The Voynich Ninja

Full Version: geoffreycaveney's Judaeo-Greek theory
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Quote:... it seems quite bizarre that he already has to defend his thesis ...

Sorry, but claiming that one can read and understand the text in the Voynich MS, after 100 year of unsuccessful attempts, is a Very Big Claim.

Theses are there to be defended.

Nothing bizarre about it being challenged. Especially since it has absolutely *nothing* about it that makes it in any way more interesting than all the preceding ones.

Same-old same-old:
- Complicated translation tables
- Lots of hand-waving
- Barest amount of credible plain text
- No explanation for any of the very unusual statistics of the Voynich MS text
There is one thing Geoffrey has done that most of the others with similar ideas have not done...

He has tried to find a "pathway" between Voynichese and a language (in this case Greek) that might account for the seeming compression or monotone characteristics of the VMS text. Most people don't even acknowledge this aspect of the text.

In this case, the proposed intermediary is Hebrew. I completely understand what he is saying about how syllables are dropped or changed to suit particular dialects because I see this in manuscripts, especially within certain ethnic groups, or enclaves, or whatever you want to call a small group of colonists within a different culture. Spelling wasn't standardized and there were few books and no radio/TV to cinch down languages, so you can actually see phonology affecting the way people wrote things in a way that is not possible now.


I don't know whether this idea is sufficient to account for the ways in which the VMS is structured, I'm as concerned as anyone about "solutions" based on too many degrees of freedom (too many degrees of freedom usually means the wrong approach or a one-way cipher) but at least it's a rational process of investigation and Geoffrey is more willing to answer criticisms and investigate his toolchest (learn what needs to be learned to adjust or defend the idea) than anyone we have seen so far.
(10-04-2019, 11:10 PM)DONJCH Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This task will obviously slow down further development of the thesis , of course.

The amount of time he is willing to defend his method is entirely up to Geoffrey, and there can be benefits to corresponding with others as well.

I'm with JKP, it would be unfair to put Geoffrey's efforts on the same level as Stellar's dozen theories. Yet I still think there may be too much freedom and we're in a one-way-cipher situation. But it's harder to judge than your average Latin theory since I don't know any Greek.
What is unique for me is that there are two steps of decryption instead of one, and both with an enormous amount of freedom.
The first is to go to what is called unpointed Judaeo-Greek (but it isn't) by a great amount of inconsistent substitutions, and the second to go to Greek by a great amount of insertion of additional characters.

And I'm sorry but I don't agree that the word structure can be explained by this approach.
(08-04-2019, 02:05 AM)geoffreycaveney Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I begin with the simplest and least interesting label words: The leftmost labels of the top row of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the middle row of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. .

leftmost top row label You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
[otorchety]
leftmost middle row label You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
[otoram]

my readings:
"o-khoriik[o]s"
"o-khorAs"

[Note: For practical purposes I have been treating the Voynich characters [m] and [g] as alternate characters for [y] for some time now. I have added them to my own provisional working letter correspondence table. I have certainly never interpreted [m] and [g] in any other way in any previous readings or interpretations.]

my interpretations:
ο χωρικ[ο]ς
ο χωρος

translations:
"the rustic/regional/village/country"
"the field/farm/estate ; the country/land/region"

Comments:
These are perfectly normal standard Greek words, and perfectly appropriate as labels for plant roots and leaves, although I admit that personally I find these particular labels rather pedestrian, boring, and not terribly informative: I would think such descriptions would apply to an awful lot of plant roots and leaves. Be that as it may, I see nothing wrong with either of these label words.

It's not surprising that you too are beginning to find your results boring. I totally agree that they are. In my opinion this is because your "anything goes" approach doesn't really offer any challenge. Here you pick up the first two random words that you think look somehow similar and you are done: "perfectly appropriate as labels"! Bang!

There would be so many non-boring things to say, if one wanted to look deeper into things!

E.g.:
  • is it common to see the definite article before labels in Greek manuscripts?
  • is it common to see adjectives used as labels in Greek manuscripts?
  • is definite article + adjective a combination that can stand on its own (e.g. as a title)?
  • which plant categories (if any) were used in medieval Greek (or Hebrew) works?
  • which labels appear next to containers in Greek manuscripts (such as You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)?
  • is the label "the field" something that can be seen on Medieval/Renaissance pharmacy jars (in any language)?
A very high proportion of labels in Greek manuscripts are not textual, they are numbers.

They look like letters but they represent numbers. They are references.

It's entirely possible that this is also the case for VMS labels (all of the labels? I don't know, but some of them especially look like they might be). That doesn't necessarily mean they are Greek, or even that they are any kind of numbers, but I mention it because I've seen it so frequently in Greek manuscripts.
(11-04-2019, 09:54 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(08-04-2019, 02:05 AM)geoffreycaveney Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I begin with the simplest and least interesting label words: The leftmost labels of the top row of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the middle row of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. .

leftmost top row label You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
[otorchety]
leftmost middle row label You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
[otoram]

my readings:
"o-khoriik[o]s"
"o-khorAs"

[Note: For practical purposes I have been treating the Voynich characters [m] and [g] as alternate characters for [y] for some time now. I have added them to my own provisional working letter correspondence table. I have certainly never interpreted [m] and [g] in any other way in any previous readings or interpretations.]

my interpretations:
ο χωρικ[ο]ς
ο χωρος

translations:
"the rustic/regional/village/country"
"the field/farm/estate ; the country/land/region"

Comments:
These are perfectly normal standard Greek words, and perfectly appropriate as labels for plant roots and leaves, although I admit that personally I find these particular labels rather pedestrian, boring, and not terribly informative: I would think such descriptions would apply to an awful lot of plant roots and leaves. Be that as it may, I see nothing wrong with either of these label words.

It's not surprising that you too are beginning to find your results boring. I totally agree that they are. In my opinion this is because your "anything goes" approach doesn't really offer any challenge. Here you pick up the first two random words that you think look somehow similar and you are done: "perfectly appropriate as labels"! Bang!

There would be so many non-boring things to say, if one wanted to look deeper into things!

E.g.:
  • is it common to see the definite article before labels in Greek manuscripts?
  • is it common to see adjectives used as labels in Greek manuscripts?
  • is definite article + adjective a combination that can stand on its own (e.g. as a title)?
  • which plant categories (if any) were used in medieval Greek (or Hebrew) works?
  • which labels appear next to containers in Greek manuscripts (such as You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)?
  • is the label "the field" something that can be seen on Medieval/Renaissance pharmacy jars (in any language)?

I sincerely appreciate the fact that Marco is studying and learning about reading and interpreting medieval Greek manuscripts. This is highly valuable and useful knowledge and information for all of us, whether one agrees or disagrees with my theory, and greater knowledge of such subjects on both sides of the argument can only benefit the discussion.

Ultimately, such questions will need to be answered by a professional specialist scholar in the field. Now I don't believe it is wise or prudent at this stage of the research to go asking a dozen or so such scholars on various such subjects to take the time and effort to answer such individual particular detailed questions, yet. If I make progress with my theory and my research, the appropriate time to reach out for professional feedback on many such subjects will arrive in due course. I do not want to rush or hurry the process prematurely.

I can make just a couple basic comments in reply to Marco's questions for now:

The Voynich MS, whatever it is, is a strange and unique document. Its script is different than anything else that anyone has ever seen, as far as we know. So it is possible that the types of labels it uses, for pharmacy jars or for anything else, are also different from typical or common or normal or standard such labels of such things in medieval Greek manuscripts or any other type of manuscripts. I agree that the evidence would be stronger, the more similar the types of labels are, but at the same time, having somewhat different types of labels would not necessarily be convincing evidence that the reading and interpretation must be wrong, either. (N.B.: For an example of "convincing evidence that a reading and interpretation is wrong", see my recent critical commentary on the Book Pahlavi theory of the Voynich MS that has been presented in another recent series of papers.)

About the Greek root word of the two label names you ask about here, this is not just some random Greek word for "the field" that I found in the back of a dictionary somewhere. The word "χωρα" is a basic and important Greek word, with meanings such as "place, region, country", and many further related meanings by extension: "piece of land", "country, countryside" (opposite of the town), etc. The words I read and interpret in these two labels are derived from this basic root.  One meaning of "χωρος" is even "northeast wind". Could the label perhaps refer to plants from some northeast region? I don't know, but it's possible. And "χωρικος" is clearly the adjective derived from "χωρος". An alternate interpretation could be that the labels refer to wild plants as opposed to cultivated plants. I am certain that others can evaluate the subtleties of the meanings of the botanical terminology better than I can; for now I am just making my best effort to read and interpret the words themselves.

About the Greek grammar: The definite article is ubiquitous in Greek. One scholar of Greek described its role by saying that basically, you can put the definite article in front of any Greek word and it makes the word a noun. Of course this is an exaggeration, but it illustrates the ubiquitous role of the definite article in Greek.

Geoffrey
(11-04-2019, 04:54 PM)geoffreycaveney Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About the Greek grammar: The definite article is ubiquitous in Greek. One scholar of Greek described its role by saying that basically, you can put the definite article in front of any Greek word and it makes the word a noun. Of course this is an exaggeration, but it illustrates the ubiquitous role of the definite article in Greek.

Italian (and English?) work similarly, so it seems reasonable that article+adjective is OK in Greek too. 

I think the presence of the definite article in Greek labels or titles deserves some investigation: initial o- is particularly frequent in Voynich labels, so languages that show some evidence of a similar behaviour are particularly good candidates. Other languages remain in the everything-is-possible category. 
But o- is far from being mandatory (it appears in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of the "pharma" labels). I find this stuff quite non-boring, but honestly I don't have the time to research everything I find interesting.

I wish people presented the actual evidence supporting their ideas more often, because in general I find the evidence more instructive than the ideas. This is just my personal preference and I accept that others have a different approach to the hobby.
(11-04-2019, 10:02 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A very high proportion of labels in Greek manuscripts are not textual, they are numbers.

They look like letters but they represent numbers. They are references.

It's entirely possible that this is also the case for VMS labels (all of the labels? I don't know, but some of them especially look like they might be). That doesn't necessarily mean they are Greek, or even that they are any kind of numbers, but I mention it because I've seen it so frequently in Greek manuscripts.

I suspect that not only the bigger part of the labels but big parts of the text as well (especially where there are lots of numerals) are references
How would the article 'o' be represented in unpointed Judaeo-Greek?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23