Couldn't that logic be applied to everything we say we "know".
-> Wittgenstein's private language argument.
You have created a word in a private language "frequency/ies" Apparently, you feel you know what you mean - nobody else does. On the other hand, the main meaning
of "dog" is known by English speakers, showing that it is not from a set of words within a private language.
You are suggesting that only John (or whoever wrote "John") knew what "word" meant. In the extremely unlikely event of your being anywhere near correct, as John is dead and has taken his secret to the grave, there can be no answer to your question. It is lost for ever.
Old Church Guy did point you to a reputable site that did define "word" as it appeared in John. You did not accept this definition despite your education in the area being abysmal.
I suspect you are now trying to drag others into your delusion. But do not worry: the "real" meaning will come to you; be revealed unto you; will appear in your brain with astonishing clarity, but, like "frequencies" you will not quite be able to explain it to others, nor will you (without resort to fantasy and non-sequiturs) be able to say how "word" fits with any known theory.