|
For the select few of you
who have subscribed to the transcription pages and viewed thousands of Voynich
characters aligned with their corresponding glyphs, I'd like to start building a
feedback loop to help me consider possibilities beyond my range and
observation. I'm very close to posting Quire 7, and with that quire I'll
be almost half-way through the transcription (due to numerous missing pages in
later quires). Half-way is a good point to decide if you must swim the
rest of the channel or return!?!
I've been watching Nick's
{4o} very carefully to see if it qualifies as its own glyph, but haven't reached
any real conclusion on this as yet. There are enough {o4} and {4c} sets to
question this, which would place the {4o} more probably in the same category as
the digraph {89} instead of a single glyph, and only a little over half of the
{4o} sets demonstrate solid connectivity.
Just as the {4o} is an
issue for consideration, so is my distinction between a loop-tailed {9} and a
straight-tailed {9}. If this was not so apparent in the few color images,
I'd simply call them the same glyph and be done with it. In black and
white they're difficult to discern in many cases. I do think however that
the case for the {C} <cc> set is quite well established, as it is for
other {c} sets and variants. The {m} and {n} are also almost universally
accepted throughout transcription history, as is the recording of their variants
as being set aside in single glyph form.
In the interest of a
better transcription, I hope you will take some time and offer your criticisms
and insights.
GC
|