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

Re: Another explanation for dain daiin...

I agree that there is no doubt that <daiin> and <dain> are prime suspects of 
something strange going on, but I don't know what. :-/

On 21 Jan 2002 at 11:09, Nick Pelling wrote:
> >If it was a compression mechanism, the text would no exhibit so low
> >entropy. The low entropy is not given by daiin only. There is a
> >strong bias for certain duplets as Stolfi pointed out some time ago.
> On the contrary, this actually reinforces the duplets observation. :-)

How? I don't understand how a "macro" or meta-language command to 
copy/repeat words give any clues as the alphabet structure. A bit like saying that 
"ditto" or "etcetera" give a clue about the Roman alphabet.
> I believe that the underlying alphabet is (with a few notable
> exceptions, such as "d" and "y") entirely expressed as duplets.

There may be some <ii>, <ee>, but the "entire alphabet"?
Then "word" sizes would not be words at all and so they could be phonemes or 
syllables as suggested in the past -- I can imagine Jacques and Stolfi getting 
ready for the pizza :-)