciation are also changed by speaking briskly

E
1- the system of sounds is affected because of some disability in the organs and helping organs of sound
2- The diseases of organs of sound or their helpers (Asthma, Bronchitis, the berating problem, Tuberculosis, Phenomena, goiter, nose bone’s abnormal etc) effect the system of sounds. In other words, new letters are created
3- The absence of all or at least the front 2 teeth changes the sounds

F

The organs of speech or their helpers develop and adjust themselves
according to the physical condition or a region, its climate, etc. In this way, languages are deprived of many sounds of foreign languages. Therefore, while speaking foreign languages, their original tone and pronunciation are not maintained. Generally the difference of gender is also not sustained.

In short, there are a lot of things and matters that don’t let a system remain in its formal or general or learnt discipline. There is a distance of heaven and earth between theory and practical.
In any big culture, thousands of mini-cultures are thriving in their circles with full independence. The difference exists in the temperament and needs of nations. This difference casts its effects on the original or real things. It is in no way useful to achieve results by ignoring the differences.
(By: Prof Maqsood Hasni
Translated by: Prof Naimat Ali)
Ion   Thu Dec 14, 2006 3:26 am GMT
What is the point you want to make here? That No language remain in one state? That betwen theory and practice is a difference? That for perfectly speaking British English is better to be born in Britain, nobody contest anything from above, I guess!

I'm sorry, I dont understand what you are looking for, or I'm too tired...
JakubikF   Mon Dec 18, 2006 5:31 pm GMT
I can't find your point either...
User   Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:38 pm GMT
I hope you're not an English professor. Your English is atrocious.
Prof Maqsood Hasni   Tue Dec 19, 2006 10:18 am GMT
Here, the discussion often occurs with respect to the circle of expression and lines concerned with the learning of a langue with reference to one or two dimensions. In this regard, my point of view is that languages have never been limited. Learning is a separate affair while speaking and writing are absolutely different from it. Languages can’t be kept within specific circles. They depend upon man. Man does not depend on them. They have to stand by the conditions and the changing trends and behaviors of a man. In learning a language, the system of lines has to be followed, no doubt. While during writing and speaking, the system of lines does not remain intact. English is especially noticed with this respect. There is, no doubt, that I am not an English teacher. But I strongly oppose the negative behavior towards English with respect to my links.
todosmentira   Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:20 pm GMT
Prof Maqsood Hasni

3 words: 1) turgid 2) incoherent 3) obfuscation

I suggest you find a better dictionary to look them up than the one you are currently using!

Insh'allah you overcome your addiction to posting pompous faux-academic drivel on forums such as this.
Ion   Tue Dec 19, 2006 3:48 pm GMT
I personally think that nobody contradicts you, prof. Maqsood! That's why, I don't think that you brought up something special here. From what you say, it is like telling us that white is white and black is black...

Or, I might not understand your Ideea properly!

best regards
Prof Maqsood Hasni   Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:30 am GMT
Thank you for talk. I have already mentioned that I am not an English teacher. But some time I convey my mind through English. Now I don’t know that any question rises in this regard. To point out my English, in fact, testifies my subject that man can use a language according to his need, will and style. If you go to bazaar and meet different people, you come to know that one word is pronounced differently by different persons with a vivid distinction. If a discussion is made according to the instructed subtleties, it will not develop at all. The use of a word depends upon the authority of a person. In big culture, a lot of small/mini cultures are also developing with their own identity. In this situation a language can’t be enclosed within one or two dimensions. I think, instead of the correct or incorrect English, discussion must be made on my thesis which is clear.
According to structuralism, every theory, meaning and explanation are rejected and some other explanation occupies its place. In other words, no theme meaning theory and explanation is final. It must be kept in mind that all the words written by you or me are not the revealed ones by God. They are not exception to objection. My theory can also be wrong. Changes may also occur in it. It can be rejected at any time. I request you to please discuss the theory more than my language. So that better results may come before us. The theory must be taken to laboratory; you should notice how the people who use the idiom given by the linguistics. Even in a house, grand pa and grand son use an idiom differently. Your talk is praiseworthy. I shall be more pleased if you discuss the theory. Take care
João   Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:45 am GMT
Boring thread I must say...
Prof Maqsood Hasni   Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:10 pm GMT
you are right.
I quite sure you have not intrest in linguistics.
Guest   Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:02 pm GMT
Prof Maqsood Hasni, you have no real point. The question you should be asking is "So what?"
Steve   Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:52 am GMT
You have some good points there, professor...
Prof Maqsood Hasni   Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:50 am GMT
thank u Steve
Gog bless u
Steve   Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:36 am GMT
Professor,

I read your comment twice and I have some questions, hope you have an answer or have an idea where an answer can be found.

Is there a direct connection between the inability to speak and the develpment of organs (mainly internal, and or brain). Is lack of speach or even when someone speaks less than normal, has anything to do with internal illneses, thinking of words as a release of energy?

Philosophically, does this sentence mean anything to you?

"In the beginning there was word..."
Guest   Wed Dec 27, 2006 6:50 pm GMT
Professor,refer a state that has changed its language.