Introduction

For the past three years I have been involved with formulating the theories advocated in this paper. My study began with the exciting essay put forth by the Hungarian constructivist Nicolas Schoeffer entitled Spatiodynamism, Luminodynamism, and Chronodynamism [1]. This, in turn, led me to earlier constructivist writings by I.K. Bonset and Vladimir Tatlin.

As I delved further into constructivist theory and its relation to language, I discovered that nowhere could I find a study concerning a primal approach to linguistic onto-genetics.

In 1977, I was surprized to uncover the works of one nearly-forgotten pioneer, Karl-Heinz Wortszene. Wortszene's theories concerning a projectivist approach to language history were never published in his lifetime and lay in manuscript form for nearly 40 years before my discovery. Yet his early constructivist study of human linguistics made in the early 1930s foreshadowed most modern research into linguistic onto-genetics.

I am deeply indebted to Mr. Michael Dean for his brilliant discovery of the art quotient [2], which led me to make the necessary connections between linguistic onto-genetics as advocated today and the primal constructivist approach as advocated in the work of Karl-Heinz Wortszene.

I. Wortszene's Projectivist Approach to Language History

Function and Symbol. In his lengthy work entitled Beyond the Wordstruct, Wortszene describes the symbol as "an abstraction of mind over matter", and goes on to advocate that the symbolic plane of language interferes with the construction of language; and that the function of language is based upon a physical appreciation of the word's structure, and of those larger structures relating to the word such as speech and language.

Wortszene's thought here corresponds directly to I.K. Bonset's thinking in his essay Toward a Constructivist Poetry [3]. At the end of this essay, Bonset states "The constructivist poet creates a new language for himself out of the alphabet: the speech of long distances, of depth and height, and by means of this creative language he conquers space-time-motion."

We can take this thought further by quoting Michael Dean from his study An Approach to Linguistic Onto-Genetics [4], where in Section VI entitled "Language and Emotional Problems" he postulates "Language, in an undistrubed state, should be Energy made Audible (or Visible)."

In Wortszene's work, Energy (visible language) can not exist outside of an internal or external relationship of its structure. In fact, Wortszene postulates that the very word itself has an internal structural dynamic that insistently refers only to itself.

But before Wortszene could make this claim, he had resolve the internal structural dynamic of the letter; for is it not true that the lettrist-structure informs the word-structure? He began with his Mirror Image Test of Letter-Structures:

What Wortszene discovered here is important because it relates to the onto-genetics of language: the mirror-uppercase and some mirror-lowercase letters are the only type within the alphabet that can reproduce their own kind. Wortszene's conclusive equations verify this beyond debate:

Some questions are now in order and, in fact, must be asked: What function do the non-serif mirror letters serve in the onto-genetics of language? How have the unbalanced non-mirror types influenced language history, and the growth thereof? I hope to give the answers to these questions through the following sections of this study.

The Chronodynamic Word. Wortszene's concern for the rigorously balanced structure of alphabetical letters was the groundwork upon which he was later to build his theories of projectivist word structure. His theories dealt with the manner in which word structure (as well as letter structure) was responsible for the propagation of language and literature. Wortszene was aware that structure in words somehow led to the proliferation of a variety of literatures; that genesis and evolution in language somehow relied upon the dynamic space-time structure of letters and words.

These concerns found later expression through the works of Nicolas Schoeffer. In his essay from 1960 entitled Spatiodynamism, Luminodynamism, and Chronodynamism [5], he states "It is clear that any process which tends towards a temporal liberation, that is to say an infinitesimal multiplication of its virtual possibilities, necessitates first of all a rigorous structure."

Wortszene saw clearly that language was a "temporal liberation" built upon the "rigorous structure" of words and letters. For Wortszene, since language acted across time, then too the word or letter must function according to some temporal operation. This led him to believe that within the word itself, it was the letter that was the active structural principle while the word provided a temporal context within which letters could propagate themselves. Hence, the word acting as temporal context for the letter becomes chronodynamic.

With this fluidity of time provided by the medium of the word, Wortszene then embarked upon the question of space within language. The first obvious realization was that the letter occupied a certain space in time; and since this time (word) was fluid, letters had the power to change positions not only within one word but also across words. Letters flows from one word to the next. In fact, Wortszene saw clearly that the same letters would appear over and over again as the temporal continuum of speech (or spoken language) manifested itself through words. Here we have one of Wortszene's most important discoveries: spatiodynamic speech; that is, the active principle of letters travelling across words, and in doing so effecting the temporal process of speech and language. This discovery was to lead him to his most important theory: that of projective wordstruct.

II. Space-Time Dynamics in Wortszene's Wordstruct

The Project of Wordstruct. In the Introduction to his study An Approach to Linguistic Onto-Genetics [6], Mr. Dean states "Art is a functional definition of Creativity." In order to understand this statement in terms of language, Wortszene had to explore the construction of the word. Based on the discoveries of spatiodynamic speech and his mirror image test, Wortszene stated "Letters are the source of creativity in language. They act spatiodynamically within the chronodynamic context of the word. Without the act, there can be no context; and without the context, there can be no activity. Therefore the letter and the word are simultaneously interdependent." This became Wortszene's First Law of Wordstruct which he expressed formulaically thus:

Hence, language is the product of a complex reproductive system inherent to letters. But this realization was not enough, Wortszene proceeding to explore the nature of this reproductive system. He turned once again to his Mirror Image Test. Close scrutiny revealed more about spatiodynamic activity among letters.

Schoeffer has said "The essential aim of spatiodynamism is the consecutive and dynamic integration of space." [7] Wortszene saw that certain letters such as A, H or M were able to integrate space more perfectly than others, due to their symmetrical structures; while letters such as F, J or L did not integrate space as well, due to their imbalanced structure. Wortszene concluded that the mirror-uppercase letters were the true progenitors of language, while the non-mirror types were responsible for the variety of form in language. Wortszene labelled the mirror types certainties and the non-mirror types uncertainties. Schoeffer picked up on Wortszene's conclusion when he says "In the permanent accomplishment of the chronodynamic work, change, through the medium of time, plays the role of a catalyzing agent. By this process a certainty rigorously structured at the outset gives rise to uncertainties to which it transmits its proportional qualities. The final result is determined by the success of the initial spatial and temporal structuration." [8]

Of course, for Wortszene this meant that language as an art ("permanent accomplishment") was the spatiodynamic play between the mirror types in order to reproduce themselves, a play which would inevitably give rise to mutations, the non-mirror types.

It was here that Wortszene formulated his Second Law of Wordstruct: "Letters that reproduce themselves in a mirror without any visual change of position are the procreators of Language"; and his Third Law of Wordstruct where he states "Letters which are imbalanced structurally are the permanent accomplishment of Language, and the roots of all linguistic culture." A crude diagram by Wortszene illustrates his thought:

Wortszene goes on to give us his formulae for the progenitation of words and language:

This then is the proof that the non-mirror types (N) owe their existence within language to the chronodynamic force of the mirror types (Aa); and that this force underlies the "functional definition of Creativity" in language.

Here is Wortszene's diagram illustrating the chronospatiodynamic movement of letters to form language creatively (the word-flow is taken from Gertrude Stein's Mother of Us All, and reads "We cannot retrace our steps going forward..."):

Here then is the essence of Wortszene's theory of word structures (or Wordstruct): that mirror type letters have the power of perpetual motion through time and space creating language. Wortszene calls these shifters; and the non-mirror type letters are mutations of these shifters which have no chronodynamic self-generating power of their own, but act as anchors to give language its structure as a "permanent accomplishment"; he calls these plants. In the following section we shall study how these shifters and plants have effected both primitive and modern cultures.

Wordstruct as Unconscious Cultural Projection. If we refer to Wortszene's Mirror Image Test (given above), we'll see that, with the exception of uppercase E, the shifters include all the necessary vowels for the maintenance of a language, and hence a culture.

Through a study of linguistic anthropology it can be readily seen that primitive or tribal societies were based on languages that had a predominance of vowels in their words; that is, their languages were built more upon shifters than upon plants. This has had significant historical repercussions in the unconscious cultural projection of primitive societies. There have been societies that have become extinct because they have not given their words the necessary number of plants in order to retain their language structures as a "permanent accomplishment". Then there are other societies whose growth have been retarded because of a surplus of shifters in their words.

An interesting observation is that these primitive or tribal societies have been, for the most part, nomadic; that is, wanderers (or perhaps shifters), and that this cultural trait is paralleled in the structure of their languages.

In modern civilizations that have flourished, it can be seen readily that, for the most part, there is a predominance of plants in their language structures. Take for example the name Wortszene (comprizing two Germanic words: "wort" meaning word, and "szene" meaning scene or perspective) having only three shifters W, o and t; the remaining six letters being all plants including the vowel e. Hence the word Wortszene is structured as a permanent accomplishment in language according to the Third Law of Wordstruct.

In the history of Germany's unconscious cultural projection there was a major shift in language structure that effected its future. When Germany was still an area of nomadic tribes there was a predominance of shifters in the language, as can be seen in the word Tristan (4 shifters to 3 plants); whereas Germany's rise to feudalism and nationalism is marked by a predominance of plants, as can be seen in the word Bismark (4 plants to 3 shifters). A study is still needed to explore why a culture like Germany would change so rapidly from a shifting culture to a planted culture.

III. The Relation of Wordstruct to Linguistic Onto-Genetics

Cultural Projection and Linguistic Onto-Genetics. In the preceding section we saw how Wordstruct is directly related to a society's unconscious cultural projection of itself through its language. The question now is: How do Wortszene's findings relate to modern linguistic onto-genetic research being done presently?

We need to turn again to Mr. Dean's study An Approach to Linguistic Onto-Genetics in order to relate Wortszene's thought to present concerns. The point of relationship is to be found in Lang's Second Law of Languages which is stated in Dean's study: "If the sum of words in a phrase is divisible by a vowel, its meaning is bilaterally symmetrical across Cultural Biases." [9]

We take Mr. Lang's use of the word "vowel" to mean shifter, and his use of the word "meaning" to mean unconscious cultural projection. In this regard, Mr. Lang is stating that a society's inclination or prejudice is based upon the projection of cultural attitudes through the medium of the shifters in its language. If a society then has a predominance of shifters in its language, its cultural attitudes and also knowledge of itself will remain unconscious (shifting and not graspable); but a society that has a predominance of plants in its language will bring its unconscious cultural projection to the level of statement (a literature as a permanent accomplishment in language).

Postscript: a Future Course for the Study of Linguistic Onto-Genetics. This essay has focussed on the method of reproduction particular to language (i.e., the chronodynamic word and spatiodynamic speech). It has shown the effect that letter structure has had upon human culture. The study of letter structure in words can be termed microsyntactics. A study remains to be made upon the effect of microsyntax on the larger structures of syntax (word-in-sentence structure) and macrosyntax (literature-as-unit structure) [10] as it applies to conscious and unconscious cultural projection.

If Mr. Dean is right in asserting that "the state of Language describes the state of our relationships" (i.e., emotional, cultural, creative), then the future study towards a constructivist theory of linguistic onto-genetics will necessitate the construction of a future language, a language that will perfectly describe our relationships (to the world, to each other, to literature) without hindering the flow of chronospatiodynamism, or in Nicolas Schoeffer's words, a language "in an open form, with a solid hold on time." [11]

Footnotes:

[1] Schoeffer, Nicolas. "Spatiodynamism, Luminodynamism, and Chronodynamism" from Nicolas Schoeffer (Neuchatel: Editions du Griffon, 1963).

[2] Dean, Michael. "An Approach to Linguistic Onto-Genetics" from Canadian "Pataphysics (Toronto: Underwhich Editions, 1980).

[3] Bonset, I.K. "Toward a Constructivist Poetry" from Mecano, no. 4-5 (Vienna: Lieden, 1923). The translation is by Ita and Otto Van Os.

[4] op. cit.: Dean, Michael.

[5] op.cit.: Schoeffer, Nicolas.

[6] op. cit.: Dean, Michael.

[7] op. cit.: Schoeffer, Nicolas.

[8] ibid: Schoeffer, Nicolas.

[9] op. cit.: Dean, Michael.

[10] Whether or not a "permanent accomplishment" in language is desirable is not the concern of this study; but if the reader is interested in relating this study to questions of literature and narrative, I refer the reader to the TRG "Research Report Two: Narrative" in Open Letter, Third Series, Number 9. The relationship between Wortszene, Lang and macrosyntax then will become clear.

[11] op. cit.: Schoeffer, Nicolas

This report was orginally published in Canadian "Pataphysics (Underwhich Editions, Toronto, Canada, 1981), and in Open Letter (Fourth Series, Nos. 6&7, Toronto, Canada, 1980-81).