VMs: RE: Folio 39r

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxx>]

Wonderful!  The one page I put forward is one I haven't read and
reread, but I in fact put it forward because I found it
surprising, not looking to errors.

Good test for a transcription query however.  I need my sleep, at
which point I will reissue images of both the corrected
transcription and the previously posted images.  It's a wonderful
place to start this discussion, and of course, if anyone has a
better image than I have, clarity is always a very good addition!

Nick, your suggestions - how can we make this more directly
correctible?  Every technology I've tested, discussed or
contemplated leaves out some of our more backward fellows.
Anybody have a free-ware version of 'Post-it Notes'? ;-0  Here's
the area where I'm at a loss, since I have no intention of ever
going back to writing <iin> for a simple 'm'.  A true discussion
needs both image and transcription simultaneously to be effective.
That's why I've gone to the database approach, since I can store
both in the same file.  Better ideas are appreciated.

GC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-voynich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-voynich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Nick Pelling
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 3:56 AM
> To: Voynich Ms. mailing list
> Subject: VMs: Re: Folio 39r
>
>
> Hi GC,
>
> At 09:28 25/09/02 +0100, Gabriel Landini wrote:
> >On Wednesday 25 September 2002 8:45 am, GC wrote:
> > > Folio 39r is the
> > > page, and I've posted a copy of the transcription at
> > > http://voynich.info/vgbt/vgbt-39r.jpg with some
> pointers as to
> > > which glyphs I consider 'rare', a definition
> established by raw
> > > count.
> >
> >Very nice rendering of f39r.
> >I think that the first word is <tedochshd> instead of
> <tedchshd> ; a small
> ><o>
> >is missing.
> >I read the third word as <chdain>. Note that the first
> <ch> or <a> is quite
> >different from the last <a>.
>
> A few more to add to the list:
>
> line 1, word 1: is the looped <ch> the tear-drop form?
> line 4, word 5: gallows is incorrect
> line 6: should the final two gallows be a different
> glyph entirely?
> line 7, word 7: word should begin "8"
> line 10, word 1: o should be a
> line 10, word 6: oo should be oe
> line 11, word 5: the last two letters look more like
> the familiar ar
> line 13, word 7: loop missing above first glyph
>
> Let me know if I can make corrections more directly. :-)
>
> Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....
>