Re: VMs: De modis significandi sive grammatica speculativa

[steve ekwall <ekwall2@xxxxxxxx>]

hi all :-)

-=se=-> info in
<-=se=- info out 
-=se=-> (inserted below) <-=se=-

 Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 19:15:39 -0400
 From: Florin <ifthink@xxxxxxxxx>
 Reply-To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
 To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
 Subject: Re: VMs: De modis significandi sive grammatica speculativa
 
 Hi Jean,
 
 >From what I understand they tried to demonstrate that any kind of
 grammar could be explained based on an universal grammar set of rules.
 The existence of an universal grammar was assumed implicitly, probably
 as a natural context-free grammar (hence their problems). Or it was
 vice versa, they tried to find a set of rules to prove the existence
 of an universal grammar. This is as confused as I am myself reading
 their works. Anyway, what they were not doing, it was building an
 universal language/grammar, something like Esperanto. Maybe another
 obscure group was trying to do just that.
 
 I was trying to find some similarities between the Rohonczi, Hampton,
 Seraphianus and Voynich. While I didn't studied very much the first
 three ones, I have a feeling that their authors were/are some how
 "wired" differently than most of the folks. Entering their worlds
 would be difficult but not impossible as I saw/expect some consistency
 in their works, which is largely lacking in the Voynich. Whenever I
 find a pattern in it and I expect this to stay, something comes and
 brakes it down  and this seems done rather deliberately.

-=se=-> Hi Florin :-), I've tried (appearntly poorly) in the past to 
explain that the ~FoLdInG Key~ will aburptly SHUT this 
(UNcoding) system DOWN if one looses track of your letter (pointer)
\ position(s). the ~trick~ if one could call it that, is to "*See 
The Mirror*", or rotate your "masterkey (now reformed alph.numeriac 
alphabet)" when you encounter the _larger gallows characters_.
I think there are only 2 alpha.numeric 'substitution' areas, but the 
fact THEY can ~rotate on the fly~ (by inserting a _simple_ gallows 
figure), allows infinite @#$^!.! (confussion(s)).
<-=se=-

 I would have expected this to be an obfuscation(done by substitution) 
 of a franco-germano-latino-scandinavian language written with some how
 strange symbols but this is hardly the case as there are no (as far as
 I know) large repeating blocks of texts.
 This means that a seed/key may be  involved and the things are getting
 more complicated.
 
 So, what this could be ? An encrypted artificial language ? A very
 sophisticated algorithm with endless rounds of substitutions and
 transpositions at the bit, nibble or byte/s level ? This sounds rather
 overkill.
 
-=se=-> personally, for reasons unkown to me, I think IT WAS DESIGNED 
to be "overkill" (until now), But the TIME IS NOW!. so try 
simply FolDinG & 
Flipping a KEY  on the Gallows & see how it pans out?? <-=se=- :-/?

 Or, a very simple thing with very complex consequences. 
 
-=se=-> IT'S SIMPLER THAN YOU THINK !! <-=se=-

 Regards,
 Clueless One aka Florin :)
 
 
 PS. Now that I wrote those down I realized two things: 
 1. Writing in a very elaborated style, a large text even with a
 minimal number of topics, may not necessary exhibit large repeating
 blocks of text.
 2. There is a common thing to those codices, ... all of them are 
 written with an uncommon, unique set of symbols. Why ?

-=se=-> 
"###
 #o*
 ***"

The _odd shaped symbols_ of the voynich are shaped as 'pointers' that 
point to AREAS on a simple piece of paper. THAT IS, can you point to 
UPPER left (with a symbol?), how about "\", 
Upper RIGHT (with a symbol?) how about "/"
what a about a CENTER 
Character (with a symbol?), how about "o"... same would go for 'e' 
pointing lower _right, AND 'g' pointing to lower _left...etc.. etc.. 
problem encountered here on the voynich list (computer mathmatics) 
doesn't allow for random ~swapping~ of characters... That is to say I 
am ~writing voynich~ & know I'm coming up on a WORD that should be 
'hidden'... I swap (via Larger Gallows) to the OTHER MASTER KEY BOARD 
to the "Same Alphabet and Numerics",(anytime before I get to the 
"WORD" with a gallows on the OTHER KEY,  but now THEY ALL are in 
DIFFERENT 
POSITIONS!!!!!!! This [and remember there are eight (8) gallows] 
flip too can _easily return to the 'PlAiN' TEXT with a mere BACK or 
FOWARD 'pointer'_  (c_, C_C_, or C_C_C  \,\\,\\\ etc)... 

It was with this _understanding of the folding key (and associated 
characters/pointers)_ that without even have seen the vms, I predicted 
that one should NOT find 2 gallows Side by SIDE... (!!!) I think it 
was Gabriel Landini here that pointed out (sure enough), exceptions on 
f104v.17 and f113v.21... i think I found another also on 49v.22, but 
that is 'what i call _lower case_ characters' (c_caMaM) sid eby side 
and I suppose some words could fall into a pattern to just happen to 
fit... IF they did, they probably are not ~secretive~ words etc.. ( 
like the words *S_EE_* *TR_EE_* and *BL_EE_D* might not be important 
top code again.. etc..)

<-=se=-


 On 8/28/05, jean-yves artero <jyartero@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
 > Hi Florin
 > 
 > Your post is intriguing and elliptic; here is a bit
 > more about this book and his author:
 > 
 > http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/8246/gramspec.html
 > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/erfurt/
 > 
 > "Thomas of Erfurt belonged to an interesting though
 > somewhat obscure group of late 13th- and early
 > 14th-century philosophers known as the speculative
 > grammarians or Modistae. The term 'speculative
 > grammarian' is ambiguous because it is also used by
 > historians of medieval philosophy to refer to
 > 12th-century Parisian grammar masters such as William
 > of Conches, Peter Helias, and Ralph of Beauvais, who
 > systematically revised the ancient grammars of Donatus
 > and Priscian -- textbooks which had been used to teach
 > Latin to schoolboys -- in order to produce a universal
 > semantics.[7]  The two groups are related, as it turns
 > out, since the latter-day grammarians adopted many of
 > the theories as well as the universalizing tendencies
 > of their 12th-century predecessors. Foremost among
 > them was the theory of the modi significandi, or modes
 > of signifying. The term 'Modistae' or 'Modist'
 > properly refers to the later group."
 > 
 > Interesting...but somewhat obscure group, ey, why not?
 > 
 > Jean
 > 
 > --- Florin <ifthink@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
 > 
 > > Could it be that the vms author was inspired by this
 > > book written by
 > > Thomas of Erfurt ?
 > >
 > > Regards,
 > > Florin
 ______________________________________________________________________

 Hope this finds you & all out there well :-) 
I KNOW I've said this many times over in the past, but I guess
some may just not "get-it" yet... (sorry i'm so inept here) :-/
(see archieves here)

Best to you & yours
-=se=-
steve (don't need a computer/ ~just folded paper~) ekwall :-)
 

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