The Voynich Ninja

(07-08-2020, 08:52 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Dear Ahmet,

I wanted to give some more constructive feedback to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , which was quite amazing and just made me want to say "Wow", but someone else already said it before me.

A lot is known about the life of Voynich, and you may not be fully aware of that.

Any theory about the manuscript that goes against some of the established history of it, has a major problem.

This is true for the theory that Voynich faked it, that Edward Kelly faked it, or that it was written in Meso-America. We know that it was produced in the early 15th century, and that it was in Prague/Bohemia at the start of the 17th century. We also know that it was with the Roman Jesuits from 1665 onwards. There are of course also many specific details that we do not know.

So by adding the type of speculation to your work, that is written in the post that I linked, you are creating a problem for your theory.

However, this is not at all necessary.

There are several completely logical and historically acceptable ways, how a MS that was in Turkey in the 1500's could end up at the court of Rudolf II.

Ogier Ghislain de Busbecq spent many years in the Ottoman empire, and acquired numerous items for his patron Maximilian II, who was the father of Rudolf II.

Leonhard Rauwolf traveled extensively in the near East, and later sold some of his books to Rudolf II.

Rudolf II was very interested in tulips, and bought many bulbs that came from the near East, probably Turkey.

Certainly, there were many contacts and any of them could (theoretically) bring a book from Turkey to Prague.

Dear Rene,

The probability you mentioned is possible. Moreover, at that time, the Ottoman Empire was in constant diplomatic relations with all kingdoms in Europe, and ambassadors were frequenting both sides. I cannot ignore this possibility you mentioned.

However, I must say that I have been researching this issue for a long time as you all, and I was scanned over ten thousand manuscripts. The last Ottoman period is also the period that Voynich and his bookstores was active.

Numerous articles and researches have been indicated about lost manuscripts in Ottoman/Turkey. But, no one knows the exact number of the stolen manuscripts and historical artifacts. It is known that the Ottoman administration have been lost total control in all matters before and during the occupation by the British, Italian, French ...etc soldiers.

I saw certain information in some archive record in Turkey.
I wanted to scan full of the Ottoman archives to see any copy with VMS alphabet. Because I thought two copies of the VMS were made, but I couldn't complete that scanning works yet. This part is a long term project for sure.

Although I couldn't find exactly what I was looking for, I found information that some libraries were burned. Later, when I focused on this topic, I came to the findings that I think may be a link between fires. Voynich has sold rare manuscripts for nearly 30 years. It has organized sales points throughout Europe, included America. We know that in 1902 he handed over thousands of manuscripts to the British Museum at once. In that time period booksellers didn't just sell books in their own shops only. They also sold their books through by shops of others in a close network. So they were in communication with each other.

The question is simple. For about 30 years, Voynich has filled shops and did wholesales events too.

We all are mostly talking about VMS, but how many manuscripts or rare books could this guy was sold in about 30 years? Where was the actual source of these books? Did he really find it in Europe? After my research I have something to say I don't think so.

The Ottomans were sending gifts to European kings in some periods. We know that among them was manuscripts. We know this because that gifts were recorded in the Ottoman archives. So they have records about that part. And some historians use this information in their book and/or articles.

Some manuscripts consisted of two or more volumes. For example, an Arabic manuscript was translated into Persian or Turkish by order of the Sultan, and the exact copy was prepared in a second language. The first volume of this type in Europe but the second volume still in Turkey today. About those there is no record about gifting. So, we can trace some of the manuscripts. But these are very few.

It is a known fact that a number of historical artifacts and manuscripts have been smuggled (with tens thousands of in number according to some researchers estimate) in that period.

Until now, it was thought that these were caused by a large number of anonymous thefts, and it is unknown exactly how many items were stolen. I predict the number to be around 1 million pieces. However, many libraries were burned down in the same period and the list of artifacts inside were burned in these fires. Therefore, we cannot trace the majority of manuscripts.

Of course, I cannot say that I put all the parts in place in this puzzle. However, I think we put some parts of this puzzle in the right places.

At the same time, I think it will be useful to cooperate with people who have worked on this subject for a long time and to do research together. We are also open to work with those who want to collaborate for illuminated that dark part of the history.

Thanks,

Ahmet

(10-08-2020, 03:37 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We know that in 1912 he handed over thousands of manuscripts to the British Museum at once.

I am sorry, but this is not true. This did not happen.

If you want to collaborate with people to find out the true history, you have to accept the information that they bring, also if this is contradicting your expectations or your theories.

That, by the way, is true for everyone here and outside, who are trying to find explanations.

(10-08-2020, 06:41 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(10-08-2020, 03:37 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We know that in 1912 he handed over thousands of manuscripts to the British Museum at once.

I am sorry, but this is not true. This did not happen.

If you want to collaborate with people to find out the true history, you have to accept the information that they bring, also if this is contradicting your expectations or your theories.

That, by the way, is true for everyone here and outside, who are trying to find explanations.

Thanks for reminding. I was going to write 1902, I wrote 1912 by mistake. It was a mechanical error. I do it often because I have some kind of focusing problem. 

I guess you have explored this issue many times. You probably know more about the history of VMS than I do. I have read research articles on this subject, and we have given some of them references in our book. But I also researched the subject myself and I can say that I put together the missing pieces of the VMS puzzle in a slightly different way compared to yours.


You are one of those who wrote the historical events known today in Europe about VMS. On the other hand, I think I wrote about the unknown side and the wrong known aspects of the subject. Of course, mutual sharing of information is a good thing. In that way, if I'm making mistakes, I'll have a chance to fix it.


The catalog list book ("A First(-Ninth) list of books offered for sale". {With “A First list of books, second edition”, “A Supplement to the Eight list”, and “Index of books contained in List I-VI.”} London 1898-1902 / Author: Voynich, Wilfred Michael) presented to the British Museum in 1901, and British Museum agreed to have all of this listed MS and rear books in same year in 20-AU-1901. 
So The Museum and W. Voynich has agreement each other in 1901 sor sure.

Most likely, the museum management did not trust to W. Voynich and probably they suspected that the artifacts might be stolen. For this reason, they did not want W. Voynich's name to appear as the seller in the official contract. For this reason, they found it appropriate to register that works as donations to be accepted to the museum. In 1902, when they found people to buy the artifacts from Voynich and donate them to this museum, they completed that procedure.

Thus, on the September 1901 list book, they made a semi-formal agreement with W. Voynich in 1901, and they used the list book itself as the agreement protocol. But today, many researchers think that this museum reached an agreement in 1902.

Year 1902 is the date when the historical artifacts were officially delivered to the museum, but in reality the museum was willing to commitment to buy all of the artifacts in 20 AU 1901.

The museum sealed W. Voynich written list book as a sort of statement that the agreement was made in 1901. In other words, they were already agreed in 1901 about that museum would get all of listed Manuscripts that offered for sale by W. Voynich for sure.

I think small details can paint a different big picture for us.

With all respect,

Thank you

(10-08-2020, 03:04 PM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(10-08-2020, 01:58 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(08-08-2020, 06:49 PM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(08-08-2020, 04:06 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif]In brief, "The Baby pomegranate bag wax" (is not phrase or is not sentence too, but it is an adjective.[/font]

Thanks.

Thank you for the additional explanation, especially taking all this time to respond to us in English.

Is "the baby pomegranate bag wax" a typical adjective in Turkish or Old Turkish?

Yes, there are various adjectives which same like structurally similar with this VMS adjective.
You can find basic information in this link below.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
This page gives limited information about Anatolian Turkish. But I think that you will have some idea.
Thanks,

I'm not clear if the examples on that webpage are 1:1 translations or if the translations swap the word order so the phrases make sense in English. Either way the translations on that page make sense and sound natural to me - a blue house, a rich man, tired children. 'Baby pomegranate bag wax' makes no sense to me - I have no idea what it is trying to convey.

I'm not asking if the STRUCTURE of the adjective is typical for Turkish/Old Turkish but if the actual adjective makes sense.

It is clear to me that the words 'ÇNOR ÇLU ŞAMU' (in f-2r) is an adjective. It may not much sense in English, but it should be an adjective in Turkish. I think this adjective was used to express a certain part of the plant drawn on the page where it was written.
However, I can inform more clearly (about how it is used in the sentence) just after translate this 3 words with the sentence.

Voynich sold several thousand printed books (not manuscripts) to the British Museum, over a period of probably 20 years.

In his eighth list of books of 1902, he sold 137 rare books to the BM at once. These are also mostly, if not all, prints. One of them is printed on previously written parchment, i.e. a print palimpsest. Quite unusual, but not particularly valuable.

(11-08-2020, 08:29 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Voynich sold several thousand printed books (not manuscripts) to the British Museum, over a period of probably 20 years.

In his eighth list of books of 1902, he sold 137 rare books to the BM at once. These are also mostly, if not all, prints. One of them is printed on previously written parchment, i.e. a print palimpsest. Quite unusual, but not particularly valuable.

Let me state this first, you did some of the most comprehensive studies on Voynich and VMS. I read most articles and posts on your web-page a while ago. I believe, when you write about VM history with using scientific approach, you take into account available clear evidence and findings that what you have found. This is actually an issue that every study or article claiming to be scientific should pay attention. In other words, I call the act of writing history by looking at the available data as scientific work. However, if the historical documents are partially destroyed, changed and manipulated, the available data do not provide clarification of the subject under investigation.


There are aspects of the known Voynich story that contradict human logic on many issues. I think these aspects need more research. For this reason, we should look at the existing findings, but we should also try to investigate further areas where our logic tells us that the finding at hand is wrong. Doing so, of course, we ask new questions about doubts. And I'm trying to answer them for myself, and on this side of the business; of course, I'm trying to fill in the gaps, partly by speculating.

As my research progresses and finds new evidence, less speculation will be needed. In other words, these researches will continue until more evidence will found. Moreover, the statements made by many researchers today, considering it to be scientific, cannot shed light on any of the dark sides of this issue.

So I am not claiming that there is no speculation in my articles on Voynich, or in our book. But there is also evidence that there are some clues about some details and new areas that need to be explored. We also mention this evidence in our studies.

Now I'm going to ask you some questions about the details we think differently. If you wish, you can share your opinion and answers to these questions. But it's okay if you don't want to read a long article written in bad English. In this case, you cannot read the rest. If you are not going to read, the summary is that "when we look at the same data, maybe we interpret it differently."

British Museum  related questions:

1- Why did this museum not want to buy much older manuscripts (which parts are only/unique in the world) from Voynich's catalog instead of buying only 137 parts (which mostly printed and some of tham not much valuable works such as a print palimpsest) such as ordinary and particularly valuable works?

2- If this deal was made in 1902 and only 137 pieces of artifacts changed hands, why did this whole list (Voynich-written list-book) stamped by British Museum in 1901 with their seal?

[You can see this BM 1901 seal on the page of this source Source: A First (-Ninth) list of books offered for sale. {With “A First list of books, second edition”, “A Supplement to the Eight list”, and “Index of books contained in List I-VI.”} London 1898-1902 / Author: Voynich, Wilfred Michael, / The British Library System Number is 003818912 / Shelfmark S.C. 1097.]

3- British Library has this list book which has been sealed by British Museum in 1901 with their ‘year-1901-seal’. Why the BM sealed whole list? If BM was bought some of these books why they sealed whole this list book?

4- I visited this library for my research a while ago; I would not be able to see this list-book written by Voynich without permission. I have never been able to reach the original paper book. After a while, I was able to see the photo film of this work because the officer wanted to help by taking initiative on herself (without having a special permit before). Then I saw the 1901 and 1902 BM seals on this photo film of the book. In your opinion, myself as a member reader of this library, why I can physically examine a manuscript older than a thousand years old, but I can't see & examine an ordinary paper book written in 1901 itself ? And why I can see the photo picture of it only after if I will get a special permission? Do you think this situation is normal?

5- Most of The rare books and manuscripts were listed by Voynich in his catalogue books were sold by Voynich or by his wife in time. Some of the list-books written by Voynich, (which has short-descriptions of about 12,700 to 13250 rare books, and let’s say about 13000 rare books and manuscripts) were listed in these list-books.

[Thirty catalogues of which 25 are bound in two volumes and Voynich’s “Short catalogues” with continued a series of nine, (consecutively-paginated “Lists”) which he issued between 1898 and 1902 issued by Wilfred Michael Voynich to sold (David Pearson, Provenance research in book history: a handbook, London 1994, p.169).] & [Stock catalogues, numbered series: 1-16 § 18-29 § 31-32 London, Wilfred M. Voynich, 1903-1912 <https://www.robinhalwas.com/110000-wilfred-voynich-stock-catalogues>]

How many books do you think it takes to fill the shelves of a single bookstore that Mr. Voynich own like in London?  Voynich had established sales points in different locations in Europe.  How many books in total might have been required to keep the shelves of all these bookstores full?

Do you think that he sold only 13 to 20 thousand pieces of books only during the period he did this job for 20 years? (I think there are hints that it may be 30 years, but assume that we consider this period as 20 years as you said)

Let's say he sold 20 thousand pieces during his 20 years of business life. In other words, it should be thought that it only sold 1000 pieces per year. On average, it should sell 2 to 3 books a day (exact number: 2.73 books / each day) at all points of sale throughout its entire European operation. How can this person afford the luxury life and the cost of real estate and workers' salaries and other payments by selling 2 or 3 books a day across Europe? Does this account make sense? Which businessman would invest in this type of business at that time? Does it seem like a wise investment and/or real?

In other words, there are many inconsistencies between known historical information and reality in life.
Of course, this person didn't just sell 137 books to the British Museum. Probably, the museum must have received all of the works on this list presented by him. However, although this museum seems to have received 137 of the works from Voynich, the remaining works must have been shown as donations from many different people. In order not to attract attention, they divided the list into small pieces and made it look as if they were donations from different people. Thus, they prevented any doubts that might arise about the origin of the books in the future. May be they showed that only 137 books sold that connected with Mr Voynich.

We know that his London shop and house were located in a central area close to the British Museum and British Library. It is unclear where he got the money to provide this opportunity.

Many researchers say that Voynich started his business sometime around 1897 or around 1898. But in connection with the 1904 document on the granting of British citizenship to Wilfrid Voynich (The Naturalization Papers Of Wilfrid Michael Voynich - Record HO-144-751-117022, published by National Archives / Researcher Colin MacKinnon), he should have obtained a few reference letters and it should have presented to the British state.  As understood from the official records on this subject, those 2 people who gave him reference letter was worked at the British Museum in the year when they met with him. And one of those people was Richard Garnett, and he had declared that he had known Voynich since 1892.

So, if Voynich, as is often thought, got into the business of selling rare books in 1897 or 1898 and was able to sell some works to the British Museum in 1902, it is possible to think that he may have started to establish these commercial connections in 1892.

Actually, you and I are mostly looking at the same documents. I also get some information from your articles. But we both evaluate that same information differently.

You follow more scientific paths for sure. In my opinion, there is a lot of evidence and documents which say us Mr. Voynich were a liar. For this reason, there is no reason to believe whatever statements Voynich made during his lifetime. Therefore, we cannot accept any statement of this person as first degree evidence for any scientific study.
I think we are looking at the same issue from different angles.

Any researcher might think from this data that Mr Voynich, after getting to know these people (who working at the British-Museum (inspired by them)), decided to get into these business.

Thus, this researcher will say that Voynich entered this business in 1897 or later. For this reason, the date of the first list book written by this person can be regarded as the date this person started work. Or another document of that period can be shown as proof that this person started these works around 1897.

However, someone else who looks at the same data may think that Voynich had started these works in 1892 or before, and can say that is why Voynich contacted that two people who was working in this museum that time.

In the known story, this person achieved an incredible success in what he started with a small capital. However, claiming that these works were started with that small amount of borrowed money as he mentioned is also completely illogical and unrealistic in my opinion. For this reason, the statements of this person cannot be first degree evidence.


So although we look at the same findings, we think differently.

(11-08-2020, 06:40 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In my opinion, there is a lot of evidence and documents which say us Mr. Voynich were a liar

This is a pretty substantial claim for sure, I can hardly wait until I see the evidence... is this another thing you like to share and talk about in your books in the future?

(10-08-2020, 09:58 AM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(08-08-2020, 05:09 PM)Alin_J Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(07-08-2020, 12:00 AM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(04-08-2020, 12:05 AM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi Ahmet, nice to see you here and thanks for answering questions. What is your translation of the vord daiin? 

Hi Pepper,

You asked an explanation about a short word with using a short sentence. However, the answer is not short. Because this word is used in many different meanings as both a word suffix and an independent word. For this reason, this word is used very often in VMS and this is a very normal situation.

We can write this word in Latin abc in the form SAĞN / ŞAĞN / SEĞN, SAM / ŞAM / SEM / ŞEM, ŞAIIN / SAIIN / ŞEĞN / ŞEİİN according to ATA alphabet transcription. 

I am not saying that the author was referring to all of these words by writing with this single word. There's absolutely nothing like that. Only this word has a Turkish equivalent of all different transcription combinations and some of their meanings are also common. Because the word root is the same. So, that as the word is read in context, the human brain (for a native speaker) automatically derives all variations, and selects the appropriate one for the context. An example of the brain automatically selecting the appropriate concept to the context in English would be the presentation of the word “fly.” Depending on the context in which it is being read, the brain will draw a distinction between “fly” the verb and “fly” the noun. A similar situation exists in Turkish, albeit with more options. If this is confusing, you can read the explanation below and see that all of them in Turkish.

I hope you will understand my English in first read.

The spelling of this word as SAIIN and as like SAĞN are so close to each other with in phonetic-value that they cannot be perceived as different words. The root of this word is the SA- ('SAĞ-' in some dialects), and it has the suffix '-ĞN'.

The suffix “-ĞN” (“-AĞN”/“-ĞIN”/ “-GİN”) is the phonetic equivalent of “-AĞIN / -EĞİN” due to the Turkish vowel harmony rule, for when the last letter of a root is a consonant, a vowel may be placed as a conjunction between the root and the suffix. These suffixes indicate prospect attainability, potentially achieving something, to be able to potentially attain/reach something, and expecting forthcoming form of something (-able). Sir Gerard Clauson in his book "Studies in Turkic and Mongolic Linguistics" (page 154) explained the suffixes “ĞIN”, and “GİN” as: ["-ğın/-gin function uncertain; e.g. kev- "to masticate" > kevgin "indigestible"; rare and unproductive and probably very old."]. In addition, Sir Gerard Clauson explained in his book "An etymological dictionary of pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish" (Clauson) that: ["-ğ the commonest Deverbal Suffix; forms a wide range of Deverbal Nouns and Noun/Adjectives, Nomen actiones, etc".]

You can see this word in some Turkish dictionaries (with certain meanings) in the form SAĞIN. But you can often see this word in dictionaries with the word-suffix '-mek / -mak'. So you can see this word in the dictionaries as like SAĞINMAK and SAĞMAK too.

The suffixes “-mek/-mak”: these are suffixes of Turkish infinitive. They turn the root word into a verb as well as also a concrete noun.(Clauson, Eyuboğlu, Guise)

SAĞINMAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
SAĞMAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(See Turkish equivalents in the dictionary in google word translator.)

In addition, the various meaning of the word SAĞIN itself is shown in some dictionaries.
SAĞIN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You could say that essentially, the letter A and E correspond to ATA Transcription with a single typeface. So we can read this word as SEĞİN.
However, the word SEĞİN is a Turkish word too.
SEĞİN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

If you read the word in SEM format, it also has Turkish meanings.
SEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

If we talk about reading this word as SAM, we can say the following. This word is both a word-suffix and a word that has its own meaning.

The word SAM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The suffixe -SAM: The suffix “-SAM” indicates actions taken in first person. This suffix is directly described as “I/me” and is related to the suffixes “-SAM”, “-SIM”, “-SİM” or “-SEM” which all describe action’s owner to be “I, me, myself” (first person) (Guise).

In Turkish, some word-suffixes can be written separated from the main word/root since ancient times.

Likewise, the pronunciation of word SEM also has Turkish meanings. For example, we know that this word is used in the meaning of 'medicine' in Old Turkish. But the word SEM also has other meanings too. 
SEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The pronunciation of this word as ŞAM and as like ŞEM has some meanings in Turkish.
ŞAM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

If we talk about the spelling of the word ŞAĞIN;
Today, this word is written and read in the Anatolian dialects in the form of UŞAĞIN. In other words, the word has a U sound on the front side. We know that some dialects in Azerbaijan are still used in the form of ŞAĞIN in the same meaning.

In this spelling, the root word is the word UŞAK. But when it was take the word suffix -ĞIN, the K sound was lost in pronunciation and the word became as USAĞIN.
UŞAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

If we read the word as ŞEĞN, this lives in our language in the form of ŞEYİN. The root of this word is ŞEY. It usually appears in the root form in dictionaries.
ŞEY: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞEYİN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

As you can see, we have shown all the different readings of this word read in VMS according to ATA transcription. Moreover, we shared all related Turkish dictionary pages.

You may have noticed that this word is repeated in almost every page, with multiple numbers in VMS. Moreover, just like in modern Turkish, this word appears in VMS as both an independent word and as a word suffix. So, in this point, the overlap between Turkish and VMS is very clear. All I can tell you is that the word is not used in the same meaning, or in the same function with all of these repetitions in VMS.

So that's why there are many repetitions.

In the runic alphabet inscriptions from the Old Turkish Period, cases where two or more sounds were met with a single alphabet sign were recorded. So this is not just for VMS-specific too.

However, this type of alphabet has helped the author to encode confidential information. We talked about how this coding is done in our second youtube video in English.   You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

May be it is very difficult to understand this situation for a person who thinks English (or any other PIE rooted language) in his/her brain, but an example, even if a word has 10 readings and 100 different meanings, someone who knows Turkish will understand the meaning of the word when they read a sentence. In addition, Turkish speaking person will always understand whether it was used as a word-suffixe or as a separate word too.

So, This is suffix and word. Different readings of the word mostly from same root and a native speaker brain automatically selecting the appropriate concept or meaning form the meaning content. 

The author could write this word in a more separable form by using with simple alphabet characters only, if she/he were wanted to that.

If the author were wanted to that, she/he was not match some single sign in the alphabet with 2 sounds. So this type of writing is not very normal. However, the aim of the author was to create a coded MS which should have been not easy to read. The author was coding and developed a complex alphabet to make this MS difficult to read.

In other words, this alphabet is the situation specific alphabet to created only for VMS, which has been created with consisting of both the syllabic alphabet, the simple alphabet and the tamga-scripts and the numbers. For this reason, now we are reading a simple word in very different ways.

The interesting thing is that even when we take the meanings of different words, the meaning integrity of the sentences is often not broken in meaning. I think this is a situation that created by the intelligence of the author, but it cannot be a coincidence. It is probably not possible to simulate this situation in a language other than Turkish.

Best regards,

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta

Hello Ahmet,

I believe that in your answer you are attempting to provide us with ample explanations to why this particular separate glyph sequence is found very frequently in the VMS (in fact it is the most frequent qlyph sequence), if I'm not being too much mistaken? However, you didn't really answer the question asked. In your links that you have provided no actual translations of the words can be found since everything is written in Turkish, so you have to have knowledge of Turkish to understand the web-pages. Therefore I would here like to re-formulate the original question:

What would be your translation of the - or one of the - most commonly found example(s) of this word/word-suffix in Turkish/Old Turkish languages, into English? 

I am not relying on Google translate, I would like an answer from someone who speaks Turkish. Thank you.

Hello friends,

Let me give two more examples from today's Anatolian Turkish, where the first and second person singular request / wish modes are used, so you can clearly see that the word suffix -SAM / -SEM, -SAN / SEN is also using in modern Turkish too. 
 
The name of the author who wrote this poem: Niyazi Bilgin
Name of this poem: *Ne Yapsam Bilmiyorum* (* I Don't Know What To Do *)
[Source: Niyazi Bilgin <https://www.gulum.net/sair/bolumler.php?op=goster&id=4391>]
 
Note: I marked the words that repeat twice in this poem, in red. Also, the last voice of one of these repetitions has been lengthened. (example: of offfffff) All of these have also seen in 600 years old VMS texts.
 
 
*Ne Yapsam Bilmiyorum*
 
Ne yapsam bilmiyorum...
Versem aklımı yem diye kuşlara.
Yatsam bir tren yolunun kenarında.
Çıkıp bir ağacın dalında uyusam.
Yolun ortasında oturup sigara içsem.
Arabamın el frenini açıp salsam caddeye.
Hiç durmadan koşsam çılgınca.
Duvarların üzerinde yürüsem
Ve durup durduk yere
Bağırsam birinin kulağına hiç yoktan.
Saçlarımı kazıtsam sıfıra
Ve yanımdan geçen birine atsam yumruğu.
Alıp başımı gitsem bilinmezliğe.
Girip bir saunaya saatlerce kalsam.
Gecenin bir saatinde gidip iş yerime çalışsam,
Ne işin var burada diyenleri dövsem.
Hiç durmadan sigara içsem.
Gitar çalsam delice.
Binanın tepesine çıkıp şehri izlesem.
Buz gibi suda yüzsem.
Müziğin sesini sonuna kadar açsam .
Kapıyı çalanlara açmasam kapıyı.
Yemek yesem çatlayana kadar.
Ağlasam gözyaşlarım kuruyana kadar
Ve birden başlasam gülmeye katıla katıla.
Bilgisayarda oyun oynasam,
Yenilince atsam camdan aşağıya.
Elbiselerimi değiştirip dursam
Ve her değiştirdiğimde ,
Arkadaşıma sorsam nasıl oldu diye.
Bütün renkleri karıştırsam birbirine;
Mavi hariç !!!
Ve serpsem bir tuvalin üstüne.
Dalında meyve koparsam,
Ve yoldan geçen birine versem.
Bisikletime binsem ve başka şehre gitsem.
Sonra tekerini patlatıp otostop çeksem,
Yarı yolda inip geri dönsem.
Bir taksiye binip şehri dolaşıp geri evime gelsem.
Uyusam hiç kalkmadan günlerce.
Sessiz sessiz otursam.
Kardeşimi ziyarete gitsem ,
Ve cebimde ne kadar para varsa hepsini ona Versem.
Elbiselerimi yırtıp otobüsçüye param olmadığımı söylesem,
Beni götürmesini istesem.
Gitmesem işe günlerce,
Daha sonra gece gündüz çalışsam.
Arabamın önüne pervane taksam ve uçmaya çalışsam,
Uçamayınca ağırlıktan olduğunu düşünüp
Pervaneyi elime alıp kendim uçmaya çalışsam.
Düşüp bir yerimi kırsam.
Alçılı alçılı dolaşsam aylarca.
Durmadan seni düşünsem
Düşünsem düşünsem...
of offfffffff
Neler yapsam bilmiyorum sensiz
Aslında bir sen olsan bir de ben...
Hiçbir şey yapmadan seni izlesem.
 
Niyazi Bilgin
 
 
The name of the author (who wrote following poem): Cemal Süreyya (1931 - 1990)
Neme of this poem: *Sen Gelsen* (*if you come*)
[Source: Cemal Süreyya <http://asksiirleri.org/sen-gelsen-cemal-sureya>]
Note: In this poem, first person (-SAM/-SEK) singular, second (-SAN/-SEN) person singular and third person plural present tense (-SAK/-SEK) request / wish modes suffixes were marked with blue. -SAK syllable is seen in VMS, just like SAN and SAM word suffixes.
 
Sen Gelsen
 
Şimdi açsam pencereyi beklesem
Sen gelsen
Olmaz ya hani geliversen
Hiç bir şey sormasan
Hiç bir şey söylemesen
Sussam
Sussan
Sussak.
Susuşların anlattığını dinlesek
Sırt sırta otursak
Katılasıya ağlasak
Sormasak birbirimize sebebini
Sarılsam
Sarılsan
Sarılsak.
Ve yine hiç bir şey konuşmasak
Ama anlasak
Ne vardı sahi
Olmaz ya
Hayal ya
Hani diyorum olsa ne vardı.
 
Cemal Süreya
 
 
Best regards,
 
Ahmet Ardıç
ATAT Team Alberta

I detected a typo in the text I was wrote. In the description of the -SEM suffix I marked in red, I accidentally typed -SEK. It will actually be -SEM. 
> Note: In this poem, first person (-SAM/-SEM) singular, second (-SAN/-SEN) person singular and third person plural present tense (-SAK/-SEK) request / wish modes suffixes were marked with blue. -SAK syllable is seen in VMS, just like SAN and SAM word suffixes.

Ahmet, if you use the Full Edit option, you can delete irrelevant parts of a quoted passage and keep only the part to which you are replying. Just be careful you don't accidentally remove the end-quote marker

Code:

[quote]...relevant part of quoted passage here...[/quote]

.

It will make the relevant parts of your post easier to read. When multiple nested quotes are repeated, the post tends to become very long.

(11-08-2020, 08:58 PM)Alin_J Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(11-08-2020, 06:40 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In my opinion, there is a lot of evidence and documents which say us Mr. Voynich were a liar

This is a pretty substantial claim for sure, I can hardly wait until I see the evidence... is this another thing you like to share and talk about in your books in the future?

I am trying to answer the questions asked, and I am trying to give information on issues that require clarification. We do not keep or hide any information specifically about our study. Of course, the fact that I'm just learning English, and that makes it difficult for me to express myself. Also, I haven't figured out how to use this platform's page yet. For example, I tried to share images, but I couldn't.

Of course, no information is confidential, but I do not want to write longer articles with more detail here, because as far as I understand, nobody likes to read long articles with broken English.

What we are  doing in our study is like searching an aluminium coin which drowned in sand on a large beach. For this reason, it will take time and we will share some of our current findings in the first book, but in the first book, we fill the gaps with our own speculations while telling the history of this story, and we state this issue in our book to be honest. However, we found clues that our speculations might be correct, and we are further exploring these areas.

We also planned the second and third book. Because both the readings continue and we read more and more sentences every month. We will publish these readings with new findings. For this reason, we planned 3 books.

More questions may be answered if will be ask. For example, issues such as the numbers 4 and 7 were not written as they appeared in VMS in the first half of the 15th century. I think a lot of that kind of wrong information and generalizations have been made before. I can clarify different details when asked and whenever possible. If there are some questions that I may not be able to answer, but I can take notes and investigate them and may be answer them in the future.

But since my English is bad, please write down the questions in a few different ways. And I think I can be more helpful if you ask about specific issues. However, if there is no question, I will not comment further on this page. As I said, I had the chance to share my information on this page as I am on summer vacation. I won't have much free time after vacation.