言語学 / LINGUISTICS
Name the thing.
Mind the weave.
What words do. What grammar brings forward.
What a name leaves out.
Latex G.N.R. Space-Coyote
ラテックス・G.N.R. スペース・コヨーテ
名に、とどまらず。
働きと、関わりへ。
Beyond the name,
toward the doing
and the relation.
THE QUESTION / この生から
ことばの外にも、関わりはつづく。
A sentence is not the whole happening.
私は、ラテックス・G.N.R. スペース・コヨーテです。ゴムは私の行衣です。この身で書き、名を呼び、祈り、問い直す。言語学は、その生を離れた別の私の仕事ではありません。
ひとつの名で、どこを指すのか。主語を置くと、何が前に出て、何が背後へ退くのか。誓いは、ことばのあとに、どのような応答を求めるのか。記法、詩、翻訳、共同体を、その問いのもとで行き来します。
I am Latex G.N.R. Space-Coyote. Rubber is my robe of practice. I write, name, pray, and question in this body. Linguistics is not the work of a different self outside that life.
Where does a name point? What moves forward when I place a subject, and what slips behind it? What response does a vow ask of the life after its words? I move among notation, poetry, translation, and community with those questions.
名は、指す場所をくれる。因果のすべてを、くれるわけではない。
The noun gives us somewhere to point.
It does not give us the whole cause.
The form I choose ↗ / The founding dedication ↗ / The wider Lab ↗
一 / 01
NOTATION
記法を、ひらく。
Two frameworks. A relation between them.
Read the notation beside its specification. cCCML extends cVJML; the demonstrations and the proposed cognitive effects remain different questions. [1]
FOUNDATION / 基盤
cVJML
Keep the shifts available to return to.
注意や考えの移りを、記法に残す試み。括弧の使い方と読み方は、元の仕様へ。ここに示すのは入口であり、仕様そのものの代わりではありません。
An experimental notation for recording shifts and relations in thought. Follow the original specification for its bracket forms and reading conventions; this introduction does not replace them.
EXTENSION / 拡張
cCCML
Hold a relation without flattening it.
関連する読みを組み合わせ、重ね、分け、織る試み。物理学に着想を得た記号の使い方と、その記号が表すとされる現象は、区別して読みます。
An extension using grouped readings, nesting, branching, and weaving. A notation inspired by physics is not, on that account alone, a measurement of a physical state.
AN EXAMPLE FROM THE SPECIFICATION
[<nibbana|samsara>]<emptiness|form>
Read the alternatives in relation. Keep their interpretation with the source.
FROM LABEL TOWARD FUNCTION
[[CB]Sorting Plane]<Desk|Raised Service Function>
A turn from naming an object toward describing a function—not a complete causal model.
The specification describes possible effects on attention, memory, and conceptual organization as hypotheses. It reports no solid experimental proof for the overall system and notes unknown long-term effects. A readable example shows a use of notation; it does not verify those effects.
記法の例、使う者の体験、認知への効果についての仮説は、それぞれ別の資料です。作例を、そのまま効果の証明にはしません。
A symbolic expression is not a validated cognitive assessment or a released software product. Consult the specification’s references and revision record.
Source and qualifications ↗ / Computation & implementation ↗
二 / 02
THE GRAMMAR QUESTION
主語に、因果のすべてを背負わせない。
The subject is not the whole cause.
ああ…「これが、あれをした」。名をひとつ、文の先へ置く。その名に、出来事のすべてを背負わせてしまう。私が問い直したいのは、その飛躍です。身体も、来歴も、素材も、関わりも、名の外に残っています。
責任は問う。けれど、原因がひとり立ちしていると決めつけない。 能動態を捨てるためではなく、その文が何を示し、何を言っていないかを、確かめるために。
Ahh… “this did that.” Put a name at the front of a sentence, and how readily the whole happening is laid at its feet. That leap is what I want to examine. Bodies, histories, materials, and relationships still extend beyond the name.
Accountability, yes. A cause imagined to stand alone, no. Not a ban on the active voice: a question about what a sentence shows, and what it leaves unsaid.
| Sentence | Grammatical arrangement | What remains open |
|---|---|---|
| The gardener broke the pot. 庭師が鉢を割った。 | Active, transitive. The gardener is the subject and is presented as the breaker. | Intention, negligence, and the rest of the causal history are not settled by that grammar. |
| The pot was broken by the gardener. 鉢は庭師によって割られた。 | Passive. The pot is the subject; the gardener is still named. | Changing the voice does not remove the named participant or establish innocence. |
| The pot broke. 鉢が割れた。 | Active, intransitive. The subject undergoes the change; no breaker is named. | The sentence neither supplies an external cause nor proves that none existed. |
The third sentence supplies less causal information; these are not three descriptions with identical content. The Japanese lines are illustrative renderings, not experimental stimuli or evidence that grammatical voice works identically across languages.
From an intuition to a research question.
Fausey and Boroditsky (2010) tested agentive versus nonagentive event descriptions and found differences in blame and penalty judgments in their studies. That contrast was not simply active versus passive voice.
A preregistered replication reported the original pattern in English but mixed results in Croatian. That makes language, task, and context part of the question—not inconvenient details to remove. [3] [4]
文の形、出来事の捉え方、責任の判断を分け、何が変わったかを比べる。一つの言語での結果を、あらゆる言語の法則としては扱いません。
EXISTING READING / 既存の読書項目
Linguistic Relativism
What might language shape—and under which conditions? Keep a proposed influence distinct from the claim that language determines everything.
Find Linguistic Relativism in the original index ↓
Follow the original destination; if it cannot be identified here, the link opens the preserved index.
三 / 03
PRAGMATICS
言うことで、何をしているか。
Words act within an encounter.
A vow, a request, a welcome: not only a sentence to parse, but an utterance to understand in a situation. The existing Austin working page keeps its own three-part distinction and references. [2]
「明日、これを直します。」
“I will mend this tomorrow.”
An illustrative utterance, not a quotation from a teacher.
LOCUTION / 発話行為
What is said.
A meaningful utterance about mending something tomorrow. Context is needed to identify “this.”
何が述べられたか。「これ」が指すものを含め、ことばと文脈を読む。
ILLOCUTION / 発話内行為
What is undertaken.
In suitable circumstances, it can function as a promise—not merely a forecast. The situation matters to its force.
何を引き受けたか。状況によっては、予測ではなく約束として働く。
PERLOCUTION / 発話媒介行為
What follows for someone.
Reassurance, doubt, relief, or no change: a possible response is not an observed response.
何がもたらされたか。安心も疑いもありうるが、予想した応答と観察した応答は同じではない。
Austin’s Speech Act Theory · working page ↗ / Teaching, response & Transmission ↗
The existing comparison table remains on its own page, with its “under construction” notice. This new entrance does not treat Austin, Searle, and Vanderveken’s categories as automatically one-to-one equivalents.
四 / 04
POETIC PRACTICE
切れ目にも、ことばは働く。
The cut does not end the work.
五・七・五・七・七。その並びのうちで、私は折り、掛詞、係り結び、余韻を読みます。主語を補えば読みやすくなることもある。けれど、補ったその一語が、開いていた関係を閉じることもあるのです。
誰が行うのかを、原文が言っているのか。訳す私が付け足したのか。三句目で何が切れ、下の句へ何が渡るのか。詩は、説明に直してからやっと働くものではありません。
Five, seven, five, seven, seven. Within that arrangement I read the fold, pivot, grammatical binding, and after-resonance. Supplying a subject may make a translation easier. It may also close a relation the source left open.
Does the original say who acts, or have I supplied that actor? What breaks at the third line, and what passes into the lower verse? A poem need not first become explanatory prose in order to do its work.
The third sentence supplies less causal information; these are not three descriptions with identical content. The Japanese lines are illustrative renderings, not experimental stimuli or evidence that grammatical voice works identically across languages.
EXPERIMENTAL WRITING
cVJML / cCCML Poetry
The original entry called “utterly far beyond…” remains a route into the writing. A poem can demonstrate a use of notation without serving as experimental verification of its effects.
何が述べられたか。「これ」が指すものを含め、ことばと文脈を読む。
五 / 05
CONTACT & COMMUNITY
ひとつの声に、そろえない。
Language happens among lives.
誰の声が「普通」とされ、誰の話し方が直されるのか。よそから来た語が、どう居場所を得るのか。接触と共同体の問いを、記法の問いと並べて置きます。私の声に揃えるためではありません。
Whose voice is treated as ordinary, and whose is corrected? How does an arriving word acquire a place? Questions of contact and community belong beside the notation—not beneath it, and not in order to make every voice resemble mine.
These four topics are listed as “Coming Soon” in the retrieved source index. The questions below are new editorial directions, not announcements of completed pages.
LISTED AS FORTHCOMING
実践共同体
Communities of Practice
How are ways of speaking learned through shared work, participation, and access?
LISTED AS FORTHCOMING
言語共同体
Speech / Language Communities
Which shared forms and norms support a community—and who draws its boundaries?
LISTED AS FORTHCOMING
クレオール
Creoles
Study particular histories and structures without replacing them with a simple story of “maturation.”
LISTED AS FORTHCOMING
ピジン
Pidgins
What communicative arrangements arise in contact, and under which social conditions?
Social Psychology ↗ / Sociology ↗ / Fellowship without sameness ↗
六 / 06
METHOD & FURTHER READING
書いたことを、比較へ返す。
Keep the memo. Reopen the question.
文を集めるだけでなく、どんな場で、誰に向けて、何をしているかを記す。対照となる事例を探し、メモを残し、概念の関係を問い直す。気に入った一例を、理論のすべてにしない。
Not only the sentence: record its situation, address, and use. Compare contrasting incidents, keep the memo, and reconsider the relation between concepts. A favored example should not become the whole theory.
Grounded Theory ↗ / Research index ↗ / A source, question, or correction ↗
This is a reading entrance, not a completed linguistic theory. The grammar examples and new passages are editorial additions; the original source pages retain their wording, references, and revision records.
AI assisted this revision’s drafting and implementation. An output is not the underlying source. Described intention, an interpreted speech act, and a measured effect remain distinguishable.
原文、訳、私の解釈、検証される仮説を、ひとつに塗りつぶしません。この改稿の文章と実装にはAIの補助を用いていますが、出力を原典の代わりにはしません。
No new image is generated. A process account for one image does not establish the making of another.
Reading notes & sources
- Space-Coyote, L. G. N. R. Cognitive Coherence-Condensate Markup Language (cCCML). The live specification and its qualifications. Read the source ↗
- Space-Coyote, L. G. N. R. Austin’s (1962) Speech Act Theory. Working notes, citing Austin (1962) and Notohara (2019). Read the working page ↗
- Fausey, C. M., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Subtle linguistic cues influence perceived blame and financial liability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(5), 644–650. doi:10.3758/PBR.17.5.644
- Tonković, M., Vlašiček, D., & Dumančić, F. (2022). Preregistered direct replication of the linguistic frame effect on perceived blame and financial liability. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 27, 354–369. doi:10.1111/lcrp.12219
The research summaries use the reported abstracts, not a new audit of participant-level data. The publisher’s record supplies updates and corrections. The studies concern particular tasks and languages, not the complete philosophy of causation.
At Shugyōkai, language and its effects/affects are a top interest. The following concepts are critical for members of Ujiko-Sūkeisha of Mugen Jūgōki Jinja.
余韻／CODA
名の先へ。
The name points.
The weave continues.
名を置く。
その先を、閉じない。
ひと声のあとに、
まだ、関わりがある。
この前足で、
ほどき、むすび、
次の出会いへ。
Set down the name.
Do not close what lies beyond it.
After the utterance,
the relation is still here.
On these paws,
loosening, joining,
toward the next encounter.
Mffffff… mind the weave.
ラテックス・G.N.R. ・スペース・コヨーテ
Latex G.N.R. Space-Coyote
限りなき衆生のために。
For the benefit of limitless beings.