Re: VMs: Latin abbreviations

[Gordon Rugg <g.rugg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Gabriel,

I think the key issue here is whether the shorthand method is unambiguous or not.
If the same symbol is only used in places where there's no possible ambiguity,
then there's no problem about using the same symbol for two or more characters. In
English, for instance, it would be possible to use the same character (say, "9")
to represent both the sound we transcribe as "h" and and the sound we transcribe
as  "ng", without ambiguity, since "h" only occurs at the start of syllables, and
"ng" only at the end. (I'm deliberately excluding the English orthographic use of
"sh", "ch" etc, each of which uses two written characters to represent a single
sound.)

If, on the other hand, the shorthand uses the same character to represent
characters which aren't in complementary distribution in the way described above,
then there are real potential problems. A study by Susan Kelliher found that
shorthand secretaries were unable to read most of their own shorthand records a
few months after writing them - the shorthand was being read partly as script, but
also partly as aide-memoire, and after a few months much of the secretary's memory
of what had been said was gone. The risks of multiple interpretations for the same
abbreviated form are well known in VMS research, given some of the previous
claimed solutions...

Given what Philip Neal and others have pointed out about the regularities in
Voynichese word structure, I'd guess that the VMS would lend itself fairly well to
unambiguous use of the same symbol to represent more than one character, but
that's just a guess.

Best wishes,

Gordon (who does not believe that VMS "9" is really likely to represent "h" and
"ng", just in case anyone's wondering...)

Gabriel Landini wrote:

> On Wednesday 09 July 2003 19:47, Larry Roux wrote:
> > I would say that "cannot be read back" is a bit harsh.  After all, I could
> > write:
> >
> > nd thn thr wr wrds
> >
> > which is lossy due to loss of vowels, and while it could be read as
> > "Aenid thine thor wore wards"
> >
> > it is obvious it is meant to be: "and then there were words"
>
> I do not think it is obvious. It may be to you because you wrote it, but if
> you did not write it, you have no way of proving that it does not say:
> "and then three were awards". So what is reversible to you may not be to
> anybody else. You knew the contents, the rest don't.
>
> I would suggest that you have a look at Cappelli to understand the different
> types of abbreviations there are. (if you can read Italian, there is a full
> chapter on this in the dictionary).
> The great majority of abbreviations are not single vowel deletions.
> I am not saying that the vms is written this way, but if this is the case, the
> chances of reading it are very small.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gabriel
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

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