The Voynich Ninja

(24-11-2018, 05:29 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It doesn't look like "will" to me. The first letter looks like medieval "v" and the third and fourth ascenders are too short compared to the others and there's a crossbar.

Shouldn't you be trying to read it in the language it's written rather than trying to wrestle it into English?

JP, I've been looking around and I see that elsewhere you have already transcribed the three letter word and the first four letters of the next word as:

hov vi[ ]l

The hov might not be a big problem because the transliteration of Vav can be either a w or a v. Is "hov" a real word in any language?

On the second word, I'm apparently not the only person who sees a double l (ll) there, whereupon your "crossbar" could be merely a handwriting run connecting an i to the first l. Perhaps you found yourself unable to distinguish the third letter because an "il" would lead to a double i: viill?

On your display of the medieval w, I saw a couple of instances where it was depicted as iv (without the dot). Are there any instances where is was depicted in reverse, as vi (without the dot)?

I see borderline Spanish, German, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Latin words in the marginalia. Why not English, given that, as I claim, the author was English? What you need to do, JP, is offer a sensible alternative to "how will" and I will probably concede to your point of view.

I really don't know what the third letter of "ho[ ]" is but it looks more v than anything else in the various image-processed versions.

The next word more than likely starts with "vi" but the rest is not clear.

Quote:"The hov might not be a big problem because the transliteration of Vav can be either a w or a v. Is "hov" a real word in any language?"

It's NOT the job of research to turn it into something meaningful. It's the job of research to determine what it is and it may NOT be meaningful in a normal linguistic way. It may be processed text.


I also don't think it's productive to try to make it into words in a language different from the preceding words. It's better to try to discern the language rather than shoehorn the letters to turn them into something they are not.

One has to learn to be comfortable with unknowns and to live with them until research makes them clearer rather than to force something on them. Most people are in too much of a hurry to do good research.

Look at the embossed scan on davidsch's blog. It reveals more than the raw scan:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote:Is "hov" a real word in any language?

For what it's worth, in Slovenian it's the onomatopoeia for a dog's bark, corresponding to the English "woof". But I somehow doubt there's any Slovenian in the Voynich manuscript. :p

(24-11-2018, 10:50 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's NOT the job of research to turn it into something meaningful. It's the job of research to determine what it is and it may NOT be meaningful in a normal linguistic way. It may be processed text.

You remind me of the UN chemical weapons inspectors: their job is to determine whether or not chemical weapons were used, not to say who did it.

But I think you need to understand that the Rosicrucians (my field of expertise) did not write gibberish. They wrote so that members of the Inquisition would think it's gibberish while scholars with certain knowledge would be able to figure out the true meaning. Thus, every word of the marginalia has to be saying something directly or indirectly useful for the decoding of the VMS. If your analysis of any section of the handwriting does not lead to something helpful, it is safe to assume that you probably went astray somewhere along the way.

For example, on f116v, there is no chance whatsoever that they wrote 'pox leber' with the intention of it meaning 'goat's liver'. It is therefore necessary to examine pox leber for clues on how to modify it. Thus, we see that the x of pox is written in a much darker ink, likely overwriting a different letter, and we see a stray dot above leber, giving us an excuse to exchange one of those e's for an i. And so forth.

On the top of f17r, I am not saying that the 'vi' has to be the reversal 'iv' (the letter w) but only that such a reversal falls within the realm of possibilities and would be consistent with other indications that the VMS decodes in a right to left direction.

So far, I am able to make sense out of roughly 70% of the marginalia. If I make further progress, I'll let you know.

(24-11-2018, 11:29 PM)Battler Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote:Is "hov" a real word in any language?

For what it's worth, in Slovenian it's the onomatopoeia for a dog's bark, corresponding to the English "woof". But I somehow doubt there's any Slovenian in the Voynich manuscript. :p

Thanks. When I enlarge the 'v' on Yale's TIFF images, I can envision it as a 'w' when viewed from a certain angle. The problem is that the rise in the middle of the w is short, much shorter than what we see on JP's images of the medieval w where the middle typically rises to the height of the sides. If you get the chance, have a look at it and let me know what you think.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

1006106.tif

(24-11-2018, 10:50 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Look at the embossed scan on davidsch's blog. It reveals more than the raw scan:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Embossed scans certainly make it easier to read but I am fearful that some of the finer detail might get lost in the process. Case in hand is the following word from the top of f17r:



The enhanced scans reveal the second letter under the bar to be the Latin letter z, but I think it's the glyph that looks like the number 8 with a tail. Note that this glyph is distinct from the glyph that looks like the number 8 without a tail. Both 8's appear both in the text and among the 17 glyphs of f57v.

In your opinion, is there any chance the second letter could be that glyph rather than the Latin z? The matter is relevant for my efforts to create a transliteration alphabet. Thanks.

It may or may not be the letter z.

It's probably a rotated "m" shape which is a common Latin abbreviation symbol that looks like "z" but is used at the ends of words. It has a variety of meanings, but two of the more common expansions are "em" or "um". The line over the two letters is a macron, an apostrophe symbol.

It does not look like a medieval 8, not at all and medieval 8 was never written with a tail.

Here are some examples of 8 from the 14th century. The ones from the 15th century are basically the same. Note the loops are generally quite wide, not squished like the last letter in luc'm

(25-11-2018, 10:11 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It may or may not be the letter z.

It's probably a rotated "m" shape which is a common Latin abbreviation symbol that looks like "z" but is used at the ends of words. It has a variety of meanings, but two of the more common expansions are "em" or "um". The line over the two letters is a macron, an apostrophe symbol.

It does not look like a medieval 8, not at all and medieval 8 was never written with a tail.

Here are some examples of 8 from the 14th century. The ones from the 15th century are basically the same. Note the loops are generally quite wide, not squished like the last letter in luc'm

Gosh, JP, I was only trying to describe glyphs (VMS symbols that resemble the number 8) because, apparently, it is not possible to type the actual glyph given that, to date, no one has bothered to incorporate those glyphs into the ASCII table. I was not referring, literally, to the number 8.

Similarly, the first letter under the bar would be the glyph (VMS symbol) that resembles the letter c with a top that extends straight out to the right. as seen in three of the four sequences of 17 on f57v. I very much doubt that it is the letter c followed by a rotated m.

Let's agree to disagree and call it quits. OK?

Quote:Similarly, the first letter under the bar would be the glyph (VMS symbol) that resembles the letter c with a top that extends straight out to the right. as seen in three of the four sequences of 17 on f57v. I very much doubt that it is the letter c followed by a rotated m.

It's very probable that it's a c followed by a rotated "m". The rotated m is an abbreviation symbol used at the ends of words, just as I said. It's very very common, it looks like a z, and it can follow any letter, but it will frequently follow "c" so why do you say it can't?

I don't know why you keep disagreeing with me on very simple aspects of reading medieval manuscripts. I read them every day. You haven't even learned to recognize the basic letters yet. You need to learn some fundamentals before you start trying to read the text. In the long run it will be more satisfying than making it up as you go along and wasting so much time going down the wrong road.

(25-11-2018, 03:57 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. I think it's the glyph that looks like the number 8 with a tail. Note that this glyph is distinct from the glyph that looks like the number 8 without a tail. Both 8's appear both in the text and among the 17 glyphs of f57v.

Hello Morten,

If you look at this page
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
you will see the EVA alphabet.

It seems you are talking about EVA-d and EVA-g

If for some reason you are setting up your own transliteration alphabet, you should probably first study the previous ones on this page in some detail.

Not only have VMS characters been converted to ASCII, but it is possible to use them on this site.