The Voynich Ninja - Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

(06-09-2022, 03:27 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As you can see, the first number of "Persian language of YEK" (آ / یکی) and the Turkish word "TEK" overlap both phonetically and in meaning. We can establish similar examples between the number pronouns in English and the number pronouns in Turkish too. Etc. ...

For example, VAR (BAR/BİR) > ONE sound conversion should probably have passed from one of the Tatar-Turkish dialects to English as ONE. (VAR > ONE) are words that are close in sound value and overlap in meaning.

The word THREE (3) in English is the sound form of the word DİRİ/TİRİ in old Turkish. This word can be use as the name of the third finger in our hand in Turkish and one of its many meanings in Turkish was (UZUN/DİRİ/İRİ) "longer than the others (it was said for the longer finger)".

It is true that the numerals from one to ten give some good hints (but of course not 'proof') about the relation between languages. It is easy to see how these numerals in Farsi / Persian are related to several Indo-European languages. Of course, that is just a small part of the evidence that Farsi is Indo-European.

It is also easy to see that the modern Turkish numerals do not look like Indo-European numerals *at all*.

However, if another set of words, which could include "Tek" and "Diri"/"Tiri", in old or modern Turkish, do resemble Indo-European numerals, then it is just possible that these were introduced in parallel from neighbouring languages. And these could very well be Indo-European.

Exactly the same thing happens in the Thai langauge. This is a S-E Asian language which has no relation whatsoever with Indo-European. The words for one to five are:
Nüng, Song, Sam, Si, Ha.
However, there is another set that is used a.o. as prefixes, which sounds like:
Ek, To, Tri, Jattawa, Benja.
This shows a strong relation with Indo-European. How could that happen?
Easy. The main religion in Thailand is Buddhist, and many words related to religion derive from Sanskrit, which is Indo-European. Others derive from Pali, another Indian language.

So, if Persian numerals appear similar to some versions of Turkish numerals, this does not mean that Persian is not Indo-European. To the contrary. It rather indicates that these Turkish versions derive from Indo-European.

However, just two out of ten isn't anywhere near sufficient, and a relation between "Tek" and "Yek" appears very far from certain to me.

(06-09-2022, 08:26 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(06-09-2022, 03:27 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As you can see, the first number of "Persian language of YEK" (آ / یکی) and the Turkish word "TEK" overlap both phonetically and in meaning. We can establish similar examples between the number pronouns in English and the number pronouns in Turkish too. Etc. ...

For example, VAR (BAR/BİR) > ONE sound conversion should probably have passed from one of the Tatar-Turkish dialects to English as ONE. (VAR > ONE) are words that are close in sound value and overlap in meaning.

The word THREE (3) in English is the sound form of the word DİRİ/TİRİ in old Turkish. This word can be use as the name of the third finger in our hand in Turkish and one of its many meanings in Turkish was (UZUN/DİRİ/İRİ) "longer than the others (it was said for the longer finger)".

It is true that the numerals from one to ten give some good hints (but of course not 'proof') about the relation between languages. It is easy to see how these numerals in Farsi / Persian are related to several Indo-European languages. Of course, that is just a small part of the evidence that Farsi is Indo-European.

It is also easy to see that the modern Turkish numerals do not look like Indo-European numerals *at all*.

However, if another set of words, which could include "Tek" and "Diri"/"Tiri", in old or modern Turkish, do resemble Indo-European numerals, then it is just possible that these were introduced in parallel from neighbouring languages. And these could very well be Indo-European.

Exactly the same thing happens in the Thai langauge. This is a S-E Asian language which has no relation whatsoever with Indo-European. The words for one to five are:
Nüng, Song, Sam, Si, Ha.
However, there is another set that is used a.o. as prefixes, which sounds like:
Ek, To, Tri, Jattawa, Benja.
This shows a strong relation with Indo-European. How could that happen?
Easy. The main religion in Thailand is Buddhist, and many words related to religion derive from Sanskrit, which is Indo-European. Others derive from Pali, another Indian language.

So, if Persian numerals appear similar to some versions of Turkish numerals, this does not mean that Persian is not Indo-European. To the contrary. It rather indicates that these Turkish versions derive from Indo-European.

However, just two out of ten isn't anywhere near sufficient, and a relation between "Tek" and "Yek" appears very far from certain to me.

Hi Mr. Rene,

You say; "It is also easy to see that the modern Turkish numerals do not look like Indo-European numerals *at all*." But the concept called Etymology looks at how the old phonetic form of a word in a language has evolved over time too. While doing this, it also takes into account synonyms words in that language, if necessary. Here, your experts who write Etymological dictionaries for Indo-European languages are doing this job, almost completely ignoring Old Turkish. This is not a correct method. Word exchange between languages is not only seen in languages from the same group. Many single words in your language seem to have evolved from the conjunction of two or more words in our ancient language. To see what I'm talking about, your linguists must know the Turkish language to a degree that they can take into account. It can be said that they do not (mostly) look at this area at all.

If you're going to research the history of a word, you should reference the oldest written source you can find. If there is an old form of any word in Turkish, it cannot be called Etymology to refer that word to the imaginary sound forms of "PIE roots". This means creating imaginary roots and makes language history difficult to access.

I'm not talking about one or five words.

I'm talking about thousands of words.

We know other researchers who talking about same thinks and they listing hundreds of words in each of their many articles and books. However, the sources cited by these are not taken into account by your Etymologists. This is not a service beyond fabricating some kind of false etymological structures.

Persian is not a language from the same group as Turkish.

I did not say that Persian is not an Indo-European language. Persian word structure is incompatible with Turkish. For this reason, it is a fact that they are from separate groups based on.

Turkish cannot be derived from any Indo-European language.

Word root structures of Turkish are monophonic and/or monosyllabic. In other words, word roots in Turkish carry meaning diversity and meaning pool. This must be a fairly old building. I explained this through examples in these pages in an earlier comment. We cannot mention the root meaning pools of the roots of words in Indo-European languages for every example. However, every root syllable of Turkish is born with multiple meaning content. Words in Indo-European languages mostly have longer syllable structures. Such a structure must have been formed relatively recently in the history of human speech. Because it would be an illogical inference to claim that long and complex word structures are created without creating the first words with simple and short words. If you will sees two possibilities, you cannot start from the illogical one. For example, for this very reason, the Chinese language must have been formed in an earlier period on the historical line, just like the Turkish language. European (or PIE called) languages, on the other hand, are relatively recent languages in the historical line. For this reason, your language is not a oldroot language, but a collection of languages whose words are mostly borrowed from other languages.

But many Indo-European linguists think like you. Than you can feel good. Smile

However, the fact that many people have an opinion cannot make that opinions true or realistic.

I'm sorry, but late period collection languages cannot be a source for rooted languages, but they can give a small number of words to them. This type of exchange of words from your language to ours may have occurred relatively recently, especially in history, and we recognize the words quoted. Although there is no meaning in the roots of these words, they have a meaning as a whole and seem to have entered the human language as if it had fallen from the roof.

Although you and your linguists are not yet aware of the ancient vocabulary of "Proto Indo-European rooted languages", almost 80% and certainly over 50% are of Early-Pre-Turkic origin. But you won't be able to understand this anytime soon. Maybe you will laugh at me today. But this is not a problem and this will not be new to me.

I write many pointh in this way item by item with presenting many evidence in my book and papers. My goal is to mark that all in human linguistic history. In the past, those who said that the world was flat like a tray were in the majority. May be one day you will realize that your thoughts about PIE today are garbage in real area. If a man evaluate what I wrote through a logical filter, that man can understand this more quickly.

In addition to that, the people who found the first sign of writing in history and the people who made the first alphabetic writing system were definitely not an Indo-European language speaker for sure too.

Peoples who were nomadic groups and whose words spoke agglutinative languages found first writing signs more possble than others. The fact that the settled peoples invented writing earlier than the nomads is rather illogical and, with all due respect, a silly tendency.

If we were to make an analogy; I'm just one of those guys (in linguistics) and who say the world isn't really like a flat tray. You are probably one of the first to laugh at this ideas, but it is not a point in real area.

Thanks

(05-09-2022, 12:17 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Because Turkish words have word-suffixes. These suffixes can refer to the first, second and third persons, as well as contain information such as past, future, present tense etc. Therefore, when the subject person and tense described in some pages change, the phonetic value structure at the end of the word also changes sharply. Therefore, it is thought that "there is a different language in the content", but there is no different language.

The Turkish language is not the only language that has suffixes for first, second and third persons; past, present and future tense. Slovenian has even the suffixes for 3 genders. The distinction for 3 different genders can be found in the VM. Also, Slovenian language has prefixes, which Turkish does not have. And yes, a dialect of Slovenian was spoken in Thessaloniki under the Byzantine Empire in the 9th century. There might be some words still in use, and that could be the reason you cannot read sentences, but are able to adjust your alphabet to approximate those words. Also, Slovenian language has over 600 Sanskrit words, which also might be found in Turkish.

I think the best way to test your theory is to give 5 Turkish academic a copy of one page of the VM text (not your transcription) and your ATA alphabet and let them transcribe and translate the text individually. I suppose if Turkish language was so obvious, they could easy transcribe and translate a page, and the work of all five academics should be at least remotely similar.
[/quote]

Dear Cvetka,

At this stage, we are making presentations for Turkish-speaking experts and we are at the stage where there will be no need for 5 people to take a reading test to show them that the content is in Turkish. These people already understand in the first half hour that they are looking at an Old Turkish texts. But the dialect encountered for the first time is often surprising. However, those who want to do the kind of test reading you mentioned can do so using the ATA key. We are already confident that the results will not change.

Thank you for making a nice reminder. At the first opportunity, we can find five volunteers and give a page that we have not read before. We showed page 33v to a linguist professor. His translation into modern Turkish corresponded to ours about 50%. But of course, sometimes a few of the multiple meanings of words can function without breaking the sentence integrity. In this case, it is normal to have some differences in the translation. In fact, our main claim is not that the translations we make are 100% correct. Our main claim is that there is Old Turkish content in the sections we look at in the content (the dialect of which we have not yet understood, but probably the Black Sea, Thrace and may be Balkans geography).

I do not have detailed knowledge of Slovenian. Nor do I know whether a Slovenian dialect was spoken in Thessaloniki during the Byzantine Empire. But of course, we present multiple proofs in different details that the VM-texts are in Turkish. The overlaps we have shown are not accidental in terms of quality and quantity.

If the content was not in Turkish, it would not be possible to read whole pages by chance, and it would not even be possible to read a few sentences or detect drawing-word overlaps.

In this respect, since the mathematical probabilities obtained do not contradict logic, the overlaps we have shown did not occur as a coincidence. Without the Turkish language in the content, it would not be possible to forcefully read them with using the same reading key (ATA) for Turkish.

Our results clearly show that what we are proposing is more than theory, and that these are early conclusions to see when starting reading studies for all 240 page.

We introduced ATA alphabet transcription as a reading key. With using this key we offer, not only us but everyone can read. Linguists, who are experts in the Turkish language, who look at the content, already see that the content is in Turkish. In some cases, more than one meaning of a Turkish word can overlap without compromising the integrity of a sentence. In these cases, more than one translation can be obtained for the same sentence. But these can be discussed as differences of opinion in this field of Old-Turkish.

I have given the list of the scientific committees for our next presentation here (two pages before). Which we will show an example of reading a large number of sentences and a full page (33v). If we make some mistakes, we can correct them again by taking the opinion of linguists.

In general, it will be very difficult for any Turkish language expert to claim that our pointing content of VM is not Turkish after our paper.
I have not yet to meet a Turkologist who is far from professional knowledge to do this.

Thanks again for your suggestion. We have two different translations for the 33v page. However, as other Turkish language experts translate these pages and different pages into today's Turkish languages, the comparison to be made between different translations will be useful for us to discuss the dialect of this work and to see our own mistakes.

Kind regards,

Now, I would like to quickly and briefly summarize some of the details that I have mentioned in my previous comments and with the evidence I have shared. My purpose in this summary is to point out the clear overlaps between VM texts and Turkish.

Some of The Evidences Are;

1-) There were cases where both did not contain words ending with “/b/, /c/, /d/, /g/”. (Please refer to the phonetic values of the letters according to the ATA transcription in order not to confuse the information given here. Do not confuse with the EVA system variations.)

2-) Likewise, words starting with the letters “/f/, /h/, /j/, /l/, /m/, /n/, /r/, /v/, /z/, /ğ/” (with a few exceptions) does not appear in both in Turkish and in VM texts. (There is a complete words-structure overlap between the Turkish language and the VM texts.)

There are some well-known (few) exceptions to the rule we talked about in item 1 and 2. For example, words borrowed from other languages such as Arabic and Persian are present in both (as in VM texts and Turkish).

All these have been reflected in the VM in parallel with the Turkish language vocabulary formation.

3-) There is a complete overlap in word repetitions written side by side, and a 1/1 similar situation is not seen in Indo-European languages. A similar situation is seen in the Korean language and the same structure in the Japanese language. According to many linguists, the Korean and Japanese languages are languages that have diverged from the Turkish language and the common root. However, similar frequency quartet and quintuple repetitions overlaps have not been recorded in Japanese and Korean but only they can be seen in the old (VM) texts and today's & Old Turkish texts, indicating that the words have quartet and quintuple repetitions in these languages. Therefore, this feature is an overlap that can be seen between VM and only the Turkish language.

[attachment=6844]

For example, it is known that there are examples of word-doubling, triad, quatrain, and quintuple word repetition in the manuscript titled “Kutadgu Bilig” written by Yusuf Has Hâcib in the eleventh century. It can be found in all known periods of the written Turkish language. (The Academic Source: Aksan 2000 / Doğan Aksan, "En Eski Türkçenin İzlerinde")

In other words, this situation cannot be seen in the same structure, frequency and diversity in Arabic, Persian, Jewish, Chinese languages as well as in Indo-European languages etc.

4-) Visual overlapping of word roots & word suffixes. Some mistook root words as prefixes. If it were, the same prefixes would not be written separately and sometimes adjacent to the word in front of them. In other words, it was expected to be written always adjacent or always separately. When these are root words, they can sometimes be written together and sometimes separate as a root word.

[attachment=6845]

Moreover, you cannot find the numerical variety of words starting with the same root word in Indo-European languages. Evidence seekers can compare VM words that begin with the syllable OY- (AY). The number and variety of words starting with the syllable AY in VM texts only coincide with Turkish. The same is true for other word roots. If you want, get Indo-European dictionaries and start counting the number of words starting with the syllable AY- and see the result.

The overlaps we tried to explain with items 1, 2, 3, amd 4 above are structural overlaps. All of these structural overlaps have been identified between Turkish language and VM texts. A similar improvement could not be achieved between VM texts with any other language.

But the overlaps are not limited to these. So let's keep writing the rest Smile

5-) Due to the fact that many open questions have been answered, our thesis has illuminated the unknowns about VM, including all the gray areas above them.
For example;

A-) The fact that the content of the images evokes Europe has misled the researchers. For example, there are cases where the drawing details such as naked women drawn, bathing pools (there are thermal spas like in Italy, etc.), some specific drawings of castle bastions and women's clothing etc. are associated with the Middle Ages European culture. We understood from our readings that the author is a traveler in Europe. She had completed this manuscript (over many years) while she was traveling part of Europe, including Istanbul (then Constantinople).

It was also a fundamental mistake to associate most drawings with only European culture and geography. Because at that time and today, Turkish baths and spas are famous. In fact, the most thermal pools in Europe are in Anatolia.

In addition, it was a very risky situation to travel like a traveler in Europe at that time writing a manuscript with the same content as like VM pages. Because you could be accused of witchcraft and burned alive. At that time, Europeans had become quite bigoted and fundamentalist because of church pressure. The same risk was not in question in Turkish-dominated lands. Moreover, obscene drawings in public in Europe were just as risky unless they had a special order for the church. We are not saying that they were never done. Some exceptions are already known. Nude women's drawings were also made in Europe, but it is absurd to think that they were not made in the Ottoman Empire. It is already known that the old manuscripts, which contain many obscene drawings, are from the Ottoman period. The situation is not very different in women's clothing. In the Ottoman palace, there were concubines brought from all over Europe.

Ottoman women, especially in the harem/palace, mostly freely chose the clothes suitable for them, and they spent enough time in the harem baths and pools. Therefore, we cannot see a feature in VM drawings that can be attributed to Europe but that we can say that it does not exist in Turkish culture. Moreover, attaching special meanings to drawings is based on second-degree personal interpretations. They can never be first-order evidence comparable to net-readings.

B-) The claim that the work was written with a near-perfect handwriting for 240 pages without any deformation such as writing-erasing or scraping, and this is considered surprising. However, we understand from a reading that as the author writes certain pages, she sends copies of them to a certain place with the help of postmen when she finds the opportunity. For this reason, looking at the first copy, it is possible that the second copy is written with less errors and in a more regular and neat-looking script. This is exactly why there are 6 or 8 separate hands in writing.

See this hands [attachment=6846]

But there is a strong possibility that those who wrote the second copy did not write the text with understanding. So, the brain/author was a single person. But the hands that wrote the copies were different. Todays VM book is the secont copy.

C-) By looking at the statistical structure of the words in the content, it is thought that there is more than one language in the content. However, in a language with agglutinative words such as Turkish, when the subject or the subject time changes, the suffixes at the end of the words will change, and the structure on some pages will not be considered appropriate for the general form. This is not surprising. This was the case in all periods of the Turkish language because we are talking about a situation that depends on the structure of the language.

D-) About the Turks used Arabic Alphabet issue; Kodex Cumanicus is a manuscript written in the Kipchak Cuman Turkish Dialect and even before the VM, and was written in the Latin alphabet. Turks also used the Runic alphabet throughout the Ottoman Empire and before the Ottoman Empire. Also, the Karamanli Turks used the Greek alphabet, and the Khazar Turks adopted the Jewish alphabet because they (Khazar-Turks) had also adopted Judaism.

Even before 1071, Turkish-speaking communities lived in Anatolia, Istanbul and Europe, and some of them had adopted to Christianity. And all these groups used various alphabets. For example, the Pecheneg Turks are among them.

That is, it is an unreal generalization that the Turks only use the Arabic alphabet and it is incompatible with the facts. Turks also used the Latin alphabet. However, during the Ottoman period, the Arabic alphabet was an official one. This situation did not find its reflection among the people. Because it was difficult for people to learn the Arabic alphabet and they preferred to use the various alphabets they learned in the family. Claiming otherwise on this issue is unproven and inconsistent.

6-) Although we have examined only 10% of the manuscript in detail, it is not by chance that we have identified and defined 700 words in Turkish. The VM is written in a natural language. That language is Old Turkish. About 20% to 21% of the words are read all the 240 pages, with virtually no phonetic changes. That is, by being on every page and every line, they are read clearly for this 240 pages long. This situation should have been expected when a correct reading analysis or key was found, and it did.

As of now, there are overlaps between 101 words and the drawing made on the same page. About 20% of these overlaps were found to have not changed their phonetic value or changed them minorly. For example, plant names such as ŞALAK, SAZAK, SESAME, etc are among them. There was also overlap in animal names and star names. In addition, the words expressing action (verb) overlap with the drawings. We wrote which ones are on our own page. In addition, about 100 complete sentences were read by us.

Please see some of the word drawing overlaps here again;

[attachment=6847]

[attachment=6848]

[attachment=6849]

We have mathematically explained the possibility that 4 words written side by side, consisting of 20 letters in total, coincidentally (by chance) overlap with any natural language. We have shown this description according to the 26 Letter alphabet. We did the same math calculation with 180 letters (including syllable characters) and showed them.
[attachment=6850]

If you examine the VM texts in detail, we are talking about a book written with approximately 180 signs, if you take into account all the letter-like long-signs. These signs are not simple letters. Is there an alphabet for any language in the world that expresses with about 180 different and base sound forms? Of course not. Because these are not simple letters, but they are syllabic characters.

We have already shown that , and these syllabic characters are also mostly created with mostly using same Latin alphabet signs. The syllable character formation and reading method we have shown can be applied to all complex (syllable) writing signs throughout 240 pages in VM.

Moreover, the ATA alphabet transcription we made for the VM-letters VM has the highest number of Latin alphabet characters in its content with the same phonetic value as in the Latin alphabet.

[attachment=6851]

This shows that the letters VM are not unknown but known. VM letters are mostly composed of Latin alphabet letters and syllable derivatives created by combining them. That is, it is correct to consider the author's handwriting as a form of handwriting that has never been seen before. But it would be misleading to describe them as alphabets that have never been seen before. Researchers who have not been able to get rid of this mistake for about 100 years are in the majority around the world.

Please see this in detail again;
[attachment=6852]

7-) Having read 101 drawing word overlaps and 100 sentences so far is nothing but the fact that the mathematical probability calculations are clearly shouting the truth. (So much so that these numbers will increase to cover all 240 pages in the future.)

A person who is called a real scientist should not ignore the option with the highest logical and mathematical probability when comparing different options in front of him or her. On the contrary, a scientists should characterize the option that offers the most overlap as the highest probability.

While many drawings show that the phonetic value of word matches has not changed in 600 years, we also find and show the words written here from existing and old dictionaries.

We continue to explain the subject in academies and to enlighten linguists on these issues. The developments are very positive. We have not encountered a single objection on a single issue, and this shows that hundreds of linguists seem to understand what is what. Awareness about this will increase over time.

Kind regards,

Thanks

I have a question about the symbol q
I created the following table based on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It shows the number of times a symbol preceeds and follows q inside voynichese words, aiin is compacted as well as P that you transcribe as iko.[attachment=6853]
The symbol q is almost always at the begining of the words and is followed by the symbol o o. Is it compatible with turkish?

(26-09-2022, 07:55 PM)Juan_Sali Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have a question about the symbol q
I created the following table based on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It shows the number of times a symbol preceeds and follows q inside voynichese words, aiin is compacted as well as P that you transcribe as iko.
The symbol q is almost always at the begining of the words and is followed by the symbol o o. Is it compatible with turkish?

Dear Sali,

You asked a good question. Thank you for the question. Hopefully our answer will be self explanatory for you and others.

First of all, let me state that the word, and syllable structures you see are largely compatible with Turkish.

You are making an evaluation error here because you do not know Turkish. In Turkish, these syllables sometimes have a meaning content as a word, and sometimes they can be word suffixes (according to the meaning of the word in front of them) due to the place where they are connected to the word. In other words, sometimes they function as a word and sometimes a word suffix. In other words, it may not be always expected to have meaning on its own.

The term "word aiin" is a false expression. Because this syllable is not always a word. When written alone, it reads "AM". Of course, there are meanings as words. But if this syllable is at the end of a word, it is sometimes the second component of a compound word and sometimes it is a word suffix. So it is wrong to always describe it as a separate word.

Another issue is that the author writes the A and E voices with the same sign. In this case, this word "AM" that you read in the form of "aiin" also has the form of "EM" for VM (based on ATA).

You can see the meaning content of the word EM with the word suffix "-MEK" on the following dictionary pages.
EM-mek > You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The word "AM" by itself means "female mating organ". In other words, this word also means "female mating canal, reproductive tract". In short, the word "vagina" used in English is the equivalent word.

However, in some Turkic dialects, the word "EM" has the same meaning (vagina). At the same time, the word "EM" also means "medicine" and "ointment" in some dialects in Old Turkish.

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

But if you put this "-AM" and "-EM" syllable at the end of some words, it will add the meaning of expressing "first person singular" to that word.

Moreover, the VM author breaks the spelling rules and writes some end syllables separately from that word. Therefore, although these seem like words on their own, when they are read together with the word in front of them, it is understood that they are a word suffix. This writing style was chosen especially to make it difficult to read. This particular alphabet was created for the same purpose. Because the author must have wanted the texts to be as difficult to read as possible.

So, Words, you read like "aiin" (we read as "am/em/ağn") is not compacted. As well as our "iko" is not P. The sign 4 which you read as the q symbol is the D sound for us.

Normally, the letter D (4/Dört/four) is not expected to be at the end of the word. If this word is at the end it may be mostly due to dialect difference. Or that word may have passed into the Turkish language from another language.

For example, one of the meanings of the word OT means ATEŞ (fire, fever, heat) in Turkish.
However, the word OT also has meanings such as "FIRE", "SMOKE", "MEDICINE", "GUNDOW", "POISON". Its meaning is determined according to how it is connected to the previous word or how it is used in a sentencetence.

OT > You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
OD > You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

But the VM author didn't just use the word O with only its O sound equivalent. He also used the same sign for the Ö sound. In other words, the word O4 (OD) may also be used in the sense of ÖD (ÖT) in some sentences. In this case, the meaning content changes.

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

As you can see in that link, the meaning content of the word "ÖD" in the "Divanü Lügati't-Türk" (a manuscript dictionary dating from 1071-74) is as follows.

the meaning of ÖD
gall
hole in wall and tree
time, time; season, weather
self, own
time, time
cattle, ox
hole, pit
stream between mountains
creek between two mountains
road between two mountains

Here, the T sound at the and was transformed into the D sound (OT > OD) in some dialects, and in this way the word OT/ÖT became pronounced as OD and/or ÖD.

You say that the symbol 4 is always followed by the symbol O. However, examining the words here with this approach is one of the many mistakes made very often.

In some of the old Turkish texts, there were cases such as the A and E sound being expressed with a single letter. And same as the O and Ö sounds with another single letter. So this situation is not unique to VM texts alone.

As a result, trying to classify the words you want to examine by making tables in this way can be applied for Indo-European language words. But it is not applicable for Turkish. Here, due to the special and difficult-to-read writing style of the VM texts, it will be necessary to evaluate only and only the words in the form of phrases and sentences with the word in front of them.

Your use of apps like "voynichese" is misleading. Because, for example, you read a single or multiple syllable character as if it were a single letter. Just like the phonetic sign you thought was P. For this reason, the table you have already made is wrong and misleading. Forget the Voynichese app and EVA tables.

There are about 180 text marks in VM pages. If you don't believe, please separate them and count them. How many letters are in the alphabets you know? Let's say there are 30 or 33 letters at most. 180 - 30 = 150

With what sound value do you read the remaining 150 text/letter signs?

We read it all. Because these are syllabic characters. Some of these are stand-alone words. And we analyzed schematically and logically how simple sound signs are combined and how they make syllable sounds.

First, please discard "the familiar templates" you have, and use the ATA alphabet transcription we have provided for you. Thus, you will not need to memorize all 180 characters in terms of phonetic equivalent.

Another problem is that you mistake different text signs as the same sign. This is a problem stemming from not examining the typeface correctly and in detail. Unfortunately, the tables you used also contain this problem. The way to solve all these problems is to examine the syllable characters carefully.

The same is true for syllables and others that we read as SAM/SEM or -SAM/-SEM etc. They are both lexical and suffixes, and yet they have multiple semantic contents. For this reason, the only way of reading that will confirm these and all that has been written throughout 240 pages is to examine and explain them all in a sentence by sentence. If you are going to look at it individually, you should look at the photographic structure. Wich we have already presented it too.

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

The word SEM means "medicine, medicine making, cure" in Old Turkish. The word SEM / SAM has other meanings as well. At the same time, the -SEM / -SAM syllable at the end of the word is loaded with another function as a word suffix. Etc..etc.

Thanks

(26-09-2022, 07:55 PM)Juan_Sali Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have a question about the symbol q
I created the following table based on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It shows the number of times a symbol preceeds and follows q inside voynichese words, aiin is compacted as well as P that you transcribe as iko.
The symbol q is almost always at the begining of the words and is followed by the symbol o o. Is it compatible with turkish?

Dear Sali,

You say that 40 (DO) occurs 5289 times in the texts.
But in realty, some of them DO, some of them DÖ, some of them as suffixes -DO and -DÖ,
and some of them (depending on the dialect) TA, TO, TÖ, as well as -TA, -TO, -TÖ can be a word suffix based on their close-phonetic value.

In other words, not all 5289 pieces were used in the same sense and in the same function. Moreover, do not think that each of the Turkish words has a single meaning.

Another issue is about spelling in 4occ format. This is 40cc (fortieth) according to the current ATA transcription and is read as DOG/DÖG too. For example, the word 4OccOLAM is written on the page that resembles a galaxy drawing. It means "the fortieth universe". (Probably no any ancient aliens, and no an advanced telescope like those found today didn't exist 600 years ago. But the author may have been inspired by weather events such as hurricanes or tornadoes.)

Now we are explaining them here because of an alphabet whose writing style has been made particularly difficult and has been specially designed by the author. In other words, the short answer to the question you forwarded is that the "4o" spelling is seen in 5289 examples does not mean that all of them have the same meaning. Because the subject is Turkish but not English or Italian or any other language.

There is no way out or practical explanation other than by examining the sentences, and thinking in terms of with "voynichese" numbers is misleading. Moreover, approximately 150 syllable marks are not disclosed in voynichese or EVA or in other tables. For the first time, we predicted and explained them as a syllable marks.

Thanks

(26-09-2022, 11:31 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.the meaning of ÖD

The combination oq appears 22 times in the whole VMS, if o have several meanings then the different meanings of the combination make it even more marginal.

(26-09-2022, 11:31 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You say that the symbol 4 is always followed by the symbol O. However, examining the words here with this approach is one of the many mistakes made very often.
As a result, trying to classify the words you want to examine by making tables in this way can be applied for Indo-European language words. But it is not applicable for Turkish. Here, due to the special and difficult-to-read writing style of the VM texts, it will be necessary to evaluate only and only the words in the form of phrases and sentences with the word in front of them.

But the numbers are clear, this combination represents 5.289 of 5.421. Where is the mistake in the approach? You can evaluate the words one by one, but that will not change the global numbers. The approach of big numbers to understand the relation between symbols is good for any language that uses them, I dont see any reason why turkish should be different.

(26-09-2022, 11:31 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Your use of apps like "voynichese" is misleading. Because, for example, you read a single or multiple syllable character as if it were a single letter. Just like the phonetic sign you thought was P. For this reason, the table you have already made is wrong and misleading. Forget the Voynichese app and EVA tables.

The group of P. I am not reading it in any way. The apps voynichese does not read it in any way. It just count coincidences, and it says than the group of P is preceded by q only 3 times in the whole Vms, and never is followed by q.
My table counts coincidences, there is nothing wrong in it. How do you interpretate the data is the question.

(27-09-2022, 12:53 AM)Juan_Sali Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(26-09-2022, 11:31 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.the meaning of ÖD
The combination oq appears 22 times in the whole VMS, if o have several meanings then the different meanings of the combination make it even more marginal.

(26-09-2022, 11:31 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You say that the symbol 4 is always followed by the symbol O. However, examining the words here with this approach is one of the many mistakes made very often.
As a result, trying to classify the words you want to examine by making tables in this way can be applied for Indo-European language words. But it is not applicable for Turkish. Here, due to the special and difficult-to-read writing style of the VM texts, it will be necessary to evaluate only and only the words in the form of phrases and sentences with the word in front of them.
But the numbers are clear, this combination represents 5.289 of 5.421. Where is the mistake in the approach? You can evaluate the words one by one, but that will not change the global numbers. The approach of big numbers to understand the relation between symbols is good for any language that uses them, I dont see any reason why turkish should be different.

(26-09-2022, 11:31 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Your use of apps like "voynichese" is misleading. Because, for example, you read a single or multiple syllable character as if it were a single letter. Just like the phonetic sign you thought was P. For this reason, the table you have already made is wrong and misleading. Forget the Voynichese app and EVA tables.
The group of P. I am not reading it in any way. The apps voynichese does not read it in any way. It just count coincidences, and it says than the group of P is preceded by q only 3 times in the whole Vms, and never is followed by q.
My table counts coincidences, there is nothing wrong in it. How do you interpretate the data is the question.

Dear Sali,

It is true that you have seen two letters side by side 5289 times as if they were a linear-pattern or a photograph. The mentioned web-app lets you count them. But there are facts that have been overlooked.

1-) This syllable, which is seen 5289 times, is not the same syllable that has the same phonetic value and has the same meaning on every line in which it is written. Sometimes the word suffix is sometimes a standalone word. The phonetic value, on the other hand, varies slightly according to the vowel harmony rule of the Turkish language and according to the alphabet transcription. For example, not making a distinction between O and Ö or A and E, etc. I have explained this part in detail before.

2-) It is possible that the syllable characters are similar to each other in terms of handwriting and that they are read incorrectly. The apps and tables you use all suggest incorrect sound equivalents, as well as suggest the same phonetic value for different signs.

3-) There are about 180 writing signs in the book, including syllable characters. About 30 letters, or sometimes less, were envisaged in each of the "Voynichese" implementation and the EVA variations, as well as in the alphabet transcriptions made before that. How will you solve a system with 180 fonts by suggesting 30 letters? Seeing the syllable characters as a normal alphabet sign already leads to a fundamental wrong start in the way of analysis.

4-) Turkish is an articulated language in terms of word formation. You can translate some single words in Turkish to English by forming sentence in English, sometimes with using 9 words or more. If you write Turkish word suffixes by separating them from the root, it can be difficult for the reader to read. Therefore, when you read the whole sentence, the phonetic value before any syllable changes the meaning of the word you read, so it is necessary to look at the whole. In other words, 5289 words may actually be loaded with 20 or 40 different words or word suffix-functions. that is, there is no situation where the same thing is repeated 5289 times.

5-) "Voynichese" app counts coincidences. But in many times it counts the coincidences by choosing different sign as a same one. Often, more than one syllable counts as like the same/particular phonetic value. So those numbers aren't correct anyway. However, they can be work for counting for side by side single adjacent letters (only for without syllable characters).

So, Voynichese counts coincidences, which is nothing wrong in it. But each of the "same looking coincidences part" could be different word and suffixs based on position in their sentence.

Thanks