Borean Speakers: an introduction to languages

In homage to Sergei Starostin, one of the main advocators of the existence of Borean

(Borean language written in native Borean glyphs coined by NicoDico and inspired by all ancestral native writings of the Earth: sinograms, Maya glyphs, hieroglyphs, cuneiforms. Explained further.)

In this paper, the reader shall discover how all extant languages and native writings of the Earth which belong to Homo sapiens (circa 300 Kya to present) are related and stem from Borean languages, the ancestor of all languages of the northern hemisphere.
They shall understand the outlines of all speakers of Earth languages and their steady evolution to present, correlated with several native scripts.

This paper should prove a precious help to researchers and language learners, as it introduces the complete canvas of languages and unlocks new visions of civilisations of the world.

Table of contents:

• Introduction
• A short history of humanity and Borean languages
• Dene-Daic speakers
• Transhimalayan speakers
• Uralic speakers
• Afro-Asiatic speakers
• Transeurasian speakers
• Indo-European speakers
• Austroasiatic speakers
• Deep East Asian population and microlithic industry
• Metathesis, Initial drop and Epenthesis in Transeurasian and Transhimalayan
• Root contamination and similar evolution from Borean
• Chinese doublets in Japanese and Korean
• The essence of Chinese
• English-Chinese incompatibility
• Nativisation at high and medium ancestry
• Borean core analysis
• Local Borean languages
• East Asian and European Borean
• Cognition of basic Chinese, Japanese and Korean
• Basal words in some daughter languages of all great language families
• Borean glyphs explanations
• Conclu-discussions
• References I
• References II
• Borean words reconstructions

Introduction

The present paper is driven by very simple yet arduous questions: why are languages what they are nowadays.

The following texts and short chapters are the sequel of this paper, which provided a brief overview of the matters that shall be studied to understand Borean languages, its speakers and their heirs.

The present paper should be connected to this article which corroborates the theory whereby languages and writing have undergone a long concomitant transformation process since Lower Palaeolithic (circa 3.3 Mya).

Throughout ‘Borean speakers: an introduction to languages’ we shall refine the first research upon Borean languages and examine all great language family speakers of the Earth through the spectrum of genetics, linguistics, archaeology and history.
To conclude this paper, the author shall provide a one hundred Borean word table so as to corroborate the Borean languages evolution; this table is a sensibly revised version of the one introduced in the first paper.

If one wants to understand their branch of human science with insight and precision, they must understand the complete canvas, not a partial fragment of the said canvas.
Beyond bias, there are linguistics matters that one cannot explain without being restrained by their own domain.

Our century now provides us with tremendous knowledge and means to delve deeper as yet; ergo we cannot only content ourselves with the unilinear pattern that we have hitherto observed and that has often obscured young and hoary minds.

This paper shall therefore endeavour to introduce the reader to the complete yet broad canvas of Borean languages and their speakers, via recent studies in several domains such as genetics, archaeology, history and linguistics. It should grant a strong overview of all languages of the world and facilitate new language-related studies, research and learning.

Contrarily to many papers that have been shown before, this paper is devoid of difficult linguistics signs and terms; it introduces with great concreteness the reader to all languages of the world per the broad prism of Borean languages.

A short history of humanity and Borean languages

Hominids separated from chimpanzees circa 7-6 Mya, and have evolved in a non-linear fashion throughout the African continent.

From these high-ancestry hominids stems Australopithecus circa 4-3 Mya, which seemed to have already mastered lithic tool fabrication as it evolved upon the African ground.
This lithic industry seems to insinuate that Australopithecus must have developed a form of ancestral language in order to bequeath its knowledge (Benozzo, Otte 2017). Furthermore, the cut of each lithic artefact (bifacial, truncated, flake or blade) seems to hold keys to explain the different kinds of languages of the world: each stone carving region develops a local fashion of cutting stones which influences their vision of the world, as well as languages and behaviour.

Ancient hominids always evolving in a non-linear fashion upon the African ground, we could surmise that there might have existed techno-cultural exchanges between ancient Australopithecus communities, hence a supposed form of archaic language, intimately related to each local lithic industry. Languages would accordingly have begun to shape at least circa 3-2 Mya.

The genus Homo, our genus stricto sensu, originates from these hominids at least circa 2.5 Mya (Benozzo, Otte 2017), and despite the lack of consensus to describe the exact nature of what defines it accurately as human, it is characterised by its strict bipedalism, brain size and behaviour; not to forget the probable inheritance from Australopithecus of the most ancient fragments of nowadays languages, which must have influenced the Borean languages, itself occupying approximately 1% of the transformations of human languages.

Homo habilis, Homo ergaster, Homo erectus and Homo rudolfensis were amongst the first species, known hitherto, of hominins originating from the genus Homo and to which the above-mentioned human features could apply. Nonetheless, their languages remain uncharted, contrarily to Borean languages which seem to appertain mainly to Homo sapiens.

Homo erectus was one of the first hominins to leave the African continent (as of 2020), and it explored the Eurasian continent circa 1.8-1.6 Mya (Reich 2018). We have found fossils of its species in Eurasia (Nihewan and Zhoukoudian China, Atapuerca Spain) and within Indonesian islands (Java).

Migrations throughout the Eurasian continent requiring coordination, Homo erectus language must at least have consisted in simple language patterns that allowed it to communicate. As we observed with Australopithecus, the transmission of a lithic industry must also have necessitated a certain form of ancestral language.

S. Wolf et al (2017) suggest that ochre use from 500 Kya to 310 Kya could be related to important cognitive functions, even amongst Neanderthal as early as 250 Kya. This technological evolution also concurs with the rise of the Borean languages alongside Homo sapiens first archaic individuals, circa 300 Kya in Northern Africa.

Homo erectus signifies ‘upright man’ and its present name is influenced by the Borean word ‘treka’ (right), which itself might conceal traces of Homo erectus language, as we currently understand that Homo sapiens and Homo erectus lived during a concurrent span of time circa 300 Kya to 100 Kya and may have interbred outside or inside the African continent.
The following question now arises: How did Homo erectus call itself as a human? Did it even consider itself as a human, or closer to animals wherefrom it originally descends?

Homo erectus (circa 2 Mya to 100 Kya) disappeared approximately 100 Kya, probably due to its inadaptability to the changing paleoclimate of the Earth. It has dwelled upon the same Eurasian ground as Neanderthal, Denisovan, Homo sapiens and other hominins that are presently unknown of archaeology but revealed by the genes, and referred as ‘ghost populations’.

Neanderthal (circa 400 Kya to 40 Kya), our cousin of the genus Homo seemed to dwell upon vast regions of Eurasia, stretching from modern Europe to East-Asia, until the South of Siberia and even the Middle East. Neanderthal cousin, Denisovan, also lived upon a vast region of East Asia to South-East Asia.

These two ancestral hominin populations originated circa 800-600 Kya from at least one common ancestor, Homo heidelbergensis (R. Rogers et al., 2017), and separated from each other circa 400 Kya (Neandersovan), until their demise circa 40-30 Kya, following the arrival of Homo sapiens in Eurasia.

Modern genetics has proved that Homo sapiens had interbred with Neanderthal, Denisovan (R. Browning, 2018), and other ghost populations, during their common history outside African ground 58-52 Kya (Pille et al., 2020). Since Lower Palaeolithic, human history has consequently never proved rectilinear; several ancestral and well-referenced Homo populations of different species have cohabited with Homo sapiens upon Earth, at least for 200 Ky: Homo erectus (circa 2 Mya to 100 Kya), Neanderthal (circa 400 Kya to 40 Kya), Denisovan (circa 400 Kya (?) to 40 Kya).

During the long span of 200 Ky, these ancestral hominins have interbred, as recorded in their genes; since such encounters and cultural crossovers could not have occurred without exchanging and sharing words but also technology and culture, there must still subsist some relics of other languages than Borean (circa 300 Kya to 10 Kya) within this language that has been passed to us in all the forms we presently know and that shall be explained hereunder.

Moreover, as analysed by the Max Planck institute, Denisovan and Neanderthal were as capable as Homo sapiens, but their brain harboured a different mental structure. This may prove a key to understanding their indirect heirs, such as Transeurasian, Austroasiatic and Dene-Caucasian speakers, whose mindset seems to differ diametrically from the one of Indo-European speakers, and vice versa.

Neanderthal and Denisovan themselves have interbred with other high-ancestry ghost populations outside Africa, whose language patterns may also have influenced these formers. Languages and genetics appear therefore more complex than we had previously thought.

Homo sapiens seems to have emerged from archaic hominins at least from 300 Kya in Northern Africa, but only circa 100 Kya it commenced to venture upon the Earth, in sparse migrations, until the great migration waves surging circa 70-50 Kya.

These migrations must have been influenced by the changing palaeoclimate of the Earth such as mega droughts and other palaeoclimatic factors, but Homo sapiens pertaining to the genus Homo, curiosity to know and understand must have assumed a major role in these migrations. This is attested by the very root of Homo sapiens, its name “sapiens”, stemming from the Borean word *sepa | *sape (to try and know) that implies the following nuances: ‘knowing the world by tasting and examining. Probably related to the sound of someone tasting something, such as “sip” and “sap”.

As we shall understand further in this paper, languages undergo transformations under several mains factors: migrations (Tambets et al., 2018, M. Narasimhan et al., 2019), agriculture (Robbeets 2017, Sagart et al., 2019), climate (Honkola et al., 2013, Everett et al., 2014), and new technology development.

Neolithic (circa 10 Kya to 4 Kya) provides more tangible proves to support the above-mentioned factors as they are more recent and studied; nonetheless, should one think objectively about human migrations and how languages could have transmuted during Palaeolithic, adapting to new regions and moving with their speakers, they should consider migrations (Out of Africa, into Africa, into Eurasia, into Sahul, etc.) as major actors of language evolution and spread.

The Borean word *mowa (to move) seems a cognate of the etymon *mawa (sea), if it did not slowly stem from this word itself, such as the letter ‘M’ as illustrated further. These two words imply that archaic Homo sapiens considered seas as a continuous and potent flow; inasmuch as seas of the world could have left a deep mental image as it helped it to migrate between continents.

Homo sapiens commenced to venture upon the Earth circa 70-50 Kya stricto sensu (Pille et al., 2020); however it did not roam upon uninhabited grounds, as other species such as Neanderthal, Denisovan, Homo erectus and other ghost populations had already inhabited Eurasia for at least several hundred thousand years beforehand.

During approximately 30 Ky, Homo sapiens voyaged throughout the Earth in several migrations; it reached the Sahul continent (Australia and Papua New Guinea merged together) already denoting industrious seafaring skills, and Eurasia at least 50 Kya (Spriggs and Reich, 2019). At least 20-15 Kya (Hong et al., 2019), it crossed the Bering strait, perhaps several times, and attained the American continent before giving rise to Mesoamerican and Amerind aboriginal populations of the American continents.

The arrival of Homo sapiens in Eurasia seems to have provoked the decline of other Homo aboriginal species, mainly due to natural selection rather than mass killing as formerly advocated. After the demise of all other species than Homo sapiens upon the Eurasian grounds circa 40-30 Kya, Homo sapiens remained the only species that prevailed upon others on Earth.

Nevertheless, we should not consider Homo sapiens as an omnipotent species, as it inherited some profitable features from Neanderthal or Denisovan, such as their immunity to local disease, some gene mutations helping populations to live in high altitude, or keratin genes that were more adapted to cool climates and that helped it to survive.

Eurasian populations possess between 2-4% of Neanderthal genes and South-East Asian and Oceania population approximately 2-5% of Denisovan genes in their genetic heritage (Meyer et al., 2012, Vernot et al. 2016, R. Browing et al., 2018). Given that ancestral interbreeding did occur between known and unknown populations, including Homo sapiens, we could therefore surmise that some of this heritage was bequeathed into Homo sapiens’ languages, namely Borean languages.
 
When Homo sapiens ventured upon the Earth and encountered aboriginal populations, cross-cultural exchanges and interbreeding could not have occurred wordlessly; archaic humans must have communicated with each other, for they are humans and can communicate in a human way: human languages.

The aborigines must have taught the newcomers about the plants, the animal species and the dangers but also the pleasures of the unknown region they had just reached, for all were human beings and not plain lines written in a book.

Despite the survivance of Homo sapiens and its languages, we should remind ourselves that Borean languages themselves only represent 1% of the probable evolution of human languages, correlated with the evolution of writing since Lower Palaeolithic (circa 3.3 Mya). Homo sapiens itself being at most 1% of the evolution of hominids.

We can presently coordinate Borean languages with migrations and the development of Homo sapiens: Lower Borean (circa 300 Kya to 60 Kya), Medium Borean (circa 60 Kya to 40-30 Kya), Upper Borean (circa 40-30 Kya to 10 Kya).

The slow and local adaptations of Borean languages also concur with the transition of the Pleistocene into the Holocene: Upper Palaeolithic (circa 40-30 Kya to 15 Kya), Mesolithic (circa 15 Kya to 13-10 Kya), Neolithic (circa 10 Kya to 2 Kya).
Since the end of Upper Palaeolithic and the commencement of Mesolithic, the climate of the Earth had become warmer, and allowed agriculture to exist, while allowing populations to settle.

Sedentism provoked population growths wherefrom ensued migrations and language splits, during the ‘great Neolithic language split’. This great language split was triggered and accelerated by new technology, exchanges and interbreeding amongst local and archaic populations, such as the example of Proto-Indo-European populations of Yamnaya with local European Neolithic populations whose fusion gave rise to Proto-Germanic between circa 2800-2400 BCE.

Some researchers mention the existence of Nostratic or Eurasiatic, a language that seemed to be widely spoken throughout Eurasia. These two appellations define with precision the outlines of the two close forms of Borean that were spoken in modern Europe and modern Asia. At such high ancestry of Upper Palaeolithic, ere populations were allowed to settle, languages already showed a certain stability; language differences must therefore have proved minor, such as American and British English or China and Taiwan Chinese.
The hereinbelow Borean reconstructions should testify of these minor discrepancies.

Basal words can also support this dichotomy between different sorts of Borean: if one basal word is currently common in an East-Asian language (especially Transhimalayan or Transeurasian) and literary, specialised or rare in an Indo-European language, it indicates an ancestral split between Borean speakers, and vice versa. These words shall be explained further in the present paper.

This split concurs with the several groups of Homo sapiens that separated in the Middle East to reach East Asia through Northern and Southern routes of the Himalayan mountains and Europe via Eurasian steppes where they encountered European Neanderthal at least circa 50-40 Kya (Demetera et al., 2012).

Forasmuch as all currently existing human beings are Homo sapiens direct heirs, that they all can speak a language, and that languages themselves have evolved concomitantly with writing since Lower Palaeolithic, we cannot state any more that languages and writing have suddenly appeared during the Neolithic. Beginning our analysis from Neolithic would present to us a simple fragment of the complete canvas of Borean languages and its speakers.

All languages and earthlings of the Northern hemisphere are heirs of Homo sapiens and Borean languages. The latter, itself being impacted by its palaeoenvironment and climate, has exerted a potent influence upon all main native writings of the Earth, such as hieroglyphs, sinograms, cuneiform, Mesoamerican glyphs and Indus Script. This concomitant evolution is detailed in this paper in French.

As implied hereabove, the author does not believe in a single form of Borean, for history has never proved linear, even at high Upper Palaeolithic ancestry. Borean languages spoken first throughout the African continent, then Eurasia until they spread to Sahul and the American continents, must have been impregnated by higher ancestry hominins essence and their languages; Borean languages must have thrived in local and cross-cultural communities intertwining Homo sapiens and other aboriginal hominins.

Should one want to analyse and comprehend human languages and their transformations, they should embrace multiple domains whose matters of study have exerted an influence upon hominids and hominins since Lower Palaeolithic (Benozzo, Otte 2017), namely (palaeo)climate and environment, lithic industry, zoology, biology, chemistry, history and anthropology.

Linguistics alone appeared as the most salutary expedient of linguists of the past; nonetheless, our century now allows us to surpass this simple view and obtain a profound understanding of human languages, correlated to all above-mentioned factors and human inherent artifices such as native writing.

Despite modern technology and the broad possibilities of our century, we still remain limited by ourselves, Homo sapiens, and the lack of collaborative efforts to provide a deeper insight of human languages. For we, as Homo sapiens, are also human, we cannot avoid being subject to jealousy, trivial fighting and egoism, these many vices that can hamper research and lead to narrow views.

Only a detailed and precise analysis of the Borean languages that we can currently reconstruct, namely Medium-Upper Borean, by combining all proto-languages of Homo sapiens should yield keys to understanding a Borean-Homo sapiens native pattern and a foreign pattern.

We should thus be able to discriminate native Borean words that strictly belong to Homo sapiens and others that do not seem native and might have been borrowed from other hominins’ languages.

Linguistic phenomena such as metathesis and epenthesis may also prove convincing to yield keys upon Borean high ancestry speakers and their mindset. They shall be explained further.

As we have already observed in the paper upon the evolution of writing, Homo sapiens being a human species, it bears mental and physical limits; thence all native writings of the Earth that are developed by heirs of archaic Homo sapiens originate from similar concepts and even Borean pronunciations are restricted to a certain range.

Homo sapiens phonetic range also being limited, if basal words do not stem directly from the same Borean roots, numerous words in different languages harbour similar phonetic patterns, hence the existence of a sapiens limit.

We shall now examine all speakers of great language families stemming from Borean languages and their speakers. This auscultation of the past should allow us to discuss several characteristics of high ancestry languages which influenced medium ancestry languages, namely Transhimalayan, Transeurasian, Austroasiatic, Afro-Asiatic, Indo-European, Amerind before exerting influence upon low ancestry languages amongst which the reader should at least know one to read the present paper.

• 

• 

Dene-Daic speakers

Circa 23-15 Kya, several migrations originating from the Eurasian continent (Reich et al., 2012) crossed the Bering Strait to reach the American continents (Skoglund et al., 2015), where they seem to have spread rapidly from North to South (Moreno-Mayar et al., 2018), to reach South America around 14.6 Kya (Raghavan et al., 2016)

From these Upper Palaeolithic Siberian populations stem Amerinds and Mesoamericans, the aborigines of these grounds, before Vikings brief discovery and settlement circa 1000 AD near Canada and European colonisation circa the sixteen century which almost obliterated all aboriginal populations of these continents.

The reader should note that native American speakers share a genetic affinity with both East Asian deep populations and European populations for they share a common deep Palaeo-Siberian ancestor, as proved by the Lake Baikal boy remains who lived 24 Kya (Reich, 2018) and highlighted by A. Yang et al. (2017) whom studied 40-35 Kya Eurasian individuals (Tianyuan and European) and contrasted them to Native American populations.

The most renown Native American population being the Clovis culture which seems to have originated circa 13 Kya (Raghavan et al., 2016) in Northern America. Modern civilisations owe much to these aboriginal settlers, for the crops they have cultivated following the advent of agriculture since at least 5-4 Ky BCE, such as tomatoes, cacao (chocolate), corn or potatoes that were brought back by the European approximately 500 years ago.

Dene-Daic speakers span from the remote North of the Alaska and Eskimo-Aleut languages to the great plains of modern United States of America and Amerinds Apache, Sioux, Navajo, to the Mesoamerican and Andean civilisations such as Olmecs, Zapotecs, Aztecs, Inca and Maya. They also comprise Palaeo-Siberian languages (such as Yeniseian languages), and Vasconic languages (such as Basque) that were isolated by time and migrations (Ruhlen, 1998).

The American continent occupies an extended latitude and longitude, and the climate is diverse with extreme cold conditions in the North and South, from temperate and warm conditions to tropical conditions in medial regions of the continent.

These wide and diverse (palaeo-)climatic conditions must have exerted an impact upon ancient and recent Dene-Daic speakers (Everett et al., 2014), hence perhaps the impressive diversity of word order in all languages of this family: OSV (Object-Subject-Verb), OVS (Object-Verb-Subject), VOS (Verb-Object-Subject), SOV (Subject-Object-Verb), primeval word order being probably SOV (Subject-Object-Verb) (Gell-Manna, Ruhlen 2011), which would correlated with the Palaeo-Siberian origins also yielding SOV languages such as Uralic, Transhimayalan or Transeurasian.

South American Andean regions have been occupied since at least 14.5 Kya (Nakatsuka et al., 2020) which have gradually evolved from hunter-gatherer-fisher populations into farming populations, adapting to the high mountains of the Andes and the jungle of the Amazon.

Evolving from congregations of Neolithic farmers from at least 2000 BCE, Mesoamerican civilisations anchored and complexified in modern Mexico. They developed their own writing, consisting of glyphs with which a semantic or phonetic pronunciation was associated (Winters, 2011), in correlation to the sedentarism of local communities and the growth of populations.

After the Olmec civilisations which seemed the first to develop writing amongst Mesoamerican civilisations as glyphs (E. D. Pohl et al., 2002) since at least 900 BCE (Hudson and S. Henderson, 2018), Maya exploited glyph writing at least circa 600 BCE (Winters, 2011) and refined this writing system (Reilly, 2004).

Zapotec civilisations from 500 BCE to 800 AD (M. D. Pohl and Urcid Serrano, 2006) seem to have coexisted with Mayan civilisations and may have been inspired by Olmec glyphs to forge their native glyphic writing.

Amerind civilisations conveyed their language mainly orally before European colonists forged them alphabet-like native writings.

• 

• 

Transhimalayan speakers

Transhimalayan is the appellation advocated by George van Driem and his colleagues to replace the too narrow “Sino-Tibetan” which does not reflect the wide diversity of the languages of this part of the world.

Eurasian aboriginal populations have remained poorly documented, but we presently understand that several Homo species had cohabited upon Eurasian grounds for several hundred thousand years, before our direct ancestors, deep Homo sapiens populations migrated there and settled.

These populations have dwelled upon mountainous and steppic regions that were formerly colder than present, and which must have exerted an impact upon their speakers.
Transhimalayan languages were mainly SOV (subject-object-verb) before low ancestry Chinese acquired SVO (subject-verb-object) due to local and mutual influence (Gell-Manna, Ruhlen, 2011).

The Medium Palaeolithic Xujiayao bone remains attest the presence of Homo sapiens at least from 125-100 Kya in East Asia (Demetera et al., 2012), which seem to belong to the first yet scarce Homo sapiens migration waves out of Africa.

Nonetheless, deep East Asian ancestors seem rather to originate from the 70-50 Kya migrations which reached East Asia from Northern and Southern routes of the Himalayas circa 40-30 Kya and share a deep common ancestor with Native American populations (A. Yang et al., 2017), as similar speakers of the Dene-Daic family. Until at least the Native American people ancestors’ migrations circa 20-15 Kya and the Jômon migrations circa 30-15 Kya, East Asian people have continually dwelled upon a vast region of Northern China and the Amur river basin.

This vast East Asian region seemed shared by the speakers of East Asian Nostratic-Eurasiatic such as Transeurasian languages but also Uralic speakers before they migrated to Northern Europe at medium ancestry (circa 6000 BCE). Nonetheless, these languages already sensibly differed from Dene-Caucasian languages, the deepest direct ancestor of modern Chinese, as one could remark in the roots explained further.

Ancestors of deep East Asian populations who gave rise to medium ancestry Transhimalayan languages are referred as ghost populations, and were likely to speak Dene-Caucasian, the early local branch of Borean. This high ancestry language also seems to have given rise to scarce Eurasian languages such as North Caucasian, Yeniseian and Basque.
It also pertained to both ancient Himalayan Tibetan aboriginal populations and Yellow River basin ghost populations whose heirs, Transhimalayan populations, gave rise to both Han (Chinese) and Tibetan low-ancestry populations.

Language changes being related to techno-cultural innovations and important migrational events, the shift from Dene-Caucasian to Transhimalayan could have occurred circa 12-10 Kya during Mesolithic or even earlier (Upper Palaeolithic) when these speakers disseminated in places including the Yellow River Basin.

Transhimalayan itself split circa 6000 BCE (Liu et al. 2020) into approximately 50 languages, including Chinese, Tibetan and Burmese, after the development of rice farming, which seemed to be an isolated technological innovation and slowly spread to the rest of Asia.

Chinese speakers have since continually dwelled upon an increasingly growing region of the fertile Yellow River basin; contrastingly, Tibeto-Burman speakers have moved to the Himalayan mountains and interbred with aboriginal ghost Tibetan populations.

Chinese speakers have developed tones at very low ancestry in Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD), which completely differed from the Mandarin Chinese five tones, and are still reflected in the wide diversity of Austroasiatic language tones.

Moreover, these tones seem to have developed from the loss of final laryngeal consonants but also through the influence of the wet and hot Asian climate (Everett et. al, 2014) to which these populations were continuously exposed for thousands of years.
Mutual Chinese and Austroasiatic language influence must also have assumed an important role in the development of tones.

• 

• 

Uralic speakers

From 1.8 Mya to 40-30 Kya, several species of the genus Homo have dwelled upon a vast region of Eurasia, including Homo Erectus, Homo Heidelbergensis, Neanderthal, Denisovan, and unknown ghost populations.

Since the replacement by Homo sapiens of local aboriginal populations, Uralic speakers who have emerged from this admixture, seemed to have continually dwelled upon vast regions of North Eurasia.

These languages include Baltic-Finnic (Finnish, Estonian), Ugric (Hungarian, Mansi) and numerous Palaeo-Siberian languages, such as Lapland languages (Sami), Samoyed, or Yukaghir. These populations dwell upon cold and boreal regions of Eurasia, mainly characterized by tundra, steppes and conifer forests; moreover these regions proved even colder before the Last Glacial Maximum (circa 30 Kya to 15 Kya).

This (palaeo-)climate must have played a crucial role upon these speakers and their native languages (Everett et al., 2014), that are mainly SOV (Subject-Object-Verb) (Gell-Manna, Ruhlen, 2011), such as Amerinds, Transhimalayan or Transeurasian.

Due to the similarities of word order and the closeness of deep populations dwelling into the Siberian Altai Mountains and Eurasia, Uralic speakers seem to share deep affinity with Transeurasian speakers. Both of these speakers may have been influenced by Altai Neanderthal which had dwelt in these regions since at least 400 Kya to 40-30 Kya; their (Palaeo-)Siberian origins seem therefore amongst the most plausible (Tambets et al., 2018).

At medium ancestry circa 20-15 Kya, ancestral Palaeo-Siberian populations that share a common ancestor with Uralic and West Eurasian speakers seem to have migrated to the American continent whereas others have continually dwelled upon steppic Siberian regions, before migrating to Northern Europe such as Uralic speakers.

Such as Transeurasian, Indo-European, Transhimalayan and Austroasiatic, Uralic languages split circa 6000-4000 BCE (Tambets et al., 2018), which could be explained by migrations from Siberia towards North Eurasia and especially Northern Europe, most probably caused by climate change which induced population growth and their dispersal (Honkola et al., 2013).

These medium ancestry Uralic speakers have intermixed with local aboriginal populations whose languages seem to have disappeared (C. Lamnidis, 2018) in aid of Uralic languages.

• 

• 

Afro-Asiatic speakers

The Fertile Crescent and Northern Africa are located upon the crossroad of migrations which lead outside African grounds to the Eurasian continent; their population canvas is therefore rather intricate and cannot be explained as a unilinear story.

The speakers of these regions dwell upon arid and hot regions, which must have exerted an influence upon their languages (Everett et al., 2014); several episodes of green Sahara have also transformed this desert into a lush jungle. Afro-Asiatic languages were mainly SOV at high ancestry and have transmuted into VSO at low ancestry (Gell-Manna, Ruhlen 2011), probably due the several migration waves that emerged from Eurasia.

All species of the genus Homo, since Homo erectus (circa 2 Mya to 100 Kya), have crossed the wide territory upon which dwell nowadays Afro-Asiatic speakers whose languages include Semitic (Arabic, Hebrew, etc.), Egyptian (now extinct), Cushitic, Omotic, Berber, and Chadic.

Assuming that major events such as migrations and new technology emergence caused languages to split, we can surmise that Afro-Asiatic Borean may have begun to split in the Levant and in Northern Africa at least 20-15 Kya, following climatic changes such as Last Glacial Maximum (circa 26 Kya to 19.9 Kya), the gradual settlement of North African and Levant civilisations (circa 15 Kya), also attested by genetics (Haber et al. 2013).

At least from 50-35 Kya (E. Platt et al., 2016), Afro-Asiatic populations have dwelled upon vast regions of the Levant of North Africa. We could cite the Kebaran (circa 22.5 Ky to 14.7 Ky BCE), Mushabian (circa 16.7 Ky to 14.7 Ky BCE) or else Natufian (circa 15 Ky to 11.6 Ky BCE) who have dwelled upon a similar vast region of Northern Africa and the Fertile Crescent (N. Garrard, 2013), ensuing Homo sapiens several migrations and settlements outside the African continent from 100 Kya to 70-50 Kya (Haber et al., 2017). North African Medium Palaeolithic sites present Homo sapiens lithic tools that are also scattered throughout North Africa and date back to at least 160 Kya (Le Quellec, 2014). Severe droughts and the changing palaeo-climate of the Saharan regions may have played an auxiliary role in dispersing populations and cleaving languages.

More recently, the advanced Upper Palaeolithic civilisation of the Natufian (circa 15 Ky to 11.6 Ky BCE) was one of the first to settle in the Fertile Crescent and to transition from hunting-gathering-fishing into farming. It also seems related to the spread of shamanism to other regions of the world, especially East Asia (Bruneteau, 2020).

Serra-Vidal et al. (2019) suggest that North African Moroccan civilisations such as the Berbers were genetically yet remotely related to Natufian civilisations and had anchored locally since Upper Palaeolithic (at least circa 15 Kya), before external migrations from Europe or the Fertile Crescent intertwined with local Palaeolithic-Mesolithic populations and much later with Bronze Age populations (Fregel et al., 2018). 

Heirs of these ancestral Homo sapiens populations have consecutively dwelled upon the same regions of the Fertile Crescent and Northern Africa, hence the resemblances between customs, cultures and languages of Afro-Asiatic speakers. As technology evolved and the palaeo-climate shifted allowing populations to settle, these ancient settlers commenced to open commercial trades with Eurasia upon Mesolithic-Neolithic times.

Berber populations, located in a wide region of North Africa but principally in the Morocco Maghreb region, are strongly associated with the Upper Palaeolithic-Mesolithic-Neolithic genetic continuum and seem to be the aboriginal dwellers of the Maghreb region (Fregel et al. 2018), hence the sensible difference from Arabic and their native writing that differs from Arabic letters.

Levantine populations (Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Jordan, Syria, and Cyprus) are themselves, strongly associated to the Natufian civilisations; they appear as the continuity of ancient Upper Palaeolithic dwellers who intermixed with external Anatolian and Iranian populations (Feldman et al. 2019) until the development of maritime trade routes and the admixture with European populations of the Mediterranean basin during Bronze and Iron Age (at least from 2000 BCE).

Upon the end of the Mesolithic (circa 8500 BCE), Mesopotamian civilisations had already begun to develop a native proto-writing that was based upon the Palaeolithic-Mesolithic petroglyph and art-writing tradition, from which developed cuneiform writing 5000 years later, circa 3500 BCE.

Ancient Egyptian civilisations also seemed influenced by the Mesopotamian development of cuneiform to coin their own native writing, hieroglyph, dating back to at least 3000 BCE. Much as all ancestral native writings of the Earth forged by Homo sapiens, hieroglyphs are also based upon the Palaeolithic-Mesolithic tradition of art-writing (Bruneteau, 2020).

During the medial part of the Neolithic circa 4-3 Kya, the Canaanites a population who had dwelled in vast region of the Fertile Crescent to Egypt since at least medial Mesolithic circa 10-9 Kya (Haber et al., 2017) witnessed the rise of Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilisations, which mutually influenced each other. Canaanite languages are now almost all extinct except their last heir, modern Hebrew, yet few traces of these populations and language have been conserved by time; these rather undocumented populations therefore appear crucial to explain Afro-Asiatic populations and languages. At least from 4300 BCE, Proto-Semitic may have split into Hebrew and Arabic, in correlation to the split of their common ancestry population around the same time (A. Klyosov, 2010).

During late Neolithic between 2500-1000 BCE, Caucasian populations migrated into Afro-Asiatic Levantine grounds as shown by genetics (Agranat-Tamir et al., 2020), further complicating the Afro-Asiatic population canvas.

All ancestral native scripts of Afro-Asiatic speakers such as hieroglyphs or cuneiforms have underwent the influence of Afro-Asiatic Borean; this local sort of Borean has exerted a strong influence upon the Phoenician alphabet (as illustrated hereunder in Borean core analysis, I) Water suffix and in this paper) since circa 1000 BCE, and which was later employed to write Indo-European languages through Greek and Latin influence. This secular alphabet even migrated and transformed locally to adapt to Tibetan, Austroasiatic languages and perhaps Berber languages.

Upon the 7^th century AD, the rise of Islam from the Arabian Peninsula exerted a potent influence upon Afro-Asiatic speakers civilisations which have embraced this religion; however in the Levant (Israel), Judaism was preached and has been advocated hitherto, perhaps due to distance caused by the ancestral Proto-Semitic linguistic and cultural split.

Even amongst closely related language families, much as Tibetan and Chinese, significant cultural differences can still be observed at low ancestry.

• 

• 

Transeurasian speakers

Transeurasian is the appellation advocated by Martine Robbeets to designate the ancestors of Japanese, Korean, Mongol, Turkish and Tungusic speakers. It now replaces the controverted appellation of ‘Altaic’. To this list should be added the Jômon language and its descendant, the Ainu language, now almost extinct.

These populations have dwelled upon the same mountainous and steppic cold regions as Dene-Caucasian and Transhimalayan speaking populations, which must have had techno-cultural mutual and palaeo-climatic influence upon languages (Everett et al., 2014). East-Asian Borean but more generally Nostratic-Eurasiatic was SOV (Subject-Object-Verb) (Gell-Manna, Ruhlen 2011), hence perhaps the influence of local Neanderthal, Denisovan populations and their language patterns, since Borean appeared as SVO (Subject-Verb-Object).

Homo erectus, Neanderthal, Denisovan and other ghost populations lived in East Asia several hundred thousand years before the migrations of Homo sapiens at least circa 50-40 Kya to these grounds through Northern and Southern routes of the Himalayas.
These aboriginal ancestral populations were slowly replaced by Homo sapiens which kept small fragments of their genes and most probably languages.

East-Asian Homo sapiens deep populations have continually dwelled amongst a vast region of Northern China and Siberia, and the Amur River basin (Wang et al. 2020). Circa 30-15 Kya some of these populations migrated to Japan via the North of Hokkaïdô wherein they left their traces as the Jômon man; nevertheless, we can also report anterior relics from at least 50 Kya belonging to the ancestors of Jômon men in Japan.

Japan should thus have been a known island whereto deep Asian populations navigated to obtain obsidian, a precious volcanic stone of unknown significance for these populations. Jômon man gave descendance to the Ainu people whose language is a crystallization of the Jômon language itself, due the approximative 15 Ky of isolation it underwent until Korean men of Mumun sailed to the archipelago circa 1000-900 BCE and brought their culture and language therein.

Jômon-Ainu therefore proves a precious testimony of archaic Transeurasian. In this perspective, we could surmise that Transeurasian slowly evolved at least from 15 Kya, since Jômon migrations have isolated this language which bears similarities with other Transeurasian languages and Transeurasian etymons themselves.

The reader can remark these similarities in the table hereunder:

East Asian Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	Transeurasian (circa 15 kya to 6 Kya)	Ainu (circa 3rd-10th century AD)	Jômon (at least circa 15 Kya to 1000-900 BCE)
*keta; kota (small village; small house (protected by walls))	*kota (village; locality)	kotan (Ainu village)	*kota (small dwelling)
*lepa (butterfly)	*nepa (flying insect)	heporap, maraurep  (butterfly)	*lepa; repa (butterfly)
*pura (to snow; to rain)	*poru (to snow; to rain)	upas (snow) (Metathesis)	*pora (to snow)
*tana (part of the nose)	*tane (part of the nose; nostril)	etu (nose) (last syllable drop or metathesis)	*tuna ((part of the) nose)
*kume (dark; black)	*kume (black; coal)	kunne (black)	*kume (black)
*wisa (to grow)	*iuse (to grow; sprout)	sak (summer) (Summer and sprouts are often related; the Ainu word is very similar to Korean 이삭 (isak) (sprout))	*(w)isa (to grow (during summer))
*kane (building; construction)	*chane (fortified building)	casi (fortress; castle) (Has evolved as Korean native 잣 (chat) (castle))	*cane (small fortified place)
*nura (light; fire)	*nole (to burn; flame)	nuy (flames) -This word may remind Arabicنور  (nur (light; fire))	*nora (to burn; fire)
*hapa (food)	*epo (food; bread)	aep (food) (Japanese ancient word *opwomono meant ‘food’ before 食(た)べ物(もの) (tabemono))	*hepo (food)

.

At least circa 20-15 Kya some of these deep East-Asian populations may have migrated to the Americas where they settled and became native populations.

Transeurasian speakers dwelled in a vast region of East-Asia of the Amur Basin (Wang et al., 2020) closely related to the one wherein lived Transhimalayan speakers, and even extending as far as ancient Anatolia, in modern-day Turkey.

Mongol speakers slowly spread from this ancestral dwelling and gave rise to the Mongol and Tungusic languages in Northeast Asia circa 6000 to 3600 BCE (Wang et al. 2020). This final approximative date also corresponds to the estimated transmission period of millet farming from China into the Liaodong basin to medium ancestry Korean speakers.

Proto-Korean-Japanese speakers have slowly migrated in the North of the Korean peninsula, especially in the Liaodong basin where Chinese technology such as metallurgy and agriculture spread into the peninsula. Korean speakers themselves originate from complex interbreeding between East Asian deep populations and more recently from Northern tribes of the peninsula whose languages slightly differ. This complex genetic canvas is consequently intricate to untangle and basal Korean genes seem arduous to localise.

Correlatively to the transmission of Chinese technology, the first kingdom of Gojoseon (circa 1000 BCE to 200 BCE) rose, before rapidly perishing due to the Chinese kingdom of Yan assaults circa the 2^nd century BCE.

Circa 1000-900 BCE, ancient Proto- Japanese speakers of Mumum-Yayoi men migrated to Japan where they brought their technology, such as weaving, agriculture, metallurgy, but also their language (Proto-Japanese).
Jômon men had suffered a severe loss of population due to the end of Neolithic low temperatures and Korean migrants may have helped them to recover, perhaps explaining the relatively benevolent admixture between aboriginal Jômon men and Korean Mumun migrants.

Turkish speakers seem the admixture of deep Anatolian-Transeurasian populations and more recently Indo-European migrants. They were amongst the first who developed agriculture and located at the crossroad of Eurasia, in nowadays Turkey.

• 

• 

Indo-European speakers

At least two hundred thousand years before the arrival of Homo sapiens in Europe, Homo erectus (circa 2 Mya to 100 Kya), Neandertal (circa 400 Kya to 40 Kya), Denisovan (circa 400 Kya (?) to 40 Kya) and other unknown ghost populations lived in a vast region of Eurasia in tenuous communities.

At least circa 40-30 Kya, Homo sapiens gradually migrated in several groups from the Middle East to Europe where it replaced local Eurasian Neanderthal populations and perhaps other ghost populations. It brought therein Late-Medium Borean (circa 100 Kya to 40 Kya) that had already undergone the afore-mentioned ancestral language split. Modern European populations appear as a complex continuum of these Homo sapiens populations which had interbred; however the ancestors of modern European languages (except Basque) only appeared later.

European Neanderthal population, the aboriginal populations of Europe interbred with Homo sapiens at least from 58-52 Kya, during their common history, until they disappeared circa 40-30 Kya. These populations have granted Homo sapiens their skin colour, due to a keratin gene and may have helped it to develop their immunity system to resist local disease.

From at least 10-8 Kya, Eurasian steppe populations migrated from Central Asia to Europe (Hong et al., 2019), which may have given rise to steppic nomads related to the spread of these languages. As Reich (2018) observed, European populations originate from aboriginal Palaeolithic European populations (Neanderthal-Sapiens), Eurasian steppe populations (Palaeo-siberian) intermixed with local Anatolian farmers (circa 6 Kya) and more recent steppe pastoralist Eurasian populations (R. Jones et al., 2015, C. Lamnidis et al. 2018).

Stemming from these medium ancestry Eurasian populations, circa 3500-3300 BCE, Eurasian steppe nomads from the culture of Yamnaya migrated to Europe from Eurasian steppes where they had dwelled in a vast region comprised between several modern Central Asian countries. The Eurasian steppes may even have assumed the role of techno-cultural crucible wherefrom new inventions would have spread to Europe or East Asia.

The potent influence of Yamnaya culture steadily spread throughout Europe, being one of the civilisations that seem to have given rise to Indo-European languages (E. Platt et al., 2016, Reich, 2018, M. Narasimhan et al., 2019), beginning with Proto-Germanic, one of the earliest branches of the former, which ensued the admixture of Yamnaya nomads into local Neolithic communities. Kristiansen et al. (2017) show that Proto-Germanic may have shaped between 2800 to 2400 BCE.

As Yamnaya influence extended to Neolithic local sapiens cultures, languages families of Europe formed whose daughter languages still exist or have now disappeared: Anatolian (Hittite), Hellenic (Greek), Germanic (English, Dutch, German, etc.), Italic (French, Spanish, Italian, etc.), Celtic (Gaelic, Irish), Indo-Iranian (Sanskrit, Hindi, Bengali, etc.), Balto-Slavic (Russian, Czech, Polish, etc.).

Indo-European roots must have been strongly influenced by aboriginal Neolithic European communities for their basal roots transmuted as their Eurasian native speakers intermixed with local populations.

• 

• 

Austroasiatic speakers

Much as Transhimalayan and Transeurasian populations, the Austroasiatic deep ancestry population is rather intricate and cannot be explained in a rectilinear story.

This macro-family contains the following main languages, amongst more than 1500 others: Thai, Vietnamese, Malay, Laotian, Cambodian, Mon-Khmer, Javanese, and all Polynesian languages. Most of the speakers of this macro-language family dwell upon islands of warm-wet climate (Blust, 2013), which must have exerted an influence upon their languages (Everett et al., 2014).

These languages have conserved their initial Austroasiatic SVO (Subject-Verb-Object) albeit some medium-low ancestry changes to VSO or VOS that reshifted to their initial SVO state (Gell-Manna, Ruhlen 2011). Austro-Asiatic languages seem to have conserved their primeval Borean grammar pattern.

At least several hundred thousand years before the migrations of Homo sapiens from the African continent, Denisovan (circa 400 Kya (?) to 40 Kya), Neanderthal (circa 400 Kya to 40 Kya) and other unknown ghost populations dwelled upon South Asian grounds. We can even find Homo erectus (circa 2 Mya to 100 Kya) bones in Java island denoting the great voyages outside of Africa other species of the genus Homo had already undertaken before Homo sapiens. 

From at least 65-60 Kya groups of Homo sapiens had already reached South Asia through Southern routes of the Himalaya (Demetera et al., 2012, McColl et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2020) and began to cross seas; Australian aborigines originate from these migrations that forded Melanesian seas island by island to reach the ancient continent of Sahul (Papua New Guinea- Australia) at least 40 Kya (Demetera et al., 2012).

Denisovan aboriginal populations seem intimately related to deep New Guinea and Australian aboriginal populations as they intermixed circa 50 Kya (Reich 2018), probably upon South Asian ground before putting out to sea.

Highly skilled Austronesian seafarers (who became current Polynesian people) did not spread to Polynesia until circa 4000-3000 BCE from aboriginal Taiwanese populations of Taiwan, following the spread of agriculture from the Yellow River basin circa 5000 BCE (Reich 2018, Liu et al. 2020), hence the cultural and linguistic similarities between Taiwanese aboriginal populations and Austronesian languages, such as the Lapita culture (Spriggs and Reich, 2019). Some of these Austronesian speakers, seafaring through several migrations would have reached Indonesia circa 2.1 Kya and the Philippines circa 1.8 Kya and others Fiji, New Caledonia or Vanuatu circa 1000 BCE, before spreading to the rest of the Pacific.

Maori language, a low ancestry language from Austronesian Borean began to anchor in New Zealand when Maori people reached the island for the first time approximately 500 years ago.

South Asian fossils are arduous to obtain mainly due to the wet and hot local climate that does not favour fossilization. Yet, through the help of modern genetics, we can understand that South-East Asian deep populations originate from common ancestors at least 30 Kya before reaching their current meridional location (Singh et al., 2019), often called Hoabinhian.

Nonetheless, South Asian deep aboriginal populations seem to have been replaced or have intermixed with more recent populations from 7-6 Kya following the spread of rice and millet farming from the Yellow River basin (Reich, 2018, McColl et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2020), who spread their languages (strongly related to Transhimalayan) as they merged with local aboriginal South-East Asian populations.

This medium ancestry admixture would explain some common features between Transhimalayan and Austroasiatic languages, but also their common deep ghost population common ancestor which originates from the first Homo sapiens migrations into Asia around 50-40 Kya and seems to have continually dwelled upon Chinese ground until the development of agriculture and the great Neolithic language split circa 6000 BCE.

First Austroasiatic recent speakers would have originated in the Mekong River Valley wherefrom they would have spread giving rise to all branches of Austroasiatic languages (Sidwell and Blench 2011).

To corroborate this medium ancestry spread of Austroasiatic language, the most ancestral speakers of Thailand were not Thai speakers but rather Mon-Khmer speakers whose language predates the former as aboriginal populations of these grounds (Wibhu et al., 2011). These historical events would remind the reader the story of Afroasiatic languages: Arabic (external migrations) and Berber (aboriginal).

Thai speakers seem closer to Southern Chinese speakers (McColl et al. 2018, Muisuk Kanha et al. 2019) of Cantonese for instance, which would also explain the diversity of their tones and their recent migration circa 1000-700 years ago (Muisuk et al. 2019) which caused aboriginal people to decline. Tone diversity in Austroasiatic languages seem mainly caused by the loss of final laryngeal consonants and the influence of the humid and hot climate to which these populations have been exposed for thousands of years.

Vietnamese speakers, much as Thai speakers are descendants of ancient Hoabinhian hunter-gatherer-fisher aboriginal populations (at least 40-30 Kya) and admixture of Southern China Neolithic farming populations of at least 5-4 Kya (Liu et al. 2020). Vietnamese therefore originates from this immixing of an ancestral Upper Palaeolithic and a more recent Neolithic culture. Before French-English colonisations two centuries ago and the introduction of Latin script which was afterwards nativised, Vietnamese people used Chinese sinograms to write their language while also inventing their own sinograms to transcribe native words, namely chữ nôm.

Finally, the reader should observe that Austroasiatic languages seem to share a common elision feature with Transhimalayan as observed further. This analysis corroborates the common deep ancestor existence, the probable predisposition to tones and the similiarities between these languages and the homeland of their speakers

• 

• 

.

Deep East Asian population and microlithic industry

As far as deep ancestry Lower Palaeolithic, Benozzo and Otte (2017) have shown that lithic industry cut had a decisive impact upon the type of language spoken in a certain local region of the world.

More recently circa 40 Kya, microblade technology seems to have developed as a unique feature of East Asia deep populations close to lake Baikal and Altai Mountains in Siberia.

This lithic industry seems to have spread afterwards in Eastern Asia, including Nihewan basin (Northern China, Hebei) circa 26 Kya, to deep ancestry populations which may already have noticed the abundance of the Yellow River basin.

Microlithic cut was also transmitted to Jômon populations at least circa 30-25 Kya, the era it migrated to Japanese archipelago where some ancient microlithic fragments have been retrieved.

This high-precision industry sharply distinguishes deep ancestry East-Asian populations from their European counterparts; furthermore, microlithic industry only developed around Mesolithic (circa 15 Kya) in Europe, which could insinuate a techno-cultural deep ancestry transfer.

Th Microlithic blade cut seems to have shaped East Asian populations intellect and deeply influenced their vision of the world for they were the first populations to create pottery (as of 2020), around 20 Kya for Chinese Xianrendong cave populations (Jiangxi province) and 15 Kya for Jômon hunter-gatherer-fishers.

All these potteries already denoted a great mastery of the pottery biscuit, and the same pottery would be the first objects to serve as food vessels and recipients before becoming decorative or ceremonial objects bearing the first forms of Chinese native writing, sinograms since at least 4000 BCE.

• 

• 

Metathesis, initial drop and epenthesis in Transeurasian and Transhimalayan

Metathesis is the language phenomenon whereby speakers of a language would invert syllables of a word; epenthesis adds a syllable to a word; and initial drop loses the initial sound of a word.

These three phenomena might be closely related to archaic hominin populations interbreeding and intermixing with more recent migrant populations. Since basal words are located at the very source of language, if a basal word undergoes metathesis, initial drop or epenthesis in Transeurasian or Transhimalayan it should be related to the deep past of East Asian speakers.

All basal words in Transeurasian and Transhimalayan are not subject to these three phenomena, but many seem to present this ancestral split, strongly supporting the idea that these two languages were direct local adaptations of local aboriginal populations with Homo sapiens since at least 15 Kya.

Furthermore, as Gell-Mann and Ruhlen (2011) observed, Borean languages were firstly SVO (Subject-Verb-Object). Therefore, only a local adaptation or acculturation of speakers of a SVO language such as Medium-Late Borean with aboriginal populations of Neanderthal or Denisovan, harbouring an unsimilar brain structure, could have transmuted it into a SOV language, as early as high ancestry East Asian Borean (Nostratic-Eurasiatic) which then influenced medium ancestry languages such as Transhimalayan and Transeurasian.

Basal words that were inverted by metathesis or slightly prolonged through epenthesis must therefore belong to the ancestral form of Medium-Late Borean (SVO language) brought by Homo sapiens at least 50 kya in East Asia which slowly evolved into East-Asian Borean (Nostratic | Eurasiatic) (SOV language) at least circa 40-30 Kya before developing into Transeurasian and Transhimalayan at least circa 15 Kya (SOV language).

Ancestral basal word splits and migrations being intimately related, but lithic technology slowly developing and deep ancestry populations continually dwelling in the same vast above-mentioned region, local Borean languages must also have undergone a slow and steady evolution.

The author consequently surmises that basal words subject to metathesis, initial drop or epenthesis might be strongly influenced by local hominins phonetic ranges and mental structures when they merged with Homo sapiens migrants. This linguistic shift may also apply to Uralic speakers whose language shifted from local SVO Borean into SOV.

We shall observe hereunder several convincing examples to support the above-mentioned metathesis, initial drop and epenthesis theory:

Borean	Eurasian Borean (Eurasiatic | Nostratic)	Transeurasian	Proto-Korean-Japanese	Japanese	Korean
*mana (to think) (Also yields “mind” and “mentalité”)	*manu	*ena (to think) (initial drop)	*omeop or nyeo	omou (おもう|思う) (to think)	yeogida 여기다  (to think)
*maka (mould; mucus) (Also yields “mould” and “mucus”)	*muka	*kompe (mould) (metathesis) (pe is a suffix)	*kweombi	kabi (かび | 黴) (mould)	keompangi 곰팡이 (mould)
*lakwa (lake)	*lakwu	*koli (lake) (metathesis)	*keoram (lost in Japanese)	kumui (クムイ) (lake) (Okinawaian dialect)	karam (가람) (lake; river)
*ləma or *ləda (to lead (along the road)) (Also yields ‘to lead’)	*leda	*taru (to be together; to lead) (metathesis)	*teol(i)	tsureru (つれる|連れる) (to bring to)	terida (데리다) (to bring to)
*gəpa (to give; to receive (as a gift)) (Also yields: ‘to give’)	*gepa	*ega (to rise; to lift; to present (a gift)) (metathesis)	*aek; eok	ageru あげる (to give)	ollida 올리다 (to ascend; to offer)
*hota or *kota (hot)   (May originate from the sound one makes when feeling something hot: あつ, 더워. Also yields “hot, chaud, chaleur”)	*heta or *keta	*ota (fire, hot, warm) (initial drop)	*(a)ta; eo(to) (In Japanese and Korean, differentiation is made between heat for the climate or a surface)	whence atsui (あつい|熱い|暑い) (hot) but also atatakai (あたたかい|温かい|暖かい) (warm)	whence ddatut 따뜻하다 (warm) or (warm) ddasu hada 따스하다 (warm)
*neka ((as dark as) night)	*noka	*panek (shadow) (epenthesis. Japanese derived word attests the final “k”)	*peomeo(k)	honoka (ほのか) (dim; sombre)	bam (밤) (night)
*na(h)rə (nose) (Word for nose accompanied by a final noise referring to sneezing or snor(t)ing. Literally: the body part that snor(t(e)s) or sneezes)	*newre	*pune (nose; to smell) (epenthesis)	*punae (seems lost in Korean)	hana (はな|鼻) (nose)	(?)
*pata (foot; to walk) (May originate from the sound of walking feet. Also yields “foot; pied”)	*pahda	*(p)alca  (foot; knucklebone)   (Initial dropping of “p” in some Transeurasian languages, but the initial “p” is attested in Korean.)	*(p)al(i) (Possible confusion in Korean, Chinese and Japanese between foot and leg because of the oracle script of 足showing both, and thus referring to both parts.)	ashi (あし|足) (foot; leg)	bal (발) (foot; leg)

Borean	Transhimalayan	Chinese (Archaic, Medieval, Mandarin)
*mana (to think)	*nam or *ńV̄̆m (念) (to think; thought)  (metathesis)	/*nɯːms/ (1, 2) or /*nˤim-s/ /nemH/ (3) 念 [niàn] (thought; idea) (1)(2) (3) (Oracle, bronze, seal and regular script of 念)
*kula; kura (to hide) (Colours are used to mask and hide things, hence the meaning. This nuance is also attested in the bronze script of 色, with someone masking their face.)	*srǝ̆k (色) (colour) (metathesis. Intrusive “s”.)	/*srɯɡ/ (1, 2) or /*s.rək/ /ʃɨk̚/ (3) 色 [sè] (colour) (1) (2) (3) (Oracle, bronze, seal and regular script of 色)
*lema (road) (Only attested In Dene-Caucasian) metathesis of *mara (to lead; to follow a road)	*lǝ̆m (冘) (road) (metathesis)	/*lum/  /jiɪm/ 冘 [yín] (road (archaism))

Borean’s *mana (to think) being transmuted by initial drop (Transeurasian) and metathesis (Transhimalayan) at medium ancestry seems a convincing example of the above-mentioned theory.

Moreover, the sinogram 念 (thought) bears a profound meaning as we can see the inverted mouth (亼) crowning upon 心 (heart) from oracle to regular script, which signifies that the former exerts a strong downward action upon the latter. 念 (thought) expresses the potent action of the mind upon the heart, which insinuates the thought creating process.

Root contamination and similar evolution from Borean

Low ancestry languages such as Chinese, French, English, but also Korean or Japanese still show ancient traces of Borean influence. Sometimes etymons have been contaminated by others, provoking incomprehensible immixing of two words into a similar root; sometimes etymons have evolved in a similar fashion without being related to each other, due to a phonetic limit of Homo sapiens.

The following examples (amongst several others) will corroborate the non-omnipotence of Homo sapiens and the limits of its oral and written language patterns at high, medium and low ancestry.

I) The sinogram 足 [zú] means ‘leg; foot’ but also ‘being satisfied, being sufficient’; both meanings were also transmitted into Japan and the Korean peninsula alongside with sinograms.

However, in the oracle script and bronze script of this sinogram (cf. table), we can only observe a leg and a foot, the latter being probably the extension of the former in Transhimalayan minds. Since the oracle and bronze script do not yield compelling keys to understand the second meaning of ‘satisfied’, the contamination of the two afore-mentioned different meanings must have occurred at higher ancestry.

In Borean, the root *tsoka means ‘full; big’ whereas the root *tsaka means ‘leg; arm’; in Dene-Caucasian *č̣HǝqwV́ [*cheqwa] means ‘thick; abundant’ and *č̣V́[l]xḳwV [*chakwa] means ‘foot; leg’; in Transhimalayan, both words have fully contaminated each other and the root *tsok has assimilated both meanings of ‘foot; leg’ but also ‘abundant; sufficient’, before giving them to the sole sinogram of 足. The contamination is consequently due to the intermixing of two Borean roots at the medium ancestry of Transhimalayan.

足 meaning and script evolution table

	足 (foot; leg)	Satisfied
Borean	*tsaka	*tsoka
Dene-Caucasian	*č̣V́[l]xḳwV [chakwa]	*č̣HǝqwV́ [*cheqwa]
Transhimalayan	*ćok	*ćŏk
Old Chinese	/*[ts]ok/ (oracle and bronze script)
Medieval Chinese	/t͡sɨok̚/ (seal script)
Mandarin Chinese	足 [zú] (regular script)

 

II) The sinogram 路 [lù] and the words ‘road; route’ both stem from the Borean word *rempa or *remka  (separated way) and have evolved in a similar fashion which seems especially apparent in medieval Chinese and medieval English | French.

In medieval Chinese 路 [lù] was pronounced /luoH/ and ‘road; route’ were respectively pronounced ‘ro(u)te’ and ‘rode, rade’. The Borean words have been nativized in a similar yet distant and local fashion.

III) At low ancestry, in Korean 거미 (keomi | spider) and 개미 (kaemi | ant) resemble each other, hence a possible confusion between insects that possess mandibles and can sting.

This time, the confusion seems to occur at medium ancestry in Transeurasian where *kajama (stinging insect) seems the epenthesis of the Borean word *mar(w)a (ant), and that yields 개미 (kaemi | ant).
Transeurasian word *kumi (biting insect) originates from the Borean word *kuma (spider or biting insect) and yields 거미 (keomi | spider). 

Both words being highly similar at medium and low ancestry, there must have been a confusion between biting or stinging insects at least since medium ancestry.

IV) Many linguists have realised that ‘nuit | night’ and ‘huit | eight’ seemed similar at low ancestry, in many Indo-European languages. As long as no novel Borean speaker-related thesis can disprove the following statement, this is a mere coincidence that once more supports the limit of Homo sapiens phonologic range. ‘night’ and ‘eight’ do not seem to bear a meaningful cultural significance.

The words ‘nuit | night’ stem from the Borean word *neka ((as dark as) night) and have evolved into the Indo-European root *negw‑ (to be dark: night) or *nókʷts (nuit).
The words ‘huit | eight’ stems from the (European) Borean word *oktow, itself being composed of *kʷetwr̥- (four, quatre) and *dwóh₁ (two, deux).

If ‘eight’ and ‘night’ do not bear any cultural or ethnic significance, for instance much as night watch related to the traditional Chinese time system, their similarity would thus mainly be related to Homo sapiens phonetic range limits.

V) The words ‘worm (ver)’ and ‘fourmi (emmer)’ seem intimately related from high to low ancestry, both being creeping insects that can bite.

Borean word *mar(w)a (ant) and *kora or *kura (worm) gave descendance to Indo-European words *morwi (ant) and *kʷŕ̥mis (or *wr̥mis) (worm), which are semantically and phonologically related.

We can observe that insect roots are intimately related and often contaminate, hence the imprecision to determine which kind of insect the high ancestry root referred originally.

VI) The words ‘mer, marine’, ‘to move, mouvoir’ and ‘mère, mother, mama, maman’ seem intimately related. The author suspects that the verb ‘to move, mouvoir’ (Borean root being *mowa) stems from *mawa (sea).

Much as explained above, the word *mawa has exerted a potent influence upon Borean speakers, inasmuch as when Borean speakers would depict waters they would draw several ‘M’s since Upper Palaeolithic until the transformation of Egyptian hieroglyphs, Proto-Sinaitic writing and Phoenician alphabet into the Greek and Latin alphabet letter of ’M’. This ancestral correlation is detailed hereunder and in this paper.

The word ‘motif, motive’ originates from the Indo-European root *mew (to move), itself stemming from Borean *mowa (to move). Since Upper Palaeolithic, cave painting has shown moving patterns of cave lions and ancient megafauna, as observed in grotte Chauvet or Lascaux. The very essence of a motif seems therefore to lie within the movement given to it, and the primeval yet constant movement that seems to have influenced Borean speakers is sea itself, *mawa (sea).

The author consequently suspects that the movement of the sea and waves (*mawa) would have influenced the word to express a movement (*mowa), which itself strongly influenced the representation of motives in Palaeolithic art.

Marcel Otte (2015) explains with great accuracy this watery movement as follow:

An element as fluid as water could only be depicted by alluding a movement: namely the meander of its surface and the spiral of its backwaters.
(Original: Un élément aussi fluide que l’eau ne peut se laisser représenter que par l’allusion à un mouvement : le méandre de sa surface et la spirale de ses remous.)

As for the word for ‘mère, mother, mama, maman’, some would argue that toddlers would only pronounce simple sounds when they are born, and that the first sounds for ‘father’ and ‘mother’ should begin with ‘ma’ or ‘pa’.

Their statement would be utterly correct, should they have not forgotten the primeval palaeo-environment wherein Borean speakers grew. Borean word for ‘mère, mother, mama, maman’ is *hama, which the author suspects to be related to amniotic fluid and an ancestral comparison to this body fluid and the blue-green fluid of the sea.
This comparison is also observable in the sinogram 流 (to flow) whose bronze script form depicts an inverted child from which drips amniotic fluid.

The reader can observe the complete evolution of the letter ‘M’ and the potent influence of Borean hereunder:

Letter	Borean (circa -40 Kya to 15 Kya)	Afro-Asiatic (circa 15 Kya to 6000 BCE)	Egyptian (circa 3000 BCE)	Proto-Sinaitic (circa 1750 BCE)	Phoenician (circa 1000 BCE)	Old Greek (circa 800 BCE)	Latin (circa 600 BCE)
M	*mawa (sea) (Palaeolithic sea symbol: world)	*maʔ- (sea; water)   (Potential symbolic continuity)	mw (maw) (water)	maym (water)	mem	M mu	M   (Arabic = mim (م))

VII) The Japanese words 骨 (hone | “bone”) and English ‘bone’ both stem from the Borean word *panga (bone (general term)). They have undergone a similar phonetic evolution, supporting the author’s theory that European Borean and East-Asian Borean (Eurasian Borean, also called Nostratic or Eurasiatic) were very similar, and only slightly varied. Some low ancestry words that were not erased by time can still testify of these minor discrepancies.

At high ancestry, Borean word was *panga (bone (general term)), at middle ancestry they seemed to evolve into Eurasian Borean *pejna (bone) which might have slightly differed according to the region.
This word became *pejne (bone) in Transeurasian (‘ne’ being a nativisation suffix such as entry 8, 116) and *bʰeyh₂- (bone) in Indo-European before acquiring local pronunciations and native writings in Japanese 骨 (hone | “bone”) and ‘bone’ that enshrouds their similar origin.

VIII) The Chinese words 宵 | 霄 [xiāo] (sky) and French ‘ciel’ both stem from the Borean word *sawa (ciel), and seem to share an intimate phonological evolution, at very low ancestry.

We observe the said evolution in medieval French and medieval Chinese where 宵 | 霄 [xiāo] was pronounced /siᴇu/ and French was ‘ciel’ but plural is ‘cieulx’. Nowadays, at very low ancestry, in modern French and Chinese we can still observe their similar yet local and distinctive linguistic patterns: 宵 | 霄 [xiāo] and ‘ciel’.

IX) The following observation includes a cross-etymology which incidentally corroborates the ancestral split that took place during the 40-30 Kya Eurasian migrations when groups of Homo sapiens separated to reach Asia and Europe and interbred with local aboriginal populations.

One etymon is now commonly used to refer to ‘god’ in East-Asian language whereas the other is a casual word which bears the significance of ‘to call, to invoke’ in Indo-European language, and vice versa.

Borean *dawa (god; to invoke) gave descendance to Indo-European *deywós (dieu), Transeurasian *djaba;  ǯiaba (to invoke; to call) and Transhimalayan *tē  or *teɣ (帝) (god; divinity).

Borean *gawa (to call (; to invoke)) gave descendance to Indo-European *ǵʰewH- (to invoke, to call: god), Transeurasian *kiamo (divinity; spirit) and Transhimalayan *daw(h) 召 and 招  (to invoke).

This correlative evolution is supported by the evolution of 召 (to invoke) which was pronounced /ɖˠiᴇuH/ in medieval Chinese, strongly resembling the French word ‘dieu’.

Transhimalayan and Indo-European seem to share a particularly strong affinity; whereas Transeurasian and Indo-European seem to be diametrically opposed, due to the afore-mentioned neurolinguistics reasons and other factors that shall be developed hereunder.


X) The Borean etymon *gara (to flow) seems to imply broadly that a river flows in a valley. From this root originates Transhimalayan *g(h)rua (-t) (流) (to flow; rivulet) and Indo-European *h₃reyh₂- (to flow: ru, rivière, river). Archaic Chinese pronunciation of 流 /*ru/ immediately reminded the author of the French word ‘ru’, also stemming from the same Indo-European root and meaning ‘rivulet’.

XI) Truth, real, shells and fruits

Nature is oftentimes used to describe the most basic concepts of all things, such as “truth”, “real”.
In Indo-European, ‘truth’ seems to derive from *drew-, *deru- (firm; solid) or from *dóru (tree) and ‘real’ from *reh₁ís (well; goods). Precious goods being the real matters belonging to one, whose meaning has derived to yield ‘real’.

In modern Chinese, 實 (true; fruit) bears the meaning of ‘true; real’ and ‘fruit’, which was also transmitted into the Korean peninsula and Japan, alongside with the sinogram, without further explanations or clues in these languages either.
 
In the oracle script form of 實 (true; fruit), we can see cowries (貝), the ancient coin unit employed in ancient Xia-Shang-Zhou China, and precious things (周) under a roof (宀), which insinuate the real belongings one possesses.

The sinogram 實 (true; fruit) contains 貫 (to pierce) where we can observe two cowries strung; the former was not however influenced by the latter pronunciation as shown hereunder. We could conjecture that the Borean root *hula, Dene-Caucasian *=V́ƛV [hela], Transhimalayan *lĕŋ or *lon (to pierce) which is associated to the sinogram 貫 (to pierce) has indirectly contaminated the former meaning, adding the following word evolution: (two strung) cowries🡪real possession🡪true.

Were not 實 (true; fruit) containing 貫 (to pierce) there would not have existed any root contamination; yet the former contains the latter without being influenced by its pronunciation but rather by the meaning, hence a probable root contamination. Moreover, the two above-mentioned roots resemble each other very closely since Borean.

	實 (fruit; true)	貫 (to pierce)
Borean	*herla (nut; berry)	*hula (to pierce)
Dene-Caucasian	*HwV́rƛ̣V [hwerla]	*=V́ƛV [hela],
Transhimalayan	*lĭ(t)	*lĕŋ or *lon
Old Chinese	/*mə.li[t]/ (oracle and bronze script)	/*kˤo[n]/ or /*koːns/ (oracle and bronze script)
Medieval Chinese	/ʑiɪt̚/ (seal script)	/kuɑn/, /kuɑnH/ (seal script)
Mandarin Chinese	實 [shí] (regular script)	貫 [guàn] (regular script)

We could therefore surmise that the primeval meaning of 實 was ‘fruit; berry’ as attested by the pronunciation stemming from Borean *herla (nut; berry) and perhaps due to contamination of the phonetically similar root *hula (to pierce), this sinogram was also associated with precious goods (cowry) which are related to the real matters one possesses, then to reality and the truth.

One should also connect the sinogram 實 (true; fruit) to 果 (fruit) which bears similar graphic features since seal script, and shows a fruit tree.

With this root contamination the reader should reminisce 足 (foot; satisfied) explained hereinabove.

XII) to lie

In the English language, the word ‘to lie’ possesses two meanings: one being to deceive someone by words and the other being to lie down and sleep. 

This similar evolution from Borean seems to originate from a root contamination that becomes apparent at very low ancestry, in Middle English.

	To lie (sleep)	To lie (to deceive)
Borean	*legu	*huluga (to lie; to deceive)
Indo-European	*legʰ-	*lewgʰ-
Old English	liċġan	leogan
Middle English	lien, liggen	lien
English	lie	lie

XIII) to speak and to lie

Given that “lying” to someone is an action that implies the fact of deceiving someone by words, “lie” and “speak” must be related. The original Borean meaning should be “to be deceived by words.

	to lie	to speak
Borean	*tela (to deceive) *huluga (to lie; to deceive)	*hela (to speak) *kala (to speak) *hewa (to speak) *tera (to curse)
Japanese	tarasu 誑(たら)す (to deceive)	hanasu 話(はな)す (to speak)
English	to lie | lay	to say
(Old) Chinese	*lŭH | lu(h) (誘) [yòu] *lem (詒) [yí] *kre | *huay (欺) [qī] *gre (惑) [huò] (to deceive; to mislead)	*lə (詞 | 辭) [cí] *lām (談|譚)[tán] *ƛŏt (説)  [shuō] *kwa (云 | 曰 | 謂) [yún] [yuē] [wèi] *gwra (話) [huà] (to speak; to tell)

XIV) night and die

As it was remarked to me, before cities were lit at night, when the sun set, darkness surrounded everything. Our ancestors probably imagined eerie and malevolent creatures related to death and night, hence the resemblance of these two words in many languages at medium and low ancestry.

	night (entry 61)	to die; to harm (entry 28)
Borean	*lela (dark (as night)) *nǝka ((as dark as) night) *məra (evening, dark)	*(ha)mara (to die) *dawa | *tawa (to mourn, to die) *sewe | seje (to be grieved, saddened; to die) *neka (to die; to kill)
Daughter languages	*nǝk (黑) (dark) [hēi]   *mor or *mon (晚) (night; evening) [wǎn] night nuit	nuire, nocif, necro   mort, mourir, mal   *kham | *ghuam (戡) (to slaughter, to assassinate)   *dat; daw (逝) (to decease, to pass away)   mo (も|喪) (mourning)   mudda  묻다 (to bury)

Chinese doublets in Japanese and Korean

Chinese native writing, sinograms, is adapted to fit the Transhimalayan oral language (Neolithic signs) but also archaic and medieval Chinese correlated with oracle, bronze, seal, clerical and regular script. Sinograms are not used in Tibetan languages which have developed another native script closely resembling hanguls and kanas, and which derives from the Phoenician alphabet.

Sinograms have evolved in intimate correlation with the time and the medium upon which they were employed (bones, bronze objects, silk, bamboo, paper) but also the oral language. All major and ancestral writings of the Earth derive from Palaeolithic signs or depictions to be nativised by the local heirs of Homo sapiens at medium ancestry (Bruneteau, 2020).

Should we consider Chinese Neolithic signs, sinograms are at least 8000 years old; they have perpetuated from their basal forms the tradition of associating an idea with a local pronunciation to create a unique native writing.

Chinese sinograms were introduced into the Korean peninsula at least from 100 BCE, when Han Chinese began to set colonies upon Korean ground.
As a quirk of fate, Korean peninsulares greatly helped the introduction of sinograms into Japan, at least from the third or fourth century AD, via at least two scribes who were recorded in Japanese oldest archives.

Since sinograms were not adapted to the Japanese language, nor to the Korean language, as they both are Transeurasian languages, which location greatly differ in the Borean language tree in spite of the closeness of their ancestral dwelling, Japanese and Korean peninsulares had to use sinograms in a half phonetic half semantic fashion to write their native language, as they then lacked a native writing.

Learning and recognition of sinograms may have required several hundred years, as upon their transmission times were completely devoid of dictionaries; sinogram related knowledge was mainly conveyed orally and through sparse archives and learning books, such as the one offered to the Yamato court by the Korean scribes. 

Sinograms seemed to be officially acquired by the Yamato court as late as the beginning of the eighth century, as attested by the compilation of Japan’s first archives, the Kojiki (714 AD) and the Nihon shoki (720 AD). Assuming that sinograms were beginning to be adopted by the third or fourth century and assimilated in the early eighth century, their learning process may have required three centuries to be fully mastered, moreover only by the court.

When Korean scribes offered sinogram learning books and Buddhist manuscripts to the Yamato court, they certainly ignored that the pronunciation they had heard from the Chinese to read each sinograms consisted in native words they already knew.

All pronunciations of Chinese sinograms had already derived from a Borean, Dene-Caucasian, Transhimalayan word that has also already been nativised into Japanese and Korean several hundreds or thousands years earlier, in a local and different manner.

Japanese and Korean peninsulares have allotted to sinograms a medieval Chinese pronunciation, heard from the Chinese themselves when they discovered sinograms, but also a native pronunciation, that often stems from a Borean basal word.

We shall hereunder examine ten examples.
(Order: sinogram, Japanese native and non-native pronunciation, Korean native and non-native pronunciation):

I) 火 (fire): Transhimalayan *mējH or *mej, archaic Chinese *m̥ǝ̄́j then *hwǝ̄́j, medieval Chinese /huɑX/, and Mandarin Chinese [huǒ].

火 (fire) yields ひ (hi) and カ (ka), 불 (bul) and 화 (hwa). These four pronunciations stem from the Borean word *paha (fire) and its metathesized form *huma, expressing an action of fire or fire itself. The two native pronunciations were once nativised from Borean and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

II) 馬 (horse): Transhimalayan *mrāH or *mrāŋ, archaic Chinese /*mraːʔ/ or /*mˤraʔ/, medieval Chinese /mˠaX/, and Mandarin Chinese [mǎ].

馬 (horse) yields うま (uma) and バ (ba), 말 (mal) and 마 (ma). These four pronunciations stem from the Borean word *mara which seems to vaguely designate an ungulate such as a horse, a cow or even an antelope.

However, the word for ‘horse’ allotted to the sinogram 馬 (horse) historically originates from the Indo-European *mark(os) (mare; wild horse) since horse was first domesticated by the Eurasian steppe nomads of Yamnaya circa 3500 BCE, wherefrom the word seems to have spread.
It was once nativised into Chinese and borrowed into Japanese and Korean at medium ancestry, then once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

III) 雀 (sparrow; small bird): Transhimalayan *ćĕkʷ, archaic Chinese /*ʔsewɢ/ or /*[ts]ewk/, medieval Chinese /t͡sɨɐk̚/, Mandarin Chinese [què].

雀 (sparrow) yields すずめ (suzume) andしゃく (shaku), 참(새) (cham(sae)) and 작 (jak). These four pronunciations stem from the Borean word *tchaka (small bird) which reflects a bird chirping. The two native pronunciations were once nativised from the Borean word, and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

IV) 鴎 | 鷗 (seagull): Transhimalayan *qo(r), archaic Chinese /*qoː/, medieval Chinese /ʔəu/, Mandarin Chinese [ōu].

鴎 | 鷗 (seagull) yields かもめ (kamome) and おう (ou), 갈매기 (kalmaegi) and 구 (ku). These four pronunciations stem from a high ancestry Borean word reconstructed as *gwarmo (seagull). The two native pronunciations were once nativised from the Borean word, and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.
As we shall observe further, animal appellations often originate from their cries.

V) 海 (sea): Transhimalayan *s-mǝ̄ʔ or *me(h), archaic Chinese/*m̥ˤəʔ/ or /*hmlɯːʔ/, medieval Chinese /hʌiX/, Mandarin Chinese [hǎi].

海 (sea) yields うみ (umi) and かい (kai), 바다 (bada) et 해 (hae). These four pronunciations all stem from Borean *mawa and *wata, which were once nativised from Borean and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

VI) 犬 (dog): Transhimalaya *d-kʷəj-n, archaic Chinese /*[k]ʷʰˤ[e][n]ʔ/ or /*kʰʷeːnʔ/, medieval Chinese /kʰwenX/, Mandarin Chinese [quǎn].

犬 (dog) yields いぬ (inu) and けん (ken), 개 (kae) and 권 (kwon). These four pronunciations all stem from Borean *kwana (dog) which may transpose the dog barking in a Borean fashion. Japanese native word has undergone an initial drop which has remained in the native Korean term. All these pronunciations were once nativised from Borean and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

VII) 無 (nothing; negation): Transhimalayan *mă(H), archaic Chinese /*ma/ or /*mo/, medieval Chinese /mɨo/, Mandarin Chinese [wú].

無 (nothing; negation) yields な (na) and む (mu), 없 (eopt) and 무 (mu). These four pronunciations all stem from Borean *ma (negative order) and *he (negative verb); they were once nativised from Borean then imported through Chinese pronunciation.

VIII) 酸 (acid): Transhimalayan *śūr, archaic Chinese /*[s]ˤor/ or /*sloːn/, medieval Chinese /suɑn/, Mandarin Chinese [suān].

酸 (acid) yields す (su) and さん (san), 쓰 (ssu) and 산 (san); these four pronunciations all stem from Borean *sure (sour) which may originate from the noise or face one makes when tasting something sour: ssssu.
All these pronunciations were once nativised from Borean and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

XIX) 固 (hard): Transhimalayan *r-ka, archaic Chinese /*[k]ˤa-s/ or /*kaːs/, medieval Chinese /kuoH/, Mandarin Chinese [gù].

固 (hard) yields かた (kata) and こ (ko), 굳 (kut) and 고 (ko); these four pronunciations all stem from Borean *kata or *kara (hard). Solid and hard things are expressed in ‘k; g’ clinking sounds as a rock one could strike on a solid surface. All these pronunciations were once nativised from Borean and once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

X) 髪 (hair): Transhimalayan *pŏt, archaic Chinese /*pot/ or /*pod/, medieval Chinese /pʉɐt̚/, Mandarin Chinese [fà].

髪 (hair) yields かみ (kami) and はつ (hatsu), 가락 (karak) and 발 (bal); these four pronunciations stem from Borean *kampa (head; hair) and were once nativised from this root, then once more imported through Chinese pronunciation.

Readers aware of Indo-European doublets could parallel these Chinese doublets with Latin doublets such as:
‘word’ and ‘verb’ that both stems from Indo-European *werdʰ(h₁om) (word)
‘cave’ and ‘cavity’ that both originates from Indo-European *ḱowh₁ós (hollow)

The essence of Chinese

Chinese is an ancestral language that derives from East-Asian Borean (also called Dene-Caucasian) before evolving into Transhimalayan, archaic Chinese, medieval Chinese, and Mandarin Chinese. Its written language might be one of the oldest native writing extant continuum in the world.

In the Borean language tree, Dene-Caucasian and Transhimalayan seem already remote from East-Asian Borean (Nostratic or Eurasiatic) for both speakers to understand each other with ease, hence the difficulty to understand Chinese, even amongst other speakers of East-Asian languages.
Should we invert our vision of languages, East-Asian Borean (Nostratic or Eurasiatic) was already fairly distant from Dene-Caucasian and Transhimalayan for its speakers to comprehend the former with few efforts.

Elision (or deletion) consists in removing a syllable from a word, and seems at the very root of Transhimalayan, the direct ancestor of the Chinese language. This neurolinguistics phenomenon which distinguishes Transhimalayan speakers who seemed to select mainly one syllable to express one word has given its shape to archaic, medieval and modern Chinese.

If Transeurasian, Austroasiatic, Indo-European or Afro-Asiatic speakers cannot recognise Chinese words immediately, it mainly seems due to the elision and inherent nativisation of Transhimalayan at medium ancestry that has influenced modern Chinese.

Sinograms are Chinese speakers native writing which can fundamentally only befit Sinitic languages. Words that were shortened by elision from Transhimalayan cannot be recognised any more by third speakers due to the said phenomenon; moreover sinograms confuse speakers and learners of Chinese, as they greatly differ from other native writings that do not associate a syllable with a glyph bearing a meaning.

Metathesis, a phenomenon of syllable or sound inversion, that does not seem as axial as in Transeurasian also appears in Transhimalayan and bedevils an extern reader or learner, preventing them to recognise words immediately. These two phenomena also support the mutual misunderstandings between nowadays speakers of Borean daughter languages.

One should consider that Transhimalayan has returned to its most ancestral roots via this phonetic shift: from archaic monosyllabic words probably pertaining to lower Borean, to disyllabic words that grant more accuracy to languages, it returns to monosyllabic words.

We shall observe hereunder ten convincing examples to support the above-mentioned elision and metathesis theory, including all forms of sinogram:

I) Water (sea water) (水)

The different scripts of this sinogram show a river (probably the Yellow River or one of its affluent) and water emphasised by short strokes.

Etymon | Word	Water (probably first ‘sea water’)
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*weta (sea water)
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*=V̄[ṭ]wV [wetwa] (Palaeolithic glyph)
Transhimalayan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*tujH (Potential Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	*/*s.turʔ/ (Oracle script)
	*/*s.turʔ/ (Bronze script)
	*twǝ́j(Seal script)
	ćwǝ́j (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	水 */ɕˠiuɪX/ [tshui] (Regular script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	水 [shuǐ] (water)

II) Lake (湖 or 淵)

Borean etymon *lakwa (lake) which gave Indo-European ‘lake’ and Chinese 湖 [hú] (lake) was inverted by metathesis into *kahna (water (of a lake)) which gave Indo-European *h₁éǵʰeros or *ag’her- (lake) and Chinese 淵 [yuān] (deep pond). The latter possessing an oracle script form that is intimately related to the water Palaeolithic-Mesolithic-Neolithic glyph observed above.

淵 (deep pond) depicts water and a wide basin to contain it.

Etymon | Word	Lake (body of water)
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*lakwa and *kahna
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*laqa | laka and *qwana (Palaeolithic glyph)
Transhimalayan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*k(h)a and *qwen | qwan (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*ɡaː/ and /*qʷiːn/ (Oracle script)
	/*ɡaː/ and /*qʷiːn/ (Bronze script)
	/*ɡaː/ and /*qʷiːn/ (Seal script)
	/*ɡaː/ and /*qʷiːn/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/ɦuo/ and /ʔwen/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	湖 [hú] (lake) 淵 [yuān] (deep pond)

III) River; stream (流)

From the reconstructed oracle script to the regular script of the sinogram, we can observe an inverted infant with amniotic fluid (㐬) and water (水)

Etymon | Word	Water flow (river, stream)
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*huwa
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*=ŭGwV́ [hugwa] (Palaeolithic glyph)
Transhimalayan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*g(h)rua (-t) (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*ru/ (Oracle script)
	/*ru/ (Bronze script)
	/*ru/ (Seal script)
	/*ru/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/lɨu/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	流 [liú] (to flow; to stream)

IV) Sea (海)

Whereas Egyptians and Mesopotamian would depict sea waters by emphasizing its movement, Chinese speakers insist upon it being the mother (母) of all waters (水). Oracle script is reconstructed from other sinograms.

Etymon | Word	Sea (water)
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*mawa
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*ɦwmēɦwā [hwmelwa] (Palaeolithic glyph)
Transhimalayan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*s-mǝ̄ʔ or *me(h) (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*m̥ˤəʔ/ or /*hmlɯːʔ/ (Oracle script)
	/*m̥ˤəʔ/ or /*hmlɯːʔ/ (Bronze script)
	/*m̥ˤəʔ/ or /*hmlɯːʔ/ /*m̥ˤəʔ/ or /*hmlɯːʔ/ (Seal script)
	/*m̥ˤəʔ/ or /*hmlɯːʔ/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/hʌiX/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	海 [hǎi] (sea)

V) tree, stump (株)

This entry also supports the ancestral 40-30 Kya language split: Borean *dwara (tree; stump) yields Indo-European *deru or *dreu- (firm, solid: tree) which itself yields the common word ‘tree’ but Chinese 株 [zhū], from the same Borean root, is only a counter for tree.
If one basal word is common in European Borean, then it must be literary or specialised in East Asian Borean (Dene-Caucasian or Nostratic | Eurasiatic), and vice versa.

Chinese sinogram 株 stems from 朱 (cinnabar), probably a stump or a tree wherefrom one would extract a red pigment, implied by the small round or perpendicular bar.

Etymon | Word	Tree (stump)
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*taro
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*daró (Palaeolithic glyph)
Transhimalayan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*t(r)ŏ (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*tro/ or /*to/ (Oracle script)
	/*tro/ or /*to/ (Bronze script)
	/*tro/ or /*to/ (Seal script)
	/*tro/ or /*to/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/ʈɨo/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	株 [zhū] (stump; tree counter) from 朱 (cinnabar)

VI) Name (名)

Oracle script of this sinogram shows a moon (夕) and a mouth (口), implying that one must inform others of their presence by saying their name at night to be recognised. This denotes the importance of one’s name as a proof of identity even from such remote times.

Etymon | Word	Name
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*lamna
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*haman (?) (Palaeolithic glyph)
Transhimalayan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*miǝ̆ŋ (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*C.meŋ/ or /*meŋ/ (Oracle script)
	/*C.meŋ/ or /*meŋ/ (Bronze script)
	/*C.meŋ/ or /*meŋ/ (Seal script)
	/*C.meŋ/ or /*meŋ/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/miᴇŋ/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	名 [míng] (name)

VII)  Core; heart (核)

This sinogram being mostly phonetic, it does not bear any significant ancient script form. However, it seems to stem from the Borean word *kuru (berry; fruit) by metathesis: *reka (core; pith). 

Etymon | Word	Heart, breast
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*reka or *karta
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*lĕ(x)ḳV or *qVdV́
Transhimayalan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*rǝ̄k (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*[ɡ]ˤ<r>ək/ or /*ɡrɯːɡ/ [grek) (Oracle script)
	/*[ɡ]ˤ<r>ək/ or /*ɡrɯːɡ/ [grek] (Bronze script)
	/*[ɡ]ˤ<r>ək/ or /*ɡrɯːɡ/ [grek] (Seal script)
	/*[ɡ]ˤ<r>ək/ or /*ɡrɯːɡ/ [grek] (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/ɦˠɛk̚/ [hrek] (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	核 [hé] (core; pith)

VIII) Hole ; mouth (口)

Borean etymons for mouth and hole are closely related; all of them begin with ‘ku’ or ‘hu’: two sounds that seem to refer to opening one’s mouth to indicate something hollow by mimicking it or making one’s voice resound.

One can easily recall how they would try to shout in tunnels and caves and hear how their voice would resound; this is an ancestral reflex.

Etymon | Word	Mouth; hole
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*kuwa
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*guhv́ or *kuhv́
Transhimayalan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*ku(w) or *khuā(H) (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*kʰoːʔ/ or /*kʰˤ(r)oʔ/ (Oracle script)
	/*kʰoːʔ/ or /*kʰˤ(r)oʔ/ (Bronze script)
	/*kʰoːʔ/ or /*kʰˤ(r)oʔ/ (Seal script)
	/*kʰoːʔ/ or /*kʰˤ(r)oʔ/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/kʰəuX/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	口 [kǒu] (mouth)

XIX) To call; to shout (號)

The Borean etymon *kala may originate from the sound of someone calling another, as in many derived daughter languages, this sound seems conserved or derived to express a calling or a shouting.

From the bronze script of this sinogram one can observe that the action of shouting is implied by a howling (号) tiger (虎), a Chinese way of suggesting this action with a much revered animal.

Etymon | Word	To shout; to call
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*kala
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*=īxkwÁ [hixkwa]
Transhimayalan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*khāw or *gaw (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*ɦlaːws/ or /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤaw-s/ [graw] (Oracle script)
	/*ɦlaːws/ or /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤaw-s/ [graw] (Bronze script)
	/*ɦlaːws/ or /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤaw-s/ [graw] (Seal script)
	/*ɦlaːws/ or /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤaw-s/ [graw] (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/ɦɑuH/ [hrao] (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	號 [hào] (to shout; to call)

X) To fit, to match (合)

From the oracle script of this sinogram we can observe a kind of box or vessel upon which is placed a lid, insinuating that both of them would fit, hence the meaning.

Etymon | Word	To be united
Borean (circa 40 Kya to 15 Kya)	*kopa
Dene-Caucasian (circa 15 Kya to 10 Kya)	*gwǝ̄ṗǝ
Transhimayalan (circa 10 Kya to 6 Kya)	*kV̄p or *kup (Neolithic glyph)
Archaic Chinese (circa 2200 BCE to 300 AD)	/*kuːb/ or /*kˤop/ (Oracle script)
	/*kuːb/ or /*kˤop/ (Bronze script)
	/*kuːb/ or /*kˤop/ (Seal script)
	/*kuːb/ or /*kˤop/ (Clerk script)
Medieval Chinese (circa 600 AD to 1200 AD)	/ɦʌp̚/ (Regular Script)
Mandarin Chinese (since the 19th century)	合 [hé] (to fitch; to match)

We can now understand that at medium ancestry, since Transhimalayan, the Chinese language commenced to adopt the shape that defines it as the Chinese language.

Austroasiatic language researchers or learners would have noted that Thai language also presents the same phonetic features by selecting one syllable of a Borean word before nativising it. Thai นิด (nit | tiny) descends from Austroasiatic *na (small; tiny) which itself stems from Borean *tana (small; tiny).
Thai พูด (phut | to speak) descends from Austroasiatic *baha (to speak), which itself stems from Borean *hapa (to speak). 

Attentive readers would have remarked that the answer of these words themselves already lied within the translation: Thai นิด (nit | tiny) seems a native local adaptation of a word sharing the same root as “(ti)ny” and  พูด (phut | to speak) seems a native local adaptation of a word sharing the same root as “par(ole)” (speech; word), 言葉 (ことば |(koto)ba| word) or even 말 (mal | word).

XI) To conclude this section, the author invites readers to observe an interesting phenomenom that is inherent to Chinese.

In Transhimalayan, an « s » is added as a suffix to some sinogram pronunciations and transforms them into the opposite of the model word. Moreoever, this opposite meaning seems constantly reflected by the fourth tone.

We shall therefore observe below how 賈 (to trade) yields 價 (price) or 買 (to buy) yields 賣 (to sell) at medium ancestry:

Borean	Transhimalayan	Old Chinese	Medieval Chinese	Mandarin Chinese
*kera | *kela (to sell; to barter)	(1) *krah (賈) (to trade)	/*kraːʔ/	/kˠaX/	賈 [jiǎ]
	(2) *krahs (價) (price)	/*kraːs/ or /*C.qˤ<r>aʔ-s/	/kˠaH/	價 [jià]
*meraka | *mereka (to exchange; to barter)	(1) *mreh (買) (to buy)	/*mreːʔ/ or /*mˤrajʔ/	/mˠɛX/	買 [mǎi]
	(2) *mrehs (賣) (to sell)	/*mreːs/ or /*mˤrajʔ-s/	/mˠɛH/	賣 [mài]

English-Chinese incompatibility

For historical reasons, all earthlings are now influenced by English, a low ancestry branch of Indo-European, which has pervaded all daughter languages stemming from Borean. Recent technological words such as ‘computer’, ‘radio’, ‘plug’  derive from ancestral Borean words whose meaning has adapted to fit the era wherein they are employed.

English has become the language of the world, the idiom of globalization and research; however, this low ancestry language does not benefit all daughters of Borean, for their nativisation would not resemble the one of English.

Japanese and Korean which descend from East-Asian Borean (Nostratic | Eurasiatic) share a relatively close ancestry and their phonology bears similarities with Indo-European languages, itself descending from European Borean (Nostratic | Eurasiatic). Furthermore, Japanese and Korean native writing, kana and hangul, allow them to transcribe English sounds phonetically in a rather easy fashion. Nevertheless, even at medium ancestry, Chinese (Transhimalayan) seemed already too distant from Indo-European to be able to transcribe with ease its native sounds.
An intrusive ‘r’ sound testifies of this uneasiness when the word for ‘horse’ *márkos (wild horse; mare) was borrowed into Transhimalayan from Indo-European.

Sinograms are fundamentally only adapted to transcribe the Chinese language, and impart one sound to one sinogram that also bears one or several meanings so as to reflect with accuracy the oral language.

Indo-European languages are transcribed with alphabets that Indo-European native speakers have locally modified, and each letter of the alphabet lost its primeval meaning to become phonetic since the Phoenician alphabet (circa 1000 BCE), itself deriving from Egyptian hieroglyph influenced by Afro-Asiatiac Borean and glyphs.

Although Japanese native script, kana, derives from sinograms it is rather recent (circa 9^th century), and only conserves one sound for one glyph such as the Korean native writing, hangul. Kana and hangul therefore prove closer to the alphabet than Chinese sinograms, hence the fundamental incompatibility of Chinese and English. This difference has urged Chinese native speakers to use sinograms to express recent concepts or else to coin new sinograms, especially in specialised fields such as chemistry, physics, medicine.
We can also observe some slight differences between China and Taiwan use of sinograms, as illustrated below.

The reader shall find five compelling examples hereunder of English-Chinese incompatibility:

I) ‘News’

Korean and Japanese speakers would phonetise the word ‘news’ as 뉴스 (nyouseu) and ニュース (nyûsu) when Chinese speakers would have recourse to the word 新闻 |新聞 [xīnwén]. It can be explained as ‘newly (新) heard (闻 | 聞) (matters)’.

II) ‘Radio’

Korean and Japanese speakers would phonetise the word ‘radio’ as 라디오 (radio) and ラジオ (rajio) when Chinese speakers would coin the word 收音机 | 收音機 [shōuyīnjī].
It can be explained as ‘machine (机 |機) that records (收) sounds (音)’.

III) ‘Smartphone’

Korean and Japanese speakers would phonetize the word ‘smartphone’ as 스마트폰 (sumatupon) and スマホ (sumaho) when Chinese speakers would coin the words 智能手机 [zhìnéng shǒujī] (China) and 智慧手機 [zhìhuì shǒujī] (Taiwan).
It can be explained as ‘wise (智慧) | efficient (智能) hand (手) machine (机 | 機)’.

IV) ‘Mouse’ (device)

Korean and Japanese speakers would phonetize the word ‘mouse’ as 마우스  (maouseu) and マウス (mausu) when Chinese speakers would coin the words 鼠标 [shǔbiāo] (China) and 滑鼠 [huáshǔ] (Taiwan). It can be explained as ‘indicator (标) | gliding (滑) mouse (鼠)’.

V) ‘Plug, socket’

Korean and Japanese speakers would phonetize the word ‘plug, socket’ as 콘센트 (konsenteu) or コンセント(konsento) (concentric plug) when Chinese speakers would coin the word 插座 [chāzuò]. It can be explained as ‘inserting (插) place (座)’.

Some rare cases of new native word coining can also be observed in Japanese and Korean, such as with the word ‘refrigerator’. In the late nineteenth early twentieth century, new words and concepts from Europe had pervaded Korean and Japanese which had nativised them in their own fashion using sinograms. However, now English phonetic words prevail.

VI) ‘Refrigerator’

Japanese : 冷蔵庫 (れいぞうこ | reizôko) explained as ‘cool (冷) storage (蔵) box (庫)’
Korean (Japanese borrowing) : 냉장고 (冷蔵庫| naengjangko)
Chinese : 冰箱 [bīngxiāng] explained as ‘ice (冰) box (箱)’.

Chinese shall consequently never be able to be replaced by English nor will it be able to phonetise all recent words such as in Japanese or Korean. The sole solution when nativisation or new word coining seem peculiar to Chinese speakers’ ears, is to say the word orally as it is, or let the alphabet intrude into the written language itself, albeit in a Chinese fashion.

Words such as ‘app’ or ‘Ins(tagram)’ can be cited referring to this Indo-European concept’s intrusion into Transhimayalan.

Nativisation at high and medium ancestry

All languages of the world seem to have evolved from simple sounds into the words we currently use. This phenomenon seems especially obvious with animals, whose names are often related to the cry they emit. Medium-Upper Borean itself already seemed well nativised, should we judge by the consistency of the suffixes explained further; word nativisation must therefore have begun at least from Medium Borean (100 Kya to 40-30 Kya).

Nativisation is therefore a phenomenon whereby ancestral Homo sapiens speakers of Borean (for we ignore the languages of other hominins) observe their surroundings and transpose the inherent sounds of things that surround them into basal words.
Nativisation reveals the most basic fabric of words and explains how words themselves are coined during at least hundreds of thousands of years.

Chinese tones are especially proficient in transmitting animal cries; one should remark that animals often bear the first tone, the most representative of a long and recurrent animal cry.

We shall observe hereunder thirteen examples of this phenomenon: 

Etymon	Borean	Dene-Caucasian (DC, TH, AC, MeC, MaC)	Transeurasian (PKJ, OJK, MJK, SJK)	Indo-European
I) frog	*kwara (croaking sound (frog))	1) *xq̇wV́rV(q̇V̄) [*qwara[qa]] 2) *gwra 3) /*qʷraː/ or /*qʷreː/ 4) /ʔˠua/ 5) [wā] (蛙 | 鼃 | 䵷) (frog) Nowadays: 青蛙 [qīngwā]	1) *kero (frog; toad) 2) *kae(gu)r 3) *kaeru | *kaegur(i) 4) 蛙 (かえる|kaeru) | 개구리 (kaeguri) (frog)	1)*gʷredʰ- 2) batrachian, grenouille, rainette
II) duck	*kama (aquatic bird) (possibly imitative root, such as French, « coin coin » for ducks)	1)*qwarma (?) 2) *ɣʷăr [hwar] 3) ʔwan [hwan] 4) /ʔʉɐn/ [huan] 5) [yuān] (鴛) Nowadays: 鸳鸯 [yuānyang] (Mandarin duck)	1) *kiama 2) *kameo 3) *kamwo | *kama 4) *kamo | *kama (uji) 5) 鴨 (かも) (duck) | kamauji 가마우지 (cormoran) = 가마 + 우지 (鸕鶿)  (cormoran)	1) *h₂énh₂ts or *anǝt-, *nāt- (initial drop, then epenthesis in Latin) 2) canard
III) dog	*kwana (dog) (May originate from the dog barking, related to Borean interpretation of the sound)	1) *χHwĭ́je [kwije] 2) *d-kʷəj-n [kwen] 3) *kʰʷeːnʔ 4) kʰwenX 5) [quǎn]   (犬)  (dog) Nowadays: 狗 [gǒu]	1) *kanga (dog; puppy) 2) *kang 3) *kangi | *kam 4) *kahi | *kami 5) ookami (おおかみ|狼) (wolf) and (개) (dog) (cf. entry 68)	1) *kwon(s)- 2) dog, chien, hound
IV) spider	*kuma (spider (biting insect) related to *pema (to weave; to spun)	(No current data available)	kumo (くも|蜘蛛) (spider) related to himo (ひも|紐) (string)	*(s)pénh₁-ne- (to weave, to spun: spider) or  *(s)neh₁- (to weave: araignée)
V) crow; raven	*koro (crow) (Originates from the crow or raven croaking: the one that croaks.)	1) *xkVrV́ [kara] 2) *ɣā [qra] or *ka-n 3) *qˤa 4) /ʔuo/ 5) 鴉 [yā] 烏 [wū] (烏|鴉|鵶) (crow) yielding 鴰 (crow) Nowadays: 乌鸦 [wūyā]	1) *kiaro (crow; raven) 2) *ka(ra) 3) *kara | kar 4) *kara(su) | kar(magwi) 5) kara(su) (カラス) (crow) (su = animal suffix) (kkamagwi) 까마귀 (crow)	1)*gerə- (to croak: crow) or *ḱorh₂(wós) 2) corbeau, raven, crow
VI) sparrow	*tchaka (May refer to bird chirping)	1) *ǯăq̇wV 2) *ćĕkʷ 3) *[ts]ewk 4) /t͡sɨɐk̚/ 5) 雀 [què] (sparrow) Nowadays: 麻雀 [máquè]	1) *sercu 2) *susunmai | sae 3) *susu(n)me | sae 4) *suzume | sae 5) suzume (すずめ|雀) (sparrow) sae (새) (bird (common term))	1) *spḗr (?) (sparrow) 2) sparrow, passereau
VII) chisel	*tsok(w)a (chisel; to bore a hole) (From the sound itself: tchik, tchak)	1) *č̣wǝ̆ḳwV 2) *ʒ́hV̄kʷ 3) /*[dz]ˤawk/ 4) /d͡zɑk̚/ 5) 鑿 [záo] (chisel)	(No current available data)	Ibid
VIII) to walk; foot	*pata (foot; to walk) (May originate from the sound of walking feet: pata, pata, pata. Japanese onomatopoeia ぱたぱた (patapata) expresses a loud walking sound)	1) *pakda (?) 2) *pak 3) /*baːs/ 4) /buoH/ 5) 步 [bù] (to walk) Nowadays: 走路 [zǒulù] (to walk)	1) *(p)alca  2) *(p)al(i) 3) *pal | asi 4) *pal | ashi 5) ashi (あし|足) (foot; leg) bal (발) (foot; leg)	1) ped-or *pōd(s)‑ 2) foot, pied
IX) seagull	*gwarmo   (May originate from the seagull cry: the one that cries.)	1) *xq̇áŕmV (?) 2) *qo(r) (?) 3) *qoː 4) /ʔəu/ 5) [ōu] (鷗) (seagull)	1) *karmo 2) *kalmeo 3) *kameo | *kalmeo 4) *kamwo | *kalmeogi 5) kamome (カモメ|鷗) (seagull) galmegi 갈매기 (seagull)	*gʷel- (throat: gull, goéland) and *mew (mew: mouette)
X) fox	*kwala   (May originate from the fox yelp, yap (when caught?): the one that yelps, yaps. Related to Borean dog barking)	1) *[xq̇]wĕ[l]ʕǝ́ [qwala] 2) *kʷā 3) *ɡʷaː 4) /ɦuo/ 5) 狐 [hú] (fox) Nowadays: 狐狸 [húli]	1) *kiuti (fox) 2) *kitu 3) *kitunai | *kjyeou (?) 4) *kitune |*(k)jyeou (?) 5) kitsune (きつね | 狐) (fox) yeou (여우) (fox)	1) *h₂wl(o)p- ~ *h₂ulp- (“(red) fox”: vulpine) 2) vulpine
XI) to weave	*tǝka   (Probably related to the sound of a loom: tschik, tschik, tschik)	1) tǝkwa 2) *tak or dak or *tǝ̆k 3) *tək 4) /t͡ɕɨH/ or /t͡ɕɨk̚/ 5) 織 [zhī] (to weave)	1) *toku 2) *tah 3) *ttah 4) *ttah 5) ttahta 땋다 (to plait; to twist (rope)) (lost in Japanese)	1) *teḱ- (to make: tissue, textile)
XII) fear	*parak   (Primeval manifestation of the feeling of fear: parh, phar)	1) pahraka (?) 2) *phāk (怕 |怖) (to fear) 怕 seems from 怖 3) *pʰraːɡs 4) /pʰˠaH/ 5) 怕 [pà] (to fear) Nowadays: 害怕 [hàipà]	1) *oreka (to be frightened) 2) *enterek 3) *odworwoku 4) *odoroku 5) odoroku (おどろく | 驚く) (to be surprised; to be frightening) (lost in Korean)	1) *pr̥k- or preg (to fear: fright)
XIII) fruit and pith	*kuru (berry; fruit) (seems to be logically inverted by metathesis to yield *reka (pith; core) This seems especially apparent until Old Chinese.	1) *ḳúrV [kuru] | *lĕ(x)ḳV  [leka] 2) *ko(r) (果) |*rǝ̄k (核) 3) /*[k]ˤo[r]ʔ/ (果) | /*[ɡ]ˤ<r>ək/ (核)   4) /kuɑX/ (果) | /ɦˠɛk̚/ (核) 5) 果 [guǒ] (fruit) and 核 [hé] (core; pith)	(No current available data)	Ibid
XIV) crack, fissure	*krak (to crack) (From the sound an object or a surface makes when cracking. Fourth tone in Chinese reflects well the cracking sound.)	1) *krak 2) *krak 3) /*[k]ʰrak/ (隙)| /*qʰraːs/ (罅) 4) /kʰˠiæk̚/ (隙)| /hˠaH/ (罅) 5) 隙 [xì] 罅 [xià] (crack; fissure) 罅隙 [xià xì] (crack; fissure (literary))	(No current available data)	*krak (crack, craquelure, craqueler)
XV) to cut	*kacha | *chara (to cut into pieces) (From the sound of cutting something: kut, kut, kut, chak, chak, chak)	1) *qwat 2) *qat 3) /*kaːd/ or /*Cə-kˤat/ 4) /kɑt̚/ 5) 割 [gē] (to cut)	1) *kiro (to cut) 2) *kieor 3) *kir 4) *kiru | *kalda 5) kiru (きる|切る) (to cut) and kalda (갈다) (to hone)	1) *kes (cut)

Borean core analysis

As we delve deeper into Borean etymons and reach the phonological limits of Homo sapiens, we can observe that some language patterns are iterated amongst etymons.

I) Water suffix

The phoneme *(k)wa is recurrent in numerous etymons bearing the significance of ‘water’; we could thus surmise that it is an ancient word for ‘water’. *ma, such as in *mawa (sea) could also be related to a great body of water as it also seems recurrent.

Nativisation from Borean (high ancestry) until low ancestry has however diluted the sound, and sometimes caused it to disappear completely or partially. 

The author surmises that all water-related words are derived of *hekwa (water) whose last sound has been transposed into other etymons:

*lakwa (lake), *kahna (water (lake)), *hagara (?) (water body) (yielding *qwana (Dene-Caucasian) and *qwen, qwan (淵) (deep pool; lake)), *huwa (water flow), *mawa (sea), *weta (sea (water))

Evolution of ‘water’ into centum languages correlated with native scripts:

Borean	Cuneiform	Hieroglyph (alphabet and Arabic)	Sinograms	Mesoamerican writing	Indus Script
Palaeolithic glyph (world)	*mawa (sea)	*mawa (sea)	*weta (sea water)	*jama (water flow) *hana (water)	(No current data available)
Mesolithic glyph (world)	*maʔ- (sea; water) (Afro-Asiatic)	*maʔ- (sea; water)   (Ibid)	*=V̄[ṭ]wV [wetwa] (Dene-Caucasian) *tujH (Transhimalayan)	*jume (?) *kona (?)	Ibid
	(Sumerian I) *a (water)	(Egyptian hieroglyphs) mw (maw) (eau)	(Oracle script) */*s.turʔ/ (archaic Chinese)	Olmec script ji (?)	or Sindus (Indus river original name)
	(Sumerian II) *a (water)	(Proto-Sinaitic) maym (eau)	(Bronze script) *twǝ́j (Archaic Chinese)	or (Zapotec glyphs) nisa (?)
	(Babylonian) *a (water)	(Phoenician alphabet) mem	(Seal script) ćwǝ́j (Late archaic Chinese)	(Maya glyph) ha | ja (water lily upon water)
	(Assyrian) *a or mû (water)	M mu (Old Greek)	(Seal script) (Medieval Chinese */ɕˠiuɪX/ [tshui] (Regular script) Mandarin Chinese 水 [shuǐ] (water))
		M   (Arabic = mim (م))

Austroasiatic and Tibetan scripts mainly derive from Proto-Sinaitic which itself stems from hieroglyphs which was influenced by Afro-Asiatic Borean and glyphs. Japanese kana derive from sinograms and hangul is a recent native writing that might have been inspired by Tibetan and other native scripts of the world. These writings therefore do not appear in the above table.

II) Disyllabic words

Most of the reconstructed Borean words are disyllabic as it may have proved the easiest yet unconscious creation of words for our ancestors minds. Moreover, before Homo sapiens localized and settled in a precise location of the world, its words had to bear precision for they were mainly used as a tool to communicate, and also to ensure the success of migrations throughout the globe. Disyllabic words therefore prove a steady and accurate fashion of communicating with more precision than monosyllabic words, from which may have originated disyllabic words.

Words seem to have arisen from simple sounds related to nature, our ancestors’ surroundings and other local features such as local animals, fruits or natural structures.

However, monosyllabic words do not appear as effective enough to communicate as their phonetic range is limited; hence the unconscious recurse to disyllabic words to convey an intent. Until medial Neolithic circa 4000-3500 BCE, languages were mainly diffused orally and could not really be written and recorded.

Although we can find Palaeolithic symbols and Mesolithic petroglyphs throughout the world, native writings as we know them are only being developed during Neolithic.
Moreover the supports to transcribe and record them in a sure and accurate fashion (papyrus, paper) were also being invented during the Neolithic stricto sensu, which coincides with the slow increase in world languages basal words and the thriving of new words that are being coined at late medium ancestry (Latin, Archaic Chinese, Proto-Semitic, etc, Proto-Thai.)

Via their newly coined native writing such as sinograms, Mesoamerican glyphs, hieroglyphs, cuneiforms that really developed during the short lapse of Neolithic (circa 6000 to 2000 BCE), native languages that have evolved in a local fashion from Borean could now be recorded and words were now also written. This may have allowed words to become monosyllabic again and new native words to be created by combining ancestral words together or else by taking ancient roots to shape new words, sometimes even creating doublets.

Some disyllabic Borean words:
*paha (fire), *lela (dark (as night)), *ponga (bud, flower), *kuwa (hole; mouth), *lamna (name), *taro (tree; stump), *sala (salt), *gama (precious metal (gold)), *sawa (sky)

III) Trisyllabic words

Some rare trisyllabic words can be reconstructed. They perhaps bore a particular significance to their speakers, as if three syllables would be distinguished from their disyllabic and monosyllabic counterparts:
*hazwara | haswara (star), *wenlewa (good; kind)

The former *hazwara | haswara (star) denotes the uniqueness of these trisyllabic etymons as explained in IV) and V).

IV) Luminaries (sun and moon)

Starless night skies hanging upon illuminated gossamery cities are a recent consequence of human overpopulation.
The reader can easily imagine that when Borean speakers dwelled upon the Earth and ere the invention and spread of light in the 19-20^th centuries, the skies of the Earth reflected the darkness of the Universe, albeit dotted with countless luminaries.

The Sun and the Moon are two important heavenly bodies of the Solar system; needless to say that our ancestors had observed them closely hanging in the skies, hence the resemblances between the names of the two astral bodies and the sky in Borean etymons.

Sun	Moon	Sky	Stars
*zawa (sun; dawn)	*jana (year; moon cycle)	*sawa (sky)	*hazwara | haswara (stars)
*nera (sun; day)	*mera (moon; month)	*nana (clear sky)
*heka (?) (sun)	*hala (light; luminary)	*kuma (sky; cloud)
*tana (sun)	*talga (heavenly body (moon))		*tatcha (star; moon)

These similarities can still be observed in some low ancestry languages:

Korean: 달 (dal) (moon; month) and 날 (nal) (day)
French-English: ‘sun’ and ‘lune’


V) Fire suffix

Water and fire can be counted amongst the most important basal words as one cannot live without these ancestral entities of nature.

Consequently, there must have existed a fire suffix, perhaps opposed to the water suffix.
The suffixes *ha | *pa or *ra | *la  seem to represent fire or fire-related concepts:
*paha (fire), *nera (sun; day), *təpa (warm), *hala (light; luminary), *hase (to burn).

These suffixes allow the author to surmise that the word *hazwara | haswara (star) might in fact be composed of the suffix *ha (fire) and *sawa (sky) or *zawa (sun; dawn).
Borean speakers interpreted stars as “fire (bodies in the) sky”.
In Indo-European languages, this fire suffix has now fossilised: ‘estrella’, ‘star’, ‘astral’ , ‘astre’, and ‘étoile’.  All ‘a’ and ‘e’ appear as relics of the *ha (fire) suffix.

This could also explain the recurrent association of stars to fire in Borean etymons and daughter languages.


VI) Total word number

From the current word reconstructions estimated at 300 entries times three nuances on average, the author has almost reconstructed 900 Borean etymons.

We could therefore surmise that there existed around 1500-2000 Borean etymons which have been associated, combined or inverted by metathesis to shape the average of 200 000 words per language of the world.

VII) Mouth prefix

*ha seems a mouth prefix which originates from the sound one makes when opening the mouth « ha ». It is observable in many words referring to speaking or mouth. (cf. entry 49)

Local Borean languages

Considering Borean as the main language of Homo sapiens which migrated around the world, one would be easily tempted to believe that Borean itself was unilinear.

Nonetheless, such as the great diversity of extant dialects throughout the world, which reflect the intricacy of languages and their abundance, even Lower Borean (circa 300 Kya to 100 Kya) should not be interpreted as a uniform language.

Insofar as Borean speakers, namely most archaic Homo sapiens originated upon the African continent and did not evolved in a rectilinear way but were spread throughout these grounds in various communities, even the most archaic forms of Borean (Lower Borean) must have shown a slightly different pattern according to the region wherein they were spoken.

These discrepancies between communities would have widened as Homo sapiens speakers of Borean migrated irregularly outward the African continent; unsimilar kinds of Borean must then have been influenced by local aboriginal populations of Neanderthal, Denisovan inherent to the African grounds, but also local (palaeo-)climate, megafauna and all inherent factors of a local region of the world.

Borean languages must therefore have slightly varied such as nowadays British English and American English, Taiwanese Chinese and China Chinese, before migrating Homo sapiens settled and underwent the great Neolithic language split that definitely separated all languages of the world yet gradually granted them their current shape.

Such minor variations deepened as Homo sapiens populations settled around the globe whilst interbreeding with local communities. Linguistics patterns of local aboriginal populations and their admixture with Homo sapiens Borean speakers must have had an extrinsic impact upon locally brought Borean causing its variation.

Throughout this paper, one can verify this hypothesis by examining how Borean transformed under local aboriginal population influence and perhaps its climate and geography, which  gradually caused it to alienate from its primeval shape. Local adaptations also testify of the diversity of aboriginal deep ancestry populations of the world, and their uniqueness, for they may have played a crucial role in causing languages to differ greatly from each other during the laps of several tens of thousands years.

Much as the current great dichotomy between East Asian and Indo-European languages that seems to originate from the ancestral language split occurring 40-30 Kya, aboriginal populations’ linguistic patterns upon Borean triggered another butterfly effect that estranged all languages of the world.

Some researchers believe in the existence of a single kind of Borean for the vast continent of Eurasia, which is often referred as Nostratic of Eurasiatic. Nevertheless, these two terms depict a too simplistic canvas; there must have existed slightly different kinds of Borean according to the regions wherein they were spoken: East Asian Borean, South Asian Borean, Austronesian Borean, Central Asian Borean, Middle East Borean, Palaeosiberian Borean, and European Borean.
Each of these ancestral branches themselves must have slightly varied from one local community to another.

The kind of Nostratic or Eurasiatic we can currently reconstruct appear as a universal kind of Borean that prevailed upon others, which have now utterly extinguished. 

If rare basal words from Eurasian Borean daughter languages cannot be related to this main kind of Borean, they may be related to different kinds of local Borean that have survived through time to reach us. These words are precious relics of the past and should be cherished.

East Asian and European Borean

To corroborate the ancestral language split that should have taken place at least circa 40-30 Kya ensuing Homo sapiens migrations towards Europe and Asia and sensibly dividing European and East Asia populations (A. Yang et al., 2017), the author shall provide hereunder a list of basal words.

Basal words are located at the roots of all languages and can testify of profound upheavals occurring within languages due to extrinsic factors such as migrations or new technology.

Several tens of basal words that derive from Borean now appear as literary, specialised or simply extinct in East Asian daughter languages of East Asian Borean and common in daughter languages of European Borean, and vice versa.

This delicate phenomenon testifies of fundamental changes that have shaped East Asian and European languages, and widely deepened the discrepancies between these languages, insomuch as they became diametrically opposed to each other.

This linguistics vicissitudes seem intimately related to the East Asian ‘ego-ga’ way of thinking (cf. entry 79). In a casual discussion, Indo-European languages speakers tend to relate to themselves extrovertly but East Asian languages speakers tend to relate to themselves introvertedly. This fundamental placement of ego seems to originate from the fashion East-Asian and Indo-European speakers already related to themselves at high-medium ancestry.

The reader can observe hereunder ten convincing examples testifying the ancestral East Asian-European Borean language dichotomy:

Borean	Indo-European	Chinese	Japanese	Korean
*siga (to search) (entry 1)	*seh2g-   (to seek)	索 [suǒ] (to search) (literary)	sagasu  (さがす|探す) (to look for; to find)	chatta  (찾다) (to search)
*sawa (sky) (entry 15)	*keh₂i(-lom) (whole: ciel)	霄 | 宵 [xiāo] (sky) (literary)	sora (そら|空) (sky)	haneul (하늘) (sky)
*kala (to call; to speak) (entry 17)	*gal(o)s-, *glōs-, *golH-so- (voice, cry: to call)	號 [hào] (to call; to shout) (literary)	kataru (かたる | 語る) (to speak; to narrate) (quite literary)	karoda (가로다) (to speak  (archaism))
*lela (dark (as night)) (entry 61)	*Hréh₁trih₂. or *lāt- (night) (lost since ancient Greek)	夕 [xī] whence 夜 [yè] (night)	yoru (よる|夜) (night)	jeo(nyeok) 저(녁) (night (the side where the sun sets))
*kuma (cloud) (entry 77)	*ku-m-olo from *ḱewh₁- (to swell: cumulus) (quite specialised)	雲 [yún] (cloud)	kumo (くも|雲) (cloud)	kurum (구름) (cloud)
*huwa (to rain; to flow (water)) (entry 85)	*ur, *uh₁r- or  *awǝ-/e- (to flow, to rain: urine, urinate) (Quite archaic in this meaning)	雨 [yǔ] (rain)	Probably lost in Japanese	oranbi 오란비 (long rain)
*lepa (butterfly)	*lep (to peel, scale: lepidopteran) (Specialised and literary)	蝶 [dié] (butterfly)	Lost in Japanese but still living in Ainu: heporap, maraurep (butterfly)	nabi (나비) (butterfly)
*talga (heavenly body (moon))	*dAnǵʰ- or  *denǵʰ- (Heavenly body: Old English “tungel”)	Seems lost in Chinese	tsuki (つき|月) (moon; month)	dal (달) (moon;  month)
*zawa (sun; dawn)	*sāwel- ou *seh2wel‑, (soleil, sun: héliotrope, hélianthe)	夙 [sù] (dawn) (literary)	Seems lost in Japanese	hae 해 (sun)

Cognition of basic Chinese, Japanese and Korean

After reading the above analysis and gaining a deeper understanding of Homo sapiens languages through the prism of Borean languages, we shall now try to seize some of the reasons preventing Indo-European learners to recognise immediately Chinese, Japanese and Korean and vice versa for East-Asian learners of Indo-European languages.

The reader shall find hereunder the sentence ‘I drink water’ from Borean to nowadays Chinese, Japanese and Korean and vice versa in Indo-European:

Chinese

(I beg specialists to forgive me for not using 飲 and 吾 instead of 我 and 喝. This is merely for the sake of naturality.)

Borean (oral language) (SVO)	na hapa weta
Dene-Caucasian (oral language) (SOV)	na hwetwa hwapa
Transhimalayan (oral language) (SOV)	ŋhāj tujh hwap
Archaic Chinese (oral and written language) (SVO)	我喝水 ŋhā́j qʰrəp twej
Medieval Chinese (oral and written language) (SVO)	我喝水 ŋấ hrep swi
Mandarin Chinese (oral and written language) (SVO)	我喝水 [wǒ hē shuǐ]

Japanese

For more naturality in Japanese and Korean, we shall omit the subject, another linguistics feature that could prevent learners from understanding words instantly.

Borean (oral language) (SVO)	na lamna mawa
East Asian Borean (Nostratic, Eurasiatic) (oral language) (SOV)	na mewa lamna
Transeurasian (oral language) (SOV)	(na be) miuri be liumo
Proto-Korean-Japanese (oral language) (SOV)	((n)a pa) meolu wo (pa) nǝ̀mu
Archaic Japanese (oral and (phonetically) written language) (SOV)	(我波)水乎飲 (a ba) midu wo (ba) *nomu
Medieval Japanese (oral and written language) (SOV)	(我は)水を飲む (ware ha) mizu (w)o nomu
Modern Japanese (oral and written language) (SOV)	(私は)水を飲む (watashi wa) mizu o nomu

Korean

For more naturality in Japanese and Korean, we shall omit the subject, another linguistics feature that could prevent learners from comprehending words instantly.

Borean (oral language) (SVO)	na hama mawa
East Asian Borean (Nostratic, Eurasiatic) (oral language) (SOV)	na mewa hema
Transeurasian (oral language) (SOV)	(na hen) miuri be uma
Proto-Korean-Japanese (oral language) (SOV)	(na (h)en) meolu bul masi(da)
Archaic Korean (oral and (phonetically) written language) (SOV)	(我段)飮水 (a neun) meul (b)ul masida
Medieval Korean (oral and written language) (SOV)	(나는)믈을 마시다 (na neun) meul ul mashida
Modern Korean (oral and written language) (SOV)	(나는) 물을 마신다 (na neun) mul ul mashinda

Indo-European

Borean (oral language) (SVO)	haga tara (?) weta
Eurasian Borean (Nostratic, Eurasiatic) (oral language) (SVO)	(h)ega wete tera
Indo-European (oral language) (SVO)	eǵóh₂ dregō wódr̥
Proto-Germanic (oral language) (SVO)	ek drinkō watōr
Archaic English (SVO)	iċ drince wæter
Medieval English (SVO)	ich drynke water(e)
Modern English (SVO)	I drink water

Basal words in some daughter languages of all great language families

Would one want to learn a language or understand further all languages of the world, they should not limit themself to medium ancestry languages such as Transhimalayan, Proto-Semitic, Proto-Thai or Transeurasian.

Their vision of languages and the world shall broaden once they have realised that all Homo sapiens languages stemming from Borean are related since at least Middle Palaeolithic.

Should it be to research or learn a low or medium ancestry language, a very broad spectrum embracing all levels of ancestries of a language shall bring tremendous strength and help to one to comprehend details they could not have otherwise seized. Espousing the complete canvas of language indubitably conducts to deepen the understanding of the said languages, until their innermost nuances and details.

Some languages are introduced in a relatively biased fashion as ‘difficult even for native speakers’; this difficulty can be explained by the local fashion they have developed from Borean, related to their deep ancestors, their lithic industry, the local palaeo-climate and their mindset.

Nonetheless, should one accept that all languages of Homo sapiens stem from at least one form of Borean that gradually localised, their studies and learning shall prove less difficult.
Once local difficulties of languages such as pronunciation, tones, tonic accent, native scripts are obviated, one can devote themselves to languages with much more ease.

One should now forget the reductive thinking advocating that languages are difficult and that some of them are even too difficult for native speakers themselves.

Within all of us lie the keys to understand and speak all languages of the world.

Tibetan	Arabic	Thai	Chinese	French	Japanese Korean
Borean: *weta (water)	Borean: *sawa (sky)	Borean: *paha (fire)	Borean: *siga (to seek)	Borean *bata (to build)	Borean *kala (to go; to come)
Dene-Caucasian: *wetwa (water)	Afro-Asiatic *samay- (sky)	Austroasiatic: *ʔpuj-X [put] (fire)	Dene-Caucasian *seg(w)a (?)	Indo-European: *bhu- or *bʰuH- (to live, to dwell)	Transeurasian: *gele (to come; to go)
Transhimalayan: *tujh (water)	Proto-Semitic:  *šamāy- (sky)	Proto-Thai: *pai (fire)	Transhimalayan: *sɨāk (索) (to seek)	Latin: bastire (to build)	Proto-Korean-Japanese: *kear(a)
Tibetan:  ཆུ (chu) (water)	Arabic: سَمَاء (samah) (sky)	Thai:  ไฟ (fai) (fire; light)	(Oracle, bronze, seal, regular script) Mandarin Chinese: 索 [suǒ] (to seek) is now literary and replaced by 找 [zhǎo] (to search; to find)	French: bâtir (to build)	Japanese: (来る | くる | kuru) (to come) Korean: 가다 (kada) (to go)

Chinese and Tibetan pertain to the same Transhimalayan language family, yet they can illustrate how languages can differ even amongst the same family, due to the vicissitudes of time and history.

A short evolution of Tibetan writing from Borean and Palaeolithic art-writing (letter ཆ (cha):

Palaeolithic art-writing sign	Mesolithic-Neolithic art-writing sign	Hieroglyph	Proto-Sinaitic	Phoenician	Aramaic	Brahmi	Gupta	Tibetan
Borean *tchaha (to drive; to hunt)	Afro-Asiatic *c̣awad-/*c̣ayad- (to hunt)	swt (sedge; fish hook) (Possible root contamination between fish hook root and sedge root)	saday (plant)	sade	ṣ [sˤ]	ca 𑀘 (c) wherefrom developed 𑀙 (ch)	ch	ch- ཆ (cha)

Hebrew	Spanish	Turkish	Vietnamese	Hindi	Mongol
Borean: *hase (to burn)	Borean: *para ((to) rain; to snow)	Borean: *bula (cloud)	Borean: *taha (earth; soil) from *taka (earth; soil)	Borean: *para (to fly)	Borean: *kewa (to shout; voice) (to make one’s voice heard?)
Afro-Asiatic: *his- (to burn; fire)	Nostratic (European Borean): *pura	Nostratic (Eurasian Borean): *bulu (cloud)	Austroasiatic: *tVʔ (taj) (earth; soil)	Nostratic (European Borean): *pura (to fly)	Nostratic (Eurasian Borean): *kuwa
Proto-Semitic: *hiss-	Indo-European: *plew- (to wash, to pour)	Transeurasian: *bŭlu (cloud)	Proto-Vietic: *tət (earth; soil)	Indo-European: *peth₂- (to fly) (to fly🡪feather🡪 leaf)	Transeurasian: *ki̯ube (voice; sound)
Hebrew: אֵשׁ (eish) (fire)	Spanish: lluvia (rain)	Turkish: bulut (cloud)	Vietnamese: đất (earth; soil)	Hindi: पत्ता (patta) (leaf)	Mongol: хэв ᠬᠡᠪ (xub) (voice)

Borean	Austro-asiatic	Indo-European	Transeurasian	Transhimalayan	Afro-asiatic
*sawa (sky) (1) →	↓(2) *wan	*(s)keh₂i(-lom)	*siog(u)nara	*s(k)ew	*samay-
	*va(n)	*kailom	*sanora	/*sew/ /siᴇu/	*šamay-
	ฟ้า (fáa) (sky) (Thai)	ciel (French)	空 (そら | sora) 하늘 (haneul) (sky) (Japanese | Korean)	(霄 | 宵) [xiāo] (sky (formal)) (Chinese)	سَمَاء (samah) (sky) (Arabic) שָׁמַיִם‎ (šāmáyim) (Hebrew)

Borean glyphs explanations

Borean languages seem to have evolved concomitantly to art-writing and given rise to all native scripts of the Earth. In order to coin a Borean native writing, one must then base themself upon Borean daughter languages native writings, such as cuneiforms, sinograms, hieroglyphs, or Maya glyphs.

The author explains hereunder how he has forged the native Borean glyphs:

I) This first glyph is inspired of the oracle script of 舌 (tongue) where we can see a tongue going out of a mouth and sound indicated by two strokes. Egyptian and cuneiform also resemble this depiction.


II) The second glyph is inspired by the oracle script form of 土 (earth) where we can see a lump of earth and also a hieroglyph of a mountain meaning ‘earth’.


III) The third glyph is inspired by an Egyptian hieroglyph of a mummy which lies on a bed and signifies ‘to lie’ to which was added a stroke above to reinforce the meaning.


IV) The fourth glyph is a recipient to which was added a stroke showing the inside part of it. It is also inspired by the shape of the sinogram 山 (mountain)


V) The fifth glyph is a creation of the author when he wondered how to imply ‘us’. By joining two hands and implying two persons.

Conclu-discussions

We have examined above how all languages and native writings of the world pertaining to Homo sapiens were related in the innermost fabric, namely basal words. It is presently arduous to discuss further than Medium-Upper Borean philologically-wise, or to determine which sounds seemed native to Homo sapiens and which could appertain to other hominin species.

Much as the article upon the concomitant development of writing and languages, this paper should not be concluded with hermetic lines; it should grant wings to future research workers to broaden their fields of view and embrace language diversity as a whole even though they desire to study a specific and precise domain.

Even nowadays, we can observe that narrow views of languages and their native writing persist throughout the world. Languages and all ancestral native writings of the world emerge from a secular and concomitant evolution since Lower Palaeolithic; yet their history remains obscure and simply unexplored whereas it should be correlated to various domains and produce great scientific results; it should allow modern Homo sapiens to comprehend their origins and all forms of native languages and writings. 

Research, even in a very specialised field, cannot be detached from other fields; contrarily, gathering different minds and fields to study a specific subject shall grant every participant the opportunity to shine and help others to seize their own field with more precision.

Borean languages themselves, and their medium ancestry descendance remain poorly understood, and should be studied further for they represent the greatest extant language legacy of humanity.

Young and more elderly research workers or like-minded people should now together mine the unfathomable galleries of time, knowledge, and languages.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my deepest gratitude towards Brendan Geer who took the time to review this article.

References

 

Ancient pronunciation reconstructions

S. A. Starostin (2003), A. V. Dybo, O. A. Mudrak, An Etymological Dictionary of Altaic Languages

Robbeets Martine (2005),  »Is Japanese related to Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic?

Wiktionary (based upon Baxter-Sagart (2014) and Zhengzhang (2003) for old Chinese reconstructions, Indo-European, Afroasiatic, Austroasiatic, Transhimalayan)
[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Main_Page]

STED (Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus)
https://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl

Sergei Starostin database Starling
https://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/query.cgi?basename=\data\sintib\stibet&root=config&morpho=0

The American Heritage of English language
https://ahdictionary.com/word/indoeurop.html#gher%C9%99-

Bruneteau Nicolas, Table de langues communes (2020) (unpublished)

FF-Ainu
https://www.ff-ainu.or.jp/teach/files/saru_tango.pdf

アイヌ語電子辞書　Aynu Online Dictionary by TOMITA Takashi
http://tommy1949.world.coocan.jp/aynudictionary.htm

Montgomery John, “Dictionary of Maya Hieroglyphs” [http://research.famsi.org/montgomery_dictionary/mt_search.php]

Wiktionary cuneiform list
[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Cuneiform_script_characters]

S’gaw Karen dictionary
https://glosbe.com/ksw

French-Tibetan dictionary
https://glosbe.com/fr/bo

Nuosiyi Chinese-English glossary
https://www.webonary.org/nuosuyi/?lang=en

Mongol dictionary
http://www.bolor-toli.com/

American native languages dictionary
http://www.native-languages.org/vocabulary.htm

Maori dictionary
https://maoridictionary.co.nz/

English-Vietnamese dictionary
https://vdict.com/

Aztec glyph
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Atl

Turkish dictionary
http://www.turkishdictionary.net/

Multi-function Chinese Character Database
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/

Chinese linguipedia
http://www.chinese-linguipedia.org/index.html

References II

Adelaar K. Alexander (2006), “Chapter 4. Borneo as a Cross-Roads for Comparative Austronesian Linguistics”

Agranat-Tamir Lily et al. (2020), “The Genomic History of the Bronze Age Southern Levant”

A. Klyosov Anatole (2010), “Origin of the Jews and the Arabs: Date of their Most Recent Common Ancestor is Written in their Y-Chromosomes – However, There Were Two of Them”

A. Yang Melinda et al. (2017), “40,000-Year-Old Individual from Asia Provides Insight into Early Population Structure in Eurasia”

Benozzo Francesco & Otte Marcel (2017), “SPEAKING AUSTRALOPITHECUS A New Theory on The Origins of Human Language“

Blust Robert (2013), “The Austronesian languages Revised Edition”

Brown Samantha et al. (2015), “Identification of a new hominin bone from Denisova Cave, Siberia using collagen fingerprinting and mitochondrial DNA analysis”

C. Lamnidis Thiseas et al. (2018), “Ancient Fennoscandian genomes reveal origin and spread of Siberian ancestry in Europe”

Demetera Fabrice et al. (2012), “Anatomically modern human in Southeast Asia (Laos) by 46 ka”

E. D. Pohl Marie et al. (2002), “Olmec Origins of Mesoamerican writing”

E. Platt Daniel et al. (2016), “Mapping Post-Glacial expansions: The Peopling of Southwest Asia”

Everett Caleb et al. (2014), “Climate, vocal folds, and tonal languages: Connecting the physiological and geographic dots”

Fay Nicolas et al. (2014), “From sign to system in human communication and language”

Feldman Michal et al. (2019), “Ancient DNA sheds light on the genetic origins of early Iron Age Philistines”

Fregel Rosa et al. (2018), Ancient genomes from North Africa evidence prehistoric migrations to the Maghreb from both the Levant and Europe

Gaibar Maria et al. (2011), “Genetic differences among North African Berber and Arab-speaking populations revealed by Y-STR diversity”

Gaibar Maria et al. (2012), ‘’Usefulness of autosomal STR polymorphisms beyond forensic purposes: data on Arabic- and Berber-speaking populations from central Morocco’’

Gardiner Alan (1927), “Gardiner’s sign list of Egyptian Hieroglyphs” from “Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs”

Gell-Manna Murray and Merritt Ruhlen (2011), “The origin and evolution of word order”

Haber Marc et al. (2013), ”Genome-Wide Diversity in the Levant Reveals Recent Structuring by Culture”

Haber Marc et al. (2017), ‘’Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences’’

Hallast Pille et al. (2020), “A Southeast Asian origin for present‑day non‑African human Y chromosomes”

Hong Shi et al. (2013), “Genetic Evidence of an East Asian Origin and Paleolithic Northward Migration of Y-chromosome Haplogroup N”

Honkola T. et al. (2013), “Cultural and climatic changes shape the evolutionary history of the Uralic languages”

Hudson Kathryn Marie and S. Henderson John (2018), “Writing Pictures and Painting Words: The Inherent Hybridity of Maya Writing”

Janhunen Juha (2009), “Proto-Uralic—what, where, and when?”

J. Schuenemann Verena (2016), ‘’Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods”

Kettunen Harri and Helmke Christophe (2014), “Introduction to Maya Hieroglyphs”

Kristiansen Kristian et al. (2017), “Re-theorising mobility and the formation of culture and language among the Corded Ware Culture in Europe”

Lazaridis Iosif et al., (2018), “Paleolithic DNA from the Caucasus reveals 1 core of West Eurasian ancestry”

L. Baker Jennifer (2017), “Human ancestry correlates with language and reveals that race is not an objective genomic classifier”

L. Bongersa Jacob et al. (2020), “Integration of ancient DNA with transdisciplinary dataset finds strong support for Inca resettlement in the south Peruvian coast”

Le Quellec Jean-Loic (2014), “PREHISTORY IN NORTH AFRICA AFTER THE MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC”

Liu Dang et al. (2020), “Extensive Ethnolinguistic Diversity in Vietnam Reflects Multiple Sources of Genetic Diversity”

Marcus Joyce (1976), “The origins of Mesoamerican writing”

McColl Hugh et al. (2018), “The prehistoric peopling of Southeast Asia”

M. D. Pohl John and Urcid Serrano Javier (2006), “A Zapotec Carved Bone”

Meyer Matthias et al. (2012), “A HIGH COVERAGE GENOME SEQUENCE FROM AN ARCHAIC DENISOVAN INDIVIDUAL”

M. Narasimhan Vagheesh et al. (2019), “The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia”

Montgomery John, “Dictionary of Maya Hieroglyphs”
[http://research.famsi.org/montgomery_dictionary/mt_search.php]

Moreno-Mayar J. Víctor et al. (2018), “Terminal Pleistocene Alaskan genome reveals first founding population of Native Americans”

Moreno-Mayar J. Víctor et al. (2018), “Early human dispersals within the Americas”

Muisuk Kanha et al. (2019), “Allelic frequencies of fifteen autosomal STRs in the northeastern Thai people”

N. Garrard Andrew and F. Byrd Brian (2013), ‘’BEYOND THE FERTILE CRESCENT Late Palaeolithic and Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe’’

Nakatsuka Nathan et al. (2020), “A Paleogenomic Reconstruction of the Deep Population History of the Andes”

Nakatsuka Nathan et al. (2020), “Ancient genomes in South Patagonia reveal population movements associated with technological shifts and geography”

Otte Marcel (2006), ‘’Origines du langage : sources matérielles”

Otte Marcel (2015), ‘’Sémantique et sémiotique des arts préhistoriques’’

Otte Marcel (2015), “Des steppes aux déserts, à l’Aurignacien. Les hommes modernes venus d’Asie”

Otte Marcel (2015), “APTITUDES COGNITIVES DES NÉANDERTALIENS”

Otte Marcel (2018), “Indo-Europeans Arrived in Europe with Modern Man”

Parpola Asko, ‘’Deciphering the Indus Script’’
[http://mohenjodaroonline.net/index.php/indus-script/corpus-by-asko-parpola]

Posth Cosimo et al. (2018), ‘’ Reconstructing the Deep Population History of Central and South America’

Raghavan Maanasa et al. (2016), “Genomic evidence for the Pleistocene and recent population history of Native Americans”

R. Browning Sharon (2018), “ Analysis of Human Sequence Data Reveals Two Pulses of Archaic Denisovan Admixture”

Reich David, ‘’Who we are and how we got there”, Oxford University Press, 2018

Reich David (2018), “Ancient DNA Suggests Steppe Migrations Spread Indo-European Languages”

Reich David et al. (2012), “Reconstructing Native American Population History”

Reilly F. Kent (2004), “The Lazy-S: A Formative Period Iconographic Loan to Maya Hieroglyphic Writing”

Robbeets Martine (2017), “Language Dispersal Beyond Farming”

Rodriguez Martinez, Ma. del Carmen et al. (2006), “Oldest Writing in the New World”

R. Jones Eppie et al. (2015), “Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians”

R. Rogers Alan et al. (2017), “Early history of Neanderthals and Denisovans”

Ruhlen Merritt (1998), “The origin of the Na-Dene”

Saag Lehti et al. (2019), “The Arrival of Siberian Ancestry Connecting the Eastern Baltic to Uralic Speakers Further East”

Sagart Laurent et al. (2019), “Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan”

Serra-Vidal Gerard et al. (2019), “Heterogeneity in Palaeolithic Population Continuity and Neolithic Expansion in North Africa”

Sidwell Paul and Blench Roger (2011), “The Austroasiatic Urheimat: the Southeastern Riverine Hypothesis”

Singh Prajjval Pratap et al. (2019), “Counting the paternal founders of Austroasiatic speakers associated with the language dispersal in South Asia”

Singh Prajjval Pratap et al. (2020), “Dissecting the paternal founders of Mundari (Austroasiatic) speakers associated with the language dispersal in South Asia”

Skoglund Pontus et al. (2015), “Genetic evidence for two founding populations of the Americas”

Spriggs Matthew and Reich David (2019), “An ancient DNA Pacific journey: a case study of collaboration between archaeologists and geneticists”

Srithawong Suparat et al. (2015), “Genetic and linguistic correlation of the Kra–Dai-speaking groups in Thailand”

Stade Cory Marie (2020), “Theory of mind as a proxy for Palaeolithic language ability”

Tambets Kristiina et al. (2018), “Genes reveal traces of common recent demographic history for most of the Uralic speaking populations” The Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary [http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/nepsd-frame.html]

T. Kivisild et al. (1999), “Deep common ancestry of Indian and western-Eurasian mitochondrial DNA lineages”

Vernot Benjamin et al. (2016), “Excavating Neandertal and Denisovan DNA from the genomes of Melanesian individuals”

Wang Chuan-Chao et al. (2020), “The Genomic Formation of Human Populations in East Asia“

Wolf Sibylle et al. (2017), “The Use of Ochre and Painting During the Upper Paleolithic of the Swabian Jura in the Context of the Development of Ochre Use in Africa and Europe”

Wibhu Kutanan et al. (2011), “Genetic structure of the Mon-Khmer speaking groups and their affinity to the neighbouring Tai populations in Northern Thailand”

Wikipedia, Aramaic Alphabet
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_alphabet]

Wikipedia, Brahmi Script
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmi_script]

Wikipedia, Cuneiform
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuneiform]

Wikipedia, Gupta Script
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_script#cite_note-10]

Wikipedia, List of cuneiform signs
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cuneiform_signs]

Winters Clyde (2011), “Olmec (Mande) Loan Words in the Mayan, Mixe-Zoque and Taino Languages”

Borean words reconstructions

Word (etymon)	Middle-Lower Borean (circa 60 | 30 Kya to 10 Kya)	Indo-European (circa 10 Kya to 3500 BCE)	Transeurasian (circa 15 Kya to 6000 BCE)	Transhimalayan (10 000 to 6000 BCE)	Ancient (2200 BCE to 300 AD) and medieval (600 to 1300 AD) Chinese	Mandarin Chinese (from 1918 AD)	Proto-Korean-Japanese (circa 3500 BCE)	Japanese (circa 1900 AD)	Korean (circa 1900 AD)
1) to seek (chercher)	*sega (to search)	*seh2g-   (to seek) and *(s)ker- (to turn around: chercher)	*siga (to look, to search)	*sɨāk (索) (to search)	*[s]ˤak/ /sɑk̚/ (索) (archaism) or /*ʔsruːʔ/  /t͡ʃˠauX/ (找)  (more recent)	索 [suǒ] or 找 [zhǎo]	*tchaga	sagasu (さがす|探す) (to look for; to find)	chatta (찾다) (to search)
2) to scoop water (écoper)	*skupa (?) (to scoop water) (Perhaps from the noise one makes when scooping water)	*(s)kep-   (to cut: écoper, scoop)	*suku (to scoop; bucket)	*guap (汲) (to scoop water)	/*krɯb/ */kˠiɪp̚/ (汲)	汲[jí]	*suk	sukuu (すくう | 掬う) (to scoop)	sokuri (소쿠리) (scoop; ladle)
3) to sit ((s‘)asseoir)	*swetu (to seat)	*sed-   (to sit, (s’as)seoir)	*siabu (to sit)	*cōjH or *dzojs (坐) (to sit) giving (座) (seat)	/*zoːls/ or  /*[dz]ˤo[j]ʔ/, /*m[dz]ˤo[j]ʔ/, /*[dz]ˤo[j]ʔ-s/  /d͡zuɑX/ or /d͡zuɑH/ (坐(|座))	坐 [zuò] (nowadays:座)	*suab	suwaru (すわる | 座る) (to seat)	jari (자리) (seat) but formerly (s(t)at) (seat) or saori 사오리 (seat, bench) (archaism)
4) to follow (suivre)	*swoki (follow)	*sekʷ- (to follow: suivre)	*sioci (to flee; to pursue)	*(s)jŏj | *swois (隨) (to follow (formal))	/*sə.loj/ or  *s‑wa/*soi /ziuᴇ/ (隨)	隨 [suí]	*tseot | sitag	shitagau (したがう|従う) (to obey; to follow)	jotta (좇다) (follow)
5) to come (venir)	*kǝra | *geme (to come; to go)	*gʷem- (to come, venir)	*gele (to come)	*krɨā(H) (~g-; -ŋ) (行) (to go) possibly from  *kha去 (to go)	/*ɡraːŋ/ or /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤraŋ/  /ɦˠæŋ/ (行)	行 ([xíng]) [háng]	*kear(a)	kuru (くる | 来る) (to come)	kada 가다 (to go) and
6) to catch, to grab (capter)	*kapu | *hapu (to catch, to grasp) and *kǝma | *kǝba (to grab, to catch) and *tǝka | *turi (to lift, to take)	*kap- (to catch) and *gʰrebʰ- (to grab) and  *deh₁g- (to touch, to take)	*upi or *kapi (to grasp, to snatch) (initial drop in Transeurasian) and *tuku (to grab, to catch) and *tiro (?) (to take)	ghŭp (to seize) lost in Chinese whence (?) *kʷ(r)ăk (~gʷ) (攫) or (獲) (to catch; to seize) and *rV̆m or *greum (禽|擒) and  *dhjē(k) (提) (to lift, to take)	/*kʷaɡ/ or /*C.qʷ(r)ak/  /kʉɐk̚/ (攫) and /*ɡrɯm/ /*C.ɢ(r)[ə]m/ /ɡˠiɪm/ (禽|擒) and  /*dje/  /*[d]ˤe/  /dei/ (提)	攫 [jué] (to catch) (formal) 獲 [huò] (to catch) and 禽 | 擒 [qín] (to catch birds) and 提 [tí] (to carry, to lift)	*u(m)pa | *jap and *ta(kam) and *teor	ubau (うばう|奪う) (to steal, to snatch) and tsukamu (つかむ|掴む) (to catch) and toru (とる|取る) (to take)	ubida 우비다 오비다 (to snatch (by luring)) or japta 잡다 (to seize) and datta 닿다 (to touch) and deulda 들다 (to take)
7) mosquito; fly (mouche, moustique)	*musa | *muna (flying insect) (May originate from the buzzing sound of the mosquito or the fly.)	*mus-, *mu-, *mew- (mouche, midge(t), mosquito, moustique)	*mabci (worm, insect) (« ci » seems to be a suffix for animals)	*mVn (蚊(螡|蟁)) (mosquito) à lier à 蠓 (moustique) cognate with 蛑|蟊 (a kind of fly)	/*C.mə[r]/ or /*mɯn/  /mɨun/ (蚊) (‘s’ is nasalized into ‘n’)	蚊 [wén] (mosquito)	*mu(s)	mushi (むし | 虫) (insect) (shi = animal suffix)	mogi (모기) (mosquito) (assimilation « s » into « g » +i (이) suffix for animals)
8) crab (crabe)	*kreba (crab)	*grobʰ- (to catch: crab(e))	*kejna (crab)	*q(r)ē(j)H or  *d-k(j)aːj (蟹) (crab)	/*ɡreːʔ/ or /*m-kˤreʔ/ /ɦˠɛX/ (蟹)	蟹 [xiè] (crab)	*kǝ(ni)	kani (カニ | 蟹) (crab)	ke (게) (crab)
9) sparrow (passereau)	*tchaka (May refer to bird chirping)	*spḗr (?) (sparrow)	*sercu (sparrow)	*ćĕkʷ (雀) (sparrow)	/*ʔsewɢ/ or /*[ts]ewk/ /t͡sɨɐk̚/ (雀)	雀 [què] (sparrow)	*susunmai  *sae	suzume (すずめ|雀) (sparrow)	sae (새) (bird (common term)) chamsae 참새 (sparrow) = 雀 (sparrow) + 새 (bird)
10) crow, raven (corbeau ; corneille)	*koro (raven; crow) (Originates from the crow or raven croaking: the one that croaks.) Proto-Semitic: *ḡurayb- (crow, raven), hence غُرَاب (gurab)	*gerə- (to croak: crow) or  *ḱorh₂(wós) (corbeau, raven)	*kiaro (crow; raven)	*ɣā or  *ka-n (烏|鴉|鵶) (crow) yielding 鴰 (crow)	/*qaː/ /*[ʔ]ˤa/, /*qˤa/, /*ʔˤa/ /ʔuo/ (烏) and /*qraː/ or /*qˤra/ /ʔˠa/ [鴉]	鴉 [yā] 烏 [wū] (both “crow”)	*ka(ra)	kara(su) (カラス) (crow) (su = animal suffix)	(kamagwi) 까마귀 (crow)
11) key; hook (clef; crochet)	* kuka (bend (as a hook)) (May originate from the sound of a locking door or clinking metal) French: cric crac English: click Japanese: がちゃん (gatchan). Many words resembling hooks or keys have “k” beginning.)	*kog- or *keg- or *keng- (hook; key; crochet)	*guka (to curve; hook)	*khjŏk (句 | 鉤) (to be crooked; hook)	/*[kˤ](r)o/ or /*koː/ /kəu/ (鉤) (hook)	鉤 [gōu] (hook)	*kog; kag	kagi (カギ|鍵) (key)	(kal)gorangi (갈)고랑이 (hook) which might have yielded Kuburida or kubda 구부리다 or 굽다 (to be crooked as a hook))
12) seagull (mouette)	*gwarmo (seagull) (May originate from the seagull cry: the one that cries.) (The Transeurasian word seems a combination of the two PIE roots or the two PIE roots separated from the Borean etymon) (related to entry 176)	*gʷel- (throat: gull, goéland) and *mew (mew: mouette)	*karmo (seagull)	*qo(r)” word lost or absent in Transhimalayan 鷗 (seagull) (maybe related to entry 176) 鷖 (seagull; widgeon) being also onomatopoeic	/*qoː/  /ʔəu/ (鷗) (seagull)	鷗[ōu] (seagull)	*« kalmeo»	kamome (カモメ|鷗) (seagull) from kamo (カモ | 鴨) (duck) かも (duck (aquatic bird) + め (bird living in flocks suffix) (cf. entry 176)	galmegi 갈매기 (seagull) 갈매 (aquatic bird) + 이or 기 (animal suffix)
13) high (haut)	*huka (high)	*kewk- (arch; vault: high, haut)	*koke (big)	*k(r)ā̆w or *m/s-gaw (head) whence (高|蕎) (high; great)	/*kaːw/ or /*Cə.[k]ˤaw/ /kɑu/ (高)	高 [gāo]	*keo(k)	ookii (おおきい|大きい) (big) perhaps from ooi (おおい|多い) (plenty)	(keuda) 크다 (big)
14) to cook, to bake (cuire)	*bege | *gube (to bake; to heart) hence *paku (to cook)	*bʰeh₃g- (to roast: to bake) hence  *pekʷ- (to cook: cuire)	*giube (to roast, to smoke) (Metathesis in Transeurasian) and *pialaga (house (related space or vessel))	(?) and *[ph]ǝw (炮) (to fry; to sauté) related to 焙(/*[b]ˤə-s/) (to cook, to bake) and 昲 (to bake, to heat)	/*pʰruːs/ (炮)	炮 [páo]	*kubeor | kabeor and *peyla	kaoru (かおる|香る) (to smell (of smoke ?) and he (瓮|へ) (archaism: jar-vessel for food) or (へ| 竈) (hearth (to cook food))	kubda 굽다 (to bake) and param 바람 (wall (of a house))
15) sky (ciel)	*sawa (sky) and *kula (to hide (something hiding the sky)) (The bronze script of宵 (sky) clearly indicates that the moonlight diminishes to leave the (hidden) night sky behind) Proto-Semitic:  *šamāy- hence سَمَاء (samah (sky))	*(s)keh₂i(-lom) (whole: ciel) and *(s)keu- (to hide; to mask: sky)	*si̯og(u)nara (sun; sky) and *gela (to screen) (Also cf. entry 282)	*s(k)ew 霄 | 宵 (sky (literary)) and *m-ka-n(heaven; sun; sky) (乾) cognate with 穹 (sky; vault) and (this word is optional as it seems more recent) *s-riŋ or s-r(j)aŋ (to live; fresh)applied to蒼 (sky) cognate with青 (blue-green), 生 (to live) and 晴(clear sky)	/*sew/  /*[s]ew/  /siᴇu/ (霄 | 宵) and /*ɡran/ /*[ɡ](r)ar/ /ɡˠiᴇn/ (乾) and *sʰaːŋ/, or /*sʰaːŋʔ/ or /*[tsʰ]ˤaŋ/  /t͡sʰɑŋ/, /t͡sʰɑŋX/ (蒼)	霄 | 宵 [xiāo] 乾 [qián] 蒼 [cāng]	*sanor(a) and *karumae	sora (そら|空) (sky) and kasumu (かすむ| 霞む) (to be misty)	haneul (하늘) (sky) and geurimja 그림자 (shadow)
16) to cut, to shear (couper, tailler)	*kacha (to cut into pieces) and *seka (to cut off) and *chala | *chara (to cut; to split) (Many cutting-related words imitate an abrupt cutting sound.) Proto-Semitic: *ḳud- (to cut) hence قطع (to cut)	*(s)ker- or *kes (to cut: to scrape, cortex, to share) or *sek (to cut: scier, saw, scythe, section) and *(s)kel- (to cut; to split: shelf, coutre, couteau)	*kasi (to cut into pieces) and *soke (to chop) and *charo (to cut off) or *chalu (to cut with a sharp instrument) or *kiro (to cut)	*qāt (割) (to cut off) and *sek 析 (to split wood) and *ch[ē]t (切) (to cut)	/*kaːd/ or /*Cə-kˤat/ /kɑt̚/ (割) and  /*seːɡ/ or  /*[s]ˤek/  /sek̚/ (析) and /*[tsʰ]ˤi[t]/ or /*sn̥ʰiːd/  /t͡sʰet̚/ (切)	割 [gē] 切 [qiè] 析 [xī]	*ka(n)k and *seog and *char or *turu or *kieor	kizu (きず|傷) (scar) and sogu (そぐ | 削ぐ) (to slice off) and tatsu (たつ | 絶つ) (to sever) or tsurugi (つるぎ | 劍) (sword) or  kiru (きる|切る) (to cut)	kkakda 깎다 (to peel off) and (?) and jaruda 자르다 (to cut) or (?) or kalda (갈다) (to hone)
17) to call (appeler))	*kala (to call; to speak) (May originate from the sound one makes when calling someone.)	*gal(o)s-, *glōs-, *golH-so- (voice, cry: to call, clameur, clamer)	*kero (to shout; to speak) (related to entry 73)  or *kiali (to speak)	*khāw or *gaw (號) (to call; to shout) whence *g(r)a (to call) (乎| 呼|虖) Cognate with*gwe 謂 (to call; to say)	/*ɦlaːws/ or  /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤaw-s/  /ɦɑuH/ (號) whence /*ɢaː/ /*ɢˤa/ /ɦuo/ (呼)	呼 [hū] 號 [hào]	*ka(ta)r	kataru (かたる | 語る) (to speak; to narrate)	karoda 가로다 (to speak (archaism))
18) to deceive; to lie) (duper)	*tela (to deceive) and *huluga (to lie; to deceive) (intimately related to entries related to “speak” or “word” hence the original meaning  being “to deceive by words”: *hela (to speak), *kala (to speak), *hewa (to speak), *tera (to curse)	*del- (to fraud; to calculate: dol, dolus) and *dʰrewgʰ (to deceive; to mislead: to dream, fraude) or  *lewgʰ- (to lie)	*tala (to plunder, to seduce) and *uluka (to lie)	*lŭH | lu(h)  (誘) (to invite; to kidnap) whence *lem (詒) (to deceive), *lut (訹) (to beguile), *hlut (術) (craft) and *kre | *huay (欺) (to deceive) whence *gre (惑) (to cheat ; to deceive), *gre(s) 詿 (to deceive; to mislead), *kre (諆) (to deceive)	/*luʔ/ /jɨuX/ (誘) and  /*kʰɯ/ or  /*kʰ(r)ə/  /kʰɨ/ (欺)	誘 [yòu] 欺 [qī]	*dala and *ura | usa	tarasu (たらす|誑す) (to deceive) and uso (うそ | 嘘) (lie)	dallaeda 달래다 (to coax) and kura 구라 nogari 노가리 both dialect for « lie »
19) to lead ((em)mener)	*ləma | ləda (to lead (along the road)) and *mara (to lead; to follow a road) and *lema (road) (metathesis of the above) (Only attested in Dene-Caucasian)	*leit-, *leith- (to go, to die: to lead) and *mey- (small animal: mener) and (?)	*taru (to be together) (Metathesis in Transeurasian) and *miori (road, track; to follow) and (?)	*lu (道) (road) which yielded 導 (to lead) and and  *lǝ̆m (冘) (road (archaism) (metathesis in Transhimalayan)	/*duːs/ or /*lˤuʔ-s/ /dɑuH/ (導) and /*lum/  /jiɪm/ (冘)	導 [dǎo] 冘 [yín]	*« teol(i) » and *« miti; meol »	tsureru (つれる|連れる) (to bring to) and michi (みち|道) (road)	terida (데리다) (to bring to) and molda 몰다 (to follow)
20) (to)broom; besom (balai ; balayer)	*pupa | pusa (to broom) (Perhaps from the noise made by rubbing the floor when brooming.) and *peka (to sweep, to rub (with a besom) and *sepa (to rub, to sweep)	*bʰés-mō ~ *bʰs-m̥nés (to rub: besom) or *bʰenH-tlo- (clear the way: balai) and (?) and  *swep- (to sweep)	*pubaga (broom) and *baka (to sweep) and *sipu (to sweep)	*puap (to clean, to sweep) (帚) and *bek (to sweep) (lost in Chinese) and *sut (掃) (to rub, to sweep)	/*pjuʔ/ or /*[t.p]əʔ/  /t͡ɕɨuX/ (帚) and (?) and /*suːʔ/ or /*suːs/ /sɑuX/, /sɑuH/ (掃)	帚[zhǒu] (broom (archaism)) 掃[sǎo] (to broom, to sweep)	*papaki; pui  and *bak (lost in Korean) and *sil (lost in Japanese)	hôki (ほうき|箒) (broom) and haku (はく|掃く) (to broom) and (?)	bi (비) (broom) and (?) and shitta (씻다) (to wipe)
21) strong (fort)	*tenga (stiff, thick) and *kera (hard)	*(s)trenk- (taut, stiff: strength, strong)	*tuji (thick) (This root seems related but rather uncertain)	*krăŋ強 (strong; robust) related to勍 (strong) and壯 (strong man) (Possible palatalization of “t” into “k”)	/*ɡaŋ/  /*N-kaŋ/  /ɡɨɐŋ/ (強)	強[qiáng]	tuje; ten	tsuyoi (つよい|強い) (strong)	(perhaps) tantan hada (탄탄하다) (strong; robust)
22) to sleep; slumber (dormir ; sommeil)	*jepe (to sleep) (May originate from the sound one makes when sleeping. Eurasian word.) and *hamǝ (to sleep; to dream) and *jine (to sleep, to lie in bed) Proto-semitic:  *nwm / *neoum hence نَامَ (nama (to sleep)) *wsn hence وسن (wasana (to slumber))	*slēb- or  *swep- (to sleep, sommeil) and (?) and  *dre(m)- (to sleep, drowse : dormir)	*nepu | *jipe (to sleep, to lie in bed) and *amu (to be quiet; to sleep) (lost in JK) and *djelo (weak; quiet)	*jip (to sleep, to lie down) (lost in Chinese) and *r/s-mwəj | *mĭjH (to sleep, to dream) (寐) and *chĭmH (to sleep) (寢)	/*mids/  /*mi[t]-s/  /miɪH/ (寐) and  /*sʰimʔ/ or /*[tsʰ]imʔ/ /t͡sʰiɪmX/ (寢)	寐 [mèi] 寢 [qǐn]	*neu(p) and (?) and *daswi	neru (ねる|寝る) (to sleep)   and (?) and yasui (やすい |安い) (peaceful (sleep))	nupda (눕다) (to lie in bed)swida and (?) and 쉬다 (to rest)
23) gold (or)	*gema (This word might have referred to a precious metal before referring to gold as metallurgy spread during Neolithic, or else some precious stone cherished during Palaeolithic era.)	*ǵʰl̥tóm‎ (« gold ») possibly from  *ǵʰelh₃-‎ (yellow; gleam; to shine)	* keno (metal of a blade) and *kona (bell) (Both etymons seem closely related to entry 134)	*gǝ̆m (金) (metal; gold)	/*k(r)[ə]m/ or /*krɯm/ /kˠiɪm/ (金)	金 [jīn]	both from *kanai	kane (かね | 金) (metal; gold) and  (鐘 | かね) (bell) ultimately from ki (き | 黄) (yellow)	gawi 가위 (scissors) and (perhaps) guri (구리) (copper)
24) carve; engrave (graver)	*cheka | *kreta (to cut with a sharp instrument) (May originates from the sound of wood carving or from a scratching sound.) (This entry is closely related to entry 326, and associated to Borean speakers notion of writing)	*gerbʰ- (to sratch: to carve)	*saka (to cut; to split)	*khē̆-t (契) (to separate; to divide) or *khek (刻) (to grave)	/*[kʰ]ˤet-s/, /*kʰˤet/ or /*kʰeːds/ /kʰeiH/ (契) or /*[kʰ]ˤək/ /*kʰɯːɡ/  /kʰək̚/ (刻)	契 [qì] 刻 [kè]	*saku	saku (さく | 割く) (to rip) kizamu (きざむ|刻む) (engrave) from kiru (切る|きる) (to cut) (Cf. entry 16)	saekida (새기다) (to carve)
25) to fight; to struggle (se battre ; lutter)	*təka (to hit; to fight) (Striking sound. Closely related to the etymon to beat *tupa)	*dāu-‎, *deu-‎ or *dhegwh- (to injure, destroy, burn)	*tataki (to hit, to fight)	*daw or *tok  (鬥| 鬭) (to fight; to defy)	/*toːɡs/ or /*tˤok-s/ /təuH/ (鬥) (to fight)	鬥 [dòu]	*tata(k)	tatakau (たたかう|戦う) (to fight)	(daduda) 다투다 (to fight)
26) lungs (poumon)	*pwape (lung; internal organ) (Perhaps related to the noise of filling or emptying lungs.)	*pléwmō (floaters: poumon) from *pléw or *pleu (to blow)	*opeka (lungs)	*ph(r)ap or  *p-wap (肺) (lungs)	/*pʰo[t]-s/ or /*pʰobs/ /pʰʉɐiH/ (肺) (lungs)	肺 [fèi]	*puk(oa)	fukufukushi (ふくふくし) (archaism) hai (はい| 肺) is more usednowadays, but Chinese borrowing	Bua (부아) pe (폐|肺) is more used but Chinese borrowing
27) vast body of water (often sea) (Also see entries 112, 228, 230, 341) letter *“m”	*mawa (Proto-Semitic: *māy- hence ماء (maha (water)) (The Borean word has influenced Afro-Asiatic and the Egyptians and Pheonicians when inventing the alphabet, hence the letter “m” depicted as waves.)	*mer- (sea: mer, marine)	*miuri (water)	*s-mǝ̄ʔ or *me(h) 海 (sea)	/*m̥ˤəʔ/ ou /*hmlɯːʔ/ /hʌiX/ (海) (sea)	海 [hǎi]	*meolu	mizu (みず|水) (water)	mul (물)  (water)
28) to die (mourir)	*(ha)mara (to die) (Related to the bewailing voice one makes when mourning and crying over someone’s death) and *dawa | *tawa (to mourn, to die) (ibid) and *sewe | seje (to be grieved, saddened; to die) and *neka (to die; to kill) (very rare and ancient Eurasian word.) (Could we surmise that corpses had their ashes spread or bodies inhumed into sea water *mawa? Also implied by 歿| 沒 (to sink; to die))	*mer- (to die: mourir) and *dʰew- (to die) and *sewg- (grieved, troubled: sick) and *neḱ- (to perish, to disappear: nuire, nocif, nécrologie, nécrophage)	*“niabi” (decease, funeral) and *tane (mourn, condolence) and *uju (sad, ashamed (often related to mourning)) (possible initial loss in Transeurasian) and *keba (corpse) (metathesis in Transeurasian)	*mǝ̄ŋ (to die) (薨) perhaps from  *ma (亡) (negation + to die) cognate with 喪 and *dat; daw (逝) (to decease, to pass away) and *səj (死) (to die) and *kham | *ghuam (戡) (to slaughter, to assassinate)	/*hmɯːŋ/ or  /*m̥ˤəŋ/ /hwəŋ/ (薨) and /*[d]at-s/ /d͡ʑiᴇiH/ (逝) and /*sijʔ/ /sˠiɪX/ (死) and /*kʰluːm/ /*[kʰ]ˤ[ə]m/ /kʰʌm/ (戡)	薨 [hōng] (archaism) 死 [sǐ] 逝 [shì] 戡 [kān]	*mweo and *tomurap and *(s)u(j) and *kampa(ne)	mo (も|喪) (mourning) which gave mogari (もがり|殯) (funerals) and tomurau (とむらう|弔う) (to mourn) and u(re)i (う(れ)い|憂い) (melancholy, sadness) and kabane (かばね | 屍) (corpse)	mukda (?) (묵다) (to become old) or mudda (?) 묻다 (to bury) and (?) and perhaps shireum 시름 (worries; distress) and jukeom 주검 (corpse)
29) salt (sel)	*sala (salt) (Fromthe noise one makes when tasting something salty? Might be related to entry 63)	*séh₂ls or *sal- (salt, sel)	*sibi (bitter; salty)	*śaɫ  (鹺) (salt) probably from 鹵 (salt)*la or *hjam or *g-rjum鹹 (salt(y))	/*zlaːl/ or  /*N-[ts]ˤaj/  /d͡zɑ/ (鹺) (archaism) and /*ɡrɯːm/ /*Cə.[ɡ]ˤr[o]m/ /ɦˠɛm/ (鹹)	鹺[cuó] (salt (archaism)) 鹹 [xián]	*sieo(k) However the Korean word seems the fusion of the two Chinese words for salt*tsa  and *g-rjum or a borrowing from archaic Chinese鹹	shio (しお|塩) (salt)	sogum (소금) (salt)
30) body; rib (corps ; côte)	*kwepa | *kewa (body)	*kwrep- (body; shape: corps)	*kera (belly; body; ribs)	*khǝ̆w (軀) (body)	/*kʰo/ /kʰɨo/ (軀) (body)	軀[qū] (body (formal)	*kar	karada (からだ | 身体) from kara (から) (skin, enveloppe) and daた|だ (limb)	galbi 갈비 (rib) or gari (가리) (rib)
31) finger, toe, nail (doigt, ongle)	*tika (finger; toe) and *tǝp (toe; nail) (from the sound of tapping?) and *hena (nail; tooth) (Fingers are often related to showing or indicative words)	*deyǵ- or *deyḱ- (to show: doigt, toe) and *dewmb (tail: tip) and *h₃nṓgʰs (nail: ongle, nail) and *pénkʷrós, *penkʷ-ros (the five ones: hence finger. (PIE root))	*jipo (to pinch with fingers) and *tiupo (nail) and *ki̯umle (nail; needle) (metathesis)	*djik (指) (finger; to show) and *tǝp (趾) (foot, toe) and *naw | *nǝw (nail; pincer) (Seems lost in Chinese but 螯 (*naw), 手 (*nu), 狃 (*naw) still attest it)	/*kjiʔ/ or /*mə.kijʔ/  /t͡ɕˠiɪX/ (指) (finger ; to show) and /*təʔ/ or /*kjɯʔ/ /t͡ɕɨX/ (趾) (toe)	指 and趾 [zhǐ] (finger; toe)	*t(s)um(p)e and *jub and *keum (lost in Japanese)	tsume (つめ|爪) (nail) and yubi (ゆび | 指) (finger) and (?)	teop (톱) (nail) (nail) and jibta (집다) (to pinch) and 손금 (palm line)
32) to thrust (donner un coup ; frapper)	*tulu (to pierce) (May originates from the sound one makes when hitting something: toc, tap. This entry seems also related to hitting something to pierce it.) (Closely related to entry 84)	*trewd- or *treud- (to thrust)	*tolu (to pierce)	*tut (突) (to pierce; sudden)	/*m-tʰˤut/, /*tʰˤut/ or /*tʰuːd/, /*duːd/  /duət̚/, /tʰuət̚/ (突)	突 [tū]	*tura	tsuranuku (つらぬく|貫く) (to pierce, to penetrate)	ddulda 뚫다 (to pierce, to bore (hole))
33) boat, naval (bateau, nef, toue)	*beta | bera (general appellation) and *neme | haluma (a kind of light boat) and *tuka (a big boat) (دَاو‎dhow seems to be related to an ancient word for  boat with 舟)	*bheid- or  *bʰeyd- (to break; to separate (woodwork for a boat) : boat, bateau) and  *néh₂us (small boat: nef, naval) and  *dewk- (to haul, to tow : touer, toue, to tow)	*peojna (boat, general appellation) and *niame (light boat) and *telki (small boat, raft)or *“temu (big boat)	*m-lawŋ (boat) (船) 舟 seems to be borrowed from Austroasiatic, Proto-Mon-Khmer *ɗuuk ~ *ɗuk 舫 (big boat) and 航 (navigate) seem to be related to a kind of bit boat	/*ɦljon/  /*Cə.lo[n]/  /ʑiuᴇn/ (船)	船 [chuán]	*ponye and *“niemul” (lost in Japanese) and *dika(da) or *tumu	fune (ふね|船) (boat) and (?) and ikada (いかだ|筏) (raft) or t(s)umu (舩) (big boat)	bae (배) (boat) and imul (이물) (prow) and ddae 떼 (raft, boat) or (?)
34) defecate (to shit; chier)	*chira | *suta (May originate from a defecating sound.)	*skeid‑ or *skei- (to cut; to separate: (to) shit)	*sera (to defecate; buttocks)	*skak |*sat 泄 and 潟  (to defecate)	/*s-lat/ or /*sled/  /siᴇt̚/ (泄) or /*s-qʰAk/ or /*sjaːɡ/ /siaX/, /siaH/ (潟) (to defecate)	泄or潟 [xiè]	*« seor »	shiri (しり|尻) (buttocks)	ssada (싸다) (to urinate; to defecate)
35) soup; to drink a liquid (soupe ; boire un liquide)	*supu (to sip) (Originates from the noise someone makes when drinking a liquid, as many words implying liquid (drinking) begin with “s” or “x”)	*srebʰ- (to sip, to slurp)	*siopu (to suck)	*χrup (to sip) related to 嚌 (to sip),  欶 (to drink) and 歃 (to drink) whence *[k]rĭp (汁) (juice ; water) possibly stemming from *xrep 吸 (to inhale) (« s »  palatalisation or own sound vision)	/*kjub/ or /*[t.k][ə]p/  /t͡ɕiɪp̚/ (汁) (liquid; soup)	汁[zhī]	*« su(p) ; spa(l) »	suu (すう|吸う) (to inhale)	bbalda (빨다) (to suck) but formerly (spboelda)
36) to float (flotter)	*pulku (to float) (May originate from the sound something makes when immersed into water: plouf, splash)	*plew- (to fly; to float; to run)	*uku (wet; wash) (Initial drop in Transeurasian)	*pyaw (浮) whence *phĕw(H) (漂)  (to derive, to float) or *phjǝ̆m泛|汎 (to float) Cognate with 蜉(dragonfly) and 桴 (raft) and 泭(raft)	/*bu/  /*m.b(r)u/ /bɨu/ (浮)which yielded /*pʰew/ /pʰiᴇu/ (漂) or /*pʰoms/ /*pʰ(r)[o]m-s/ /pʰɨɐmH/ (泛 | 汎)	浮 [fú] 漂 [piāo] 泛|汎 [fàn]	*hu(ku)	uku (うく|浮く) (to float) which gave ukabu (うかぶ|浮かぶ) (to float (to the surface))	heojeom (헤염(치다)) (to swim) (Also see entry 289 for ddeuda (뜨다) (to float) but formerly (bteuda)
37) bone (os)	*panga (bone; tooth; tusk (general term)) and *kacha (bone)	*bʰeyh₂- (bone) and *kost- or *h2ost‑, (bone: os)	*pejne (bone) and *kele (belt; waist)	*kūt (骨) (bone) cognate with骼 (skeleton) and 呂|膂 (spine) and骸 (corpse) and馗 (zygomatic) et軱 (big bone) probably related to  *gyu-k or *gewk (腰) (hips)	/*kuːd/ or /*kˤut/  /kuət̚/ (骨) which perhaps yielded  /*qew/  /*ʔew/  /ʔiᴇu/ (腰)	骨 [gǔ] 要 [yāo]	*pyeo(nye) « nye » is a suffix and *kesi	hone (ほね|骨) (bone) and koshi (こし | 腰) (waist)	ppyeo (뼈) (bone) and heori (허리) (waist)
38) to happen; to fit (convenir ; arriver)	*kopa (to unite)	*kob- (to fit: to happen)	*eba (to join, to meet) (« k » initial drop in Transeurasian)	*kV̄p or *kup (合) (to fit)	/*kuːb/ or /*kˤop/ /ɦʌp̚/ (合)	合 [hé]	*apu	au (会う|あう) (to meet) or (合う|あう) (to fit)	aouruda (to rejoin; to reunite) 아우르다
39) to give (donner)	*gəpa (to give; to receive (as a gift)) and *daha (to give; to present) (May originate from the interjection one makes when presenting something: gei ni, tiens, here you are, dôzo, ne.)	*ghabh- or *ghebh- (to give; to receive) and  *deh₃- (to give)	*ega (to rise; to lift; to present (a gift)) (Metathesis in Transeurasian) and *tama (to give; to present)	*qǝ̆p (to give; to provide) (給) and  *g-la (to give; to pay) 予 cognate with 賙 (to bestow alms) and 施 (to grant)	/*krub/ or /*[k](r)[ə]p/  /kˠiɪp̚/ (給) and /*laʔ/  /*laʔ/  /jɨʌX/ (予)	給[jǐ] or [gěi] 予 [yǔ]	*aek; eok and *tamap (perhaps lost in Korean)	ageru あげる (to give) and tamau (たまう|給う) (to grant, to confer)	ollida 올리다 (to ascend; to offer) and (?)
40) tree; stump (souche ; arbre)	*taro (tree; stump) and *boke | *moke (tree; wood) and *sarwa (wood; forest) and *karu (?) (tree) and *he… (?) (Tree names and trees themselves are to mingled to be accurate in comparison. Compare entries 242, 243, 244 with bird names)	*deru- or *dreu- (firm, solid: tree) and *bʰuH- (big: bois, bocage) and  *sel-, *swel- (wood, forest: sylve, sylvan) and (?) and  *h₃erdʰ- (high: arbre)	*calu (broad leaved plant (tree-creeping vine)) and (?) and (?) and *kuri | *kori (tree; stump) and (?)	*t(r)ŏ (stump) (株) hence perhaps 樹 (tree) *tu; do and  *mōk (木) (tree; wood) and  *siŋ or *sik (bois) 薪 (faggot) and (?) and (?)	/*tro/ or /*to/ /ʈɨo/ (株) and  /*siŋ/  /*[s]i[n]/ /siɪn/ (薪) and /*moːɡ/  /*C.mˤok/  /muk̚/ (木)	株 [zhū] 木 [mù] 薪 [xīn]	*turu(gi) and *keor	tsuru (つる | 蔓) (vine) and ki (き | 木) (wood; tree)	chulgi (줄기) (stem) or deonggul 덩굴 (vine) and kuru 그루 (tree counter)
41) name (nom)	*lamana (name) (Something more seems to be associated with the name of a person, as implied by the prefix. Perhaps a certain rank in ancient society. All languages have undergone apophony.)	*nō̆-men- or *h1no(h3)-mn̥ or *h₃nómn̥ (name; nom)	*liomona (name, spell, divination) (Also see entry 278)	*miǝ̆ŋ* or *r-miŋ (name) (名)	/*C.meŋ/ or /*meŋ/  /miᴇŋ/ (名)	名 [míng]	*na(n)	na (名|な) (someone; name) onna, otona, okina	nam (남) (someone (else’s name))
42) cold, freeze (froid, gel)	*gela | *kora (to be cold (general term)) (Also see entry 105) and *potu (to freeze)(Also see entry 302) and *sanu | *zaru (to be cold, chilly) (Also see entry 116) (All words beginning with “g(l)” or “br, pr” are probably onomatopeic: glaglagla, brrr, of the noise someone makes when it’s cold)	*gel- (cold: cold, cool, chill, gel, geler) and  *prews- (to freeze: frost, froid, bruine, freeze) and  *srigos or  *sriHgos (to be cold: frigide, frigidaire)	*gilo (cold) and *biudo (cold, winter) and *sano (cold; cool)	*gān (寒) (cold) whence  *răŋ / *răk (k-) or *m/s-glak ~ m-glaŋ  (凉) (to freeze; cold) whence冷 (cool) (according to the ancestry of all sinograms, 寒 (cold) seems to be the oldest form and pronunciation) and  *r-p(w)am or *bhVm  (冰) (to freeze; ice) and  *ś(r)ɨăŋ (霜) (frost)	/*Cə.[ɡ]ˤa[n]/ or /*ɡaːn/  /ɦɑn/ (寒) or /*C.raŋ/ or /*ɡ·raŋ/, /*ɡ·raŋs/ /lɨɐŋ/, /lɨɐŋH/ (涼) and  /*pŋrɯŋ/  /*p.rəŋ/ /pɨŋ/ (冰) and  /*sraŋ/  /*[s]raŋ/  /ʃɨɐŋ/ (霜)	涼 [liáng] (to be cool) or 寒 [hán] (to be cold) and 冰 [bīng] and  霜 [shuāng]	*kirze | kisereg and *puju and *sanu | *samu	kisaragi (きさらぎ| 如月) (February (lunar calender) (Maybe « the month of the second moon » ?) and fuyu (ふゆ| 冬) (winter) and samui (さむい| 寒い) (cold)	kyeoul (겨울) (winter) but formerly (kyeojul) and (?) and ssaneul (싸늘하다) (cool)
43) to burn (brûler)	*pǝra (to burn) and *nija (to burn like fire) and *teka  (to burn; to grill) (Probably originates from the sound (friction) of rubbed materials to produce fire: tshick, tschik) (closely related to entry 69)	*bʰrenw- from  *bʰreu-, *bʰru- (to burn: brûler, burn) or *bʰerw-, *bʰrew- (to boil: to burn) and (?) and  *dhegʷh- (to burn: fomes, fomenter, tephra, fever, frébrile, fièvre)	*pore (fire; to burn) and *nuje (warm; to burn) and *deka (to light fire)	*pun (焚) (to burn) and (?) *năn燃from 然 (to burn) and *[dh]ĕkʷ (灼) (to burn)	/*bun/ or /*[b]u[n]/ /bɨun/ (焚) and /*njen/ or /*C.na[n]/ /ȵiᴇn/ (燃) and *čiŏᵏ /t͡ɕɨɐk̚/ (灼)	焚 [fén] 燃 [rán] 灼 [zhuó]	*pe(r) and *muaja (lost in Korean) and *ta(k)	hi (ひ | 火) (fire) and moeru (もえる|燃える) (to burn) and taku (たく | 焚く) or yaku (やく | 焼く) (to burn; to grill)	bul (불) (fire) and (?) and tada 타다 (to burn)
44) star, bright (étoile, aster, briller)	*hazwara | haswara (star: fire (*ha) in the sky (*swara)) and *pala (to burn like fire, like a star) and *kuncha(na) (a special star or constellation) (Proto-Semitic *”naj” (?), whence نَجْم (najm) (star) (rhotacism of “s” into “n”)	ster-*or*h2ster‑. (star; aster, étoile: the shining one) related to *h₂eHs- (to burn: arder) and *pel (to burn; to singe (lost in Latin)) and ǵʰwoyǵʰ-dʰeh₁- or *ǵʰwoydʰ-dʰeh₁-. (star (lost in Latine languages and English))	*saja (clear; dawn) and *piolo (star) and *kuca(star (perhaps lost in Japanese and Korean))	*sgwar (琁  or 璇) (star; fine jade) (very literary) and  ( ?) *rē̆w(H) (燎) (to set afire (field)) and *sēŋ (star) (星) Cognate with  *chĕŋ or*(t)s(y)aŋ (清) (bright, clean) and 晶 (bright; star) (Sky and stars seem to be considered as natural purity in Transhimalayan)	/*sɢʷan/  /ziuᴇn/ (琁 or 璇) and  /*rews/  /liᴇuH/ (燎) and /*s-tsʰˤeŋ/ or /*sleːŋ/ /seŋ/ (星)	琁 or 璇 [xuán] 燎 [liáo] 星 [xīng]	*saj and *pyeoli and (?)	sayaka さやか (bright; clear) and hoshi (ほし|星) (star) and (?)	sae(byeok) 새(벽) (dawn) 벽 being closely related to entry 161 and a phonetic derivate of 밝다 새벽 = (clearness of) dawn) and  byeol (별) (star)) and  (?)
45) sapiens; to know (savoir ; sapiens)	*sepa | *sape (to try and know) and *zera (to know; to be conscious) and *kahna (to know by observing) (Borean nuance seems to imply: to know the world by tasting and examining. Probably related to the sound of someone tasting something.)	*sep- or *seh₁p- (to taste, to try: sapiens, savoir, savour) and (?) and  *ǵneh₃ (to know: cognition, connaître, recognise)	*ḗbǯo (to think, to understand, to see) (metathesis in Transeurasian) and *sari (to know; to feel) and (?)	*siǝ(H) (思) (to think; to know) and The following three words are cognates: *(s)ra; (z)ra (to see; to examine) (查) or *(t)re (to know) (知) and  *nɨ̆r | *nen (認) (to know; to recognise)	/*[s]ə/ /sɨ/ (思) and /*zraː/ /d͡ʒˠa/ (查) or /*ʔl’e/ or /*tre/ /ʈiᴇ/ (知) and /*njɯns/ /*njɯŋs/ or  /*nə[n]-s/  /ȵiɪnH/, /ȵɨŋH/ (認)	查 [chá] 知 [zhī] 思 [sī] 認 [rèn]	(?) and *seor (Initial drop in Korean (cf. entry 15)) and (?)	shiru (しる| 知る) (to know)	alda 알다 (to know)
46) core; heart (coeur ; noyau)	*reka and *karta (May originate from the cracking sound of a shell, core, kernel, pith one breaks) (cf. entry 109 and 342)	*ker(d)- (core; heart; coeur)	*keorke (heart; breast)	*rǝ̄k (核) (core) (Intial “k” drop or lightly pronounced)	/*[ɡ]ˤ<r>ək/ or /*ɡrɯːɡ/ /ɦˠɛk̚/ (核)	核 [hé]	*kok	kokoro (こころ|心) (heart)	kogaengi 고갱이 (heart; pith; kernel)
47) to leave, let go (quitter, laisser)	*reka | repa (to leave) and *nana | *lana (to go; to leave)	*leyp- (to leave) and *leh₁d- (laisser, leave)	(?) and *neni (to go away)	*lŭj (遺) (to leave behind) and (b)rɨal or  *raj  (to leave) (离|離) or *lah (捨 | 舎) (to abandon)	/*lul/ or  /*[ɢ](r)uj/  /jiuɪ/ (遺) and /*rel/, /*rels/ or /*[r]aj/, /*raj-s/ /liᴇ/, /liᴇH/ (离 | 離) or  /*hljaːs/ or  /*[l̥]Ak-s/  /ɕiaH/ (捨 | 舎)	遺 [yí] 离 | 離 [lí] 捨 | 舎 [shè]	(?) and *(n)ani	inu (いぬ| 往ぬ|去ぬ) (to leave) (archaism)	na(kada) 나(가다) (partir, sortir)
48) hole (mouth) (trou (mouth))	*kuwa (hole; cave) and *kutcha (hole) (hole and mouth are closely related)	*keuə- (depression: cave, cavity) and (?)	(?) and *kiacu (hole; mouth)	*ku(w) or  *khuā(H) (mouth) (口) which probably gave *kwar (窾) (vacuum; empty) (archaism)	/*kʰoːʔ/ or /*kʰˤ(r)oʔ/ /kʰəuX/ (口) which may have given /*kʰloːnʔ/ or  /khwòn/ /kʰuɑnX/ (窾)	口 [kǒu] 窾 [kuǎn]	*kut(ci)	kuchi (くち| 口) (mouth)	guk 굿 or gudeongdi 구덩이 (hole; depression)
49) mouth (bouche)	*hama (put something into the mouth (taste)) and *hapa (mouth; to speak) (Mouth related words often begin with “ha”, hence a “mouth” suffix.)	*men- or *ment- (to project; to chew: mouth) and (?)  many words in “pa” reflect this root: parole, profer	*amo (mouth; taste) (epenthesis in Transeurasian) and *ipi (mouth to say)	*mom (唵) (to put something in mouth) (archaism) cognate with *moŋ (river mouth) (lost in Chinese) and *hap (嗋) (to threathen; to take something into mouth) (archaic in the first meaning)	/*qoːmʔ/ /ʔʌmX/ 唵 and   /*hlab/  /hɨɐp̚/ (嗋)	唵 [Ǎn] 嗋 [xié]	*(a)maji and *ipu	amai (あまい|甘い) (sweet) or aji (あじ | 味) (taste) and iu (いう | 言う) (to say)	맛 (taste) and ip 입 (mouth)
50) sound, voice (son ; voix)	*chəwa | *chəma (sound, voice) (To relate to whispering or muttering “s” sounds.) and *wakwa | *kewa (voix; sound)	*swen- or  *swenh₂- (sound) and  *wṓkʷ(s) (voice, voix)	*siure (sound) and *kiube (voice, sound) (Metathesis in Transeurasian)	*xeŋ (聲) (Metathesis in Transhimayalan) Cognate with 音 (sound), 響 (to make noise) and殸|磬 (sound; chime; voice) and (?)	/*qʰjeŋ/ or  /*[l̥]eŋ/  /ɕiᴇŋ/ (聲)	(聲 | 声) [shēng]	*sorae and *kewa (probably lost in Korean) (This etymology seems crossed: 소리 means « voice; sound », so « kewa » is unneeded in Korean.)	Lost in Japanese but many “so ; sa” words related to noise: sawagu (さわぐ|騒ぐ) (to make noise) or sasayaku ささやく (to whisper) and koe (こえ|声) (voice)	sori 소리 (noise; voice) whence 속삭이다 소곤거리다 (to whisper) and (?)
51)(to h)ear; to listen (entendre, écouter ; oreille)	*kwilu | *kuwlu ((to h)ear, to listen)  and *alu ((to h)ear; to listen) and *mena (to h)ear); to listen) (very rare word)	*kleu- (to hear: to listen, client) and *h₂ṓws (oreille, ear, audio, audible) and (?)	*kujlu (ear; to hear) and *mamu (?)(ear) (probably related to entry 109) and (?)	*kra ((to h)ear) seems lost in Chinese whence *reng 聆 (to listen carefully) and *reng 聽  (to listen) and *nǝ̆H (耳) (ear; to hear; to listen) whence *m/s-nam (to sell) (聞) (explanation entry 75)	/*njɯʔ/ /*C.nəʔ/  /ȵɨX/  [耳] (ear) and /*mɯn/ /*mu[n]/ /mɨun/ (聞)	耳 [ěr] 聞 [wén]	*kwik and *mimi (probably lost in Korean)	kiku (きく|聞く) (to listen) and mimi (みみ| 耳)	gwi (귀) (ear) and (?)
52) to howl (hurler)	*kawa | *kulo (to howl, to shout) (May originate from the voice of someone or something howling: awoo, ahoo, gaoo)	*kau-, *kaul-, *kaug-, *kaur- (to howl, hurler)	*oru and *ulo (to cry, to shout) (Initial drop in Transeurasian or own interpretation of the sound)	*khāw (to howl) (號) whence *kuːk (to cry) (哭) (cf. entry 304)	/*Cə.[ɡ]ˤaw-s/ /*ɦlaːws/ /ɦɑuH/ (號) whence /*[kʰ]ˤok/ or /*ŋ̊ʰoːɡ/ /kʰuk̚/ (哭)	號 | 号 [háo] 哭[kū]	*uru	uttaeru (うったえる|訴える) (to sue; to complain) (old Japanese:“uru tapa”)	ulda (울다) (to cry)
53) mountain ; pass (montagne, mont; passage)	*mone | *mine (mountain (top)) and *peta (cross a mountain (via a pass or a summit)) (also cf. entry 112)  and *takǝ (high (as a mountain))	*men- (to protrude: montagne, mountain, mont) and  *pete- (to spread: pass(age) (mountain) and (?)	*nime (top; summit) and *dapa (to cross a mountain) (Metathesis in Transeurasian) and *tega (high; mountain)	*s(r)ān (山) (mountain) whence (metathesis) *ŋ(r)ōk (嶽) (tall mountain)  and *s-tjaŋ (upper part; (mountain) top) (巓)	/*sreːn/ or  /*s-ŋrar/  /ʃˠɛn/ (山) and /*tiːn/ or  /*tˤi[n]/  /ten/ (巓)	巓 [diān] 山 [shān]	*monae and *daba and *teka	mine (みね|峰) (mountain peak) and yama (やま|山) and take (たけ | 嶽) (mountain)	me (뫼) (mountain) and neomda 넘다 (to cross) and (?) 더 (deo) (more)
54) what; whom (question) (quoi ; que ; (question))	*ka (May be to associate to the sound one makes when they do not understand the speaker’s words: hein, what, quoi?) Thai origin of ค่ะ (ka) and ครับ (krap)?	*kwo- *kʷód (what; whom: quoi, que, qui)	*ka(j) (interrogative particle)	*qhā- (曷|何) (what; whom)	/*ɡaːd/ or /*[ɡ]ˤat/ /ɦɑt̚/ (曷|何)	曷 | 何[hé](archaism, literary)	*k(w)a	ka (か) (interrogative particle)	까 (kka) (interrogative particle)
55) many; all (multitude)	*mana | *mona(many; multitude) whence *muru (numerous; multitude) or *maha (all; whole) and *hela (all) (metathesis of one of the above) (Also cf. entry 99, 305)	*mana(many) whence *mel- (many: multitude, moult, multi) or *mē- (many: more) and  *h₂el (many: all, lot, alloter)	*mana (many) whence *maru (crowd; many) or *meoju (all; whole) and *éli (enough; sufficient)	*muan (萬) (ten thousands; myriad) whence *mon (滿) (plenty) and *ta (諸) (numerous) or *t(h)a (都) (numerous) whence *thaj (多) (many) or *taks (庶) (people ; many)	/*C.ma[n]-s/ or /*mlans/ /mʉɐnH/ (萬)  whence  /*moːnʔ/ or  /*mˤ[o][n]ʔ/  /muɑnX/ (滿) and  /*ta/  /t͡ɕɨʌ/ or /t͡ɕia/ (諸) or  /*taː/ or  /*tˤa/  /tuo/ (都) whence  /*ʔl’aːl/ or  /*[t.l]ˤaj/  /tɑ/ (多) or  /*s-tak-s/  /ɕɨʌH/ (庶)	萬 [wàn] 滿 [mǎn] 諸 [zhū] 都 [dū] 多 [duō] 庶 [shù]	*mana(h) whence *moro or *məru and *er	mina (みな) (everybody; all) whence mol (もろ| 諸) (various) or mure (むれ | 群れ) (crowd) and iru (いる| 要る) (to need)	manda (많다) (numerous)maen whence 맨 (everything ; all) or muri (무리) (crowd) and eolchu 얼추 (a great part)
56) hair (head) (cheveu (tête, chère)) (Also see entry 59, 251, 252)	*kampa (head; hair) and *kira (hair; head)	*kaput- (chef, head: cheveu) and  *ḱer- (hair, chère) or *kar- (hard) which yielded ‘’hair’’	*kiampa (hair; head) and *keldjo (bald, head)	*pŏt (hair) (髪) (Initial syllable loss in Transhimalayan) and  *rǝ̆ (氂| 斄) (animal hair)	/*pot/ or /*pod/  /pʉɐt̚/ (髮) and /*rɯ/  /lɨ/ (氂)	髮 [fà] 氂 [lí]	*kam(a) and *keol; kasira	kami (かみ| 上) (above) which gave kami (かみ| 髪) (hair) and kashira (かしら| 頭) (head)	kama 가마 (hair whorl) karak 가락 (è머리카락) (hair) and 골치 (head; brain)
57) hard (s’en)hardi(r)) (Also see entry 108)	*kerta | *keta (Solid and hard things expressed in « k ; g » clinking sounds as a rock one could strike on a solid surface.)	*kar- (hard)	*keto (hard)	*r-ka (固) (earth; ground: hard) (Attested by oracle script: a shield is striken on the Earth to imply hardness) or  *ghǝ̄r (頎) (solid; firm)	/*[k]ˤa-s/ or /*kaːs/  /kuoH/ (固) (solid) or  /*ɡɯl/  /ɡɨi/ (頎) (robust; sturdy)	固 [gù] 頎 [qí]	*keot | *kat	katai (かたい|硬い|固い| 堅い) (solid; hard; firm)	kuta 굳다 (solid; hard)
58) flower (fleur) (Also see entry 121)	*panga (bud; flower) and *pare (bud; flower)	*bʰew-, *bu- (to swell: bud, bourgeon) and *bhel- or  *bʰleh₃- (to bloom: flower, fleur) (cf. entry 82)	*ponga (bud; flower) and *pure (bud; leaf)	*gwra 花 | 華 (flower) and *phār or *baːr-(葩) (flower; to bloom (archaism))	/*hʷraː/  /hˠua/ (花) and /*pʰraː/ /pʰˠa/ (葩)	花 [huā] 葩 [pā]	*pona and *par	hana (はな| 花) (flower) and ha (葉 | は) (leaf)	bongori 봉오리 (bud) and (?)
59) face (visage; chère)	*teri | *turi (face (colour)) and *kəpa (shape; face) (cf. entry 318) and *pana (face; cheek)	*dhē- (to set, to put forward: face, chère) and  *skab- (to shape: shape) and (?)	*teri (skin, face colour) or *turi (face) and *kepa (shape, face) and *piana (face ; colour)	*thjīnH (靦) (face (formal)) or *tēŋ ou *dēŋ (定|顁) (face (very formal)) and *kep (頰) (cheek) and  *s-ŋa-k or  *ŋār (顏) (face) (metathesis in Transhimayalan) related to 額 (forehead)	/*tʰɯːnʔ/ (靦) or /*teːŋs/  /teŋH/ (定) and  /*keːb/  /kep̚/ (頰) and  /*ŋraːn/  /*C.ŋˤrar/  /ŋˠan/ (顏)	靦 [tiǎn] 定 [dìng] (steady; firm) (The latter is extremely rare in this case) 頰 [jiá] 顏 [yán]	*(d)eol or *tur and *kapo (cf. entry 318)	iro (いろ|色) (colour) or tsura (つら| 面) (face) and kao (かお | 顔) (face)	eolgul (얼굴) (face) or ( ?) and (?)
60) colour (couleur)	*kula (to hide. PIE) and *luwna (dawn, light. PAfrAsi) and *teri | *turi (face (colour) PTA) or *para | *pucha (sun; to shine) and *cheka (?) (guilt, shame (PTH, PAA)) (Colours are used to mask and hide things, hence the meaning. This nuance is also attested in the bronze script of 色, with someone masking their face.)	*ḱel- or *ḱley- (to hide, to mask: colour, couleur)	*teri (skin, face colour) or *piote (light; colour)	*srǝ̆k (色) (colour) (Metathesis in Transhimayalan. Intrusive “s”.)	/*srɯɡ/ /*s.rək/ /ʃɨk̚/ (色)	色 [sè]	*(d)eol or *pieot	iro (いろ|色) (colour) or (?)	eolgul (얼굴) (face) or pit pyeot 빛 볕 (light; colour)
61) night; dark (nuit)	*lela (dark (as night)) and *nǝka ((as dark as) night) and *məra (evening, dark) (All etymons seem intimately related to entry 28)  Proto-Semitic *t_̣Vlam- (darkness) whence ظَلَام (zalam) (darkness)	*Hréh₁trih₂. or *lāt- (night (lost since ancient Greek but still exists in Thai ราตรี (radtree) and Arabic ليل (layl)) and *negw‑ (to be dark: night) or *nókʷts (nuit) and *mor- (dark: mulberry, a kind of eagle)	*dule  (night) and *panek (shadow) (Epenthesis in Transeurasian. Japanese derived word attests the final “k”) and *djima | *ǯìma (dark, quiet) (Epenthesis in Transeurasian)	*rjak or *s-r(j)ak  (night; evening) (夕) whence (as attested by sinogram oldness) *(n)jăH or *ja-n (night) (夜) cognate with 玄|伭 (black, profound, mysterious) which seems to be *negw‑ metathesis and *nǝk (黑) (dark) and *mor or *mon (晚) (night; evening)	/*s-ɢAk/ /*ljaːɡ/ /ziᴇk̚/ (夕) whence /*laːɡs/  /*[ɢ]Ak-s/  /jiaH/  (夜) and /*hmlɯːɡ/  /*m̥ˤək/  /hək̚/ (黒)  and /*monʔ/ /*m[o][r]ʔ/ /mʉɐnX/ (晚)	夕 [xī] 夜 [yè] 晚 [wǎn] 黑 [hēi]	*jeo(r) and *peomeo(k) and *jeom(eol)	yoru (よる|夜) (night) and  honoka (ほのか) (dim; sombre)   and yami (やみ| 闇) (darkness)	jeo(nyeok) 저(녁) (night (the side where the sun sets)) and bam (밤) (night)   and jeomulda (저물다) (to become dark)
62 bis) huit (eight)	*(b)jat (East Asia) and *oktow (Indo-European)	*oḱtṓw or *h₁oḱtṓw (huit, eight) from kʷetwr̥- (four, quatre) +  *dwóh₁ (two, deux)	*dja(t) or ǯa- (eight) perhaps from metathesis of *toj (four)	*b-r-gjat o *(p)rjēt (eight) (八) perhaps from *b-ləj (four) 四	/*preːd/ /*pˤret/ /pˠɛt̚/  (八)	八 [bā]	*yeot	ya (や | 八) (eight)	yeo(deolp) 여덟 (eight)
63) sour (sûr)	*sure (sour) (May originate from the noise or face one makes when tasting something sour: ssssu)	*súHr(os) (sûr; sour)	*suji (sour)	*śūr (酸) (sour)	/*[s]ˤor/ or /*sloːn/ /suɑn/ (酸)	酸 [suān]	*seo	su(ppai) (すっぱい|酸っぱい) (sour)	shida (시다) (sour)
64) foot (pied)	*pata (foot; to walk) (May originate from the sound of walking feet and can be still observed in the Japanese onomatopoeia ぱたぱた (pata pata) (sound of walking feet))	*ped-or *pōd(s)‑ (foot; pied)	* (p)alca (foot; knucklebone) (Initial dropping of “p” in some Transeurasian languages, but the initial “p” is attested in Korean.)	*pak (步) (to walk)	/*baːs/ or  /*mə-bˤa-s/ /buoH/ (步)	步 [bù]	*(p)al(i) (Possible confusion in Korean, Chinese and Japanese between foot and leg because of the oracle script of 足showing both, and thus referring to both parts)	ashi (あし | 足) (foot; leg)	bal (발) (foot; leg)
65) small (malin (étroit))	*mala | *sera (bad; petty) and *chika (small) (Proto-Semitic: *ṣ-ɣ-r, hence صَغير (sagir) (small))	*(s)mei- (small: malin, small) and (?)	*seja (thin; rare) and *ciake (small)	(?) and *śewH (小) (small)	/*[s]ewʔ/ or  /*s(m)ewʔ/ /siᴇuX/ (小) (small)	小 [xiǎo]	*se(m)a and *chak	semai (せまい | 狭い) (narrow) and ( ?)	sai (사이) (interval; interstice) and chakda 작다 (small)
66) negation (négation)	*ne | na (negation) and *ma (negative order)	*ne (negation) and  *mā (negative order)	*ani (negation) (metathesis) and *ma (negative order)	*mă(H) (negation) (Cf. the five types of negation in (old, medieval and modern) Chinese: 不, 弗, 毋, 勿 and 非) (In Transhimayalan, there is only one negation)	/*ma/  or /*mo/ /mɨo/ (無|毋)	無 | 毋 [wú]	*an(a)  and *ma(i)	na(i) (な(い)) (negation) and ma(i) (ま(い)) ➡しまい (old negative)	an (안) (negation) and mal(da) 말(다) or 못 (negative suffix/prefix)
67) red fox (vulpis; vulpine)	*chele | *wulpe (fox; wolf; jackal) (May originate from the fox yelp, yap (when caught?): the one that yelps, yaps. Related to Borean dog barking)	*h₂wl(o)p- ~ *h₂ulp- (“(red) fox”: vulpine) and *púḱsos (“the tailed one”), possibly from *puḱ- (“tail”).(fox)	*kiuti (fox)	*kʷā (fox) (狐)	/*[ɡ]ʷˤa/ or  /*ɡʷaː/ /ɦuo/ (狐)	狐 [hú]	*kitu | *kyeou	kitsune (きつね|狐) (fox)	yeou (여우) begins with “k” in some dialects (fox) or sungnyangi 승냥이 (dhole) or kogyangi 고양이 (cat) whose “I” (이) suffixes refer to a beast
68) dog, wolf, (chien, loup)	*kwana (dog) (May originate from the dog barking) (Proto-semitic: *kalb, whenceكَلْب(kelb (dog))	*kwon(s)- (dog, chien, hound)	*“kanga”(dog; puppy) whence *« nin(do) » (dog) (seems a composed word)	*d-kʷəj-n (犬) (dog)	/*[k]ʷʰˤ[e][n]ʔ/ or /*kʰʷeːnʔ/ /kʰwenX/ (犬)	犬[quǎn]	*“kang”	ookami (おおかみ|狼) (wolf) (Native but combined word. May be associated to Jômon people profound belief in mountain gods such as wolves, hence the prefix “oo” (great): great dog.) and inu (いぬ|犬) (dog)	kae (개) (dog) whence kangaji (강아지) (puppy (강아) + 이 (animal suffix)
69) fire (feu)	*paha (fire; sun) (May originate either from the flamboyant manifestation of fire from a sparkle to a flame.) et *huma (fire; to burn) (This one being the opposite of the former: paha is fire, and is inverted to express an action of fire as *huma) (Proto-Semitic: * nūr- (fire; light) cf. entry 130)	*paəwr̥ or  *pah2wr̥, (fire: feu) and (?)	*piage (fire; to burn)  and (?)	*pi (to set on fire) and *mējH or  *mej火 (fire) (This root is very irregular due to possible contamination with other etymons) whence *wăr  *bʷar or *pʷar (燔) (fire; to burn (formal))	m̥ǝ̄́j hwǝ̄́j  /huɑX/ (火) whence /*[b]ar/ or /*ban/ /bʉɐn/ (燔)	火 [huǒ]	*pai	hi (ひ|日) (day; sun)	hae (해) (day)
70) flame (flamme)	*pane | *pela (May be related to the above-written etymon and its explanation.)	*bhlē‑or *bhā-1 (to shine, to be bright: flam(m)e)	*peno (flame, bright)	*lam | *lom (炎 or焰| 焔 | 燄) (flame)	/*ɦlam/ or /*[ɢ]ʷ(r)am/ /ɦˠiᴇm/ (炎) and  /*loms/  /jiᴇmH/ (焰)	炎 [yán] 焰| 焔 | 燄[yàn]	*« pana »	honoo (ほのお|炎) (flamme)	(nun)bushi (눈)부시다 (bright)
71) blue(-green) (bleu(-vert)	*pela (PIE) | *ajbo (PTA) | *chane (PTH) (Confusion in many languages of blue and green due to the versatility of nature’s colours when young. Attested by  生oracle script which shows a young sprout growing from the ground and its cognate 青 (blue-green))	*bhlē-  or*bhel‑ (clear; bright: blue, bleu)	*ajbo (grass)	*sreng (青) (blue-green) and *ŋrǝw (碧 (?)) (jade) Cognate with 白 (white) as a vivid colour	/*sʰleːŋ/ or /*[s.r̥]ˤeŋ/ /t͡sʰeŋ/ (青) and /*praɡ/, /*preɡ/ or /*prak/ /pwiᴇk̚/ (碧)	青 [qīng] 碧 [bì]	*aobeol	ao (あお|青) (indigo; jade)	puruda (푸르다) (blue-green)
72) hand, to touch (main ; toucher)	*mana ((action of) hand) and *tala | *koma (hand, arm) (hands are often seen as an extension of legs and arms)	*man- (hand: main) and  *dewk- | *ḱomt (to pull: hand)	*monneo (to knead, to press) and “tiure” (leg, knee) and “talo” (wing, shoulderblade) are related)	*māj (摩) (to massage; to rub) or 摸 (to touch) or *ƛŭH / *ƛŭk (手) (hand) (assimilation in Transhimayalan) and  *thjuk (觸) (to touch)	/*maːl/ or /*maːls/ /muɑ/, /muɑH/ (摩) or /*hnjɯwʔ/ /*n̥uʔ/ /ɕɨuX/ (手) or  /*tʰjoɡ/  /*tʰok/  /t͡ɕʰɨok̚/ (觸)	摩 [mó] 手 [shǒu] 觸 [chù]	*meom(ji) and *tari	momu (もむ|揉む) (to mass; to knead) and te (て|手)(hand)	manjida (만지다) (to touch) and dari 다리 (leg)
73) frog, turtle (grenouille, tortue) (Possible confusion between « frog » and « turtle » as seen in sinograms鼃 and 黽)	*kwara (May originate from the croaking of the frog: the one that croaks) and *kapa (turtle) (Borrow in PIE? The one with twisted limbs) (“turtle” in PTH and PTA seems from the word « shell »: the one with a shell/carapace?) (cf. entry 129)	*gʷredʰ- (frog: batrachian) (grenouille and raine(tte) are onomatopoeic  ) and  *gʷēbhǝw-, *gʷeubh- (frog (lost since Latin))   *prew- (to leap; to bounce (frog)) *terkʷ (turtle, tortoise (the one with twisted limbs))	*kero (frog; toad) (according to entry 16, perhaps “the shouter”) and *kiapa (turtle) (In PTA the first etymon seems to originate from the frog croak such as “kerokero” in Japanese: the one that croaks. The second etymon seems from the word for “shell”)	*gwra (蛙|鼃 | 䵷) (frog) (Seems to originate from the croak sound of the frog) or 鼁 (frog) and *kre 龜 (turtle) or *k-rip (turtle) (鱉and獵 (archaism)) 黿 and 鰲 (sea turtle) are local words to designate a sea turtle 黽 (frog) is rather mysterious (possibly a local word)	/*qʷraː/, /*qʷreː/ /*qʷˤre/, /*qʷˤre/, or /*m-qʷˤre/, /*m-qʷˤre/ /ʔˠuɛ/, /ʔˠua/ (蛙|鼃) and /*kʷrɯ/ or /*[k]ʷə/, /*[k]ʷrə/ /kˠiuɪ/ (龜)	蛙|鼃 [wā] 鱉 [biē] 龜 [guī] 鼁 [qù]	*kae(gu)r (frog) and *kampye (turtle)	kaeru (かえる|蛙|黽) (frog) and kame (かめ|亀|龜) (turtle; tortoise)	kaeguri 개구리 (frog) and keobugi 거북이 (turtle)
74) nose (nez)	*na(h)rə | *puna (nose) (Word for nose accompanied by a final sound referring to sneezing or snor(t)ing. Literally: the body part that snor(t(e)s) or sneezes) and *hapa (mouth; beak)	*néh₂s- or *nh₂es- (nose; nostril, nez) and  *bak-, *baḱ- (pointed stick: beak)	*pune (nose, to smell) and *piro (beak; nose)	*/s-na  or *s-naːr (nose) and  *bi (nose) (鼻) (final loss in Transhimayalan but attested in Old Chinese)	/*blids/ /*m-bi[t]-s/, /*Cə-bi[t]-s/ /biɪH/ (鼻) (Note: the root  « sna(r) is lost in Chinese but stays in紐, 鈕, 䶊, 衄, which all refer to something related to the nose or something salient)	鼻 [bí] (nose)	*punae (seems lost in Korean) and *buri	hana (はな|鼻) (nose) and (kuchi)biru (くちびる|唇) (lips)	(?) and buri 부리 (beak)
75) (to) smell (sentir)	*napa | *suna (May originate from the sound one makes when sniffing: snif snif. First root is the metathesis of the entry above)	*smelə- (to burn hence « smell; smoke”)	*nibi (to smell) (Initial drop in Transeurasian)	*m/s-nam (to smell) (聞) (Confusion between “smell” and “hear” in Transhimayalanbecause « nose » (s-na ; s-naːr) and « ear » (r/g-na) are very close to each other)	/*mɯn/ /*mu[n]/ /mɨun/ (聞) (to hear; to smell)	聞 [wén]	*ne(p) | ne(b)	niou (におう|匂う) (to smell)	nae(eumsae) (내음새) (odour; smell)
76) odour (odeur)	*pita (May originate from the smoke one smells and says « p(ou)ah ». Also related to the nose etymons above.)	*h₃ed- (to smell; to stink: odour)	(?) (no good candidate for Transeurasian; all words related to smell or smoke begin with “k” or “g”)	*pit (~ b-) (pleasant scent)	/*bliːɡ/, /*bliɡ/ /*[b]ˤi[t]/ /biɪt̚/, /bet̚/ (苾) (literary)	苾 [bì]	*put | *but
77) cloud, cumulus (nuage)	*kuma (sky; cloud) (Proto-Semitic “gaym” whence  غَيْمَة  (gayma (cloud))	*ku-m-olo from *ḱewh₁- (to swell: cumulus) and *nebh- or *nébʰos (cloud: nuage, nebulos) and  *gel- (to pile up: cloud)	*kolma (shadow; cloud) related to *gela (to mask; to hide. Cloud: the one that masks) (cf. entry 282)	*gʷǝn (~ qhʷ-) (雲) (cloud) related to 運 *gʷiǝ̆r or回 (to turn) *gʷiǝ̄l (the one that turns or derive) Cognate with群(to gather) and昆 (to swarm)	/*ɢun/ /*[ɢ]ʷə[n]/ /ɦɨun/ (雲)	雲 [yún]	*kulmeo	kumo (くも|雲) (cloud)	kurum (구름) (cloud)
78) in; to; at (dans ; en ; y) (dative (COI); locative) I	*hena (in; en) and *hat (at; à) and *kaja (to (go)) (perhaps from someone saying: “go, go”, or “let’s go” as to exhort others to go somewhere.)	*h₁én (in; en (fr)) and  *h₂éd (at)  and *ǵʰeh₁- (to go; to walk and *gʰi  (emphasis) and *ḱe (ici) for (« y » (aller))	*(n)in (locative; dative) and *du; deo (Metathesis in Transeurasian)  and *gae (allative)	ʔay (於) (to; at; towards (formal)) (In Transhimalayan 於 assimilates all dative and locative cases) and  *kha (去) (to go)	/*[ʔ]a/ /*qa/ /ʔɨʌ/ (於) and  /*kʰas/  /*[k]ʰ(r)ap-s/  /kʰɨʌH/ (去)	於 [yú] 去 [qù]	*(n)i(n) and *teo and *gae	(n)i (に) (particle “ni” locative and dative) and to et (ni)te と and (に)て (locative) and he へ (he)	eun ;  nun (은|는) (particle eun, nun) and de 데 (place) and ae 에 (particle ae)
79) me; I (direct nominative) (moi ; je : nominatif direct)	*haka (I; myself) and *na (I; us (inclusive)) (exclusive root still reflected in Japanese われ (ware) (I; us) (May originate from a primitive sound one made to designate oneself. This word is the very essence of the Borean Middle Palaeolithic split, and the fundamental difference of mind between East Asian and Indo-European.)	*éǵ(h)₂ (ego, from Latin) and  *ne- (us: us, nos, nous)	*ga (Metathesis in Transeurasian) and *ŋa (I; we)	(?) and *ŋa-j  ou  ka 吾 (I; me) (No distinction between direct and indirect subject in PTH)	/*ŋaː/ /*ŋˤa/ /ŋuo/ (吾)	吾[wú]	*ga  and *ŋa	ga が (direct subject particle) and な (na) (I (archaic))	ga 가 (direct subject particle) and na 나 (I)
80) this, that (demonstrative) (ce ; ça (démonstratif))	*tə | *tu (intimately related to second person pronoun *tu: you and I are opposed, such as men (*mene) and women (*hema))	*só; tó (this, that)	*ko (Assimilation of “t” into “k” in Transeurasian languages)	*tă- | *tǝ̆- (this, that) (之) or (是) (archaism in this nuance)	/*djeʔ/ /*[d]eʔ/ /d͡ʑiᴇX/ (之or 是)	是 [shì] and 之 [zhī]	*k(i)eo	ko こ (this) which gave kore (これ) (this) koko (ここ) (here) kono (この) (this thing)	ki 기 which gave yeogi (여기) (here) jeogi (저기) (there) keogi (거기) (over there)
81) accusative (COD)	*b(w)o	case in *ó or Ø	*be (accusative)	*ŋa-j or *ka 我 (I; me: accusative)	/*ŋˤajʔ/  /*ŋaːlʔ/ /ŋɑX/ (我)	我 [wǒ]	case in *wo or *ba/be ～をば	wo (を) (particle COD, wo)	ancient case in « bil » which became eul (을) and reul (를) (COD particle)
82) leaf, bud (feuille, bourgeon)	*lapa (leaf) and *pare (leaf; bud (quite similar to Latin “burra” and Old French “burjon”)) (This entry is closely related to entry 58, as buds and leaf seem to be extensions of flowers in Borean)	*lewbʰ- (to cut; to detach: leaf) and  *bʰew-, *bu- (to swell: bud) and  *bʰleh₃- (to blossom, flower: feuille) (cf. entry 58)	*liapa (leaf) and *pure (leaf, bud)	*s-lap (leaf) (葉) and *“(b)ru” 苞 or 蕾 (bud)	/*leb/ /*l[a]p/ /jiᴇp̚/ (葉) and /*pruː/ /*pˤ<r>u/ /pˠau/ (苞)	葉 [yè] 苞 [bāo]	*naep and *pa (probably lost in Korean)	nae (なえ|苗) (sprout) and ha (は|葉) (leaf)	Ip (잎 but formerly nip (닢)) and (?)
83) skin; bark (peau, écorce)	*pata | *pala (?) (skin) and *sala | *kwala (skin; flesh) and *kopa | *pako (bark; skin) (May originate from the sound of a cracking nut, shell or bark)	*pel- (to cover; to envelop: peau) and  *sken- (to split off: skin) and  *bʰergo- (bark (tree))	*peta (meat; skin) and perhaps *siali (flesh) and *kapa (skin; bark) (Metathesis)	*phal (皮) (skin) and  *s-nja-k | *nuk (肉) (meat; flesh) (Metathesis in Transhimayalan) and  *khrǝ̄w (shell, bark) (殼)	/*bral/ /*m-[p](r)aj/ /bˠiᴇ/ (皮) and /*njuɡ/ /*k.nuk/ /ȵɨuk̚/ (肉) and /*kʰroːɡ/ /*[kʰ]ˤrok/ /kʰˠʌk̚/ (殼)	皮[pí] 殼 [ké, qiào, què] 肉[ròu]	*ped and *sali And *kap(a)	hada (はだ| 肌) (skin) and shishi (しし|肉|宍) (meat (archaism) and kawa (かわ| 皮) (skin, leather, hide)	beogida 벗기다 (to peel) and sal 살 (skin) and kat (갗) (skin; hide)
84) to pierce; to sting (percer ; piquer)	*cheku | *chiku (May originate from a piercing or sticking sound: tschik, tschik) (Closely related to entry 32)	*stegh- (to pierce; to prick: sting)	*tiku (to stuff into, to thrust)	*ʒeŋ or *stek (刺) (to pierce) (Final “k” derivates into “ng” such as “sting” in English)	/*sʰeɡs/  /*[tsʰ]ek-s/  /t͡sʰiᴇH/ (刺) (to sting; to pierce)	[cì] 刺	*“tsuk ; tseok”	tsuku (つく | 突く) (to hit; to thrust)	jjikda (찍다) (to pierce, to cute)
85) rain (pluie)	*huwa (to rain; to flow (water)) and *paha (to pour) and *para ((to) rain; to snow) and (?) (Some seem to be the metathesis of the first one)	*ur, *uh₁r- or  *awǝ-/e- (to flow, to rain: urine, urinate) whence (?)  *(H)reǵ- (to flow: rain) and (?) and  *plew- (to wash, to pour: pluie) and  *n̥bʰrós or *n̥bʰrís ou  *embr- (pluie : imbrifère)	*udV ( ~ o-, i̯u-, i̯o-) (to rain) and *piage (rain) (ge is a suffix) (cf. entry 37, 116) and *poru (to rain; to snow) and (?)	*krwa or *qhʷăH (to rain) (雨) whence雩 (rain dance) and (?) and (?)	/*ɢʷaʔ/ /*C.ɢʷ(r)aʔ/ /ɦɨoX/	雨 [yǔ]	*oran and *ampye This word is supported by the Ainu language with “apto” (rain) or “anpe” (rain storm) and *pur	(?) and ame (あめ|雨) (rain) and furu (ふる | 降る) (to rain)	oranbi 오란비 (long rain) and pi 비 (rain) whence perhaps jangma (장마) (rainy season) (長 and 마 (rain)) and bora 보라 (snow storm)
86) house (I) (maison)	*tuke | *teke (house; building) (May originate from the sound of wood or other raw material one chops to build a house: tac tac, tick tick)	*tek (to live, settle: house)	*jibi (house) (Palatalisation of « t » into « j » in Transeurasian languages)	*t[ŭ]k 塾 (house (archaism)) or *t(r)ak (宅) (house) 家 (house) is strongly associated to « pig » as observed in oracle script	/*djɯwɢ/ /d͡ʑɨuk̚/ (塾) and /*r’aːɡ/ /*m-tˤ<r>ak/ /ɖˠæk̚/ (宅)	塾 [shú] 宅 [zhái]	*jipe This word is supported by the Ainu language with « cise » (house)	ie (いえ|家) (house) taku (たく|宅) (house (formal)) (Chinese borrowing)	jip (집) (house) taek 댁 (Chinese borrowing)
87) house (II) (dome; domestic)	*tume | *tome (house; building) and *kime (settlement)	*dem- (house; dome) and *koim | *kaym (to settle: home)	*tama (wall; roof (of a house)) whence *malu (room) (Metathesis in Transeurasian) and *kumi (settlement)	*ten (殿) (high building (palace)) and *qĭm ( ~ *qʷĭm) (house; dwelling) (宮)	/*[N-t]ˤə[n]-s/, /*tˤə[n]-s/ /denH/, /tenH/ (殿) and /*kuŋ/ /*k(r)uŋ/ /kɨuŋ/ (宮)	殿 [diàn] 宮 [gōng]	*dam whence *maru | muro	tamuro (たむろ | 屯) (camp) whence muro (むろ|室) (storage room)	dam 담 (wall) still used in 담벼락 (wall) whence maru 마루 (Korean veranda)
88) two; pair (deux ; paire)	*pura (pair) and *tuwa (two)	‌*‌perə-2 (to allow equally: pair) and *dwo- (two)	*pucu (two; pair) and *tiubure (two; company)	*p(r)ɨ̄H (倍) (pair ; double) and tŭr (對) (pair)	/*bɯːʔ/ /*[b]ˤəʔ/ /bʌiX/ (倍) and /*tuːbs/ /*[t]ˤ[u]p-s/ /tuʌiH/ (對) (pair; contrast)	對[duì] 倍[bèi]	*futa and *t(s)ur(e)	futa (ふた) (two) and tsure (つれ) (companion)	jjak (짝) (pair) and dul (둘) (two)
89) (to) breath(e), to live (respirer, souffle)	*weki | *cheki (to live, to breathe) and *puha (to blow) (All blowing related words beginning with “pu ; fu ; bu”, which originates from a blowing sound)	*gʷeyh₃- or  *gʷíh₃weti (to live, vivid) and  *(s)peys- (to blow, to breathe: respire (spirare))	*iki (to live, to settle) and *pulgi (to blow) (closely related to entry 26)	*sǝ̆k or  *m-sak (息) (to breathe; life) (Probable metathesis) or *sɨā (蘇) (to live; to breathe) and  *bŭ (-t) (弗|拂) (to blow)	/*slɯɡ/  /*sək/ /sɨk̚/ (息) or /*sŋaː/ /*s-ŋˤa/ /suo/ (蘇) and /*pʰɯd/  /*pʰ[u]t/ /pʰɨut̚/ (拂)	息 [xī] 蘇[sū] 拂 [fú]	*iki (Maybe inexistant in Korean due to the next entry) and *bul(k)	ikiru (いきる|生きる) (to live) whence iki (いき| 息) (breath) and fuku (ふく|吹く) (to blow)	(?) and bulda (불다) (to blow)
90) to be; to exist (être, exister)	*hesumi Spiro ergo sum (Inspired by Cogito ergo sum) (This state of mind and way of living is the very essence of Borean speakers: I breathe so I am)	*h₁ésmi (“I am, I exist” from the verb h₁ésti (to be; to exist) “breath” seems to originate from  *bʰuH- (to be(come)) and  *h₁es (to be)	*sumi (to live; to breathe)	*sjəm or *s(j)am-s (heart, spirit, breath)  (心)	/*slɯm/ /*səm/ /siɪm/ (心)	心 [xīn]	*s(u)mi	sumu (すむ|住む) (to live, to dwell)	shida 쉬다 (to breathe) whence sum숨 (breath) as attested by some Korean dialect in 쉼or 쉬미
91) lightening, thunder (foudre, éclair, tonnerre)	*« b(w)eo(l)k ; p(w)eo(l)k » (thunder, flash) (May originate from the sound lightening makes when falling onto the ground) and *“(st)en ; (s)lin” (lightening, thunder) (Onomatopoeic imitative sound for lightening: ling, sten, rung)	*bʰel- (to shimmer, to shine: foudre) whence *bherəg- (to shine; bright) and  *(s)ten-, *(s)tenh₂- (thunder, tonnerre)	*pialki (lightening, thunder) and *ina (dawn, dusk) (flash in the dark (Starostin)) (intial drop in Transeurasian)	*rung | *ruk (dragon, thunder) (隆 (rumble), 雷|靁 (thunder)) 霹靂 (thunder) seem both onomatopoeic) and *lin(g) (lightening, flash) (電 and神 from 申 (thunder in oracle script))	/*ruːl/ /*C.rˤuj/ /luʌi/ (雷) and /*hlin/ /*l̥i[n]/ /ɕiɪn/ (申)	雷 [léi] 申 [shēn]	*pe(n)kai | pikar and *ina (probably lost in Korean)	hikaru (ひかり|光る) whence hikari (ひかり|光) (light) and ina(bikari), ina(duma) (いなびかり|稲光)、(いなづま|稲妻) (lightening) kaminari (かみなり|雷) is a native creation 神+鳴り (gods rumble)	beongae (번개) (lightning)) and (?) 천동 (天動) (thunder) 벼락 (霹靂) (lightening) 우레 (雨雷) (thunder) are non native
92) butterfly; lepidopteran (papillon ; lépidoptère)	*lepa (May originate from the light flapping sound butterflies make when flying: the one that flaps) (Flying insects possibly beginning with the syllable “pe(p) ; le(p)”, as next entry) Proto-semitic : p/far, hence فَرَاش (ferasha (butterfly)	*lep (to peel, scale: lepidopteran) whence  *pāpel-, *peypel- (butterfly: papillon) which seems a double creation of the first one	*nepa (flying insect)	*lēp (蝶) (butterfly)	/*l’eːb/ /*lˤep/ /dep̚/ (蝶)	蝶 [dié]	*napai	chôchô (蝶々) being a borrowing from Chinese, old Japanese has other words with the same root as « tombo  (dragonfly) » for the word. Ainu language has « heporap » (butterfly) including « rap », which may be the lost (Ainu-Jômon) word for “butterfly”.	nabi (나비) (butterfly)
93) bee (abeille)	*bera (May originate from the buzzing sound bees make: the one that buzzes) (Flying insects possibly beginning with the syllable “pe(p) ; le(p)”, as previous entry) Proto-semitic : *dubur (bee) (probable epenthesis) or  *nūb hence   نَحْل (nahl (bee))	*bʰi-, *bʰey- (bee, abeille) (« dragonfly » and “libellule” are combined native constructions in French and English)	*pera (bee)	*bung | *bra(w) (蜂) (bee) whence *guājH (*guājH-*ruājH) (蜾蠃) (bee; wasp)	/*boːŋ/, /*pʰoŋ/ or /*pʰ(r)oŋ/ /buŋ/, /pʰɨoŋ/ (蜂) whence /*kloːlʔ/ /*kˤorʔ/ /kuɑX/ (蜾蠃)	蜂[fēng] 蜾蠃 [guǒ]	*peal(y)i (Ainu languages has « soya » which seems and old derivative of the Borean word)	hachi (はち|蜂) (bee)	beol (벌) (bee)
94) cricket; locust (criquet ; grillon)	*krape (May originate from the stridulation of the cricket/locust: the one that stridulates, cri, cri, cri)	*gerh₂- and *gerə-2 (cricket, criquet)	*kiape ((flying) insect) (locust, cricket sounds : 찌르르찌르르, 귀뚤귀뚤 コロコロ)	*g(h)raH (蝗) (cricket; locust) perhaps from  */k/p/s-rwak or *bəw (insect) (No sinogram for “locust” because they were associated to 秋 (autumn) as the flea of the season in oracle script))	/*ɡʷaːŋ/, /*ɡʷraːŋ/, or /*ɡʷraːŋs/ /*[ɢ]ʷˤaŋ/ /ɦwɑŋ/ or  /ɦˠwæŋ/, /ɦˠwæŋH/ (蝗) (locust)	蝗 [huáng]	*« kwo(p)u(r) »	koorogi (こおろぎ) (cricket)	kwidurami (귀뚜라미) (cricket) (?)
95) hot (chaud)	*hota| kota (May originate from the sound one makes when feeling something hot: あつ, 더워) (also cf. entry 110, 119)	*h₂eh₃- (to be hot: hot) or  *ḱelh₁-. ou *kay- (heat: chaleur, chaud) (both etymons seem closely related and might have contamined each other)	*ota (fire, hot, warm) (Initial drop in Transeurasian)	*(s)ta (暑)  (hot (climate)) whence *ʔŭk (~ɣ-, -ŏk) (燠) (hot (literary))	/*hjaʔ/ /*s-tʰaʔ/ /ɕɨʌX/ (暑)	暑 [shǔ]	*(a)ta | eo(to) (In Japanese and Korean, differentiation is made between heat for the climate or a surface)	whence atsui (あつい|熱い|暑い) (hot) but also atatakai (あたたかい|温かい|暖かい) (warm)	whence ddatut 따뜻하다 (warm) or (warm) ddasu hada 따스하다 (warm)
96) moon (god(dess)) ((dieu, déesse de la) lune)	*mera (moon; month) and *talga (heavenly body (moon)) and *hala (light; luminary) (This entry seems related to entry 44)	*mēh- (measure: moon, month) and  *dAnǵʰ- or  *denǵʰ- (heavenly body: Old English “tungel”) and *lewk- (light, to shine: lune)	*mura(round (as the moon)) whence *milte (full (moon)) and *tieolgu (moon) whence *tiolo (to shine (moon))	*lăH (s-)or  *ʔʷăt or  *s-ŋwat (moon; star) (月) (moon) and  (entry 192 (?))	/*ŋod/ /*[ŋ]ʷat/ /ŋʉɐt̚/ (月) and (entry 192 (?))	月 [yuè] (entry 192 (?))	*maru; muri and *tokeol	maru(i) (まるい|円い|丸い)(round) and tsuki (つき|月) (moon; month)	muri 무리 (moon or sun halo) and dal (달) (moon; month)
97) to fly (voler)	*para (to fly) and *tepe | *pete (to fly; wings) and *nero; bero” (to fly)	*plew(k)- (to fly) and  *pet- (to fly: feather, penne, ptero-) and  *welh₁- (voler)	*pile (to fly; to soar) and *tepe (to wave; to flap) and *nero (to fly)	*phar (翻) (to fly) and *thap (𦐇) (to soar) Many sinograms containing 𦐇 seem to reflect this ancient root and *bjar ~ *p(i/u)r (飛) (to fly)	/*pʰan/ /pʰʉɐn/ (翻) and  /tʰɑp̚/ (𦐇) and /*pɯl/ /*Cə.pə[r]/ /pʉi/ (飛)	翻 [fān] 𦐇  [tà] 飛 [fēi]	*pirunkap and *tembi and *nar; neor	hirugaeru (ひるがえる| 翻る) (to flap) and tobu (とぶ|飛ぶ) and  noru (のる|乗る) (to ride) expressions such as 風に乗る (to ride the wind) suggests an elevation similar to flying	(?) and teombida 덤비다 (to rush, fly at) and nalda 날다 (to fly)
98) to eat; meal (manger ; repas)	*(ha)muke (to eat; meal) (May originate from the munching sound one makes when eating; ) and *heta | *thepa (food; meal) (mutual metathesis)  Proto-Semitic: /ʔakal-	*mē- (to measure: meal, manger) and *h₁ed- (manger: to eat)	*muke (to suck, to eat) and *eopo (bread, food) (Initial drop in Transeurasian)	*m/s/g-ljak (食) (to eat) and *thV̄p (呫) (to taste; to eat (archaism))	/*ɦljɯɡ/ /*mə-lək/ /ʑɨk̚/ (食) and /*tʰeːb/ (呫)	呫 [tiè] 食[shí]	*meok(a) and *eop	makanai (まかなう|賄う) (to provide food) and opomono (food (archaism)) whence taberu (たべる|食べる) (to eat)	meokda (먹다) (to eat) and bap (밥) (meal)
99) thousand  (multitude(mille ; multitude)	*tsoka | *tanga (thousand; many) (Hundred seems to be seen a huge number.) (Also cf entry 55)	*teuə or  *tewh₂- (swell: « thousand » is swollen hundred)	*cako (many; to be full)	*s-toŋ (眾 | 衆) (thousand)	/*tjuŋs/ /*tuŋ-s/ /t͡ɕɨuŋH/ (眾|衆) (many; multitude)	(眾|衆) [zhòng]	*ta(k)	takuwaeru (たくわえる|蓄える) (to stock) whence takusan (たくさん) (a lot; many) (たく (many) and さま (appearance)) written phonetically as 沢山	chada (차다) (to be full)
100) air, vapor	*kepa	*kwep- or *kʷap- (to seethe, to smolder: vapor) and *h₂ews- (dawn: (morning, fog) air) and *h₂weh₁-. (to blow: atmo(sphere)) and *lubʰ(-tu-) (dome, sky, air: loft, lift, aloft)	*kijma (vapor, wrath) whence the expression  화가 나가 (to be irritated)	*kǝj or *qəp (氣) (vapor, air)	/*kʰɯds/ /*C.qʰəp-s/ /kʰɨiH/ (氣)	氣 [qì]	*kim	Perdu en japonais	kim 김 (vapor)