Re: VMs: evidence against line transposition

[Wayne Durden <wdurden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

on 4/1/05 4:03 AM, Marke Fincher at MarkeFincher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

> 
>> In other words, if there are large phrasal similarities
>> like these in the document, we can knock out Rugg and
>> line transposition both.....
> 
> There are many repeated phrases in the VMS (of 4, 5 and 6
> words), but the author(s) has taken steps to obscure them.
> 
> Spaces have been moved and individual symbols added (either
> systemically or arbitrarily) to hide the repeated
> information. 

Thanks for your thoughts Mark.  The approach I am taking focuses on what I
believe are such phrases.  If you have a compilation of such phrases I would
be very interested in comparing.  It might save a lot of effort.  I am also
trying to catch them in proximity to any of the words on the single label
folios, the best cases I have of secondary indication of real underlying
meaning.  I think I have one related to a label that to me appears as
"soladg". 

 As to spaces moved and individual symbols added to deliberately obscure the
information, I am not so sure it is intentional or for that reason.  I think
the differences in similar large phrases on different folios I am collecting
may be tense related (run, ran, running), gender/plurality related (he, him,
she, they), etc.  The reason I feel this way is because for vastly different
such phrases, the "ol" or "ox" (depending on which alphabet you accept) and
"dg" seem to be more regular than just random word endings in these larger
phrasal settings.  I believe with focused effort, by identifying such
phrases, one could made a deduction about syllables such as "ox", whether
they are tense forms or colors, etc.  Of course, they could be the binary
code which might make the larger phrasal forms just the null characters, but
one has to make some choices on the probabilities and try to follow them to
exhaustion rather than just list and list possibilities.

  I also noted from looking at known translated old french documents in the
Charette project, spaces are at times left out of the script.  (Of course
they would be frequently left out if the scribe didn't speak the language
taken down.)

On another note, I was somewhat disappointed this morning that there was
little comment on the public list about the graphic I posted, yet I received
six direct off list expressions of interest.  When I checked the hit log for
the site at which I posted the graphic, there are a rather large number of
hits and several folks crawled the images directory (there were no other
related images there, only my second grade sons photos for a web page media
project, although I will pull together some other examples and post them as
there seems to be interest).  This makes me wonder if this list is truly a
good way to solicit honest public feedback.  I was hoping maybe even three
or four folks might say I see no similarity there other than what I see
elsewhere in the manuscript and I believe you are chasing cloud bunnies, or
an opinion that yes, it looks somewhat interesting to me.  There was nothing
like that on the public list, and even Nick, whose comment resulted in the
post, didn't directly opine afterward? Was this politeness Nick?  I can take
anyone's honest opinion on the issue, and would welcome opinions that cut
off an avenue of effort I am chasing. Yet off the list I got comments
pointing out in my color markings I left out more similarities like the "am"
form or even the whole word after "ocar"...  Or suggestions that applying a
fuzzy analysis to the EVA transcript does turn up larger phrases.  What
gives?

I have a thick skin, I can take the brunt of opinions whether they are for
or against an idea floated.  I can respect the opinions of professional
linguists such as Jacques, but carry on where I have direct experience that
I believe differs.   I am willing to work hard and review images of the
original folios ad infinitum (and I believe this is necessary because
looking at them even casually raises questions that point out the
transcriptions in EVA alphabet depended on judgments on glyphs that i don't
share [i.e., "g" in the script taken down as "a" in the transcript on
occasion.)  But despite this level of self assurance, to me it is pointless
to put up opinions to this list if folks on it are willing only to write me
directly but not express their opinions on the list.  It isn't like this is
academia with careers on the line for possibly expressing an opinion?  It
presents to a newcomer the impression that older participants feel dominated
or subject to ridicule here.  It seems futile to keep posting to the list as
a whole if the only opinions that come back one way or the other come by
private communication.  Why not just fork off a private group?  Perhaps one
should infer the on list silence is a polite way of saying the similarities
you assert are in fact cloud bunnies and move on elsewhere?

For what it's worth...WLD

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