Re: VMs: Fw: Edward Kelley and the VMS

[Dennis <tsalagi@xxxxxxxx>]

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gordon Rugg" <g.rugg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Jeff" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 15 July 2004 09:01
> Subject: Re: Edward Kelley and the VMS

<snip>

> > One bit of evidence from this approach hasn't made much impression on
> > the mailing list, but may interest you. From the literature on expert
> > and novice behaviour, we'd predict that if Kelley created a second
> > language after Enochian, it would contain over-corrections for the worst
> > features of Enochian. There's general agreement that these worst
> > features are the syntax (identical to that of Elizabethan English); the
> > lack of morphemic structure within words (any character can follow any
> > other) and the script, which is not ergonomically good. Over-correcting
> > for these would produce something with syntax very different from
> > Elizabethan English (or no syntax at all); strict rules about which
> > characters can follow which other ones; and an ergonomically efficient
> > script. That looks to me like a pretty good description of Voynichese.

	So...  one fine evening, after a session with Dee and 
the angel Neboniel, Kelley thought, "Hm. Enochian was 
good enough to pull the wool over a brilliant scholar 
like Dee's eyes, and even to get me into Jane Dee's 
drawers, but if I want to sell a fake manuscript to a 
monarch for hard cash, I'll have to do better."

	Gimme a break! This is too much even to qualify as 
post hoc ergo propter hoc.  Never mind that most people 
haven't figured out that Enochian is a fraud after 500 
years.  As William of Ockham would say,
cut it out!

Dennis

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