Re: The letters <p> and <f>, again

[Jorge Stolfi <stolfi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[Oops, another one which should have been sent to the whole list.] 

    > [stolfi:] So I would rather believe that <k> and <t> are
    > "phonetically" similar, but semantically distinct (like "t" and
    > "d" in Spanish or Italian, say), and that the vocabulary is so
    > "dense" that almost any phonetically valid string is a common
    > word.

    > [Rene:] Well, this observation would make perfect sense if the
    > VMs were a rather phonetic rendering of some language. In that
    > case 'oteey' and 'okeey' are the same but only pronounced
    > differently.

That may be, but it is not what I meant. I was thinking of sounds that
are "equivalent" in the sense that swapping one for the other usually
produces valid *but distinct* words, like p/b in English (pet/bet,
pill/bill, pun/bun, pay/bay, etc.).

English is not a good model because its quirky spelling rules break
the expects phonetic symmetries: so "ph" and "th" are common while
"bh" or "dh" are nonexistent, etc.. That's why I mentioned t/d in
Spanish or Italian.

    > [Rene:] p/f are like k/t in the way their shapes distinguish
    > themselves from all the other letters (except q - Currier 4). At
    > the same time k/t behave normally while p/f don't. What did the
    > person(s) who made this up have in mind?

My current best guess is that p/f are almost, but not quite,
fancier forms of k/t.  Some instances of p/f may stand for 
k/t combined with other letters; some may be somthing else
entirely (e.g. paragraph markers, as you say --- those may
be John's "detachable gallows".)

    > What it all means in Voynichese is an open question. I would not
    > expect that letters that can be removed are superfluous. But this
    > is not a typical feature for any language I know (except for
    > some obvious cases at word endings as above).

Isn't this a characteristic feature of Semitic languages --
namely, vowels throughout the word are replaced *or omitted* 
to form inflections and derivatives.

    > [stolfi:] Let me see, I bet it it sounds something like
    > "U concete prosím u vístup a nástup ..."  8-)

    > [Rene:] Close! If this is from memory, I am impressed.
    
Well, no big deal --- I suppose it shows that I got lost in the metro
more often than you did. 8-)

Actually I *did* intend to memorize the recording. If I had stayed
another couple of days, I would have got the second half too...
    
    > The initial 'u' is actually attached to the word concete.
    > This word is the verb 'stop', where the initial 'u' is attached as
    > a regular verb mode modifier (but don't ask me how regular). Other
    > such prefixes exist (na-, ne-). Intrigues me...

I think I see why...

    > The bit that struck me most about Czech (but I know too little)
    > is that the consonants can be split up into 'hard' and 'soft' ones,
    > and this has some semi-regular consequences for orthograhy.
    
Well, if Voynichese is Czech, its "ortography" must be quite unlike
the standard one. Perhaps you mean that the soft/hard split affects
adjacent *sounds* and inflections?
    
All the best,

--stolfi

PS.  I have finally scanned some of the pictures I took at Prague:
http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~stolfi/voynich/00-05-prague-trip/

PPS. Rene, I noticed that your Geocities URL is now owned
by someone else.  Shall we assume that you have permanently 
relocated to sunny Niue?