On The Reduction Of ‘Outer - Ring’ Language Barriers.

(2019/1/24 to -

– Abstract - (See, below.) on page 24.

– Key Words- 'outer-ring', language barriers, siege, Vaubain, permitted zones of language acquisition, excluded zones of language acquisition, reduction of language barriers, selected languages, Tibetan, Japanese, Vietnamese, Russian, Burmese, Farsi, Kazakh, Portuguese, Indonesian, early-stage language acquisition.

– Rationale for this article - to identify the existence and scope of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers; to suggest ways of reducing them, in order to make entry-level language acquisition easier.

– Research Methodology- Monolog. Field observation. Anecdotes. Analysis, of the problems. Presentation, of solutions.

– Review of previous literature - No review was attempted. Assume there is none extant (or readily available). Were one to be conducted, it would ask, "What are the initial barriers to

early-stage language acquisition, that new learners encounter? What is the nature of such barriers? What basic strategies, are available to deal with these barriers?" Referenced and traceable source information is most welcome.

– Field sources- (See, below.)

– Acknowledgements- (See, below.)

Introduction - Travel, expat living, language for daily living, and language for creative expression have been a central part of my life: I could not exist without them. In this article, I wish to focus on the aspect of "language for daily living". Although I am not a good student of language, I have encountered many languages over the years, and flirted with some. When it comes to languages, I have chosen to do nothing, and "observe the lay of the land", to troll the bookstores and safely archive key texts, before plunging into intentional language study. There are reasons for all this.

The most important thing I have learned about (foreign) language study is that language is not a “bridge of communication" connecting the nations, but a wall and ditch, expressly built by insiders to keep out outsiders. Throughout my expat life, in all contexts, I have experienced exclusion, in all forms, with “access-into” or “denial- from” the language a central, constant motif. Here are my first observations: many will be developed further in this article. One is at once shut out, by not knowing the language. Each of the world's languages is structured in such a way to keep outsiders (both external, and internal) on the outside. Various groups of people work together, often tacitly, to exclude outsiders. Most failed attempts to learn a language happen at the early stages of study. Exclusion from a language (and the culture) happens by design, or by social agreement. This system is simple, elegant, and utterly effective; it is like the ‘outer ring’ of _defenses in a fortress. The aim of a language-learner is not to enter the inner citadel of a fortress, but to have limited access in the outer and middle zones. Functional survival, and not fluency, is assumed as the end-goal. Therefore, reduction of the 'outer-ring' (of defenses) in a given language is enough to assure early-stage language acquisition. The "three blocker's" (the locals, the local ‘elite, the outside intentionals) all want to prevent this. The 'outer-ring' is meant to keep out the low- level intruders. Outsiders are politely directed to the "7-11" cultural ghettos, or shut out altogether. So, the aim of this article is to provide the new arrival (to a culture) with a linguistic beach-head. (Thesis statement: "The purpose of this article is to analyze the structure of, and social motivation for the ‘outer-ring’ language barriers; to discuss strategies for reducing the ‘outer-ring’, so as to make entry- level language acquisition easier for more learners… and not just the favored, selected few”.)

– Body (Discussion).

– Overview of the Discussion section. This section will be divided into two main parts- "Problems" and "Solutions". The structure of the ‘'outer-ring'' defenses will be analyzed; also, the motivations of the “three blockers” will be discussed. Then, ways of reducing the ‘outer- ring' defenses, and dealing with the “three blockers" will be presented, with emphasis on the ‘outer-ring’.

– Body (Discussion): Problems.

Theoretical overview of the problems. This discussion is not just about a bunch of ‘elitists shutting out the newly arrived misfit – it goes far deeper than that! Since ‘outer-ring’ is an abstract concept, this section aims to introduce and explain some theoretical ideas. Language acquisition is not really about developing new relationships and building confidence, as some would believe; it is an act of siege warfare, and of siege engineering. Throughout history, the art of siege has been studied, but no one has done it better than Vauban. His "star-forts” came at just the right time, as newly reformed and re-educated Europe went out to colonize most of the rest of the world. Therefore, any new student of a foreign language should give some thought to the ideas of Vauban, and similar writers.

Most fortresses have inner, middle, and outer defenses. The citadel is the inner, most important part, and is strongly protected. For the language learner, this is the nirvana of fluency, of knowing all the social rules and pitfalls, and having all the right friends in all the right places; one has arrived, so to speak. The ‘outer-ring’ of defenses covers a bigger area, and is meant to thin out the enemy during the earlier engagements. For the language learner, the initial problems with the language are very different from later problems – they are elegantly simple, yet ruthlessly effective in shutting down so many new arrivals.

Why is it that some of the worst language learning problems happen at the beginning? That is because "Festung Linguistica" is specifically made and designed by society to be this way. Society has determined that the "boor, with big boots, who spreads mud on the carpets", is more of a nuisance than "one serpent, in the inmost bosom”. So, the ‘outer ring’ is designed for the clod-hopping boor, the unaware, the novice, the uninitiated: that means most of us, for “serpent-grade learners” are rare, and hidden.

Different societies have devised different types of ‘outer-ring’ defenses, to weed out the new learners. Some specific examples, from a few languages, will be looked at in more detail, later in the article. Like pollen grains, they come in many shapes and sizes… but how did they appear in the language? To be blunt, I think the social - ‘elitists of each culture tacitly developed, evolved, and maintained them; in this, they are aided and abetted by the “collective will” of a given society. It is in the nature of social organisms, from bee- colonies to social groups to entire societies, to exclude outsiders. What appears to be common across all societies, is this: the mechanism is elegantly simple, and very effective in operation.

The purpose of language (and of a fortress) is to allow a common-interest, common-identity group a certain safe space to exist and do life's business. If one has to vet every social interaction, as in the jungle, then life is tiring; inside the fortress, one hopes one can relax. Societies require a certain level of screening and conformity to operate smoothly; the problem of non- conformists and misfits is not that they are wrong or destructive per se, but that they disrupt the machine. So (reason the ‘elitists, the doyens of language), if you exclude outsiders, as well as internal misfits, you will have a much better “machine” for the social collective to live in. All this is perfectly reasonable, and the continued existence of centuries - old and resilient societies is proof of this (China, Japan.)

If one studies security systems used in modern times, one will see that ‘outer-ring’ defenses play an important role. Here are some examples: the sensor-zones and artillery "free-fire” zones in Vietnam; the sensor zones around the diamond mines of Namibia; minefields around a complex; a winding road passing through a "cheveux-de- frise" of boulders over an entire cold-desert valley in Ladakh; bull sea-lions cruising the harbor of San Diego; Reaper -drones circling high above Afghanistan; the slalom of concrete bollards leading up to the entry gate of the "Green Zone". What these very material systems have achieved in military terms, the elitists have bequeathed to their respective societies in the form of elegantly simple linguistic devices - which do not rust, or require maintenance, or food, or salaries. They are truly one of the marvels of human achievement.

The next two sections will analyze ‘outer-ring’ language barriers in terms of concept, and in terms of people (both "blockers", and "blocked").

Concept-oriented barriers. The purpose of an ‘outer-ring’ language barrier is to (a) alert the locals that an outsider has appeared among them, and (b) to block the outsider's way forward. The most famous example is the “Shibboleth” story in the book of Judges. Here, the outsiders were caught out, and died. (All because of /sh/vs./s/!)

A number of concepts come out of this story. Not just a few people were caught out: everyone on the losing side was caught out. The winning side set the terms of the exercise.

When the exercise was over, there were no more people who could mis-pronounce (either outsiders, or internal misfits). Remember: war has always been used by the social- elitists to weed out and to destroy those deemed "not our kind"; then those same `elitists erect war-monuments to drive the point home. Someone had the idea to play the "/sh/vs./s/ game", and the suggestion was agreed to: consensus within a social group is very strong. The results of the exercise were very severe: it would have been a long time before mis-pronouncing strangers appeared in those parts, and besides, they were being watched for, and waited for. The "collective resistance" of the winning side would have been heightened, and maintained, every time the notorious phoneme was uttered, around the fire.

So it is today. Around every fire, there is always a serving-girl (always the lowest!) who says, "Surely thou art a Gallilean, for thy speech berayeth thee!" Who needs the rooster?

It was the Jesuits who said, "By the small things shall you know them". How true. The ‘outer-ring’ language barriers are not big things, as in military fortifications, but small things. They can be phonemes, or grammar usage, or handwriting, or something else. It is known that they alert the locals to the presence of an outsider among them. However, they also stop the outsider from going one step forward: if you cannot master this one simple skill, you cannot go forward – or even, around. It is at this point that the humble 'outer-ring' language barrier becomes truly diabolical. The reason why I think it was the social- `elitists who designed this state of affairs is this: this “road-block” always comes in the early stages of language acquisition. It is the quiet way of saying “stay out”, to as many as possible. For the “serpents”, the “tunnel - rats” are reserved far more terrible, more sophisticated trigger - traps. No one knows how they work, save those who are caught in them, and dying, or else the designers.

One of my French teachers said, if you cannot go through the problem, then go around it. Usually, this is true, especially with grammar; however, ‘outer-ring’ language barriers are a different story. They are like tamper-proof, anti-personnel mines.

How can something so small be so complex, and yet so simple? The "insiders" all understand it (save a few misfits). I think the answer is this: the ‘outer ring' language barrier is a product, a distillation of socialization, which of course takes years of native living to acquire. Every society has its ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, but those societies that have intense, socially- enmeshed cultures have truly formidable ‘outer- ring’ language barriers (eg, Japan, Korea, China, parts of Sicily, the Templars, certain "hill-kingdoms", Princeton, intense religious sects, etc.) Therefore, there are two elements: the "insiders" can use it easily, because it is inextricably linked to their socialization process (which of course, cannot be stolen); the "outsiders" cannot reverse-engineer it, counterfeit it, learn it, or use it as well as the locals, because they were not brought up in it. This is why languages in which "mere language" is altered and modified by "hyper- language" (ie, social and cultural influences upon base linguistic reality) and in turn, by the nefarious influence of the apex social- ‘elitists (especially religious ‘elitists, as in Tibet)... are so much harder to enter into.

The ultimate perversion of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers is this: they represent a dynamic and symbiotic relationship between the novice outsider, the socialized insiders, and the absent yet still present designer- ‘elitists. It is, in a sense, an abstract, conceptual form of lichen (the fusion of fungus and algae), growing on some branch. It exists in every culture, in various manifestations. However, its purpose is the same. It is simple, and very effective. In some societies, its power is terrifying. Ever in "open" societies, it is useful as a social gatekeeper. Therefore, ‘outer-ring’ language barriers work well!

People-oriented barriers. What I have written up to now has been of a general, theoretical nature. Now, I will talk from direct experience.

Once again, behind the word lies the shadow. For every forward action of an entry-level language learner, there is an opposite push. Every microbe has its assigned anti-body. The ‘outer-ring’ language barriers are manned, so to speak, by three types of "blocker": these are the locals, the local ‘elite, and outside intentionals. I met all of these individuals during one year in Lhasa, where social dynamics are writ large and strong. Locals often say, "I don't know", and then report their language interaction to you with someone else. They are the low-level pawns, so to speak. Over them are their officers, the local élite, who know the guiding principles of their culture intuitively, and who make certain that they are carried out, by the locals under them, or by themselves directly. It is not in their interest to give the keys to their culture – that is, the language – to a stranger. So, although their bookshops are in full view of all, questions about their language are left unanswered. The third group are the outside intentionals. These are people from outside the language and the culture; they are usually `elitists from their own cultures, organized and sent in, to do a specific job; they are well-trained; they subscribe to a common belief system; above all, they are intentional, thoughtful and deliberate in all they do. Anyone who is not "one of them" – even a person from their country – is a total stranger.

So, there are three groups of people who come together, lichen - fashion, to oppose the entry-level language learner at the "barricades" (so to speak) of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, like anti-bodies rushing to meet bacteria in a fresh body wound: they are the locals, the local ‘elite, and the outside intentionals. Each has their own reason for trying to stop the reduction of the ‘outer-ring’. They work together, at the deliberate, the tacit, and the “in spite of” levels. (Even strangers and foreigners, if they be ‘elitists, can find a way to relate to each other.) They make their own tacit, socially fluid alliance to attain this end – the purity of "their" culture. (Yes! Outside intentionals are just as jealous of "their" culture, their own adopted fief, as are the locals.) Most insiders see language learners as a form of intruder; outside intentionals view them as turf-rivals. Therefore, outsiders are either directed to the "7-11" cultural ghetto, or shut out altogether.

For one year, in Lhasa, I interacted with these three groups of people, and learned much about life in the “outer-ring”. (That is discussed elsewhere).

Conflict and symbiosis play ambiguous, pervasive and confusing roles at the ‘outer- ring’ language barriers. However, one thing is constant. Large numbers of entry-level language learners are shut down, at an early stage. It seems as if those on the inside want to keep those who are “not our kind" outside, for reasons of prejudice or purity. The final person to shut out the entry-level language learner is the strongest – the despairing self.

There is another group of people who tacitly accept the existence of “outer-ring'' language barriers – the "remain back home in the home culture" people. In the past, many people wanted to “go out, and see the world"; now, we live in a world of "gated communities”. Now, it is in the nature of people to shut out and exclude outsiders. There is much evidence of this in contemporary society-of course, "gated communities", the ascendency of very intentional ignorance; control and surveillance, "social-credit" dossiers, inward-looking values. It seems the pendulum is swinging in the direction of the isolationists. The act of "going out " now seems to make one into an outsider, to be screened. In this social climate, “outer-ring” language barriers are a useful thing, for they keep cultures apart, and thus distinct from each other, with a clear and discernable line between them. We are on the road back to the Tudors, and the vagrancy laws, when those who left their village were flogged.

Why is the role of symbiosis, and complex and fluid relationships between "unlikely bed-fellows appearing again and again? Once more, we are faced with that old paradigm,

“we fight not against flesh and blood, but against…” It is a world of shifting alliances, of silent opposition, of setbacks from unexpected quarters, of the unseen. Such is the nature of people, acting corporately in the identity and defense of their own culture. I would rather deal with material, measureable and describable things. Next, I will point out specific examples of “outer-ring” language barriers, for some languages.

Examples of ''outer-ring'' language barriers, from selected languages. Up to now, I have not said much about which languages I have been studying, or about a concrete example of an “outer-ring” language barrier. Now it is time.

English – Before beating up on other people's dear languages, I will start with my own native language. (I have been an amateur writer for 43 years, and have taught ESL in P.R. China for 17 years.) English has a brutally effective “outer-ring” language barrier portfolio. The "ten vowels" (five "long", and five "short") are very hard for outsiders to pronounce. English is about 85% "phonetically regular", which is fine; it is the other 15% that causes trouble. Knowing how to distinguish nouns from adjectives is a real problem for many. Being a language of “letters, and phonemes," English is a constantly synthetic system. It draws from the cultural underpinning of imagination, problem-solving, and creativity– as well as of hypocrisy. This causes real trouble for other cultures, especially where the syllable (and not the letter or phoneme) is the base-unit of language. The printed text is very clearly set out, with no missing "meaning- gaps", or text ellipsis: this is very troublesome for people coming from "indirect" cultures, for whom ellipsis, missing letters are normal fare. There are many other problems that outsiders have with the English language, but I will only mention the above, for they are “outer-ring” language barriers. The main reason why outsiders have so much trouble with English is because they rejected letters.

French – This is my second language, which I love dearly. Here, the 'outer-ring' language barriers are pronunciation of certain sounds (most often, vowels), phonetic irregularity, and having the conversation "switched" to English (when the other person perceives I am not from France). I also have certain problems involving grammar rules.

Chinese – Of course, the writing! Also, the different logic structure, the absence of "word- breaks", and the over-loaded "run-on" sentences.

Russian – For me, the biggest problem is the absence of “stress-marks". I also want some way to know the division between the "base-word" and the inflected ending to the word, so I can easily and completely analyze the word. Alas!, for all of this is assumed by the Russians, who don't tell.

Farsi – Certain letters are omitted (but their real presence is certainly understood by the Persians). There is a "disconnect" between the written language, which is more formal and complete, and the daily spoken language, which is clipped, fluid, and often elliptical. I wish everyone "spoke out what is written down, and saved the informal language for the bars! I also get confused over so many s’s, t’s, and z’s. I wish there was a romanized script.

Kazakh – Since I am by nature an analytical person, I like this “agglutinated” language. However, I wish the suffixes could be clearly dissected away from their base words: they cannot. Also, the rules of “syn-harmony” (where certain letters are altered, to make the overall sentence “sound” better) cause me much trouble, and frustrate onward progress.

Portuguese – I have always enjoyed Lisbon; so, trying to learn some language has always seemed natural. However, the "disconnect" between what is written, and how it is actually pronounced (eg, the m, n, and nasal sounds) has been a problem. I feel the written text does not help me, but misleads me. Also, the Portuguese mindset, infused into the text, and transmitted through the text, is strange to me.

Burmese – This language will keep me happily engaged for the rest of my (aging) life. It is so much better than Sudoku! Besides, Burma is an endlessly fascinating place. Oh... how I wish there was a phonetic / romanized, parallel-text system, for beginning learners! Also I wish the text could be divided into "words" (our "words", not yours!), and the "word - clusters” (not a "word", and also not a "phrase") could have hyphens, or some unobtrusive sub-script, mark to mark off the interior divisions. Also, the locals are notorious for not giving away the little tips and secrets of learning their very unique language. Someone needs to develop a phonetic / romanized script, for the foreigners, and without involving the Burmese (because the Burmese do not want it).

Indonesian – This is a relatively simple language to learn, save for one key point. The verbs “morph” (change shape) under certain conditions. It is very noteworthy how this one thing can de-rail the language-learning process. The "translated novels" (eg, Jane Eyre, in Bahasa Indonesia) tend to be relaxed, where the final version “sort of” follows the original; give me sentence-by-sentence equality!

Japanese – I will always live at the "7-11" level, and I am happy for that. Here is what I wish for here. I wish there were “romaji” books, with the "romaji" text as the centre, and the Japanese script, syllable by syllable , floating above it (lining up exactly, above each “romaji” syllable). In Japanese text, I wish the “words” were separated ("words", not syllables!), and any "suffixes" were hyphened off. I wish text was double-spaced, so I could annotate freely. I wish that each word, and even each character, came with a super-script number, so that cross- referencing with a companion dictionary would be easy. And there is more..... Alas, this will not be!

Tibetan – If there is one language that has got me thinking about "cracking" the ‘outer- ring’ language barriers one meets in daily life, it is this one! (This will be covered in far greater detail, elsewhere.) In this language, the syllable-breaks are marked, but the word-breaks are not. Punctuation, such as commas, full- stops, question/exclamation/ quotation marks are not present. There is no pure translation, only culture-filtered "re-phrasing". Above all, there is no phonetic

system of transcribing each of the three major dialects (ie, spoken phoneme, into a written IPA symbol-text). A written, IPA symbol-based script, independent of the traditional (convoluted) script, needs to come into being, and to evolve accordingly to the needs and requirements of modern, secular discourse. When this happens, everything about this language will greatly change.

Vietnamese – Here, all the syllables are kept separated; what is a "word" is known tacitly. So, those "words" having two or three syllables need to be formed, using hyphens (eg, Viet nam→ Viet-nam). Then things will become much simpler. Next, there needs to be a parallel phonetic text, closely following the Vietnamese text (because the pronunciation does not really follow the script). Much here is "assumed"; more needs to be explicit.

Hindi – First, there need to be book stores (in the Barnes and Noble, or W.H. Smith sense of this word!). There needs to be more romanized texts, as well as "romanized, with parallel Hindi-script format" texts, for easier beginner-level study!

Hungarian – It would be nice if the "agglutinated" parts of a word were marked off with hyphens, or a discreet sub-script symbol. Then, there should be some parallel script texts (the original Hungarian, with phonetic script below).

To the reader, I should say, I do not speak all these languages! However, I have come into contact with them while traveling, and they have aroused my interest and curiosity. Hence, this article. I write these examples, as I am very interested in the problems of ‘outer-ring language barriers, and how to make entry-level language acquisition more available to more people

This is the end of the "Problems" section. In summary, 'outer-ring' language barriers cause many people to give up entry-level language study. It shouldn't be this way. Next, this article will examine ways to deal with ‘outer-ring’ language barriers.

– Body (Discussion): Solutions.

Theoretical overview of the solutions. From the preceding discussion, it would seem that entry- level language acquisition is a difficult process, on account of the ‘outer-ring’ language barriers put up by every society. In one of humanity's great mysteries, ‘outer-ring’ language barriers are an amalgam, a "lichen-like" combination of inert and simple linguistic devices, resisting the insider, and an outsider striving to enter. Trying to learn a new language is an act of siege. This is why I made reference to the analysis of Vauban at the beginning of this article. Although people do not shelter in “star - forts” any more, many of the age-old dynamics of

siege-warfare can be found in the “lichen” of early-stage language acquisition – and with them, the solutions to the problem. Remember: Vauban wrote two books. One was how to build an impregnable “star-fort”; the other was how to overthrow it. Only a child of the enlightenment could have done such a thing.

We are living less and less in a material, "bricks-and-mortar", tangible commodities based world. Much of what passes for "the human experience" is abstract, digital, barely sheetrock, intangible, social, "gated", exclusionary, conceptual, and traded in very "intangible" commodities. One has only to look at two concepts – "asymmetric", and "area-of-denial" – to see the coming new world order in full bloom. Yet, in spite of all this, the underlying ideas noticed by Vauban remain.

I think the main reason why societies around the world are switching from a tangible way of life to an intangible way of life, as surely as summer becomes winter, is because the world is running out of resources. This applies to the obvious material resources of water, mineral products and agricultural products, as well as to some intangible resources. This would help to explain the astute foresight of P.R. China in engaging with Africa, and in developing the "belt- and- road" infrastructure initiative. No one else seems to be doing this! Why is this happening?

More and more, we are living in a world where "denial of information", “denial of access” and denial of fellowship", are becoming very prevalent. Remember: the end goal of language acquisition is communication with and fellowship with "the other people" (ie, foreigners), and the end of that, is some form of trade. We are living in a time when not only handshakes and swapping simple notes or language - tips are denied; substantial acts of friendship or fellowship are denied; access to entire regions is denied. I saw all these dynamics in play in Lhasa – for Tibet, like Sagres and Peeneemunde, is the breeding and incubation zone of new global concepts and movements. Make no mistake– for these things will happen. It is said that lichen, like amphibians, is one of the early species to die off, when something bad is afoot in the environment. Maybe in time, the only place to acquire and use entry-level language will be the “7-11” language ghettos, and nowhere else.

Moreover, we are living in a time when the search for answers to life's questions is blocked by “asymmetric” reactions, and opaque non-answers. This applies to entry-level language acquisitions in particular, since the language student is always asking questions. There has always been “people -oriented” asistance at the ‘outer ring’ language barrier – but now the resistance is asymmetric.

In the past, the aim of the defenders was to stop people from climbing over the walls, and entering the city. The ‘outer-ring’ of defenses played their part. Now, whole eco-systems are being blighted, so as to turn larger areas into new parts of the ‘outer- ring’ defense system. Lest the reader wonder what this paragraph has to do with language acquisition at the early stage, I mention this. The quality and range of language study materials in my home country has gone down over the years. The willingness of people to discourse has gone down. So, I get my materials from "third party" places – London, Lisbon, Ghent, Stockholm, Helsinki, Budapest, Zurich, Geneva, Dubai, Bangkok, Singapore, Lhasa, Kathmandu, Saigon, Aktobe, Rangoon, and elsewhere. I discourse with people in the strangest of places, when I can, as the opportunity presents itself. "The location of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers has become much larger, wider, and harder to pin down.

However, this allows for some creative solutions, for one can use the concepts of this new and “intangible” age to one's own ends. In the next section, I will discuss some concepts, old and new, for reducing ‘outer ring’ language barriers.

Concept-oriented solutions. Earlier in this article, I discussed "concept - oriented barriers". So here, I will reflect off those ideas, and add my own.

‘Outer-ring’ language barriers are concepts, and distillations of other people's thinking. They are not material things; that is what the social- ‘elitists would have you believe, so that you bang your head against walls of their choosing, and waste yourself. So, if they are concepts, they can be analyzed, and subverted. Remember, each system carries within it the seeds of it's own subversion and destruction.

Overcoming ‘outer-ring’ language barriers is like playing those computer games, where everything is waiting for you, and the cards are stacked against you. (Wait until you enter the inner chambers! It gets worse, still.) Why not just blow up your computer, have lunch, and do something else with your day? This is one aspect of "going asymmetric".

So, when you begin to study a new language, deal with the 'outer-ring' language barriers on your terms. Identify them, map them out, and "reduce" them (a siege term for "destroy") – or else by-pass, avoid, or work around them. As with the outer pill-boxes, so with the ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. Do it. Take what you want out of a language, and avoid the rest. Since the inherent inertia of a new language and its culture seeks to deny you access to contacts, relationships and trade, make up new methods, to get your answers; find new contacts, make other relationships, seek the end-trade you desire. Do not walk along the pathways that others have already prepared! You should learn to distinguish what is expected of you, what it is you desire, and what is needed; these are three different commodities what you need – as it drops into your own hand.

I will elaborate. In terms of "what is expected of you", be aware that the society that designed ‘outer-ring’ language barriers wants to stop you from entering into their language-mediated matrix; so, they want to defeat you outright, or waste your time. So, if the ‘outer-ring’ language barrier is important, then "reduce" it completely, like Carthage, or Magdeburg; if it is not so vital, go around it in favor of other objectives, just like Ghengis Khan did in his Caspian Sea cavalry operation. In terms of "what it is you desire”, know from the outset what it is you want to get from knowing a language. Here, there are two faults you need to avoid. If you play computer games (don't), you will find that the “problems” (aliens, monsters, zombies) come at you one after another; you encounter them "paramecium-style"; there is no global, thought out perspective. You cannot do this in language study! You need to know from the start what you want, and have a global (albeit flexible) plan, on how to get there; you do not want to just react and "take things as they come", like a "paramecium"-bacterium. Next, you should avoid language outcomes like " becoming fluent"; instead seek functional, measureable objectives. Language-learning should be "function-based", and not "competency based"; you should have a clear list of behavioral objectives that you want to achieve (and a cess-pool of everything that you want to avoid: be utterly ruthless, here), and not some nebulous dream of "being fluent”. Desire must come from you, and only you. You can “educate” your desire by entering a new language-matrix for about six months and doing no language study at all: instead, walk in the parks, sit in the cafes, “sniff the air", study the public toilets (really! everything about a society can be seen and discerned from this), absorb everything passively, avoid relationships, walk the wind- blown places, and wait. When your desires come to you, then you will be able to build your functional, measurable language objectives. I will add here a digression; what if you had language competency, but no one to talk with? Wouldn't that be a terrible waste one's life? People (might) say to me, "From 1994 to 2019, you invested in the Chinese Language, you poured out sweat and tears, you devoted yourself to the ‘nations’ – and now they are throwing out foreigners by the dozens and hundreds! Haven't you wasted your own life? To which I answer: I never formally studied Chinese; what language I learned, I learned in the gutter from gutter-snipe; if I had language questions, or writing problems, I went to my students, and they helped me. I did not "go to the nations”; instead, I "cherry- picked" from among my students, and put some of them "into orbit" (for they wanted to have it all). I knew from the start that the Chinese would "take everything, and give nothing"; that is why I invested little. I learned what I needed, for travel, and simple things. I have very large curriculum collections for my various foreign languages, but almost nothing for Chinese. I knew my “Gomer" from the beginning. And yet, I still achieved my objectives. So, reader: consider doing likewise. In terms of “what is needed”, you must trust that this will come to you, by serendipity. God information will come to you, like a sparrow seeking crumbs, if you allow it; if you go out seeking something, it will fly away. What do you need, for your language study? Wait, and let the sparrows come to you. When you know, then you can make plans.

Now, I will "reflect," based upon what I wrote in the "concept-oriented barriers", earlier on.

The aim of language study is knowledge, not conquest. You need to go forward to your own objectives, not spend time overcoming obstacles. You need to "go the journey” for yourself, and not for your identity – group. Do not accept "their terms” (the conditions of others); make your own, alone. There are three types of “outcome” in the "cheveux-de- frise" that is early-stage language study: "binary" outcome, multiple outcome, and your outcome. "Binary" outcome usually means "success, or failure", "us, or them". This is a paradigm for failing, declining, out-moded societies – o, avoid it! Multiple outcomes come from those who can't make up their mind, "get off the fence”, and make hard, unpopular decisions. Your outcome is the one you wait for (with eyes open), find, and implement. Next, do not follow group consensus, but make your own decisions. Destroy collective resistance, by making it irrelevant. (Perhaps that is why the cute, mini “star fort” in downtown Mataram (Ceylon) is still in mint condition. You should visit it!) Analyze each of the ‘outer- ring’ language barriers that you encounter, one by one, and decide what to do with them. Always remember: the end of language acquisition is “trade”, not fluency; it is “results”, and not relationship building. (In winter, the hard-earned harvest is in the barn, and root-celler, the deep - freeze, but the beautiful leaves of summer are stripped off the branches, cast to the ground, and mouldering.) Barriers should not define “the way forward” (by blocking it) – you define the way forward! Do not follow “the way expected”, to goals that are dictated by rank strangers (who are probably elitist, anyway, and not to be followed). Do not desire to be “one of the natives”, but to reach your small objective, take it, and move on. (Are you therefore no better than a “two-cent, low-profile carpet-bagger”? No, you are not, but remember – they were good at what they did, they really did “bring home the bacon”, and they are still remembered.) The ultimate shame to a fortress is to become irrelevant, and passed on by history. Therefore, whenever possible, make ‘outer-ring’ language barriers irrelevant to your language – learning objectives. Do not be channeled by circumstance, or “the way it is done”, but follow your own muse. Some of the most lethal traps that defenders use and siege warfare are those that pre-suppose the attackers will move and act in a certain way. When you are experiencing a new language, avoid “hyper-language” (ie, the influence of culture and “their” social norms of the language), as well as the unseen influence of the elitists; instead, follow “mere - language” (ie, basic an non-adorned language). Do not aspire to enter the citadel, if you do not have to. If your objectives do lie on the “expected path”, or in the citadel, ask yourself, can I do without it?, or can I get it elsewhere? Avoid ‘elitists, because they are rule-makers; make your own rules! Refuse to become a part of the “lichen”! Remember, they need you to function. So, deny them everywhere, and drive them into starvation and extinction (like the Haas eagle of New Zealand). Starvation and deprivation are very much a part of successful sieges.

I have covered a whole "mish-mash" of ideas in this section. The central idea is this: try to by-pass the ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, wherever possible, and move directly to your carefully thought-out language objectives; otherwise, “reduce” them!

People-oriented solutions. This section will also reflect ideas from the "people-oriented. barriers" section, earlier in this article. I will also add some other ideas, from experience. Generally speaking, for concept-based problems, find the answers by yourself; however, for people-based problems, you need a special helper.

"Behind the word lies the shadow"; behind the person lies the betrayal. It is a sad but evident reality that the cruelest behavior is the best tool for reducing ‘outer-ring' language barriers – especially in eastern cultures. Some societies are intensely wired for a “person -to-person" shutout of outsiders; it is a deep and latent response, operating even without the over- sight of local elitists. Play this against them. Asia is not a free, open-access place, and never will be! "Frontal attacks" on the culture will always fail, for the entire society, down to the last piece of DNA, has been hard-wired against this. So, you should try out something different. Note this: Asian societies are "reactive" (against the outsider), and can generate massive inertia. However, the people are not pro-active, and they envy each other. This can be exploited. The strength of Asia lies in its social cohesion; however, its weakness lies in lack of personal- level initiative, constant envy, and in comparing oneself with others. As for you, living among them, do not cultivate a “this land is my land” mentality. You will be cast out, soon enough. Instead, you are the jackal, watching the goats from the deep shadows. Get used to this idea.

As I said earlier, one is confronted by three groups of people, when trying to “reduce” the 'outer-ring' language barriers: these are the locals, the local elite, and the outside “intentionals”. Here are some general ideas dealing with them. If you can't get it by just asking, then observe it, or (visually) steal it. Out of a mass of observed and well- synthesized material comes a few drops of “info-nard” – for you! No person can block you from getting this. Learn something, from the reflections and ripples of seemingly unrelated events. "Let things happen", then passively analyze the patterns. (Figureatively speaking, always have some marrow bone soup on the hob.) Conflict and symbiosis are both winds, blowing in different directions, but they both yield small fragments of knowledge. Learn to exploit both sources! Many times, you will be shut out, on the outside. So, ask yourself, can one learn more from the outside, then from the inside? Where there is resistance, prejudice or purity, there is surely something to hide. Wait, and see.

Here are some ideas for dealing with the locals. See how the locals are able to solve an 'outer-ring' language barrier problem themselves – then copy them. Go to the local “watering-hole", sit down, watch, and wait, and after a while a mosaic of experience will form. In Lhasa, I had two such places. One was a very basic noodles-and-tea, open-front place, opposite the entrance to my school. The other was a pilgrim's restaurant next to one of the temples on the city pilgrimage circuit; here, I ate soup-dumplings (tang-mo-mo). In both of these places I ate my food and lost myself in my own hidden world. I did not "observe” – the locals would have known that. Life slowly formed around me, apart from me. I licked the morning dew that formed on my clothes, so to speak. Thus, I gleaned scraps from the locals, chatting over their salt-butter- tea. I became an "opportunistic feeder", like the jackal. I pounced on chances as they came in various places.

One can also use questions, when gleaning from the locals. Ask fragmentary questions from a wide, non-related range of people, and assemble the answers from the scraps, alone. Ask questions not directly related to them (ie, about someone else's hen-house, and not theirs). Ask a question in passing, or as an "aside" in a larger conversation. As with the task of "dew collecting", the gleaning of many questions takes time. Since you cannot "become socialized” like a local, it is the next best thing. Learning from the locals, like making charcoal-filtered whiskey, takes time, patience, and devotion. You will know you have it, when you find yourself unwilling to share with the next wave of language-learning upstarts. This is most ironic, for "you" are now becoming "them".

Here are some ideas for dealing with the local elite. (They are different in many ways from the ordinary locals.) First, you can learn about the local elite by "mapping out” their "push- backs". They will rarely tell you what you ask for, but they will certainly react to things you do which they don't like – from interpreting these reactions, you can learn much. Sometimes, they will help you. Welcome the brief moment, and then quietly pick up what is on offer. Next are these anecdotes, of local ‘elites who helped me.

L.E.-1 was a colleague. She was really very clever, knew English well, had an international mind, and came from a restricted access group. Her own colleagues were all "take, smile, and don't give back" types - people one could help, but get very little back from. So why was L.E.-1 quite prolific in the 'outer-ring' language barrier material she gave me? Her colleagues really detested her, she was socially isolated, and was happy to discuss professional chit-chat. I also corrected her rough-drafts of her papers, and then, discussed, academic issues. I have since left that school, but we still discuss linguistic and translation issues; the only difference is, we now talk about real, hard-core "inner- citadel" talk. We made our own symbiosis; for this, I am grateful.

L.E.-2 was quieter, and also friendly. She taught a different language (her L-4, and my L-10). I wanted some help with my L-10, and she gave me much help. Since we were working on an "outside" language (not her's), I was not a threat. Loyalty to one's group diminishes when one has no reason to fear their retribution. L.E.-2 and I talked a lot about “third - party” language – in full view of her colleagues – without any worry. If we had been discussing her own language, the story would have been very different. The skills I gained from her, I re-synthesized, and applied to her language, after I had left that job. What L.E.-2 told me was useful elsewhere. Of course, I helped her with her English. When working with a helpful local elite, remember to give-and- take; symbiosis is a valuable tool.

L.E.-3 Became my most important language-related friend; she is now in my inner circle of people. It was she, who said of language, “I want it all!”, and then set out to acquire just that. We tutored each other in conversation and writing, time went by, she translated some of my books, and led me to many language projects. From this I learned, give everything, and then sometimes you will get everything. This one worked. In fact l.E.D.-3 will probably be the first person to review this article. Now, I share all my crazy linguistic ideas with her.

L.E.-4 was an anomaly. What she shared came out of the blue. She just volunteered it, and it burst out like wine from a burst oak barrel. I just sat back, “closed my eyes, thought of England”, and lapped it up. The “beans she spilled” (linguistic, and otherwise) are still delicious, many years later. I have no idea why she did it. So I say: be ready to receive.

Here are some ideas for dealing with the outside “intentionals”. To be short and blunt, avoid them all together. They will never yield fragmentary product – or any useful product, for that matter. Everything they do is related to their belief - system. I have found little help, and much “inertia”- opposition from them. There is little they can offer you, since you are shut out from the very beginning. (They have a long and complex integration process, which was begun long before you showed up.) Try to find out or discern which of the local elite they are dealing with, and avoid them; relate to those local ‘elite they are not dealing with. This avoids “ turf - wars”.

The discussion continues… it is better not to study the culture from within the “7-11” ghetto, as there are many “sorry losers” living there, whose aim is to drag someone down. Remain outside, in the “cold”. Finally, reject “the despairing self”, as the lowest charletan and fraud! When you meet him, throw him out.

So far, this article has talked about a set of people one might approach, to learn how to “reduce” some ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. To be honest, such people are insufficient – even the helpful ones. What one needs quite simply, is a traitor. One might say, “What?! How can you say such a thing?” Since most of the “push- backs” I have seen over the years have been of a social nature, and religious, and ethnic, and cultural, I have concluded that only someone with a mind of a traitor will inform me. I want to learn about language, not “hot - and -spicy” state secrets. I have been looked down upon by people back home for teaching ESL to Chinese college kids (“aiding and abetting the enemy”, so to speak); so, if this be true, why can't I acquire the services of such a person, too? Why can’t such a character exist, and why can't I join the game? To succeed, one needs a traitor: of course, getting one is a different story.

All the “hot- and -spicy” siege stories, war stories, and other stories have a traitor in them. There is Judas, the traitor of Thermopylae, Ganelon, Arnold, and others. Siege stories are full of this kind of person – especially when the fortress is considered to be impregnatable, impossible to enter.

What would such a person look like today? As “one of us… or so we thought”, maybe like all the others in the group. Perhaps the place to go looking in recent history is in cases involving the theft of industrial secrets… and there are many. I do not know, and will not delve into such profiles, as it is beyond me; however, it must be a very fertile source, given the number of stories one hears.

Going back to the ‘outer-ring’ language barrier discussion… The locals and the local ‘elite are very rightly afraid of such a person. For them, it is their weak spot, no matter how strong the other places are. In Asian cultures, there are no friendly locals”; there are only steadfast people, and traitors. (Just as in Asian polity and foreign affairs, there are only vassals, or enemies. There is no rainbow – only a light- switch.) At this point, I should add (not that I expect to be listened to, here)... you do not want the goods of a traitor (ie, secrets); you want the mind (ie, a willingness to talk, to explain how things work, to give language - learning tips, to answer your questions clearly and without any evasion). These five things all seem “innocent” enough, but in today's world, and in certain cultures, they are considered incendiary. Unfortunately, our world has become “gated”, neurotic, opaque, offense-based, loving ignorance – and a place in which to “beggar your neighbor”. (People who help are instantly and forever considered suspect.) When they speak clearly, and answer questions directly, the

“product” is very good. In turn, you must respect them, too! You are only looking for tips on

“reducing” some ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, and not “hot and spicy” things. If you use the locals to try that, you are very bad…

What if there is no local helper available? Sometimes, there is no one willing to even smile. (There were days in Lhasa when I felt everyone was like this.) In such a case, you must become that person, by getting to know the culture, and then “betraying” it. Of course, this takes time. (I feel like I do not have time. I am thinking of Franz Fanon, writing down his ultimate ideas in “Les Damńes de la Terre”, as he ran out of time.) However, be consoled: one can enter any culture without language, and learn. Your personality model is the medieval “village idiot”. This person crosses all nations, cultures, epochs, and earthly time – as all people recognize him for what he is… Over time, you will get to know the culture, passively. This cannot be blocked. Do not “dig” for it - let it come to you, over time!

Avoid anybody (from outside the target culture), who appears to be an isolationist. They will destroy you! Hide your life from everybody, and glean alone, in the dark. Dare I say, “Work in the dark, to serve the light”?! Well, yes. Do it. We need to let the cultures “know each other” (somewhat; not in every detail) and the “reduction” of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers might help this to occur. Perhaps, the same symbiosis that makes “unlikely bed - fellows” join forces to uphold ‘outer-ring ’language barriers can be used to achieve their “reduction”. Maybe. It is a fluid, changing world.

Echoing Stalin, one could take a “no people, no problem” approach. After all, if all the travails and barriers of language are the result of the interface of people, why not get rid of the people, and see what the language looks like when it is alone, unadorned, and bleaching in the sun like ancient whale’s bones on the beach? There are many such examples on the beaches of France – abandoned,” pre-fab” concrete bunkers from the “Festung Europa” network– and they are open to the wind - blown sand, nesting birds, faint memories of the past, and the sounds of waves. They keep no one out. Perhaps, without overseers, a language can be deconstructed, and solved.

Strategies for the reduction of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, from selected languages.

In the earlier section, “Examples of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, from selected languages”, I ran ahead of myself, and listed problems and solutions together. So, I will not repeat myself. Instead, I will present more general, theoretic concepts, which can be considered against your languages of interest.

(a) On the castration of language. Yes, that is right: castration. The castration of language, in all places, at all times, is of first importance. Always look out for ways to de-construct, to subvert, to castrate, to “reduce” a given language into “mere language”, and into your own conceptual paradigms. Try to keep your methods simple. The influence of “hyper-language”, and the apex – elite, on language, is pervasive, so remove it. Ruthlessly separate language from culture. Follow language, whenever possible, and exclude culture, social norms, and the influence of the elite on your learning program (within reason). Thresh the language, to get out the “mere language”, for you. Blow away the chaff of” hyper-language”. Insist on “mere language”, at all times, and in all places. Those ‘outer-ring’ language barriers that are the product of pure logic (in their intent, construction, and application) should be completely destroyed, since they were conceived and designed with exclusion in mind. Use “ultimate deconstruction” to “reduce” the most difficult of the ‘ outer-ring’ language barriers. Buy - pass, and render irrelevant, ‘outer-ring’ language barriers that are suitable to this form of treatment. Commission the radical alteration of a short story or novel (“your” literature, “their” language), into “castration” format. For example, “Of Mice and Men”, into Japanese “romaji”, with aligned script above each syllable of the “romaji”, and traditional characters anointed in Hiragana and Katekana, and “direct translation” below each “romaji” word, and each paragraph numbered, for cross-referenced to the original text in English, and a companion audio- recording of the text in slowly - spoken Japanese, with the paragraph numbers spoken in English, for cross-reference. Leave no stone unturned, and nothing ambiguous!

(Note: For those who are shocked at these words, please note that the domain of operations that I am referring to is the limited area of the language encountered by the entry-level language learner. Obviously, the culture itself, its rich traditions, idiom, “hyper-language”, and the soul of its people, remain untouched! This article is about entry-level language learners hacking out “beach - head language ghettos” in their “early days”, just like the army used

“daisy-cutter” bombs to clear raw jungle for an instant landing - site for helicopters in Vietnam. It goes no further!)

(b) On simplifying language. Avoid all forms of "ellipsis", and assumed knowledge. Everything must be logical and obvious. Carefully survey the chosen language's "hot-spots" of ‘'outer-ring' language barriers, and make up a "big picture", a schema-map." Add in what is omitted, make explicit what is assumed, reveal what is hidden, tell what is silent, explain what is obscure, expose what is opaque, complete what is unfinished. Leave no stone unturned. Let everything be reasonable and easy to understand. Commission the writing of altered-text, children's stories, using well- known, "safe" stories. Don't be too “harsh and radical”, here. That is for other writing.

(c) On "romanized" text, and language-props. Try to reduce all language into "romanized" text, or phonetic-symbol text. I will quote again, an earlier comment (about Tibet): A written, phoneme-level, "word"-divided", IPA symbol-based script, independent of the traditional (convoluted) script, and accurately representing the spoken vernacular, needs to come into being, and to evolve according to the needs and requirements of modern, secular discourse." (2019/5/5), Develop "parallel-text" formats that suit you. Make "their" text look like "your" text, wherever possible.

(d) On phonemes. De-construct the syllable into the phoneme, at all costs, at all times. "Synthesize, using phonemes and letters”, not memorize, using syllables". This takes effort.

(e) On words. Re-organize all text into words. ("Word", as an English person would define it !!!) This concept is deeply heretical to many speakers of syllable -based languages. Do it any ways, if necessary in secret. Reorganize their text into your thought-paradigms, using spacing, hyphens, plus-signs, or discreet marks.

(f) On "sentence-level" units of expression. Of the different levels of expression (ie, phrase, sentence, paragraph, article), I think the most useful and elegant is at the sentence level. The sentence is the level at which language should be conducted – and the art of translation regulated. You should insist on "one sentence, one idea", at all times. You should insist on “sentence-based " text, for reading and writing, as well as in speaking and listening. As for translation, well, most of the problems of translation will be solved, if the speakers or writers of the "source-text" generate their language in a "one sentence, one idea" format.

(g) On language goals, for you. You must consider your own language goals. Decide what will be your “end -functions", and plan out your study program yourself. Focus on very specific “trade” objectives (“trade-ends”), to the exclusion of all other study-areas. Learn the new language on "two fronts" – according to your objectives, and according to their “push - back”. The aim of "reduction" is to achieve your ends, and move on! Do not occupy, or you will become assimilated, and become one of "them”! “Fluency”, and “level of language competency" are not foundational objectives. At the end of it all, learn the language the "normal" way, then go out and expose it completely, leaving no secrets hidden, for the next wave of learners. You cannot "reduce" everything, but maybe, the language-learners who come after you will.

(h) On attitude. Pay attention to your own attitude when studying entry-level language, especially when the local people can watch you. Sometimes, a little concession (with a few modest annotations) is better than a brutal castration of a text: do that when you are alone. Accept that every language has its quirks, and it is these that make the language unique and interesting. These (quirks) should be more tolerated (unlike "hyper-language"). Alter, with some compassion. Sometimes, try to “go half-way", and make some concessions to “their” language, as it presents itself (especially if it is logical). De-program any elements of the language that you are prejudiced against, where necessary. (eg, many people reject the alphabet, and the idea that English is all about synthesizing and re-combining phonemes and letters). Develop a “one heart, two "brains" mentality, so your “new-language self" can be free of "home-language bias". Try

thinking and speaking your own language, under "their" rules, and see what you get. Perhaps, you will see why "they" did it their way. Have a strong motivation (eg, love, or nihilism, it matters not which) to carry you through the "hard days".

(i) Study alone. Try to study alone, or, with one or two closely hidden helpers. Find ways to learn that are suitable for you, and you alone! Learn to be able to work alone, when there is no one around you to help you, and everyone around you to obstruct or oppose you (believe me, you will experience this). Do not seek to integrate into the culture, but operate in "the cold" (ie, outside), and alone.

(j) Dealing with others. Practice the out- sourcing of tasks, wherever and whenever you need it. Out-source all script-writing to a local helper; this saves time and increases output. If

you need "props" (ie, stress-marks shown, or syllables joined or divided), find a helpful local to "pre-mark", a text for you, to make your task easier. Find a helper to "learn, and drill to automaticity" the difficult ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. Work with "third- party" people, who do not have the prejudices of the target language/culture. By-pass anyone who gets in the way, or who opposes you. Know who are your enemies, before you start, and have your responses (both pro-active and re-active) all ready. Keep your own discoveries and language alterations to yourself at first, lest you provoke a strong backlash. If the locals all hide away the secrets of learning their language, then do the deconstruction yourself, apart from them. Then, post the findings on their billboards, and in their marketplaces.

(k) On materials. Collect materials from "their" bookshops, and send them home for later use, even if you have only the faintest of hunches, as you are standing in the bookstore. Buy your books on intuition. Choose books that are easy to guillotine off the binding and then scan, and with pages that are easy to digitally manipulate. Rely on scanning, and not re-typing. Find, and study, interesting works of literature.

– Conclusion.

As usual, what should have been a simple, ten- page article grew and grew. However, I enjoyed pushing myself, and getting "product". The Muse was very fruitful. Perhaps too, this article is too polemic, but there are three pieces (and maybe a few more) that have been crying out to be expressed and heard. So, I have chosen to write them, and not let them die in silence.

'Outer-ring' language barriers are very much a part of any language. Although I have linked them to the activities of certain people in a given language-speaking group, they remain something of a mystery. How did they get there, and why do all languages have them? Why are they thus so reminiscent of pollen-grains, which all have the same basic function (ie, the job of plant fertilization), but a multitude of methods and mechanisms through which to achieve this end? Why are they so successful? How can such a small thing do so much harm to entry-stage language acquisition? What should be the real purpose of language acquisition? Why is language an agent of exclusion, and not of communication? Why was language conceived and structured, to keep people out? Why is so much effort given to shutting out the outsiders during the early stages of language acquisition? How were ‘outer- ring’ language barriers conceived, made, put into place, and kept in a state of operation – and by who? (The players are often very well hidden.) Why is there an ongoing and merciless conflict between the ‘elitists, and outsiders? Why has language acquisition become a "fief" of the ‘elitists? Why do natural enemies often co-operate, in terms of shutting out the outsider? Why is the inter-dependence of insider and outsider (like lichen) so integral to the existence of ‘outer- ring’ language barriers? There are many questions!

Brief summary of the main ideas.

Problems (concepts), Language acquisition is an act of siege warfare. 'Outer-ring' language barriers both alert locals, and stop the outsider. Remember: "by the small things shall you know them". ‘Outer-ring’ language barriers are a quiet way of saying, "stay out". ‘Outer-ring’ language barriers are a distillation of socialization, known only to those who have lived under that socialization. The more "enmeshed" a society is, the more formidable are its ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. "Mere-language" is chemically altered by the superimposing, and by the influence of "hyper-language", and of the apex-’elite. All parties (outsiders, insiders, others) come together, like lichen, to create a mysterious, pernicious symbiosis. All these work together.

Problems (people). There are three types of "blocker": locals, local élite, and the outside intentionals. The locals are the "pawns", who block-and-report. The local élite supervise the blocking, and give out cultural direction. The outside intentionals have many traits, and are a world to themselves, and very excluding. All want to stop the breaching of the 'outer-ring' language barriers, each in their own way. They come together, in fluid alliances, to oppose the outsiders. The "remain back home" group also enforce the ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, but in a different way. Thus, the entry-stage language learner is faced with the three hells": the "7-11" ghetto; the fact of being shut out from the language; being kept back home. All are hard.

Solutions (concepts). The world we live in today deals in intangible commodities (not material). “Denial-of- (anything)”, as well as "asymmetric" responses, non-answers, and an opaque way of dealing with the "non-thou" are very common today. For every form of barrier, there is a solution (present in the situation). Each system carries within it the seeds of its own subversion and destruction. Make your own pathway through early stage language acquisition. Distinguish what you are expected to do, from what you desire, from what is needed. When desire comes to you, then you will know how to proceed. Language-learning should be "function-based", and not "competency-based”. Then, “cherry-pick your way through the process of language acquisition. The aim of language - study is applied knowledge, not conquest. The end of language acquisition is “trade”, not fluency, "results", and not relationship building. Move forward, to your own objectives. Make ‘outer- ring' language barriers irrelevant to your language-learning objectives. By-pass ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, or else "reduce" them! Follow “mere-language”; avoid “hyper-language", and the influence of the ‘elitists. Follow your own muse; write your own rules.

Solutions (people). For people-based problems, you need a special helper. Use the innate inertia, the deep and unchanging prejudices of a given society against it, in order to force your way into its entry-level language. If you can't ask for it, then observe it. Patient observation over time will yield exquisite drops of high-value information. Analyze the ongoing dust - motes of daily occurrences, and the personal reactions of those around you, to develop a mosaic of reality. Analyze what the wind, and social intercourse give you over time, passively. Ask yourself: can one learn more from the outside, than the inside? Watch the locals solving ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, themselves, then copy them. Let life slowly form around you, apart from you, and lick the morning dew of experience from your clothes. Glean learning opportunities, from merely "being around" the locals. Ask fragmentary, indirect questions of many people, and then assemble the parts into a whole according to your synthesis. In time, "you" will become one of "them". Learn from the local elite, by "mapping out" their "push-backs". Quietly pick up “the moment”, when it happens. Triggering the reactions of the elite is like "ping-ing actively with sonar; it is a useful method. Befriend the isolated, and drain them – nicely, of course. Discuss issues outside of the "flash-point" zone. (eg, "discuss "Burmese issues, to better understand Tibetan issues – although they do not know that). If you can achieve a good symbiosis with a local élite, then you are very lucky. "Give everything", and then sometimes you will get everything. Be ready to receive the unexpected, at the strangest of times. Do not invest in the outside "intentionals”, as they are fully exclusionary. Know enough, to avoid "turf-wars", involving local proteǵes. Only someone with the mind of a traitor can really give you what you need, to “reduce” the 'outer-ring' language barriers. For many, there are only "loyal” people – and traitors; there is no middle ground. You want the mind of a traitor, (not the goods), to explain to all the mysteries of ‘outer -ring’ language barriers, and of language in general. It is all about willingness to share". Learn the culture and language yourself, and then betray it, irriversably. The "village idiot” can go anywhere. This is the one truly universal personality type, understood in all times, and in all places. Hide your life from everyone hostile; glean alone, in the dark. "Lichen dynamics" between people, when learning language, is often fluid and unpredictable in nature. Perhaps, they can be harnessed, in the task of "reducing" the ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. Maybe, without human overseers, a language can be readily deconstructed, reduced to "mere language” and solved.

The most important ideas. Perhaps I am being redundant in repeating myself in places, but I wish to stress the most important ideas. Here then, is the "take-home" package, for you to think about.

Linguistic matters. Language is all about exclusion, not about communication. Language acquisition is an act of siege warfare, So, some of the ideas of siege engineering (Vauban, et al.) can be applied to entry-stage language acquisition. ‘Outer-ring’ language barriers are a distillation of socialization, known only to those who have lived under that socialization. There are three levels of language: "mere-language", "hyper-language", and the influence of the apex-elite. All of the language you should use will be in a "one sentence, one idea" format. Functional survival, and the limited acquisition of "trade-goals" (and not fluency) are the main goals of language learning: keep it simple.

Methods. Before you study a given language, check things out, over time. Decide what will be your "end-functions", and plan out your study program accordingly. De-construct the language to your needs. Develop everything from the phoneme. De-construct the syllable into the phoneme, at all costs, at all times. Simplify language, at all times, in all daily encounters, in all theoretical domains. You must ruthlessly separate language from culture. Use "radical castration", or more modest means, according to your needs, the type of text, and tact…but do it! Drive out all “hyper-language". Leave no stone unturned, and nothing ambiguous. Deal with each 'outer-ring' language barrier, according to your needs. Each language gets its own special treatment, according to its unique features. Develop "romanized" text, phonetic-symbol text, and "language -props", wherever possible. Re-organize "their" text, into "your" thought- paradigms. Make "their" text look like "your" text, wherever possible. Re-organize all text into words (so it looks, and feels, like English), at all costs. Observe and collect "info-dew" patiently, to develop a mosaic of reality, over time. Develop working relations with the “useful elitist”. Cultivate relationships with those who are “willing to share”. Use the innate inertia, the deep and unchanging prejudices of a given society against it, in order to force your way into its entry-level language. Find ways to deal with the three types of blocker": locals, local elite, and outside intentionals, By-pass anyone who gets in the way, or who opposes you. Harness the "lichen- dynamics", "to your own advantage. Study the jackal, over other models. Do not seek to integrate into the culture, but operate in "the cold" (ie, outside), and alone. Learn from the outside, rather than the inside. Hide your life from everyone hostile; glean alone, and in the dark. Learn the culture and language yourself, and then betray it irreversably. Try to study alone, or with one or two closely hidden helpers (you must conceal them, completely). Work with "third-party" people, who do not have the prejudices of the target culture. Practice the out-sourcing of tasks, wherever and whenever you need it. Keep your own discoveries and language alterations to yourself at first, and achieve them safely, lest you provoke a strong backlash. Collect all useful materials, and send them home, to be archived before you invest time in field language study. Buy your books on intuition. Choose books/texts that can easily be digitally manipulated (after scanning). Rely on “scan-and- alter”, not on re-typing. Then, you can use “third - party” tech-types, and have no need of local secretaries.

Attitudes. For every form of barrier, there is a solution. Language- learning should be "function-based", and not "competency-based". The aim of language - study is applied knowledge, not conquest. The end of language acquisition is "trade", not fluency, "results", and not relationship building. Make ‘outer-ring’ language barriers irrelevant to your language-learning objectives. Move on to new things; do not "stay, and become like them". One should strive to live in the area of "mere-language” and avoid "hyper-language", as well as the linguistic and cultural influence of the apex- elite on the language. Imagine, bring into being, and live in a world of "language, without human overseers" (ie, pure, "mere-language"). Practice "give-and-take" with the language, as you seek your objectives, and achieve them. Have a flexible attitude towards the language. Have a strong motivation, to carry you through the "hard days". You are the "village idiot", who can go anywhere. Never forget, you are the jackal, watching the goats from the deep shadows.

On yourself, in today's "closing-up" and diminishing world. There are two dynamics of the world we live in today. We live in a world, where time and resources are running out. Material things that we took for granted (especially, water and daily transport) will soon disappear completely, or be in the hands of "a new few”. Only a few people know this; only a few societies are doing something about it. All the rest will wake up one morning, like rats in a closing trap. This realization, and the ensuing panic, will trigger unimaginable events. The lucky few will watch it happen, from behind their strong walls. We live in a time, when people everywhere are shutting each other out. The "milk of human kindness” will also become scarce, and disappear. If you think that today's "gated communities" are bad, wait and see what is coming! If you feel that today's "non-answers", opaque communication, being shut out of every social interaction are terrible, know this: there is much more to come! Even though we live in a “modern and developed" age, in many aspects of life, we have all regressed to the elements of the ancient world. Remember: things were really "nasty and brutish" back then! Even though I am living in 2019 (the modern age), I feel I am in a medieval or ancient city under siege, and awaiting its sacking by the enemy. There are many accounts of this, in the ancient writings. I do not need to dream; I can see things all around me in the real world. For me, now in Lanzhou, the symbol of this new world order is the quiet, three-wheel, electric delivery vehicle, deep within the forest of "concrete pencil" buildings, delivering goods in utter, complete secrecy. Everything is quiet; the "willow fluff" falls down, and is lazily blown along the gutters by the faintest of breezes. Birds sing in the hidden branches. What people do not realize is that the dynamics of the village-based manor system have all returned. Only the lords come and go too far-away places. Everything, and everyone else, has been frozen into local immobility. We should not ask, why?, but, how can I live in such a world? Should I try to integrate into it, or oppose it, or live apart from it? I never really wanted to “fit in”, as I did not like what it had to offer. I also knew I was completely unable to oppose it, for it is just too big and well-organized. So, I decided to live apart from it. Surprisingly, I was able to do this, for most of my life, and in many places. In this, I am very rare. If I am guilty of one thing in life, it is that I short-circuited most of all the traps of society, and then did what I wanted with my own life, in many far places. For this, the elitists will never forgive me, as I made them irrelevant. Remember: for the elitists, being irrelevant means becoming extinct. ("Without subjects, a prince is ruined.") So, I assumed from the beginning that society is a big scam, on many levels, with the purpose of immobilizing people (in "stations of life”), and wasting their lives. So, I left, and did my own thing. I moved a lot. I developed my own life-system. For the most part, it worked. However, I paid a price. I was “shut out”, in many places, at many times, by a range of people. Therefore, I learned to live on the outside, “coming in”, so to speak, to get supplies, and do my laundry. Now, I am almost 57, and I am looking back on the past years. In a sense, my life has always been outside by choice, and through exclusion– the elitists recognize me on sight. These constant dynamics came to a head in Lhasa over the issues of entry-level language acquisition. It was there that everything came together and crystalized. Hence, my interest in ‘outer ring’ language barriers, and how to crack them. The Tibetan language and culture are one of the last great “star-forts” in the world. So, I became interested in how to use the ideas of siege-engineering to achieve entry-level language acquisition of Tibetan, and how to "reduce" some of the ‘outer ring’ language barriers. It is a vast task, but it is better by far and away than playing Sudoku!

Final tribute to Vauban. This article has wandered everywhere, but I want it to end in the place of inspiration, that is, in a “star-fort”. From the time I first learned about Vauban in school, his ideas have been a template for the way I look at the world. Along with a very few other writers, he has been very influential. Those "star-forts" I have seen have been travel pilgrimages- the Portuguese fort on a headland (not far from Cape St. Vincent), Jaffna, Galle, and others. It was in Europe that an idea started, and spread to many places. It was the right idea, at the right time. There are more "star- forts" I have not seen, and want to see, and walk about, dreaming of this or that. They will be the touch-stones of my future travel. The "colonial legacy" has long been a framework for much travel-planning, and many travel-routes; it gives me a reason for going to those "tired, dusty, over-run and "choked-up" places we call tourist destinations. So, I visit the forts, and dream. I am gazing out over the sea, through the slit of a corner room of a Portuguese fort, somewhere south of Lisbon. I am walking the walls of Malacca's Fort Rotterdam, seeing how everything comes together, and enjoying the peacefulness inside. Forts made the dreams possible, for the old colonists running spices, and for travelers today. How I live, how I plan, how I travel have all been influenced by the ideas of Vauban, even though I have yet to read his two famous books. In some ways, the surviving forts, dotted all over Asia, are the textbook I have followed. I do hope to see more “star-forts”! I also now realize that Vauban was one of the great geniuses of history – and yet, few people talk about him.

Then, there is the linguistic element of this story. Here are my final comments on this matter of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. Achieve your (modest) linguistic goals, but do not violate the culture. Even “hyper-language”, and the elitists, have the right to exist! Make for yourself enough "linguistic space" to go about your daily life, using "mere-language". (Beyond the land cleared by the "daisy-cutters", there is still hard jungle; it should be this way always.) Take what you need, leave something (perhaps you commission a local to write a modest and useful children's book, or an audio-book), and then move on. If possible, collaborate with that local to make one (modest) text in "mere- language”, as a "neo-Rosetta Stone" example for future learners. Pay that helper very well! If you want to “go fluent, go native", be respectful to the locals. If you do enter the "citadel", be respectful, and leave it safe and intact (unlike Alexander, at Perseopolis…). Finally, enjoy your fragile existence in the outer limits of a language. It is one of life’s great journeys! My thanks to the people in Lhasa, and all over Portugal, Ceylon, and Indonesia, for letting me visit your glorious visual feasts: I hope to return! (Lanzhou, 2019).

– Abstract - Languages are instituted among nations to keep peoples apart, and not linked. They are, in effect, fortresses designed to exclude outsiders, as well as incompatible insiders. One of the hardest phases of foreign language acquisition is at the beginning; here, many students give up. ‘Outer-ring’ language barriers are small, elegantly contrived units of difficulty, expressly installed on the outer fringes of a given language, to hinder entry-level students of that language. Each language has its own particular set of ‘outer-ring’ language barriers. This article examines the theoretical and conceptual nature. ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, and the different groups of people that maintain them; next, it explores possible strategies for overcoming 'outer-ring' language barriers, as well as certain types of people that can be useful in this task. Throughout, language acquisition is conceived, not as a linguistic or social cultural interface between different peoples, but as an act of siege-engineering. Of primary importance is the partition of language into three levels: "mere- language”, "hyper-language", and the influence of the apex-’elite on the language. Since it is the input of human influence which activates ‘outer-ring’ language barriers, it is suggested to study a language, at the entry level, with "mere-language" only. The development of entry-level student material, written expressly in radically altered, "mere-language" text, as well as further research into ‘outer- ring’ language barriers, is encouraged.