VMs: Re: For Jeff

["Jeff" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Francois Almaleh Wrote

 

> Hello Jeff,

 

> Could you explain us *shortly* our opinion

> about the VMs. I have read several emails from you, and I don't know what is

> your exact position about it.

 

> Thank you Francois

 

My position is that either the VMS is written entirely in Italian or that it is multi language. I am more inclined to believe it is Italian as the tests I have used previously show that the VMS has certain characteristics that Italian also exhibits. Some of the multi language tests however produce their own peculiarities worth noting.

 

My other opinion is that the VMS is a hand generated hoax using mechanical means. Carefully constructed tables or such like. This theory seems less likely as time goes on and I find out more. Although if it is not in Italian then the hoax theory becomes more prominent than the multiple language theory.

 

All tests I ran against English, French, Latin etc seemed to fair badly. It was only when I used Italian text from 1550 that I started to get promising results. Though these are still not 100% conclusive they are nearer than anything else. If Nick is right about the VMS being in a short hand I feel that my results may be wrong in many respects. Unless of course the structure of the underlying Italian is not destroyed during the production of the shorthand.

 

It would be interesting to obtain a sample of the shorthand of the period in text form to make comparisons with the plain text Italian. Anyone got any handy? :~)

 

I hope this helps

 

Jeff