RE: VMs: [ha] [hb] not different languages

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nick wrote:

> Note that the end of D'Imperio's 1992 paper recaps Currier's observations
> that there are some suggestive links between the ends of some
> words and the
> beginnings of others.

I've also seen these links.  As I mentioned, carrying the study beyond words
to include beginnings and/or endings of nearby words yields interesting
observations for a relatively few patterns.  I haven't made much of this
because, when viewing the line itself, the line generally has a "tone" of
beginning and endings.  This can be seen to change from paragraph to
paragraph and from page to page.  Sometimes from line to line!

> Also: a space transposition cipher (ie, one where (real) word endings are
> typically hidden inside (fake) words) may well retain some
> semblance of the original word-length.

In that case, the observed word beginnings and endings would then be in the
middle of words.  I believe you've suggested (correct me if I'm wrong) that
certain glyphs indicate the break for the word.
InEnglishwedontneedanybreaksrepresentedtounderstandtheflowofthetextSowhywoul
dthesebeinsertedinsteadofrealwordbreaks?  Also, the middle of the words
would then take on the conformity we see in the word initials and terminals.
Why should this be so, even in paired cipher?

> http://www.nctimes.net/~mark/Texts/voynich2.htm

Thanks for Mark's link again.  I read this when he posted it.  Very good
study, and it influenced some of my thoughts when I read it.  If Mark's
still listening, and since it was brought up:

Mark combined all A pages and B pages for this study, and in a general
sense, this is a good overview.  Sections differ however, and I had a
problem with this when I first read the study.  One paragraph in particular
bothers me, which may affect the conclusions of the study:

"One of the immediately evident differences between VMS-A and VMS-B texts is
that the average length of a word in VMS-B is by about 35% larger than it is
in VMS-A.  Another difference between the two versions of VMS is that there
are several words that are very common in VMS-A but happen rarely in VMS-B
(for example, one such word is represented by characters 8AM) and, also,
there are words which are common in B but absent in A (for examples words
represented by characters SC89 and ZC89)."

I'm bothered by this because each section contains apparently different
information, and therefore different vocabulary.  Comparing HA with HB, and
then HA with PA, PB, etc., allows one to view differences related to
apparent content before passing judgment on the entire manuscript.

The average word length in HA is 3.8, while the average word length in HB is
4.1.  This is only a 9% difference between HA and HB, pages that contain
similar apparent subject matter, not the 35% Mark has discovered in his
overall analysis.  If the assumption is correct that HB is a later form,
this 9% difference is minor and can be attributed to other factors besides
"abbreviation".  Charting word initials and terminals in both HA and HB
provides a picture that HB is more "homogenous" or "consistent" than HA.  If
the object of abbreviation is to yield a more consistent text, HB would be
the more abbreviated IMHO, assuming abbreviations play any part in the
Herbal section, which I doubt on the evidence.  Further sections need to
take into account apparent subject matter.  Astrological/Astronomical have
longer word lengths associated with them than herbals do in common language.
"Recipes" or "antidotaries" have yet another normalized statistic.  So do
almanacs.

The reference to occurrences of 8AM and various 89 series words is accurate,
though not thoroughly investigated, in my view.  If you change the terminal
of 8AM by a single glyph, you balance the statistic well enough in HB pages,
and other features that need to be taken into account regarding word initial
and terminal differences between HA and HB.  Once these two sections are
understood to a degree, similarities and differences in other sections may
be observed with this study in mind.

Someone may program this into the computer, push a button and allow the
machine to make these determinations, but I'm a paper-and-pencil person,
preferring to see what's in front of me and make those qualitative
determinations on my own before quantifying them by machine.  Old habits die
hard I guess.  I usually make a visual observation, then while looking at a
printout, test that observation in my database.  This doesn't leave much of
a "record or research", but allows me to test several observations and
queries in one evening. I take longer I guess, but I hope this allows me to
"see" things that would be missed by a machine.  In the end, the machine can
only answer the questions I ask of it, and many times not all that well,
mind you.  General questions elicit general answers, and if more specific
questions are to be asked, the the user's brain has to be engaged in the
process through an analytical feedback loop.  That brain requires both
statistical and visual information to function properly, and thousands of
questions will be sent through the loop before an accurate image evolves.
JMO, FWIW.

To that end, I've created two very useful pdf's that offer visual
information on the words in HA and HB.  These two files, when printed and
bound, allow one to flip through and see differences in a flash, while
looking at related information on the screen.  Even if this sounds too "old
fashioned" for some of you, I think a personal relationship with the text
and the folios is the only way this thing will ever completely be solved.

Here's the first file, with words "alphabetically" listed, and HB words
highlighted:

http://voynich.info/vgbt/xcrptn/ALLWORDS.pdf

Here's a far more useful reference, a reverse sort of the above:

http://voynich.info/vgbt/xcrptn/ALWDSRVS.pdf

The first file may be old hat, but the reverse sort balances the set.
Between the two you can make some very interesting observations in short
order.  I've considered doing penultimates and extra-initials, which would
make a very nice tool indeed, but have found very little use for such
documents in VMS study.  If you think these are important, let me know and
I'll produce them.

All in all, you'll get a picture of why I'm focusing on the "word", and why
I've gone out on a limb and suggested that a simple replacement algorithm
can be written for each of these two statistical sets.


GC








> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Nick Pelling
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 3:51 AM
> To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: VMs: [ha] [hb] not different languages
>
>
> Hi GC,
>
> At 00:26 03/08/2003 -0500, GC wrote:
> >I'm of the initial observational opinion that B is more
> "homogenous" than A,
> >which would indicate "more heavily abbreviated", if that is the
> case here.
> >Where may I find Mark's work on this?
>
> http://www.nctimes.net/~mark/Texts/voynich2.htm
>
> >Also, I've done character, digraph and trigraph studies, without
> spaces, as
> >standard practice, all of which lead me to believe that the "word" is the
> >actual written entity.  These studies peak with average word length, and
> >when spaces are observed the most repetitive structures appear.  Going
> >beyond the "word" to include endings and/or beginnings of nearby words
> >yields interesting observations for a relatively few patterns,
> but starts to
> >break down the "cohesiveness" of the study, bringing us back to "word"
> >again.  A detailed view of why this may not be so would be most
> interesting.
>
> Note that the end of D'Imperio's 1992 paper recaps Currier's observations
> that there are some suggestive links between the ends of some
> words and the
> beginnings of others.
>
> Also: a space transposition cipher (ie, one where (real) word endings are
> typically hidden inside (fake) words) may well retain some
> semblance of the
> original word-length.
>
> Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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