Re: VMs: [LONG] Voynich & semiotics (early notes)

["Gabriele Ferri" <gabriele.ferri@xxxxxxxxx>]

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
A: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx <vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Data: martedì 9 settembre 2003 14.30
Oggetto: Re: VMs: [LONG] Voynich & semiotics (early notes)

Hi Nick! thanks for the idea about Leonardo, I think that a friend of mine
is writing a term-paper on a similar subject for a "semiotic of arts /
visual semiotic" seminary. I'll share it with him (and maybe I'll mail you
his paper, when it's finished).

>
>FWIW, my chain of reasoning runs something like this:-

<SNIP>
>*       the information content of transcriptions (especially h2) seems low
What do you mean exactly?

>You might also differentiate between a private shorthand language (such as
>the "doodling student" hypothesis) and a coding system (such as the
>"cryptographic proof-of-concept" hypothesis): semiotically, these have two
>quite different types of reader (private and public). In fact, you might
>consider categorising different hypotheses by the view (in C++ terms,
>"private, protected, public") they take of the likely reader. :-)

Yes, that's a good idea, but I think it will be my second or third step. At
the moment, my first move is to isolate and express in proper semiotic
language how much human-interpretation (on a scale spanning from "nothing"
to "infinite, and thus impossible") is needed to translate the VMS assuming
that the correct algorithm, if any exists, is known. [see also the reply I
sent 2 minutes ago to Rene's post]

>Your (d) category seems a little bit too broad: I'd suggest instead:-
<SNIP>
Same as above, I agree, I'll do it later.

cheers
G.


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