universal without ism

or is the ism in the axiom?

For this word to mean a reference to the particular pattern of w-o-r-d, and indeed linked to a particular word – it has to come in a sequence.
One lingo might have WordThis
Another lingo might have ThisWord
In one lingo this = sequence T-O
In another lingo the sequence = Z-E

However, the UNIVERSAL, seems that we have sequences on top of which meanings may be attached and significances appear.

No?

In that sense, while The MEANINGS and Significance/s of this word might differ between cultures, contexts and people – the life of the sequence, like that of 1 + 1, is the same on earth and on alpha satori.. Indeed all the way there.. no..?

trans and maths or numbers and meanings?

I keep wondering about stuff like:
the number 2, for example, it can apply for 2 apples, 2 as an abstract outcome of a calculation, as an element of another number, as an element of a calculation, etc… In such usages, the 2 doesn’t mean something other than what it is, but is being applied to be an element greater than just what it is..
20 has a 2 10 can be said to have a 2, but not in the way 7 is.. Which numbers don’t have anything to do with 2??
There are many numbers that have not much to do with 101, for example.. This is a number on a different sort of strands and sequences.. Different kind of rhythms and links and transes..

Are there sort of universal equivalents that are not entirely numbers?