The Voynich Ninja

(28-02-2018, 10:18 PM)lelle Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Earlier today I could read the article (right now I get an error) . It stated that a one-page translation had been accomplished and that it would take two years to translate the rest.

No details, but it (the VM) seemed to be Turkish.

Even though I think this attempt won't hold water, it will be interesting to see some details.

Hello lelle,

You can find the details and articles you are looking for on the page below.

Best regards,

Ahmet Ardıç

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

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

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

(19-04-2020, 05:44 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Not many Turkish words with "m" ?

My private Turkish interpreter just told me there are just as many as with other letters.

Hello,

A substantial amount of the words used in the Voynich Manuscript are in current use by many modern Azerbaijani-Turkish and Anatolian-Turkish dialects, and many of the words have not changed at all, for the phonetic pronunciations and contextual definitions have remained intact. 

Furthermore, the text that appeared in VM is following many Turkish phonetic and morphological structures. Although, there are too many such concepts to list here a few examples we can provide include facts such as, both VM and Turkish structure does not have any words that end with “/b/, /c/, /d/, /g/”. 

Likewise, they also do not have any words that start with “/f/, /h/, /j/, /l/, /m/, /n/, /p/, /r/, /v/, /z/, /ş/”. 

There are some exception to this rule. There might be word being taken from other languages such as Arabic, Persian, etc. Additionally, we must account for the fact that certain first letters may be dropped , as well as letters can be changed to replace others as dialects expanded and evolved. For example, the word “bar” became “var”; “/b/” can also become “/m/”, “/s/| becomes “ş” etc.. 

Another example that has no exceptions is the use of the letter “/ğ/”, as there are no word that start with it. All of this is reflected in the VM.

In addition, there are many duplicate and multiple word repeats in Turkish. That kind of the repetition was written to make the plural of a word in Old Turkish. For example, 'flower'  (çiçek) is a singular word. The word 'flowers' (çiçekler) means a large number of (more than one) 'flowers' in today's Turkish, taking the suffix '-ler' make it plural. In Old Turkish period, They used to write that word twice (such as 'çiçek çiçek' / or example, like "flower flower") for making that word plural.

In Turkish, triple, quadruple, and quintile repetitions of the same word (for different purpose and/or functions) are also seen.
You can find the details and articles you are looking for on the page below.

Best regards,

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta

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

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

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

Note about Multifunctional Isolated Affixation in Agglutinative Syntax:
The author of the manuscript was very specific and precise in the choice of words. A crucial aspect of the manuscript being written in a Turkic/Turkish language is that the language is agglutinative. The word structure has to contain a root, but the root may be also comprised of other roots and different combinations of suffixes, prefixes and other roots which will cause each variation to produce a new word. Furthermore, certain roots can also be used as suffixes, often changing the meaning completely. The vast understanding of the language is proven by the fact that the author is able to take a suffix and isolate it in a sentence, causing the words before and after the suffix to each have a different meaning as they approach that suffix. However, each combination of the roots, suffixes, and prefixes in the words around (either before or after, and sometimes both) the isolated suffix also have multiple combinations both within and with the isolated suffix again, thus causing even more implications and new words. The genius behind this is that the author produces and uses all of the potential meaning combinations in context and makes each one applicable to the situation. Therefore, the author is able to take two words and have a suffix in between and create dozens of meanings, yet make each one applicable to what he/she is trying to convey, thus demonstrating that the author had total control of the language being used. This enigmatic use of syntax oddly resonates with the reader without the reader fully understanding what the author did, yet renders the reader able to derive the same conclusion and understanding regardless. This example can be found in the 3rd line of the paragraph that was analyzed in Folio 33v-Sunflower-Herbal , yet is also present all throughout the manuscript as well as in different sections of analyzed folio.

Thanks,

(23-03-2020, 02:34 AM)RenegadeHealer Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(22-03-2020, 08:55 PM)joben Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Seriously, why are they physically travelling to a location to get a hold of an "expert", as if they were in a fantasy movie? I don't consider this scientific at all.

It’s possible Ahmet Ardic was conducting fieldwork in Azerbaijan, related to the VMS, as part of his work. If the VMS really was written in a medieval Turkic language, and Mr Ardic was able to translate some of it, it’s not all that far-fetched that what he translated led him to people, places, and/or artifacts in modern-day Azerbaijan. It’s exciting to imagine that when the grand reveal happens, we’ll get not only a transition of the text, but also a connection to a specific place and group of people. I want to believe.

It’s also very plausible that the Ardics have friends, family, and professional connections in the Caucasus region, and weren’t traveling there only to show their work to a local scholar in an Indiana Jones flavored publicity stunt. If I was in the middle of a serious research project, and I was in touch with an academic interested in my work who lived in a place I was traveling to anyway, I’d certainly rather meet and share my work in person if convenient for both of us.

What raises my eyebrow about this update, is that despite going on for paragraphs, Prof Celilov’s letter adds no new information that the Ardics and their spokespeople haven’t already presented. There are no new examples, and the claims are all vague in exactly the same way as the corresponding claims in the Ardics’ announcements thus far. The words of Ardic and Celilov read like the works of two different journalists who used the exact same primary sources. That’s very suspicious to me. The most charitable interpretation of this I can think of, is that Ardic told and showed Celilov no more like he has shown his YouTube audience, and/or heavily censored Celilov’s letter so as not to reveal anything new. It just doesn’t make sense for a researcher who’s truly on the verge of a big discovery, and just needs a bit of expert verification to establish his credibility, to do either of these things. It does make sense, however, for a crank who’s bluffing to do something like this, to stall for time to placate an increasingly skeptical fan base, whether to execute some sort of endgame, or just prolong their five minutes in the limelight as long as possible. I’m getting whiffs of fraudulent inventor John Ernst Worrell Keely, or the Duke and the Dauphin, traveling con artists in Mark Twain’s novel “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”, and their Royal Nonesuch.

I’m fascinated to see how this theory plays out, after such an unusually big and lengthy buildup. The Ardics stand to either gain or lose an incredible amount of face.

Hello,

I lived in Azerbaijan for 25 years and did business there. Also my wife is Azerbaijani. One part of our family members live there and I try to go to Baku city at least once a year. Of course, I also work with Azerbaijani linguists during my trip.

Professor Dr. Firudin Celilov approved our work. But there are other linguists who confirm that the VM manuscript is written in Turkish. Some of them have repeated this fact verbally in some Turkish TV newsletters. Such as You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

But many linguists never look at the files we send them. I think they throw the files into the trash without opening them.
Many people do not even know that this VM book exists.

For this reason, it will take a longer time for the masses in general to be aware of this issue and our findings. But of course we are in no hurry. We just keep on reading.

Thank you for your interest in the subject.

Best regards,

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta

(28-07-2020, 02:50 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
The word structure has to contain a root, but the root may be also comprised of other roots and different combinations of suffixes, prefixes and other roots which will cause each variation to produce a new word. ...

To help us understand this, could you give an example of two or three of the more common roots? I don't mean in the VMS, I mean ones that are common in Old Turkish. Thank you.

(28-07-2020, 09:18 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(28-07-2020, 02:50 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
The word structure has to contain a root, but the root may be also comprised of other roots and different combinations of suffixes, prefixes and other roots which will cause each variation to produce a new word. ...

To help us understand this, could you give an example of two or three of the more common roots? I don't mean in the VMS, I mean ones that are common in Old Turkish. Thank you.

Hi, 

I can give some examples that will give you a little more understanding of the subject I am talking about. Let our example be a word which living in both VMS (Old Turkish) and in modern Anatolian-Turkish.
Let the word we examine be "YARARSAM". [The First Word of the First Line of VMS Folio 33v (This is the first word in "Sunflower Herbal" page <f33v>)]
 
Direct Latin Equivalent: “YARARSAM” (YAR-AR-SAM)
The root is 'YAR-'. The ‘-AR’ and ‘-SAM’ are  suffixes.

This word appears in following old manuscripts too (In The Old Turkish period): [Manuscript 'Irk Bitig', before 900], and [manuscript named 'Divan-i Lugati't-Türk' by Kaşgarî, written in year 1073 or earlier]
{You can see The Source (a Turkish Etymology Dictionary by S.Nisanyan): <https://www.nisanyansozluk.com/?k=yarmak>}

The root word “YAR” is a homonym, for this root has more than one definition. Such as “YAR”, “YARA”, meaning to be successful, to be advantageous, to be useful, to be serviceable; “YARAR”, has a dual meaning; useful and beneficial (Clauson).

The root word “YAR” appears typically in its original noun form and the suffixes of Turkish infinitive “-mek/-mak” (such as YARMAK/YAR-mak) turn the root word into a verb (Eyuboğlu) and also a concrete noun {SOURCE: Sir Gerard Clauson (1891–1974) “An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish”, / Suffixes / Oxford аt the Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, Ely House, Glasgow, New York, Toronto, 1972 < You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. >}.

Most common definitions for this “YAR” root and its “-mek/-mak” verb form includes “(to): split, chop, slit, rip, plow, disrupt, breach, rend, tear, slash, cleave, crimp, splinter, flaw, hew, maul, incise, rift, sever, wedge off, plough” or the Turkish equivalent which would be “kesmek, ayırmak, bölmek, kazmak, açmak, eşmek, çatlamak, yırtılmak”. {Source: < You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. >} 

The definition of this word in context  would suggest that it means “to cleave, split, or cut”, yet when searched in a vast majority of dictionaries, the definition will not present the “-mek/-mak” verb variation of the root, for this definition will be found in the suffixed verb of “YARMAK” (which dictionaries often treats as a separate word). 

The dictionary will see the words as different, for one is a noun and the other a verb, yet the “-mak” suffix is what makes the root a verb (one form of verb among many), while the root still remains as “YAR” (Eyuboğlu).

  The root-word 'YAR-' has derived many words in very different meanings. For example, while this root-word means "slit", "divide" (such as dividing it into 2 parts), this word can also mean 'love' and "lover". Or it can mean 'useful',  'cliff', 'scarp', 'precipice' etc. {See: <https://sozce.com/nedir/335796-yar> & <https://sozce.com/nedir/335796-yar-ii> & <https://sozce.com/nedir/335944-yarar> ... etc.}

It is very difficult to understand this structure for those who do not know Turkish language. Let me briefly explain how this word can mean 'cliff' and 'love' at the same time.

For example, this word can mean 'cliff' at the same time because a plain soil appears to be split or torn in two parts in a certain place.
For example, because our ancestors described the woman (or man) he/she loved as the remaining half of his/her part, they gave name 'YAR' for descrip for the situation of love as a noun. It means "this (my love) is my other half/piece", while this root-word means "slit", "divide".

My English is not very good, but I hope you understand what I mean.

The first suffix that is added to the root is “-AR”, and it indicates movement (Eyuboğlu), turns the root word into a verb and is the English equivalent of the suffix “-ING” and “TO” (Guise, Aksoy).

YARAR: is defined as “benefit, utility, use, advantage, usefulness, profit, gain, winnings, earnings, income” (Akalın, Sözce < You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). 

The last suffix that is added to the root is “-SAM”, which is suffix that indicate the action’s owner as in 'I am' (first person). 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).

In addition, the presence of “-SA” (Clauson). as a portion of the suffix acts as an indicator that is the equivalent of the English term "IF" (Guise). In addition, “-sa” suffix known as; "Forms Desiderative Denominal Verbs (No-men Actions (to wish))" (Clauson), and it is also important to keep in mind that the suffix “-SAN” can also sand as a root “SAN” which is defined as “(to): count, deem, think, suppose, and conjecture” etc (Eyuboğlu). Furthermore, based on some Azerbaijani dialects, an additional usage of the suffix “-SAIN” or “-SEİN” would be applicable to the time period in which the manuscript was written. In Turkish the suffix “SAIN” has comparable usages such as “-benzer”, “-gibi”, “-ya uygun”, “-ya müsait”, “-ya elverişli”. In English the translation would be “suitable to make something”, “convenient to make something”, “similar to something”, “such as”, “similarly”, and “like”.

Here I briefly tried to explain the subject through a single reading of this word. We also wrote the meanings of other forms of reading the word in our article. 

The spelling of this word (yararsam) in VMS is exactly the same as modern Turkish today. In other words, the word has not undergone any change in the past 600 years with its phonetic, meaning and spelling form.

Throughout the entire VMS manuscript, it was observed that approximately 20% to 21% of the words did not change the sound value and meaning in the last 600 years. 

A word in Turkish can often correspond to a single sentence in other languages.

As a result, if we translate the word 'YARARSAM' into English with this spelling, it is possible to write the following;

“YARARSAM” is translate as; “if I am to cleave”, or “if I cleave it”, or “if I was to cleave it”. “YARARSAĞN” (yarar + sağın/sağınmak/sağmak) is translated as “the plant being useful for harvesting”.

Thanks,

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta 

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

Note: If you would like to learn more about this word and the analysis of the entire sentence in which this word is written, please see the article in this link. [ATA Team Alberta, Ozan Ardıç, Ahmet Ardıç <http://www.turkicresearch.com/files/articles/dc1d818d-9a72-46a5-9259-36851700cc6c_Voynich%20Manuscript%20Revealed%20OZAN%20Ingilizce%20Makale.pdf>]

(19-04-2020, 11:00 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I can imagine that in the Ottoman there are also the dialects, and some with the Persian and Arabic is similar.
Mentally I find myself when I think about the VM in the year 1400 in the Ottoman Empire. Writing is in Arabic style, from right to left. Before the Arabic culture the East Roman Empire was present and not the Arabic one. Here we already have a written, linguistic problem.
Why should someone suddenly write from left to right, and in Arabic, when the previous one was written in left to right in ancient Greek ?
( Why left to right in Arabic, Ottoman ? ) Because it was a traveller ?
Apart from that, there is not a single reference in the VM to Ottoman culture. Even in the style of drawing there is nothing that could point to it.
It can't be a normal writing, the Arabs and Ottomans have written no less than the Europeans. So the alphabet and the language should be known. With an encoding the same rules apply as with any other language, apart from the fact that he does it from left to right.
An encryption system assumes that the person or persons can read it again after 1-2 years.
I took another look at the works. My result, nice but wrong.
I wrote something like this over a year ago. But nothing has changed.

By the way, it was no joke with the personal translator. My wife studied art and music at Taxim University (Istanbul) and my daughter went to school there for 5 years. But now they are back.

Hi Tentakulus,

This (Arabic alphabet issue) is an unscientific generalization only. During the Ottoman period, Turks did not only use the Arabic alphabet, but 'mostly' used the Arabic alphabet. 

Learning Arabic alphabet is very difficult. The sound values of Arabic alphabet is not provide (or fit) a complete overlap in order to express the sound values of the Turkish language. Because of all these problems, some of the people under Ottoman rule was used different alphabets and never learned the Arabic alphabet. 

The Old-Kıpçak-Turkish textbook named "Codex Cumanicus" was written in Latin Alphabet.

The "Venetian doges of Candia" Manuscript, and “De Turcarum Moribus” Manuscript contains many Turkish words. All of these words was written in Latin alphabet in this two manuscript too.

The book called "Turkish Writing Revolution" (written by the researcher writer historian, Mr. Bilal Şimşir), presented various documents and showed that Latin alphabet was used among the people during the Ottoman period (with proven examples).

It is no any scientific result to say that "the Ottoman people used only the Arabic alphabet". In fact, it is known that the people used various alphabets in the Ottoman Empire. 

[SOURCE 1: Britannica Ansiklopedisi, "Codex Cumanicus - Turkish Textbook" which is the record of Kipchak Turkish from late 13th-century dictionary of words in Kipchak Latin language,  <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Codex-Cumanicus>]
&
[SOURCE 2: Kitap Adı; Türk Yazı Devrimi > Yazar: Bilal N. Şimşir >  Yayıncı: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları > Ankara, 2008]
&
[SOURCE 3: Dinçer Fehmi, (2009), 1553 tarihli Latin harfli ilk Türkçe metin 16.yüzyılda yazıldı, Milliyet, 29 Temmuz 2009 . <http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/1553-tarihli-latinharfli-ilk-turkce-metin/Blog/?BlogNo=193012>]
&
  [SOURCE 4| Fehmi Dinçer’in araştırmasında bahsettiği Türkçe içeriği de olan ve Latin alfabesi ile yazılmış ve 1553 yılında yayınlanmış olan Türklerin Hırvat asıllı esiri Georgievits’in “De Turcarum Moribus” adlı eserinin sayfa görselleri için bakınız;
&
OTHER SOURCES: 
[Kaynak: Dinçer Fehmi, <https://www.academia.edu/9548404/Fehmi_Din%C3%A7er_-_1584_y%C4%B1l%C4%B1nda_yaz%C4%B1lm%C4%B1%C5%9F_Gennadius_Scholarius_%C4%B0tikatnamesi>]
&
  [Martinus Crusius, “Turcograeciae libri octo, Basileae” / yıl 1584 / sayfa 107’den 119’a kadar olan bölümde]
  [Bu el yazmasının sayfalarını görebilmek için bakılması gereken kaynak: Yale University Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library / <https://brbl-dl.library.yale.edu/vufind/Record/4161309>]
&
  [Bu el yazmasının You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ve 88r sayfalarında 1374 ve 1383 sayıları gösterilmiştir. Görselleri görebilmek için bakılması gereken kaynak: Yale University Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library / <https://brbl-dl.library.yale.edu/vufind/Record/4161309>]
&
[Mehmet Turgay Kürüm tarafından yazılan makale bu kaynakta görülebilir > Kitabın künyesi: Kıbrıs'ta Osmanlı Öncesi Türkler 1. Uluslararası Sempozyumu, Bildiriler Tam Metin kitabı.Yayınevi, Hiperyayın 2020 İstanbul ISBN 978-605-281-718-6]
&
... etc ...

Thanks, 

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta

(29-07-2020, 08:13 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am wondering why a 15th-century manuscript would be written in Old Turkish. Would it not be more likely to be written in Anatolian Turkish?

Hi,

One of these idioms refers to the dialect in a certain geographical region and the other refers to the time period. The term "Anatolian Turkish" (Turkey Turkish) is chosen to describe dialectal differences about geographic regions. The term "Old Turkish" covers the 15th century too. 

For now, we do not know what dialect/subdialect of Turkic language the author used. It is hard to define the dialect/subdialect of the author, for this dialect may be no longer in use. Or, may be the author used mixed dialect. The author's used of words were meet with todays Turkey Turkish, Gagauz-Turkish, Uzbek Turkish and Azetbaijani Turkish mostly. For this reason, we do not know exactly which dialect she/he used. When I made a presentation at Istinye University in Istanbul, we discussed this VMS dialect issue with linguists there. Everyone have indicates some different opinion on this matter. This issue will probably be discussed for a long time. 

In Anatolian Turkish the basic sentence form is (mostly) “SOV”: (Subject, Object, Verb) but sometimes in a poetic writing structure may alter this structure. In addition, it is possible to say that the order of “SOV” may change in some Turkish-language dialects. For example, "VOS" (Verb, Object, Subject) order can be seen in Gagauz-Turkish language. 

A substantial amount of the words used in the Voynich Manuscript are in current use by many modern Azerbaijani-Turkish and Anatolian-Turkish dialects, and many of the words (aprox. 21%) have not changed at all, for the phonetic pronunciations and contextual definitions have remained intact. 

Furthermore, the text that appeared in VM is following many Turkish phonetic and morphological structures. Although, there are too many such concepts to list here a few examples we can provide include facts such as, both VM and Turkish structure does not have any words that end with “/b/, /c/, /d/, /g/”. Likewise, they also do not have any words that start with “/f/, /h/, /j/, /l/, /m/, /n/, /p/, /r/, /v/, /z/, /ş/”. There are some exception to this rule. 

There might be word being taken from other languages such as Arabic, Persian, etc. Additionally, we must account for the fact that certain first letters may be dropped , as well as letters can be changed to replace others as dialects expanded and evolved. For example, the word “bar” became “var”; “/b/” can also become “/m/”, “/s/| becomes “ş” etc.. Another example that has no exceptions is the use of the letter “/ğ/”, as there are no word that start with it. All of this is reflected in the VM.

We have no doubt that the Voynich Manuscript is in Turkish, this is a clearly known issue for us. But there are different ideas about the author's dialect or sub-dialect. 

I am very confident in saying that "in the future, no linguist will be able to prove that VMS writing is not Turkish if her/his professional knowledge of Turkish language is not weak" for sure. There are very clear Turkish sentences read in VMS and no linguist can deny them. 
[<You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.>]
One of the problems is that we cannot find some words in Turkish dictionaries.
For example, if we do not recognize 1 word in a sentence, we cannot translate it. 
Of course, there are also sentences we know all the words. So, it is the area that why I can say "I am very confident"...

However, I think that some words used by the author in Turkish sentences may be 600 years old Italian or Greek words. For this reason, it is useful to work with multilingual groups. Because the author of VMS probably was a multilingual person in her/his natural daily life.

In addition, the author was carefully designed the articles of every single page in VMS (by writing a sketch or scribble page) before she/he started writing on main pages. In my opinion, She/he has been written that texts on another paper as a sketch first for every time for every single main page in VMS. When she/he was sure that she/he didn't make any mistake in sketch pages, she/he was writing the VMS main page articles herself/himself and possibly an additional one or 2 other people (if the author was busy). In my opinion, this manuscript was created by "one leading brain", but it was probably written by total of 3 people (included the author). 

Best regards,

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta

Basically:
On page f116 in the VM I see a text, probably written in a romanic dialect.
At different places I have German text.
Why should I assume that a third language is suddenly in play.
At the same time there is the change of the writing direction. left-right, right-left.
There is also no hint in the drawings to an origin in the Middle East.
Your explanations about prefixes and suffixes would ( example ) also work in German.
E.g.: (go) gehen: auf-gehen, zu-gehen, vor-gehen, ver-gehen, aus-gehen. Endings like -heit , -keit, -ung, -nis, -tum are also not uncommon.
If I would take the VM-sign "o" at the beginning of a word and use it as "a", it would even have a multiple function.

So why Turkish ?
The same applies to all languages where writing is from right to left.

Translated with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (free version)

Hi Ahmet,
thank you for the additional information!
Since a few years, I believe that labels may be a good way to test a proposed solution. So I had a look at your analysis of the Libra roundel in f72v1 (discussed You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

For comparison, I paste here Takahashi's and Zandbergen-Landini's transliterations of these words:

TT  otalal.dalal.ykeols.oteos.aiin.yotoam.oteey.saiin.oteoos.am.

ZL.r otalal.dalal.ykeols.oteo,r,aiin.yotoam.oteey.saiin.oteeos,am

ATA1 OYAPAP SAPAP ÜLCÖP 2 ÖYCÖ ZAĞN 9 OYOEK OYGU ZAĞN OYGÖZEK
ATA2 AY+AHBAP SAPIP ÖLÇÜP 2 ÖLÇÜ-SAĞIN 9 AYA+EK AYGI SAĞIN AY+GÖZEK
ATA3 AY+AHPAP SAPIP ÖLÇÜP İKİ ÖLÇÜ-SAĞIN DOKUZ AYA+EK AYGI SAĞIN AY+GÖZEK

English Translation: “Hey friends, with using the deviating measurement (scale), to make two net-right-measurements for clearly expressing that period over nine months, let's count the months and observe the moon with the tool.”

Comment:

Quote:From here we understand that the author's message is for pregnant women.

I don't see any great difference between this translation and other similar attempts, e.g. Cheshire's proto-romance or the recent Hebrew solution by Rainer Hanning.

Here are a few observations and suggestions. I am not a linguist nor any kind of expert, it's just the point of view of a Voynich amateur.

*A*
From how it is presented, the above translation appears to be a word-salad which does not strike me as very meaningful.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about Hanning's Hebrew solution come to mind:

Quote:The overwhelming feeling is that Hannig, having extracted Hebrew letters for a Voynich word, then scoured Hebrew dictionaries for any word, archaic and rare as it may be, for anything that will match or semi-match.

Your Turkish-English translation is notably a-grammatical, e.g. it only includes impersonal verb forms (present participle, infinitive, imperative). The approach seems to be: 1) map to Latin characters, 2) browse a dictionary to get a word salad, 3) get some sense out of it. This is the most widespread Voynich translation approach. It works with any language, but it requires renouncing to grammar.
Suggestion: provide more details about verifiable grammatical structures, showing that your approach is very different from those of other "solvers".

*B* 
"Hey friends" sounds like a strange thing to write in a short text at the centre of a page for a central sign in a several pages long zodiac section. I must say I don't think I have ever read anything similar in a medieval manuscript. Is this formula something that is often found in Turkish medieval scientific manuscripts?
Also, the two different meanings of saiin in a single sentence should be supported by parallels in actual documents.
Suggestion: attach examples from other Turkish manuscripts for all the constructs for which parallels exist. Expect anything that is not clearly documented to be considered unconvincing.

*C* 
In the German You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Libra is called "die wag" ("the scales" in German). In the Latin You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. it is called "Libra" ("the scales" in Latin).
This is totally normal in European manuscripts. I don't think that "the deviating measurement" is the normal way to say "the scales" in Turkish? Isn't there a simpler word?
Also, the words that should point to pregnancy ("nine months" and possibly the moon), are:
1. the immensely frequent voynichese glyph y which is arbitrarily detached from yotoam and interpreted as the Arabic number 9 (rendered with the Turkish word "dokuz")
2.  oteoos.am which is arbitrarily re-arranged as ot-eoosam;  eoosam is read as GÖZEK, of which it is said:  "The word '+ GÖZEK' is used for observing the sky with a tool and for counting months/days. (Which mean looking to the moon/sky with binoculars or with a lens-observation-tool.) From the handwriting written here, we understand that the author observed the sky with using some kind of lens instrument. (We think at the same time that the author carefully wrote this manuscript with using a magnifying glass. The author should probably have also looked small creatures with using magnifiers for seeing those which creatures invisible with looking naked eye...)"
I would like to see a dictionary entry for GÖZEK, but even if there actually is an entry for "observing the sky with a tool and counting months", I don't think that translating as "nine months" is legitimate. y (nine) and eoosam (counting months?) are separated by four other Voynichese words: it seems implausible that they are closely connected.
Suggestion: always link specific entries in an online-available dictionary or add quotes of a specific Turkish-English dictionary. And, again, make clear the grammatical relationship between words. Maybe parse-trees could help?

*D*
It seems you are not familiar with what others have found about the  Voynich manuscript. For instance this is your comment about the "octe(m)bre" annotation: "This word should have been added in a later period by a different person by using a different pen. We think that this addition was added by the antiquarian Voynich or one of his workers at the time period." Researchers substantially agree on dating the month names to the late XV / early XVI Century; there is no reason to believe that they are as late as the XX Century. But this is just a minor example, you don't seem to be aware of Currier's languages, line effects, low character entropy, reduplication and quasi-reduplication, Grove words etc.
Suggestion: read what others have written about Voynichese (Rene's voynich.nu site is a great resource) and show how your Turkish hypothesis can explain the phenomena that other researches have pointed out in the past decades.

---

There are many people who published translations which are similar to yours in both method and results. If you are not satisfied with Turkish TV and you want to reach a wider, unbiased audience, your best hope is being more rigorous than your numberless competitors.

You wrote:

Quote:I am very confident in saying that "in the future, no linguist will be able to prove that VMS writing is not Turkish if her/his professional knowledge of Turkish language is not weak" for sure. 

Things don't  work that way. If you claim that the VMS is written in Turkish, the burden of proof is on you. Linguists are totally free to ignore your claims. On the contrary, you should provide solid evidence in support of your ideas. The translation you propose appears to be comparable with other Voynich translations written in different languages. Of course it is impossible to prove that the VMS is not Turkish (or Latin, or Hebrew etc). This does not show that your hypothesis is better than others, it only shows the current state of Voynich research.