[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: site

Rene wrote:

> > Quite frankly if  you had a hard time with what I
> > said the first time...this is going to fry you.
> > http://www.gloryroad.net/~bigjim/Voynich.htm
> The main problem I see is that you have far more words than there
> are 'apparent words' on the first page. This means that you're
> using characters, pairs or triplets of Voynich characters as
> 'words' (as illustrated by your sample translation of the
> first word FACHYS).
> There are not that many different character pairs in the Voynichese
> script, so you must be translating the same combinations in 
> different manners at different times. Thus, you must be adding
> information.
> To what extent this is happening I cannot judge, since you
> don't give the exact correspondence between Voynichese and
> Hebrew, as Adams already remarked.

There an even more fundamental problem. From the web page:

     For instance, that word AIN. I thought about the fact that if AIN was
     Hebrew for the eye, then to visually encode it the author could also
     write AIIN and AIIIN. Even though on the surface it would logically
     appear that these variations represented different words, they were all
     actually the same word, the Hebrew AIN, the eye. When the letter D was
     added, as DAIN, it represented the construction D'A, the Hebrew word
     "knowledge", spelled daleth ain. You really have a two letter word, not a
     four letter word.

While EVA 'a' and 'i' look somewhat like those Roman characters, the EVA 'd'
is the Currier/Frogguy/FSG/SSG '8', and in fact looks like an '8' -- ie, the
association of 'd' with that character is to a degree arbitrary on the part of
the designers of EVA. Therefore the DAIN example above is flawed. How many of
the other Hebrew "readings" are based on other somewhat arbitrary choices of
letter in EVA?