Preface for my book

Preface
The audience of this book is specialized scholars qualified to assess phonology systems. Those who read this book must possess these preconditions and be ready to follow the logical flow of ideas here. Without this, time spent reading would be better invested elsewhere.
This is an attempt at a “grand theory of phonology.” The intent is to be comprehensive in scope, applying new ideas and theories; supposedly, nobody in the world has written this particular approach to phonology. However, I do not claim that this is the conclusive final word on the subject. I am ready to submit to any change after getting valuable feedbacks and suggestions from the specialists in this field.
This is a test; a trial to see whether any similarities or disparities exists between dogmatism and an individual person’s perception and experience of his sounds. This perception is not based on another’s experience or dogma. To the best of my knowledge, there are no contradictions or obscurities about explanation of sounds in the book. There is no such question that comes to my mind left unanswered. Yet, I in no way avow that my theory is infallible or comprehensive.
The preconditions to read
There are certain pre-conditions that will greatly enhance reading of this book. First, one should open their mind to listen to a new idea. Second, one should allow for individual views according to personal perception of and reflection on the world. Third, one should be ready to accept that century-old preconceived ideas are not to be a matter of dogmatism. As a reader of this book, one should also come out of the traps of prejudice and bias.
The reader should know the terminology and understand them fully. One should also know the causative sources of sounds theorized in the book. Finally, the reader should study and know the phonographs in the book as per my interpretation at this point in time. A reader with these pre-conditions and intentions will both enrich this material and be enriched b reader with these pre-conditions and intentions will both enrich this material and be enriched by it.
Some important guidelines
Before the main text of this book, some guidelines need to be covered. Generally speaking, when I expound the alphabetical sounds (or any other), I do not use the traditional pronunciation as a base, but I study the aetiology of that sound (what I call place, action, effort and factors) and draw a conclusion considering a sound’s causative sources. Beyond this basic framework, other guidelines are useful as stated below.
One:- I have given many examples of particular sounds. Focusing too much on these may lead to confusion (since Tibetan does not use a system like this to define sound characteristics). For instance, we may differ on the difference between ka and kha. Moreover, I may describe a distinguishing factor where traditionally there is none. Therefore, since the means of distinguishing between sounds differs between traditional interpretations and what is espoused here, an overt focus on the multiple examples may be confusing. Measuring one object with many scales creates confusion. It is always better to measure an object with one scale.
Another point is that there are some examples like “the way Kham Nangchen people pronounce….” In this case, a Nangchen person must not make a hasty conclusion to think, “I am from Nangchen, I know how Nangchens pronounce and the author must be hinting that this sound should be made this way”. The factor that may create confusion here is a new system of analyzing sound which departs from traditional systems of phonology. We need to use one system to analyze phonology—trying to combine systems creates confusion. As such, learning the phonological system explained in chapter one here is absolutely pivotal to understanding the phonology espoused here, which extends far beyond the sounds used in the phenomenon of Tibetan speech itself.
Two:- there are many references to ‘Dhoism’. Readers should not confuse the word with the particular place called Dho in Kham province. This Dho refers to one component of the three adjoined provinces; Dho- Uue-Kham. The word ‘Dho’ of Dho-Uue-Kham covers all areas of one of the three major linguistically naturally division of Tibetan plateau, My use of “Dho” implies no political segregations prevalent in exiled society. So, my native place (Lithang Nomadic) and Serta come under Dho language speaking area. Ladhak to Kongpo belongs to the Uue language area. The rest can be categorized as Kham. This division is made anthropologically for easy analysis of language phonology.
Three:- It is clear that when such a grand phonology is composed, it is essential to have a comprehensive symbolic system of all human phonology. Though I have thought about this, it is my great regret that this is not ready at the time of printing as the digital development is still in process. Hopefully these will be ready at the time of a second printing.
I consider that it is pivotal to have the phonograph to engineer the Unified Standard Tibetan Language. Moreover, such phonograph would be a great help to anybody who wishes to study any language, because such phonograph can transcribe any sound exactly the same. Unlike the present international phonetic symbol that can transcribe only some partial sounds of the world, the new phonograph will represent not the sounds themselves, but the aetiology of sounds. So, the phonograph will cause you to produce sounds automatically sensing even the smallest variations of sounds. That means you can learn a language using the symbols without consulting a teacher.
Four:- I have made a temporary phonograph using the Tibetan fonts available from computer to serve the purpose temporarily. Understanding this system is critical to understanding the content of this book.
. Five:- there is a deliberate variation in transcribing the sounds of kya, khya and gya in chapter 6 and that in chapter 13. If I am to make this unified one, it should be the same as in chapter 6. I do so, that will cause unnecessary confusion. (for the reason, see the original text)
Six:- Some points are left to the inference of the reader and some points are dealt with in great depth. This is both to test the resilience of the theory of phonology here and to facilitate the work of constructive criticism.