Re: VMs: evidence against line transposition

["JH" <haleyj@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Wayne

My comments interspersed.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Durden" <wdurden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


>
> >
> > Well... it's the first time I've been named and shamed for excess
> > politeness, but I'm happy to take it on the chin. :-)
> >
> > First, a couple of quick observations. Voynichese is strongly structured
at
> > the letter level, which makes many short clusters of letters recur from
> > page to page: these alone would make cloud bunnies easy to find. But
> > also... in EVA, a/o are visually similar, as are n/r, ch/sh, etc: these
too
> > add to the distraction, making everything seem a little more regular
than
> > it actually is.
> >
> > So... in your examples, I couldn't help but notice your matching up
short
> > clusters of letter, as well as your matching a/o and ch/sh. In my
opinion,
> > any resultant match built on these is more likely to be cloud bunnies
than
> > a message from a higher intelligence. Even if it is in French. ;-)
>
> Thanks for the replies Nick and Dana.  In fact Nick, this kind of response
> is what I was hoping to elicit from perhaps a collection of people.  Thank
> you genuinely.
>
>  I wasn't aware of the SID files about the rationales for the
transcription
> in some cases.  My personal trust in the transcripts was shaken when I saw
> some end of word characters on occasions where it seemed unmistakable that
> there was a stroke that made it a "g" looking character as opposed to the
> "a" looking character in the transcript.  My thoughts were that no matter
> how carefully prepared, the EVA transcript is susceptible to error so be
on
> the watch or be hesitant to rely on analytical methods that rely upon an
> exactitude in it.  The transcript is a derivative afterall and sometimes
> when starting it makes sense to go to the images of the original and form
an
> opinion to what degree you should accept the derivative.  It is of course
> useful, but apparently imperfect.
>

EVA is merely a starting point. You will find many ambiguities
in the transcription but at the time and with the images available
I believe the effort was as good as it could be. However it does
not take into account subtle differences.

>  I realize you and Dana point to the accent related to the difference
> between ch/sh.  Someone on the list just the other day I believe expressly
> said this was really one character in his opinion.  Others have said
> flourishes related to the gallows characters may in fact not be different
> characters, but in fact flourishes.  I have been open to either and went
> looking to old texts to see how known things have been treated and to
assign
> some personal acceptance to the ideas.  After looking at many manuscripts,
> such as the various versions at the Charrette project, I find that
> characters now translated to the same modern alphabet were in fact written
> by the same scribe with different flourishes or accents on occasion.  In
> other words, to satisfy myself how I should reconcile the possibility that
> some of the EVA characters might be unified, I went and looked elsewhere
and
> based on those efforts I tend to agree with the poster here that suggested
> that the accent which lends to the EVA ch character may be simply script
> inconsistency or even faded out on occasion.    The SIDS files may in fact
> educate me that I have been foolish and "cc" is in fact a different
letter,
> glyph or sound than "cc" with the accent.  Nonetheless, it appears at this
> point that the difference in acceptance of alphabet glyphs may make some
see
> similarities others cannot, or on the contrary it may make others see
> differences that aren't really there.  The SID files may change my
personal
> weight on p,k,t  ch, sh alphabet, but for the purposes of the reprentation
I
> posted I allow the possibility that EVA ch/sh may be incorrect.  If you
> weight that as not likely, then I understand from the standpoint, you will
> see less similarity.
>

If you refer to Capelli then ch v sh is very significant. Also t & k gallows
are
interchangeable. EVA eee in Capelli becomes ecc on occasion. Though
this means little in respect of the VMS. The EVA form dain would probably
translate to the word 'data' in Latin but does this mean anything?

> Your short clusters of letters which exhibit strong structure comment is
> well taken, but the point I am trying to make is not only the short
clusters
> of letters, but the relative order of such short clusters when comparing
> parts of different folios.  If I randomly choose chunks of the manuscript
> and line them up I can't find such similar "short clusters of letters" OR
> ones with this apparent order of the short chunks.  If anyone can simply
> choose some random chunks across folios and underline a like number of
> similarities and relative order of similarities I would likely concede the
> point and abandon the effort.  But the ones like this I do find tend to be
> paragraph ending on certain kinds of folios.
>

You should see lots of similarities in the sample below as it is
enciphered Latin. There is more order in this than in the VMS.
What does this tell us about the probability of meaning? An
analysis of the structure of the VMS against this sort of output
would be very interesting. And remember the sample below
has a readable plaintext. Nick can you spot the verbose
groups?

archoiim.r.ortoin.ltee.odam.sol.dcfhain.ychshain.yddol.
rychpoin.am.dckheee.aram.ycht.okoin.roiim.r.otair.ar.
okain.arg.rckhain.arotam.otar.olalol.dckheee.yarf.
orcfhain.arotam.lchcfhaim.olol.
arotain.yd.g.sarot.dckheee.ldcthaim.yd.arotain.ych.g.
sarot.ychoim.ryshfaiin.dckheee.ordoy.arotain.ych.am.
ol.d.ryshy.otam.ol.ordy.dysh.rcthol.sckh.okoin.dol.yt.
eefoin.ryshy.ot.sol.
okain.ary.rysh.dckheee.odcham.ycfheeain.olaram.y.
dockheeeain.ydckhain.arot.dckheee.dcthee.d.okaim.
doy.r.arotain.yam.altol.yd.arotar.ar.arotain.lchcfhaim.
olol.arshaiim.otain.oldy.arotain.
yam.altol.oldy.otain.yd.arotain.okaim.ary.dych.dckheee.
lchol.ar.dee.arotain.ychcphain.otain.ydokam.y.sckh.arf.
r.ordy.d.ychfaiin.sh.arotain.lchcfhaim.olol.dckheee.ordoy.d.


> I recognize and accept Danas version that the fact that they are not exact
> and that tenses, pluralities weakens the argument that they might be
saying
> the same kind of thing.  I tried to make it clear that I do not think they
> are exact, but believe the things I am tracking down seem to imply a
> structure based on organization of content.  I.e. certain paragraphs of
> certain folios might be discussing the plant forms, colors, root
> characteristics, etc.  Turn the problem on its head.  If this were
plaintext
> about something real what kinds of words would we expect to find, what
kinds
> of structural similarity and then go looking to see if we can find
anything
> that might be like that.  I guess I was hoping to find someone who has
tried
> attacking the problem like that and who might have anything to share ...
>
> I will make a larger quantitative display of these kinds of examples I
think
> I can make accessible via web page over the next week or so and let the
> chips fall where they may.  As Dana stated, there has been some interest
> afterall.
>
> As to Dana's question where we might go from here, I was hoping that other
> folks might make a look across folios to see if they could identify such
> larger section cross folio similarities, and perhaps folks who know better
> might be able to inform me that yes, if phrasal similarities of 8 word
forms
> could be demonstrated across multiple folios of various lengths and line
> numbers it would definitively knock out random grill formation or line
> transposition theories.   In hindsight, I don't think this is going to
> happen, but it does seem there are some like minded folks who are
privately
> interested
>
>
>
> The cloud bunnies versus message from a higher intelligence is a
"strawman"
> argument Nick, and hence I understand your comment about this being the
> first instance of being called out for undue politeness.  :)  half-kidding
> here, and by the way I have found your past posts Very interesting and I
> think your recent content about it only be currently unreadable fits my
> feelings as well. If anything, my thoughts are the very antithesis of a
> message from a higher intelligence.  I prefer to imagine it is a real text
> by real people that will one day prove to be of boring content.
>
> WLD
>

The VMS fairy


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