I cannot find a way to map Hash<Hash<ARCHETYPE_TERM, String>, String> to a two level table, I think it needs three levels, so maybe there is an error in the definition:
This should just come out to a structure which is a Hash of Hashes, where the inner hash is Hash<ARCHETYPE_TERM, String>. Note - I think in Java, the declarations would be the other way round, i.e. Hash<String, ARCHETYPE_TERM>, i.e. it is Hash<K, V> I think? But I don't see why this would cause a problem in any normal programming language that has Hashes.
I come back to this, this week, I forgot what it is about
Call can get closed, as you indicated, Hashtables are often read as Hash<K, V>, but in the specs it is Hash<V, K> (like, I believe in Eiffel? class HASH_TABLE [G, KEY -> HASHABLE])
Maybe it is good to reformulate this part, for example conform the most commonly used notation of HashTable, which will be:
Hash<String (=language-key), Hash<String (= term code-key), ARCHETYPE_TERM > >