Thusly in our view the US Secretary of State gave the Russians a free
pass which we had intercepted as a risk idea (33 language elements)
nearly five years ago.

But try as we might to bring it to people's attention was ABSOLUTELY
impossible.

SO ENJOY YOUR WAR.

----------

We firstly note that the then US Secretary of State's remark was made on
WEDNESDAY 24 MAY 2017:

NOUMENON NOUS RESONANCE ON #33 - GLOBUS CRUCIGER ANCHOR OF 24 MAY + #17
- HETERONOMY AGAINST AUTONOMY (#2017) + #18 - END OF THE RUSSIAN TSAR
(#1918)

<http://www.grapple369.com/?date:2022.5.24>

As if to grant an impetus for the Russians to then reconcile their
centennial history on the occasion of our WORLD WAR ONE centennial.

Whereas we did actually buy a ROSETTA STONE replica artefact (ie. rather
than language software) for a neighbour who had as a novelty collector,
a copy of a RUSSIAN PUTIN calendar.

---------

Colleen Dougherty Vroman : “Praying Russian people stand together and
get this man in a mental institution he definitely has lost it and I
pray that Russian and Ukrainian people stand together to get this sick
crazy individual out of office 🙏🙏🙏🙏”

<https://www.facebook.com/colleen.vroman> <— Example of godless American
with a haughty piety

{@1: Sup: 34 - KINSHIP: CH'IN (#34); Ego: 20 - ADVANCE: CHIN (#20)}

dolf: “Unlike yourself as a babbler we interface to noumenon being a
consciousness gateway to the Almighty before we venture to speak …

— OO ROO TO OOHRAH —

"I AM THE APPLE 🍎 OF HIS EYE 👁."
THINKING TO DO ME OVER 🎯?
YOU OUGHT NOT EVEN TRY.
SEMANTIC FIELDS IN CLOVER 🍀.

MOUTH WORDS LIKE PUSHKIN.
DING-DONG, POOH-POOH, <-- *THEORY* of language origins
BOW-WOW OR TA-TA PUTIN.
KOO WEE NOR TO TRY WOO.

ROSETTA STONE SO WRIT.
AS PLAIN FOR ALL TO SEE.
SAY OTHERWISE SUCH TWIT.
THAT GOD LOVES EVEN ME." {@14: Sup: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#645); Ego: 41 -
RESPONSE: YING (#594)} <-- *VERY* *COMPLEX* semantical form to be able
to humanly deduce exacting categories of understanding

#645 as [#5, #200, #9, #10, #70, #50, #300, #1] = esthíō (G2068):
{UMBRA: #1024 % #41 = #40} 1) to eat; 2) to eat (consume) a thing; 2a)
to take food, eat a meal; 3) metaph. to devour, consume;

#594 as [#30, #4, #200, #300, #50, #10] = dârash (H1875): {UMBRA: #504 %
#41 = #12} 1) to resort to, seek, seek with care, enquire, require; 1a)
(Qal); 1a1) to resort to, frequent (a place), (tread a place); 1a2) to
consult, enquire of, seek; i) of God; ii) of heathen gods, necromancers;
1a3) to seek deity in prayer and worship; i) God; ii) heathen deities;
1a4) to seek (with a demand), demand, require; 1a5) to investigate,
enquire; 1a6) to ask for, require, demand; 1a7) to practice, study,
follow, seek with application; 1a8) to seek with care, care for; 1b)
(Niphal); 1b1) to allow oneself to be enquired of, consulted (only of
God); 1b2) to be sought, be sought out; 1b3) to be required (of blood);

<http://www.grapple369.com/images/PUTIN%20201081010.jpeg> <-- *NOTICE*
*PUTIN* did a photo opportunity for us

EUGENE SCOTT (CNN) @ 1256 (GMT) 25 MAY 2017: "DISMAYED JOHN KERRY SAYS
HARVARD GRADS SHOULD 'BUY ROSETTA STONE AND LEARN RUSSIAN': "Democracy
relies on free speech. *Yes*, *say* *anything* *you* *want*, but it
relies even more on the speech being #940 - *truthful*.

#940 as [#1, #200, #500, #1, #30, #8, #200] = asphalḗs (G804): {UMBRA:
#940 % #41 = #38} 1) firm (that which can be relied on); 2) certain,
*true*; 3) suited to confirm;

@86, {@12: Sup: 79 - DIFFICULTIES: NAN (#500 - *HERE*); Ego: 5 - KEEPING
SMALL: SHAO (#79)}

“WE HOLD THESE #940 - *TRUTHS* TO BE SELF-EVIDENT, THAT ALL MEN ARE
CREATED EQUAL, THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN
UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, THAT AMONG THESE ARE #500 - *LIFE*, #500 -
*LIBERTY*, AND THE #501 - *PURSUIT* *OF* *HAPPINESS*." [AMERICAN
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776]

THE NOUMENON REFERENCE OBJECT AS THE NATURAL OR DIVINE LAW FOR ANY FORM
OF GOVERNMENT BY "DEVISING THE BIBLICAL IDEA TEMPLATE TO QUEEN
VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT AND HYPOTHESIS ON ONTIC VARIANCE"

<http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/Letters%20Patent%20Variance.pdf>

@84, {@13: Sup: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#501 - *HERE*); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN
(#82)}

.... TEMPLATE TO QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT

@140] {@22: Sup: 55 - DIMINISHMENT: CHIEN (#940 - *HERE*); Ego: 59 -
MASSING: CHU (#298)}

It is the #940 - *truth* after all that sets us free," the former
Democratic presidential nominee said WEDNESDAY 24 MAY 2017 {

NOUMENON NOUS RESONANCE ON #33 - GLOBUS CRUCIGER ANCHOR OF 24 MAY + #17
- HETERONOMY AGAINST AUTONOMY (#2017) + #18 - END OF THE RUSSIAN TSAR
(#1918)

} at the Harvard Kennedy School graduation. "And the #940 - *truth* is
-- no, this is not a normal time."

"I've been asked, 'What is the secret to having a real impact on
government?' Well, it's recently changed. I used to say, 'Either run for
office or get a degree from the Harvard Kennedy School,'" he said. "But
with this White House, I'd say,

'*BUY* *ROSETTA* *STONE* *AND* *LEARN* *RUSSIAN*.'"

YOUTUBE: "Imagine Dragons - Thunder"

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKopy74weus>

Initial Post: 28 February 2022

-------------

Ding-Dong, Pooh-Pooh, Bow-Wow and Ta-Ta: An Overview of Different
Theories on Language Origins

Some believe that language is a divine gift given to humans by God,
while others argue that language is simply the product of many years of
natural selection. Either way, at some point in evolution, humans
developed the ability to speak. But how did it all start? How did humans
first discover their ability to speak and begin to formulate the first
language? Conceived by linguists, a number of “invention hypotheses”
explain the possible ways in which language first originated in humans.
The following are explanations of a few examples of hypotheses:

From the desk of Western Washington University professor Edward Vadja:
“Linguistics 201: The Origin of Language”:
Four Imitation Hypotheses:

1. DING-DONG: The “ding-dong” hypothesis bases the origins of language
on onomatopoeia. This idea states that language began when humans
started naming objects after a relevant sound that was already involved
in their everyday life. Examples include words such as “boom,” “crash,”
and “oink.”

These represent the sounds of certain objects, but it is unclear how to
provide onomatopoeia for silent objects such as a rock. It also does not
consider abstract ideas like love or justice, as there are no sounds for
these words. Also, this hypothesis does not supply words for grammar or
abstract items in the English language, so it is not hard to imagine
that these types of words are unusual and rare in most languages.
Onomatopoeia is such a small part of linguistics and varies greatly from
language to language. Because of these limitations it is considered a
limited hypothesis.

2. POOH-POOH: The basis for the “pooh-pooh” hypothesis holds true to the
involuntary nature of human speech. Through emotional response, language
and speech would have developed in tandem with human interaction and
primitive emotional reactions. Such sounds as “wa wa wa” or “ha ha ha,”
commonly used to denoted crying or pain and happiness or laughter,
respectively, would then develop into a more unique and case-specific
series of sounds in association with other emotions and interactions
(Vadja).

The problem with this hypothesis, however, is that exclamations, such as
the emotional responses that one might associate with these “pooh-pooh”
phrases, are in fact dependent on language instead of a basis through
which language can be created. For instance, the essence of emotional
response for pain is “ouch” in English, “oi” in Russian and “eee” in
Cherokee (Vadja). If there was a generalized emotional response that all
people made independently of each other, then perhaps there would be
some legitimacy to the argument. But those noises that we all do make
based on the stimuli of sneezes or hiccups cannot demonstrate a common
linguistic nature between peoples.

3. BOW-WOW: The “bow wow” hypothesis is the most popular but perhaps the
most far-fetched hypothesis of them all. Basically, it is the idea that
human language and vocabulary originated as a form of imitation. It is
said that language came from the imitation of animal sounds.

The problem that arises in this hypothesis is that a lot of words that
describe animal sounds in different languages are similiar. For
instance, in English a pig makes the sound “oink-oink.” In Russian the
sound is translated as “hyru-hyru” and in Chinese the sound is
translated as “oh-ee-oh-ee.” As one can see, these words represent the
sound of a single animal in different languages. The sound and
pronunciation of these words are not similar. The overall idea is that
one’s language determines how one interprets a sound, and since we have
may languages, one cannot prove that human vocabulary comes from them.