VMs: RE: Re: The nature of the symbols...

["John Grove" <John@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

	Barbara, the comments on the character formation were not mine - but those
of Captain Currier of somewhat 'ancient' VMS lore. I only enjoy pointing out
the independently made observations of character similarities between c+ and
i+ that have been observed by others for quite some time.

	In reference to some of your questions regarding the stroke directions, one
can't really answer for Currier's assessment... but one could look at a few
more pages for examples where the 'o' is clearly made with two strokes. I
agree many cursive strokes were used that make one wonder whether any two
'similar' characters are really the same character.

	The 'horizontal' I think that Currier was referring to was simply the mid
section of a figure 8, which is more prominent in the EVA d characters where
the top half leans to the right of the lower half.

	As for his use of the term 'flourish', it seems apparent to me that he is
referring to the ligature stroke.

>>In one sense it does have possible meanings. The question "are the C+ and
the i+ characters carriers of more than one piece of information?" arises
from such analysis. "Is ), similar to the plume diacritic, which may be
joined at any of three points to i or c symbols for, say, three different
vowels, making the C+ and i+ characters syllabics?".

	Exactly, but I've been there and it's still very problematic - unless
perhaps a syllabic-cipher...

	John.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Barbara Barrett
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 7:20 AM
To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: VMs: Re: The nature of the symbols...





> John Jotted;
> Such a nice paragraph to re-read. For those not familiar with Currier's
> notation:
> o = EVA o
> 8 = EVA d
> 9 = EVA y
> z = EVA s
>
> Then the i series...
>
> IG = EVA j (correspond with the d)
> x = EVA l (correspond with the y)
> 2 = EVA r (correspond with the s)
> v = EVA n (corresponds with the b -- not noted by Currier as it is fairly
> rare)
>
> 1. THE NATURE OF THE SYMBOLS.
>
> I've looked at most of these letters under a magnifying
> glass, so I think I know how they were all actually made.
> These letters: <o>, <8>, <9>, <z>, all seem to start with a
> "c"-curve, which was made first, in this direction
> [counter-clockwise], so we have:

<o> = [<c> written first,
> counter-clockwise, next its mirror-image, clockwise],

Barbara Babbles;
Using faint examples from the artifact free 4-clour repo which show ink
overlap the "o" is made with a single stroke. Although *if* the o had been
done in Book Hand it would have been made that way, and certainly Book
Hand's modern equivalent, calligraphy, would teach one to make them that
way. But the vms is written in Document Hand, as is clearly evidenced by the
single stroke o's and the continuous loops in the Gallows characters such as
EVA p t f k.

<8> =
> [<c> first, then horizontal line starting from its top,
> going right, looping up and counter-clockwise, continued
> with a down flourish ending below the line, to the left],

Again, I've used faint examples and found that the 8 can and is made by a
single stroke, although examples of the 2 stroke method also exist. It seems
to depend upon the preceeding character (ie where the pen finished) as to
wheather a single or two stroke 8 followed. The two stroke method starts
with a c, then from the c's start point an upward right slanted vertical,
looping round to a downward left slanted vertical, terminating at the c's
terminus. I see no "horizontals" in this figure at all!

> <9> = [first <c>, then flourish at top of c, going down,
> ending below the line],

What do you mean by "flourish"?
My examples start with a counterclockwise c then a clockwise ) both starting
from the same point (joined at the top). I think we're saying the same thing
here but I'm not certain because in my vocabulary a flourish is an
unessesary addition or extention to the basic letterform. Therefore I'd only
apply the term "flourish" to one of the voynich wierdos - obviously you've a
different meaning for the term so one would appreciate a definition ;-)

<z> = [first <c>, then flourish at
> top of c, going up and counter-clockwise].

My analysis is a c first, then a clockwise ) curve which *terminates* at the
c start point. The ink density is more consistant there with a stop than a
start (unless a very hesitant start indeed) and the human hand doing  arcs
finds it easier to start at the highest point and work down, or to put it
another way the fingers begin at their fullest needed stretch and the figure
is drawn by the control over the fingers as they move inward toward the
palm. - starting at the bottom and then going up (while far from impossible,
indeed the mechanics make a / type stroke easier to start at the bottom as
in eva v) for a counter clockwise upwards stroke one is actually fighting
the stucture of the hand itself (ie begining with fingers clenched and
drawing during extension) and thus is counter intuitive.

I'd be very interseted to know how you concluded a counter clockwise upward
stroke.

EVA b is another variant of the joining of c and ). The c first then the )
stroke which then terminates at the c's final lift-point.


>The forms all
> have counterparts starting with <i>: <ig>, <x>, <2>, etc. We
> also have <a> = <c>+<i>. All the letters containing an
> initial "c"-curve are also the only letters that can be
> preceded in the same word by the little letter that looks
> like "c," e.g. <c89>, <ccc89>. On the other hand, the
> letters <x> and <2> (which have very high frequencies) can
> *never* be preceded by <c>, *ever*; they are instead
> preceded by <a>.

Interesting; but I'll comment later ;-)

> The final letters (that is, the ones I call finals, although
> they can also occur elsewhere) are in two series, one
> preceded by <a> and the other by <o>, giving a series of
> sixteen:
>
>        < v    iv    iiv     iiiv   >
>        < x   (ix)  (iix)   (iiix)  >
>        < 2    i2   (ii2)   (iii2)  >
>        < ig   iig  (iiig)  (iiiig) >
>
> The ones in parentheses are very low-frequency; the others
> all occur with respectable frequency. In addition, these
> combinations of symbols which appear as finals may occur
> separately -- "unattached finals", as I call them. A large
> number of unattached finals is a characteristic of
> "Language" B, and *not* "Language" A, by the way.
>
> All this indicates to me that considerable thought was put
> into how this mess was made up. We have the fact that you
> can make up almost any of the other letters out of these two
> symbols <i> and <c>; it doesn't *mean* anything, but it's
> interesting.

You're counting the inversion of c, the ), as the same stroke. But, as the
hand moves in a very different way to do clockwise and counterclockwise
strokes I'd count them differently with i as 3 stokes, variations of which
can make up eva; a b i e r n s y v and the "arrow" and "plume" diacritics.

I'd add what I term the horizontal and the loop strokes to (with one or more
of the above strokes, usually an i or extended vertical i) make up eva; l q
ch sh m d g j z p t f and k and the "teardrop" diacritic. Note for example
the similarity of hand movements for constructing both qo and t, and m and
f, which is *suggestive* that these pairs are positional variants of each
other (note, *suggests*, not proves).

In one sense it does have possible meanings. The question "are the C+ and
the i+ characters carriers of more than one piece of information?" arises
from such analysis. "Is ), similar to the plume diacritic, which may be
joined at any of three points to i or c symbols for, say, three different
vowels, making the C+ and i+ characters syllabics?". But then in latinate
the o d b p q  e, and c u n m, series would have such a question marks over
them to an alien epigrapher!

One thing it does say is that with so few strokes the vms character set was
easy and quick to write, and either the creator of the character set had a
very limited imagination (which I doubt) or the system was very well thought
out (which I strongly suspect).

The sequence analysis may bear fruit in comparing with languages which
phonemes are permited in sequence and which are not, which in turn could
lead to language identification.

Barbara



______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.576 / Virus Database: 365 - Release Date: 30/01/2004

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.576 / Virus Database: 365 - Release Date: 30/01/2004


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