top of page

What is entering?

11. About an eerie terror and nightmare


The weird kind of regimentation that designs a feudal language society brings in emotions that are not there in English. The weirdness of the regimentation is that the hierarchy is not a step – down or step-up ladder like. It is more like each two steps, up and down, are like two 180 degree opposite force contents. The Aap or Ingal or Saar or Saab or MemSaab on top jetting up and at the same time, pushing down the lower step, which is the Thoo or Inhi or Nee.


This mutually opposite-directed force component gets repeated up the ladder and down the ladder at each step.


However, no one willingly would concede to this kind of pushing down nor would they willingly offer a pushing up to the pushing-down entity, unless there is some other forceful insistence.  


The social system has the design of a pyramid, in which a un-see-able, but powerfully feel-able force runs up and down the pyramid.


This mention of a pyramid is itself an over-simplification of an extremely complicated social design. I need not go into that here.


The un-see-able but powerfully feel-able force does induce rude kind of verbal usages in the social communication. At the same time, it is these verbal usages that design the social system – that is also there.


Politeness, soft behaviour, meekness, fair-play, gentlemanliness &c. are signs of timidity in this communication system.  Off course, one can act soft if one is powerful. People would cringe before power.


No one would willingly concede an inch to a lower-placed person. For, if he is allowed any leeway, he would take a mile, when an inch is offered.


People are honest and trustworthy, and keep their words of honour and commitment to those whom they revere in words. However, the moment it is felt that the presumed Aap is actually a Thoo or a presumed Ingal is an Inhi, everything would go topsy-turvy.


For an Ingal to downgrade into an Inhi, all it takes is a bit of negative information on the person’s social profile.


‘His father is not a doctor, as we had imagined.  He is only the doctor’s assistant.’ 


Immediately the He will tumble down from UNN to USS. In southern languages of India, the plunge is much more painful. Right from a Saar to Nee or from an Ingal to an Inhi.

There is also terror in a communication system in which certain entities inside the system do not fall in line with the general flow of verbal codes.


In cases where the hierarchy is perfectly established in immutable forms as in the Indian army, communication would go perfectly smooth and without error. However, in most other communication routes there are mighty chances for unidirectional valves to appear in the communication routes. That is, the communication would go smooth in one direction. However, in the other direction, the passage gets blocked selectively.


There is another issue with regard to South Asian feudal languages. It is the presence of different kinds of verbal hierarchies, most of which are mutually unconnected. For instance, there is the verbal hierarchy connected to position in a work area or profession. That is, the ordinary worker versus the supervisor, for instance.


At the same time, there is also another verbal hierarchy connected to age.


If both these hierarchies are in tune with each other, everything can be smooth. That is, if the supervisor has an age much higher than his subordinates, both the hierarchies would run on the same pathway in the same direction. However, if the age seniority is not in tune with the positional superiority, two mutually opposite hierarchies would be present in the work area.


This hierarchy is not the one visualised in English, for this hierarchy contains pejorative verbal codes. 


People revere those who can suppress them successfully. To those who are not able to suppress them, or do act as equal to them, they will compete in a very hostile or subtle manner. 


That kind of immutable suppression is possible only if it is supported by some kind of powerful social or familial or professional set up.  Inside these systems, everything looks quite nice and attractive. However, just outside each of these setups, other individuals might not fall in line with the verbal hierarchies.


So generally people tend to move around and communicate inside the systems in which they are at home.


Allowing the lower person a feel of equality is dangerous. For, a feeling of equality will lead to the sudden vanishing of ‘reverence’. The higher man can feel the codes of pejorative addressing and references trying to perch upon him, the moment he allows a feel of equality to a lower person.


The usage ‘lower person’ in feudal languages itself has no corresponding word in English.  The lower person is a Thoo, Inhi or Nee. Or a lower He – USS or Oan or Avan.

The moment a lower man feels that he is equal to a higher man, the lower man would define the other in the pejorative verbal codes. In everything that he can, he will have no qualms in competing with the other. Competing in a feudal language system is not the same as a competition experienced in an English system.


In feudal language systems, success is the total annihilation of an adversary in various ways verbally and thus socially. Every available means to subdue another entity perceived as a competitor would be used. There is no need to confine one’s action to honest means. Competition is actually a war for domination in a social system, wherein only the dominating individuals have right to dignity &c.


The English East India Company officials were bereft of these information. In fact, they were naive, gullible and foolish. It is generally mentioned that the English Company was on an entrepreneurship mission. The bare truth is that the word ‘entrepreneurship’ as understood in feudal language nations is not what it means in English, if the powerful frill items present inside feudal language entrepreneurship are taken into account.


In feudal language systems, a worker becoming a business owner would bring in cataclysmic changes in the pejorative versus ennobling verbal codes in the immediate surroundings.   Actually feudal language entrepreneurship is spurred by this fabulous possibility in the offing.  


This is something that is not there in English. And a native-English man or woman has no information on what this means. Actually it is something that belongs to the realm of the nightmares to many others concerned.


No other professed do-gooder would do what the English Company did in South Asia. The local feudal language speaking do-gooders would throw scraps of help in the form of bits of food, dresses, bits of cash and toiletries to the downtrodden, and gather enduring tokens of gratitude, servitude, obsequiousness &c. and good opinion and good mention in the social hemisphere in return.  But the downtrodden will remain downtrodden. They will never rise themselves up and become a competitor to the do-gooder. For, these scraps of help will never raise them up from their social gutters.


The English Company in its utter lack of social prudence did things which can only be mentioned as totally foolhardy.  Even now in India, no sane person would offer English proficiency to a lower-positioned person. For, English can wipe out the communication hurdles and the unequal levels.


Everyman knows that allowing the lower man to rise up and be able look at him or her from a height of equality is one of the most stupid acts he or she should do. Equality is a very transient situation. The risen-up lower-person would crush the other person verbally.


The English Company went on doing idiotic things, for all of which current-day England is bearing the cost.


Maybe I can list out how pristine-England is paying for the stupidity of the colonial English.

Previous              Next

bottom of page