What are Endolinguistics?

Comparative linguistics have helped much in the artificial reconstruction of proto-languages. Based on historical and phonological transformations we can guess with a good degree of certainty how a proto-language might have existed. But this is partially accurate, especially in certain systems such as PIE. In other system’s where we lack sufficient documentation or that other system members -lost languages- are gone (related languages or branches have disappeared without trace) it is too difficult to be able to recreate their proto language with the accuracy of PIE.

Yet the systemic relationship between languages that are part of the same system is evident.

What endolinguistics studies helps to understand the systemic relationship between languages. One of the main arguments is this: languages share between their system siblings fundamental structures that can remain partially or completely within them. These structures as we know form part of the morphology but also are evident part of what we wrongly name “cognates”. Cognates of course share common roots. But the familiar argument of a cognate only shows a derived relationship of the old structures. Endolinguistics in the other hand, indicate that these words and structures are not isolated derivations but on the contrary they are fundamental part of the systemic substrata they commonly share.

What endolinguistics does is propose basic structural units which will portray this shared systemic substrata. These structures when complete are easy to trace, when they are lost or broken it is more difficult to trace the substrate. We call these units, binary and ternary codes.

Now, these binary and ternary codes are supposition structures, which means they are not necessarily universal among all linguistic systems. Binary and ternary codes are psychologically linked to a language interpretation, therefore the use of a code changes, inverts or displays different treatments even in the same language.

In endolinguistics we are not necessarily focused on the immediate synonym or historical relation between say the words “gift” or “present” but we emphasize that “gift” is a determinative of the verb “to give” of a Germanic direct origin and “present” which will be a Latin origin. Nor do we focus on the evident difference between Spanish “Cálido” and Germanic “Glad”.

In this latter example we focus on the psychological relation between being Glad and cálido (warm heart). One important thing to notice is that in endolinguistics we are not saying those words come directly from the same original PIE structure. Even if we are able to discover this in the future with new techniques, the fundamental topic is that the two words share a psychological trait. Therefore the Germanic “glad” and the Latin “cálido” present a methodological and psychological relationship. The bridge would be a warm feeling but if we stay only in the psychological bridge we lack a structural unit we can use to link both words. The ternary link in this case would be K-L-D.

Another aspect of a binary or ternary code is the concept of inversion. The same ternary inverts the logical sense in the Latin word “Caldo” and Germanic “Kalt”. The first meaning hot and the other cold. These words share the ternary code K-L-D. But the logical meaning is inverted. Similarly we can take Germanic “Fire” and Latin “Frio”. One describes the burning material physical phenomena which gives heat and the other simply “cold”. In this case both words share the binary F-R.

We could treat this or “find” this as PIE reconstruction, etymologies or phonetic change. We can study those relationships with other linguistic tools of course. We trace that substrate with several other methodological tools. What we are talking about with the use of EB (endolinguistic binary) or ET (endolinguistic ternary) codes is the actual shared pshycological “substrate” structure.

This brings the important topic that endolinguistics cannot be done using a single language without considering layer substrates. Endolinguistics needs comparative tools to be explored. Imagine we use a single language to try to find structures without considering any substrate. We would only find what we usually call “roots”or other morphological units. What is important to endolinguistics is the shared mathematical patterns between languages not for translation but for profound interpretation.

The study of Collective unconscious is fundamental to endolinguistics. For us, endolinguistics is a way of understanding the hidden language of the collective unconscious. could be from a national perspective if we focus on a single language (not disregarding the substrate), or we can have a broader reach if we expand beyond a single system unit to others beyond their existential horizon.

Shield:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.