Re: VMs: Can one "prove" a hoax? - and a request.

[Jacques Guy <jguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

2/19/03 7:47:36 PM, "Rafal T. Prinke" <rafalp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Donald Laycock did statistical research on the Enochian
>which he mentions in the introduction to his Dictionary
>- but there are no details. Perhaps Jacques Guy knows
>more about the nature of Donald Laycock's computer analysis
>of the two Enochian languages?

Yes. I wrote the software. There was a frequency count and,
of course, a dictionary program -- meaning, sort the words
into alphabetical order, and a dictionary-reversal program
(turn Enochian-English into English-Enochian). I seem to 
remember that Don also used a concordance I had written 
several years before, in order to find grammatical patterns, 
but the corpus is so small that the concordance was useless.

>I have Laycock's
>dictionary upstairs and am too lazy to go and check
>it right now, but I recall he concluded that the "second
>Enochian" (the one with English translations) had 
>many features of a genuine language.

He was writing for an audience of occultists, so he
was not going to reveal what he really thought of
Enochian. But he told me and here it is:

1. The phonology of the language is typical 
   Elizabethan  English.

2. Its syntax is also Elizabethan English.

3. The words are a hodge-podge of Hebrew and Greek.
   
4. It is a hoax by Kelley, and Dee fell for it like
   a rank amateur.
   


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list