Instrument for Measuring Linguistic Distance Between Indo-European Languages – Rejected

Introduction: Defending my Slavic rhyme of the first two numerals 1 & 2.

  1. Slavic numerals rhyme: (1) jednA (2) dvA, (3) TRI (4) chTiRI, (5) pYET (6) shYEsT, (7) sed*M (8) os*M, (9) DEvET (10) DEsET and on and on infinitely…..
  2. Essentially, the only reason that journals and my peers deny the publication of the paper is that I use the TWO GENDERS (feminine) for (1) jednA and (masculine) for (2) dvA while in a manner which would be more acceptable to my peers and journals I should use either BOTH feminine gender counting such as (1) jednA and (2) dvYE or BOTH masculine counting such as (1) jedEN and dvA.
  3. It is imperative that I promulgate the fact that ONLY THE FIRST TWO NUMERALS (1&2) ARE GENDER SENSITIVE AND ERGO DESERVE SPECIAL HANDLING. Numerals 3 on through infinity are NOT GENDER SENSITIVE.
  4. I further propose that the special laws governing the first two numerals are related to “gender sensitivity” and the “dual number” which was present at the birth of the Proto-Indo-European Language(s) but which fell into disuse in most current Indo-European Languages. The “dual number” is well preserved in Slovenian and is evident in all Slavic languages … and still can be detected in English, albeit in a very clandestine form. Elaboration of #4 dual number and gender sensitivity of the first two numerals for anglophones who may have difficulty understanding these in English.
    1. The very clandestine form dual number (between singular and plural) in English is evident in words like “EITHER” rather than “ANY”, “NEITHER” rather than “NONE” and “BOTH” instead of “ALL”. In Czech the dual number is better preserved than in English but not as well as in Slovenian. The Czech word for “EYE” is “OKO”. Eyes which are paired as on the face are 2 “OČI”. A rather cute name for a “bunion” in Czech is KUŘÍ OKO (Chicken’s Eye). Such deformities of toes do not categorically come in pairs and therefore even if there are two of them – they are called 2 “KUŘÍ OKA”. In a similar way — a handle on cooking pot is called an “EAR” (UCHO) in Czech. Ears on a head are 2 “UŠI” but 2 handles on a pot are 2 “UCHA”.
    2. As mentioned above ONLY the numerals 1 & 2 express GENDER. If the genders of the entities are considered irrelevant as in almost all non-Slavic languages – then the RHYME TRUMPS the GENDER.
    3. An analogous situation exists in the first two numerals in English as well as Slavic languages in that the word THIRD resembles THREE, FOURTH resembles FOUR, FIFTH resembles FIVE, SIXTH resembles SIX, SEVENTH resembles SEVEN, EIGHTH resembles EIGHT, NINTH resembles NINE and TENTH resembles TEN….. but FIRST does not resemble ONE and SECOND does not resemble TWO. In a like manner PRVI does not resemble JEDEN or JEDNA and DRUGI/DRUHÝ does not resemble DVĚ/DVA. But once we get to 3 and subsequent numerals there is a conspicuous resemblance! TŘI=TŘETÍ, ČTYŘI=ČTVRTÝ, PĚT=PÁTÝ, ŠEST=ŠESTÝ, SEDM=SEDMÍ, OSM=OSMÍ, DEVĚT=DEVÁTÝ….
    4. Nature and human nature works on the logic circuit of TWO. A neonate’s first logic duality is “the me” vs “the not me”. Computers’ most basic logic circuit is the pairing of 1010011011110. and this is based on weaving and basketry (over & under pattern). Logically humans use duality in up & down, left & right, male & female, black & white, 2 sides of DNA DOUBLE Helix, etc. etc…
    5. Claude Levi Strauss promulgated this principle: He developed the “theory” that all social structure, art, etc. had an internal homolgy of dyadic opposition. All art representation, all myth, social structure had a dyadic oppositional structure. Levi Strauss was influenced by the writings and ideas of De Carte and Marx to develop this dyadic oppositional theory; the comminality of the human mind will create art, myth, social structure, etc. with a dyadic oppositional structure. Levi Strauss is extremely difficult to read, but his ideas were the foundation of French structuralism. This was not a we/they paradigm.

I am totally satisfied that my method of calculating the linguistic distance between Slavic and other Indo-European languages is Original as well as Adequate, Efficient, Elegant and Parsimonious. I recognize that English (which started in the Balto-Slavic Cradle — subsequently — absorbed many Celtic and Italic features to become “Germanic”– was transplanted onto the Celtic Island of England as AngloSaxon — was subjugated by the Norman Conquest and had ingested Greek & Latin vocabulary as well colonial imports from India and other colonies). IT is a language where I can have a reading between ZERO and TWENTY FOUR. One has to apply a more “generous” conditions for rhyme. Alas, English can be classified as Either Germanic or Latinic language (especially after the Norman Conquest) and thus it is outside of my system. I also have the word Ukrainian misspelled on one of my charts.

Sadly, I do not anticipate that in the life-time that I have left my paper: NUMERICAL RHYME AS AN INSTRUMENT MEASURING TIME/SPACE BETWEEN INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES is likely to find merit or utility by many. This paper was published on this website and trust that a decade or two from now someone will resurrect my ideas and apply them to some future study of Linguistics. Alfred Wegener, Gregor Mendel, Galileo and others formed hypotheses which were rejected…. and later embraced. I am an optimist and rejoice that even charlatans can be published these days.