Re: VMs: Babelfish translation [plus question for Dana]

[Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Larry,

At 10:07 14/11/2003 -0500, Larry Roux wrote:
> I disagree.  ch is probably 2 glyphs.  They are written as 2 distinct 
> characters and there are examples of ah co and others.

As you know, despite the overwhelmingly dominant regularities observable 
within Voynichese, the VMs is studded throughout with handfuls of 
character-pairs which "break the rules".

Various people have pointed to evidence which they believe supports the 
idea that the VMs' text was copied by one or more scribes who didn't know 
what it meant at all. So, there is a not-easily-dismissable possibility 
that there are numerous copying errors in the text (one might suggest 
letter combinations like "ddy", "dyy" etc?) which might otherwise 
destabilise the ciphertext if the system were too fragile.

It could even be that the VMs deliberately uses an over-determined cipher 
system (ie, with built in error-detection / error-correction) to compensate 
for such scribal errors - that would certainly accord with the kind of 
system I predict.

So: I would say that <ch> is *probably* 1 glyph, though of course I agree 
that there is limited evidence to suggest that it could *possibly* be 2 
glyphs. Or even three. Any advance on three? Ah, the main at the back, 
Professor Newbold - what, no bid from you, sir? :-)

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling...... 


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