The sounds that we can make are dependent upon our physical structure, so that human language is composed of a certain limited number of sounds. Our physical construction is the result of inner molecular configurations, and the sounds we make are related to these.
Early man and woman felt a certain emotional magnification, that he/she felt, for example, the wind’s voice as his/her own. In a manner of speaking our languages, while expressing our individual intents and communications, also represent a kind of amplification arising from our molecular configurations. The wind makes certain sounds that are dependent upon the characteristics of the earth. The breath makes certain sounds that are dependent upon the characteristic of the body. There is a connection between alphabets and the molecular structure that composes our tissue. Alphabets then are natural keys also. Such natural keys have a molecular history. We form these keys also. Such natural keys have a molecular history. We form these keys into certain sound patterns that have particular meanings.
This provides us within a certain kind of communication, but it also allows a molecular expression that is natural at that level, and then used by us for our own purposes. I am not saying that molecules speak. I am saying that they are expressed through our speech, however — and that our speech represents an amplification of their existence. Through our words their reality is amplified, in the same way that man’s and woman’s emotions once found amplification through the physical elements.
Certain sounds are verbal replicas of molecular constructions, put together by us to form sentences in the same way, for example, that molecules are put together to form cells and tissue.
There are “inner sounds” that act like layers between tissues, that “coat molecules”, and these serve as a basis for exterior sound principles. These are also connected to rhythms in the body itself.
To some extent punctuation is sound that we do not hear, a pause that implies the presence of withheld sound. To some extent, then, language is as dependent upon the unspoken as the spoken, and the rhythm of silence as well as of sound. In that context, however, silence involves merely a pause of sound in which sound is implied but withheld. Inner sound deals primarily with that kind of relationship. Language is meaningful only because of the rhythm of the silence upon which it rides. Yet, to so many people, the language that we speak is, literally, foreign. However, millions of people every day are striving to learn our language, either through school classes such as German lessons in London or through other means such as the “Rosetta Stone”. And then, once they have put in the hard work and dedication, the way that we make sounds can also be understood by them too. Some people like to go to another country though to learn the language. This might mean that people go and become an au pair. As this way people can experience a new culture whilst also learning a new language. If this is something that interests you then you can check out something like “Cultural Care Au Pair” sites to give you a good idea of what happens on this sort of experience and how people can apply for it.
Its meaning comes from the pauses between the sounds as much as it does from the sounds themselves. The flow of breath is obviously important, regulating the rhythm and the spacing of the words. The breath’s integrity arises directly from the proper give-and-take between cells the functioning of the tissues; and all that is the expression of molecular competence. That competence is obviously responsible for language, but beyond that it is intimately connected with the patterns of languages themselves, the construction of syntax, and even with the figures of speech used.
Again, we speak for ourselves; yet in doing so we speak a language that is not ours alone, but the result of inner communications too swift for us to follow, involving corporal and subjective realities alike. For this reason our language have meaning on several levels. The sounds we make have physical effects on our own and other bodies. There is a sound value, then, as apart from a meaning value.
The words we speak to someone else are in certain terms broken down by the listener to basic components, and understood at different levels. There are psychological interpretations made, and molecular ones. The sounds and their pauses will express emotional states, and reactions to these will alter the body’s condition to whatever degree.
The listener then breaks down the language. He builds up his own response. We have so connected words and images that language seems to consist of a sound for feelings and subjective states, and they had no subjects or predicates, nor even a sentence structure that we would recognize.
Our language must follow our perception, though the sound structure beneath need not. We say: “I am today, I was yesterday, and I will be tomorrow, ” yet some languages would find such utterances incomprehensible, and the words, “I am” would be used in all instances.