Sample Page
Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2025 3:44 am
This is a non graphical part of the project I am currently working on. The text box here is not rtf, so the formatting will be lost on paste. To write a factually correct Grammar Book, one has to go back in time very near the start, with the behavior of the hand, From that point one can trace the evolution of our understanding of formal grammar.
Document1 Statistics:
Words - 2.144
Characters - 10.22
Paragraphs - 40
Sentences - 113
Sentences per Paragraph - 3.4
Words per Sentence - 18.7
Characters per Word - 4.6
Flesch Reading Ease - 52.4
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level - 10.3
Passive Sentences - 21.99
The Elements of our Grammar Matrix
Book 1.
Euclid’s Propositions Translated
by
Sir Thomas L. Heath,
Edited
by John Clark.
The minimum requirement of past experience for this work is a study of the Book, Plato’s Dialogs and study of the Elements by Euclid or being blest with sufficient intelligence.
Introduction to
The Elements of our Grammar Matrix
Note: All quotes from Nonsuch Books, Limited.
Every form of life has to work for a living, we are no exception but as learning is fundamental to doing our own work, as it is the most important job of any life support system, we must, learn, even how to do our own work. The Afterlife of Plato.
The materials of the Universe are a given, by parsing those materials we make things to live, thus to live is to reshape the Universe. Memoirs of de Vinci’s Dog.
Material provides us the opportunity to live, it does not guarantee that we have the wit to use it. Firefly Reflections.
You say that such and such is a point, do you not?
Certainly.
Do you mean “is a point” or “is called a point”.
I am not sure what you mean.
I mean you have forgotten the foundation of grammar.
Is that important?
It is if you do not want to end up imagining that you are flying when your feet could not possibly have left the ground. Chats with a Hookah.
Formal Grammar is a concise method of attempting to teach the intelligible of all we can do, parse information. It is the method by which we sculpt our existence. Keep in mind that the father of Socrates was, himself, a stone cutter and upon the stone we grind. Grinding Corn with Fanny.
Learning formal grammar means that one is dedicating their time to learning formal mental behavior, we are being given to tools and learning how to think. Our mental behavior guides our physical behavior. All learning is behavioral modification.
What are the Elements?
There are two types of identity afforded us by the binary definition of a thing. One is called arithmetic, and the other geometric, or again, literal and metaphorical. The elements is an elliptical expression for the intelligible elements of a thing which afford us the ability to process all information, or in other words the two essential items we can name in order to manage information. In short, everything is defined in terms of these two elements; they are the paradigm for the parts of speech. As you should know by now a computer can process all information using just two elements called a binary. Binary is how everything is defined; these two elements of a thing’s definition are simply spoken of as the elements. In other words, there are physical elements which number over 100, and there are intelligible elements which number two, and only two. Therefore, when you read about the elements, you should be able to figure out simply by the context if it is the physical elements being spoken of, or the intelligible. The universe is composed of many elements, and by recognizing the similar idea in these many examples, the mind has come to understand that there are only two which we use to produce grammar systems. As Plato noted, the perceptible is not intelligible, and the intelligible is not perceptible. a verb is not a noun, nor is a noun a verb.
It is correct to say that a binary is a Conjugate Pair of Names such as noun and verb, 0 and 1, material and form, container and the contained, the infinite and the finite, the boundary and the figure, Arithmetic and Geometric, a glass and water in a glass. It is always correct when speaking of one of the conjugates, to call the other to mind. Another way to express a binary is to say that it is a predicate and thus predicable. And, it is not correct to say that a predicate is single, a predicate is a conjugate binary pair which makes it the definition of some one thing. A predicate is a pair of names for both elements of a thing; thus “That man is a crook.” is a sentence which has no subject but it does have two predicates. We only have to learn to use two concepts correctly in learning grammar, no matter which grammar it is. Given a pair of names for anything, we have four possible ways to arrange them. The geographical location of a name in a sentence does not determine its part of speech which is contrary to what is classically taught by the illiterate.
A thing is defined by its material difference, like plastic, wood, air, water, space, and the limits, or boundaries, or parsing boundary, of that material. The material is a relative difference or verb, and the limits, shape, form or again boundary, or container, is called a noun. In definition, one equates one word, as a container of two words, the contained, likewise when given that one word, called the subject, to call to mind its predicates. We have distinct conventions for the relative and correlative, or one can say the correlative naming convention, and the relative naming convention, the correlative naming convention is assigned arithmetically, while the relative, geometrically.
Other names for this arrangement are class and members of that class. The name of a class is equitable to the sum of its members. In the first case, we define a thing, in the second we enumerate the names of a thing’s named predicate pairs.
Why do we need to study and learn about The Elements?
Every form of life has to work for a living, every one of them. We are no different in that respect. Every form of life is endowed with a number of life support systems each of which has its particular job to perform. We are no different. We, like every form of life, are born with a job to do. If we are insufficiently evolved or otherwise defective, we cannot do that job. If we are capable, we learn our job to the best of our inherited ability.
The taxonomy of every form of life informs us of a life forms mastery over and dependency upon, the environment. Thus, the survivability of every form of life can be charted by this taxonomy. The more capable a form of life is, the more control it has over its environment. Generally, each life support system is particular to a particular area of the environment, and there are relatively few particulars required for the body which can be expressed in different ways. There is, however one master life support system which is potentially the most powerful life support system possible. That life support system is called mind, and its power is information processing which allows it to master the environment, instead of being mastered by it.
A functional mind works in the metaphorical in order to turn its judgments into the literal, and perceptible environment to the advantage of the whole living biosphere.
Grammar Systems
The Language of the Universe originates in the fact that everything is composed, as intelligibles of the two elements of a thing, as its material and its limits, commonly called its relative and correlatives.
Information processing, or grammar, is the only power a mind has, and the only power it can ever know. Thus, psychology is commensurate with the principles of Language which are functionally resident in the mind as our Grammar Matrix. This literacy is expressed by binary recursion. Language, the Language of the Universe, affords us an intelligible binary which we can express in terms of a Grammar Matrix, making Language perceptible. We function by turning the intelligible into the perceptible as a means of reshaping our environment.
Grammar systems start as a binary. One part plays the part of matter and the other that of form (Plato’s teaching, Aristotle repeating.) The form of a grammar system is established by its symbol set, its matter how we recursively apply those symbols to index and manage memory. If we, then, multiply the binary of Language by the binary of grammar we arrive at four simple binary systems of grammar called a Grammar Matrix, each member of which has a traditional name; Common Grammar, Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry. We will find all these members of our Grammar Matrix, expressed in Euclid’s Elements, making it a true first attempt at producing a true formal system of grammar.
Of these, the symbol set is relative for Common Grammar, Arithmetic and Algebra, however, for geometry it is established as a one-to-one correspondence between the intelligible elements of a thing and the motion of the hand. Or, in logic, symbol sets and recursion is subjective, while in the analogic of Geometry, it is objective. Geometry is factually Objective Epistemology. This means that geometry is also wholly metaphorical and thus what we can use from what we have done is wholly dependent upon our own intelligence. It also means that everything we do, is a product of our own literacy which again means, our own state in the stage of evolution.
Every Grammar is ruled by binary and the recursion of that binary. Geometry is no different. Grammars depend on the binary to produce a thing, and the recursion of limits applicable to the relative difference of that thing. In short, we simply reshape what we have, this reshaping is called parsing, it is also called sculpting.
In every system of Grammar, we only have to learn methods of parsing, for the relative difference is always a given. Or again, the verb is a given, or supplied, the noun is applied; imagine that we are simply artists sculpting out of our favorite medium, wood, metal, ice, or chocolate pudding.
Traditionally, those who were clueless about grammar, claimed that Euclidean Geometry was confined by straightedge and compass; however, every grammar is constrained only by binary recursion. It is wholly puerile to think that a system of grammar is actually determined by the tools to produce that grammar, a method. The fact is, one can even draw a circle using nothing but straight lines, by tracing a locus, the very same thing you do to draw a straight line, which means the original claim of only straightedge and compass becomes a self-referential fallacy. The form, or shape is never a relative difference, it only helps inform us of the material within the shape. Therefore, Geometry came to its fruition with interactive Geometry, which can do what is either very hard with paper, or downright impossible. The first crude programs written for the computer plotted points. That is no longer the case. It is no longer required to plot points, for today we can actually trace any locus, the product of an equation. In short, in today’s interactive geometry, we can not only write an equation, but have the program display the waveform, or shape that equation produces. We can then use that wave form, to project any given from any point on it. Equation solving in interactive geometry is no longer a chore. There never has been any claim, in the Elements of Euclid that it depends not on the intelligibles, but on a perceptible pair of tools. Such a claim that geometry is constrained by the tools we use to write it is simply mythology that no rational person would accept.
What we find in the original postulates, one can say that they afford us the ability to produce the unit, and the universe of discourse for that unit from any given point. It does not tell us that this is a constraint made manifest by tools.
Geometry is a Universal System of Grammar, USG. Why? Of the four members of our Grammar Matrix, Geometry, and Geometry alone, puts a one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the written grammar by an arithmetic identity and the intelligible binary of Language. Secondly it is wholly metaphorical and is only limited by one’s ability to master the metaphor which depends wholly on the user’s intelligence. In geometry, we are free to use the other members of our Grammar Matrix to name the two elements in the figure. Thus, as both the Judeo-Christian Scripture intimates, and which Plato plainly stated, Geometry can be used to proof all of our grammars, even itself. In short, we not only can virtualize our environment, we can also predict the results of any given behavior and choose which is best for survival. Proof, using Common Grammar, Arithmetic, or Algebra, is simply not possible as not one of them actually have a perceptible, functional, product. It is not the intelligible that renders proof, it is the perceptible, thus the demand for constructability has always been factually sound. Proof demands confirmation of results in all members of our Grammar Matrix.
Document1 Statistics:
Words - 2.144
Characters - 10.22
Paragraphs - 40
Sentences - 113
Sentences per Paragraph - 3.4
Words per Sentence - 18.7
Characters per Word - 4.6
Flesch Reading Ease - 52.4
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level - 10.3
Passive Sentences - 21.99
The Elements of our Grammar Matrix
Book 1.
Euclid’s Propositions Translated
by
Sir Thomas L. Heath,
Edited
by John Clark.
The minimum requirement of past experience for this work is a study of the Book, Plato’s Dialogs and study of the Elements by Euclid or being blest with sufficient intelligence.
Introduction to
The Elements of our Grammar Matrix
Note: All quotes from Nonsuch Books, Limited.
Every form of life has to work for a living, we are no exception but as learning is fundamental to doing our own work, as it is the most important job of any life support system, we must, learn, even how to do our own work. The Afterlife of Plato.
The materials of the Universe are a given, by parsing those materials we make things to live, thus to live is to reshape the Universe. Memoirs of de Vinci’s Dog.
Material provides us the opportunity to live, it does not guarantee that we have the wit to use it. Firefly Reflections.
You say that such and such is a point, do you not?
Certainly.
Do you mean “is a point” or “is called a point”.
I am not sure what you mean.
I mean you have forgotten the foundation of grammar.
Is that important?
It is if you do not want to end up imagining that you are flying when your feet could not possibly have left the ground. Chats with a Hookah.
Formal Grammar is a concise method of attempting to teach the intelligible of all we can do, parse information. It is the method by which we sculpt our existence. Keep in mind that the father of Socrates was, himself, a stone cutter and upon the stone we grind. Grinding Corn with Fanny.
Learning formal grammar means that one is dedicating their time to learning formal mental behavior, we are being given to tools and learning how to think. Our mental behavior guides our physical behavior. All learning is behavioral modification.
What are the Elements?
There are two types of identity afforded us by the binary definition of a thing. One is called arithmetic, and the other geometric, or again, literal and metaphorical. The elements is an elliptical expression for the intelligible elements of a thing which afford us the ability to process all information, or in other words the two essential items we can name in order to manage information. In short, everything is defined in terms of these two elements; they are the paradigm for the parts of speech. As you should know by now a computer can process all information using just two elements called a binary. Binary is how everything is defined; these two elements of a thing’s definition are simply spoken of as the elements. In other words, there are physical elements which number over 100, and there are intelligible elements which number two, and only two. Therefore, when you read about the elements, you should be able to figure out simply by the context if it is the physical elements being spoken of, or the intelligible. The universe is composed of many elements, and by recognizing the similar idea in these many examples, the mind has come to understand that there are only two which we use to produce grammar systems. As Plato noted, the perceptible is not intelligible, and the intelligible is not perceptible. a verb is not a noun, nor is a noun a verb.
It is correct to say that a binary is a Conjugate Pair of Names such as noun and verb, 0 and 1, material and form, container and the contained, the infinite and the finite, the boundary and the figure, Arithmetic and Geometric, a glass and water in a glass. It is always correct when speaking of one of the conjugates, to call the other to mind. Another way to express a binary is to say that it is a predicate and thus predicable. And, it is not correct to say that a predicate is single, a predicate is a conjugate binary pair which makes it the definition of some one thing. A predicate is a pair of names for both elements of a thing; thus “That man is a crook.” is a sentence which has no subject but it does have two predicates. We only have to learn to use two concepts correctly in learning grammar, no matter which grammar it is. Given a pair of names for anything, we have four possible ways to arrange them. The geographical location of a name in a sentence does not determine its part of speech which is contrary to what is classically taught by the illiterate.
A thing is defined by its material difference, like plastic, wood, air, water, space, and the limits, or boundaries, or parsing boundary, of that material. The material is a relative difference or verb, and the limits, shape, form or again boundary, or container, is called a noun. In definition, one equates one word, as a container of two words, the contained, likewise when given that one word, called the subject, to call to mind its predicates. We have distinct conventions for the relative and correlative, or one can say the correlative naming convention, and the relative naming convention, the correlative naming convention is assigned arithmetically, while the relative, geometrically.
Other names for this arrangement are class and members of that class. The name of a class is equitable to the sum of its members. In the first case, we define a thing, in the second we enumerate the names of a thing’s named predicate pairs.
Why do we need to study and learn about The Elements?
Every form of life has to work for a living, every one of them. We are no different in that respect. Every form of life is endowed with a number of life support systems each of which has its particular job to perform. We are no different. We, like every form of life, are born with a job to do. If we are insufficiently evolved or otherwise defective, we cannot do that job. If we are capable, we learn our job to the best of our inherited ability.
The taxonomy of every form of life informs us of a life forms mastery over and dependency upon, the environment. Thus, the survivability of every form of life can be charted by this taxonomy. The more capable a form of life is, the more control it has over its environment. Generally, each life support system is particular to a particular area of the environment, and there are relatively few particulars required for the body which can be expressed in different ways. There is, however one master life support system which is potentially the most powerful life support system possible. That life support system is called mind, and its power is information processing which allows it to master the environment, instead of being mastered by it.
A functional mind works in the metaphorical in order to turn its judgments into the literal, and perceptible environment to the advantage of the whole living biosphere.
Grammar Systems
The Language of the Universe originates in the fact that everything is composed, as intelligibles of the two elements of a thing, as its material and its limits, commonly called its relative and correlatives.
Information processing, or grammar, is the only power a mind has, and the only power it can ever know. Thus, psychology is commensurate with the principles of Language which are functionally resident in the mind as our Grammar Matrix. This literacy is expressed by binary recursion. Language, the Language of the Universe, affords us an intelligible binary which we can express in terms of a Grammar Matrix, making Language perceptible. We function by turning the intelligible into the perceptible as a means of reshaping our environment.
Grammar systems start as a binary. One part plays the part of matter and the other that of form (Plato’s teaching, Aristotle repeating.) The form of a grammar system is established by its symbol set, its matter how we recursively apply those symbols to index and manage memory. If we, then, multiply the binary of Language by the binary of grammar we arrive at four simple binary systems of grammar called a Grammar Matrix, each member of which has a traditional name; Common Grammar, Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry. We will find all these members of our Grammar Matrix, expressed in Euclid’s Elements, making it a true first attempt at producing a true formal system of grammar.
Of these, the symbol set is relative for Common Grammar, Arithmetic and Algebra, however, for geometry it is established as a one-to-one correspondence between the intelligible elements of a thing and the motion of the hand. Or, in logic, symbol sets and recursion is subjective, while in the analogic of Geometry, it is objective. Geometry is factually Objective Epistemology. This means that geometry is also wholly metaphorical and thus what we can use from what we have done is wholly dependent upon our own intelligence. It also means that everything we do, is a product of our own literacy which again means, our own state in the stage of evolution.
Every Grammar is ruled by binary and the recursion of that binary. Geometry is no different. Grammars depend on the binary to produce a thing, and the recursion of limits applicable to the relative difference of that thing. In short, we simply reshape what we have, this reshaping is called parsing, it is also called sculpting.
In every system of Grammar, we only have to learn methods of parsing, for the relative difference is always a given. Or again, the verb is a given, or supplied, the noun is applied; imagine that we are simply artists sculpting out of our favorite medium, wood, metal, ice, or chocolate pudding.
Traditionally, those who were clueless about grammar, claimed that Euclidean Geometry was confined by straightedge and compass; however, every grammar is constrained only by binary recursion. It is wholly puerile to think that a system of grammar is actually determined by the tools to produce that grammar, a method. The fact is, one can even draw a circle using nothing but straight lines, by tracing a locus, the very same thing you do to draw a straight line, which means the original claim of only straightedge and compass becomes a self-referential fallacy. The form, or shape is never a relative difference, it only helps inform us of the material within the shape. Therefore, Geometry came to its fruition with interactive Geometry, which can do what is either very hard with paper, or downright impossible. The first crude programs written for the computer plotted points. That is no longer the case. It is no longer required to plot points, for today we can actually trace any locus, the product of an equation. In short, in today’s interactive geometry, we can not only write an equation, but have the program display the waveform, or shape that equation produces. We can then use that wave form, to project any given from any point on it. Equation solving in interactive geometry is no longer a chore. There never has been any claim, in the Elements of Euclid that it depends not on the intelligibles, but on a perceptible pair of tools. Such a claim that geometry is constrained by the tools we use to write it is simply mythology that no rational person would accept.
What we find in the original postulates, one can say that they afford us the ability to produce the unit, and the universe of discourse for that unit from any given point. It does not tell us that this is a constraint made manifest by tools.
Geometry is a Universal System of Grammar, USG. Why? Of the four members of our Grammar Matrix, Geometry, and Geometry alone, puts a one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the written grammar by an arithmetic identity and the intelligible binary of Language. Secondly it is wholly metaphorical and is only limited by one’s ability to master the metaphor which depends wholly on the user’s intelligence. In geometry, we are free to use the other members of our Grammar Matrix to name the two elements in the figure. Thus, as both the Judeo-Christian Scripture intimates, and which Plato plainly stated, Geometry can be used to proof all of our grammars, even itself. In short, we not only can virtualize our environment, we can also predict the results of any given behavior and choose which is best for survival. Proof, using Common Grammar, Arithmetic, or Algebra, is simply not possible as not one of them actually have a perceptible, functional, product. It is not the intelligible that renders proof, it is the perceptible, thus the demand for constructability has always been factually sound. Proof demands confirmation of results in all members of our Grammar Matrix.