My theory where the rules are loose and wild these types of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. would appear only in a constructed language for a Glossolalia. So just looking at these vords brings up a Glossolalia. What is interesting is the number 8 corresponds to n meaning that the frequency hit is the same for the Glyph the number 8, d in eva and n in Latin. So simply substituting Latin for eva than you can pronounce the word that was a Glossolalia dictionary term. Latin used You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.! I think the 8 was important, because it was matching frequencies of highest to lowest from both voynich glyph's and Latin Letters to show you the language to use. N happens happens to be the 8th highest Latin letter pointing to Latin.
So lets try daiin? It would be pronounced "Octessr" when spoken in tongues. So why did I not use n as in nessr. Not only does Octessr sound like professor and its in Latin, it has 3 syllables. You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. happens to be about the same frequency area as "n" in Latin. I believe it pointing as a straight across substitution all along and even though the words don't make sense, it's because it's a Glossolalia.
There is also one small word in Latin You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. in You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and it means "apart from". It could be apart from the language!
I appreciate your attention on this matter.
daiin "Octessr"
1) chpeeeey
oeeees becomes "You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.uuuub"
(2) dydydy before you write this off ntntnt listen to latin ntntnt
(1)
qoqokeey -->"kwat-too-or" e "kwat-too-or" e L uu te
(1) oeeees
(1) deeeese
(1) keeees
(1) doeeeesm
(1) ykeeeedaiir
(1) okeeees
(1) orokeeeey
(1) qoeeeety
(1) eeeey
(1) odeeeeodl
(1) odeeeey
(1) qeeeear
(1) qoeeeey
(2) dydydy
(1) diiiin
(1) oiiiin
(1) qooto
(1) ootady
[attachment=15056]
Hi oeesordy
I'm not sure if I understood everything correctly
But here are my thoughts on it...
Isn't that a break in the internal logic?
Either d->N (letter) OR d->“Oct” (numeral), but both at will?
Glossolalia as an explanation naturally leads nowhere: If nonsense is the expected result, any substitution can be “confirmed.” Just as a side note: According to previous statistical studies, purely spoken glossolalia can never maintain a structurally rigid system like the one we see in VMS—especially not over 200 pages.
Even if it’s not supposed to make sense, still: Frequency-rank matching between VMS and Latin is known to have failed: The VMS frequency distribution is structurally different from Latin (too few rare letters, too many frequent glyph clusters). This has been tested many times.
But, as I said, I’m not sure if I understood you correctly.
(11-04-2026, 06:35 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi oeesordy
I'm not sure if I understood everything correctly But here are my thoughts on it...
Isn't that a break in the internal logic?
Either d->N (letter) OR d->“Oct” (numeral), but both at will?
Glossolalia as an explanation naturally leads nowhere: If nonsense is the expected result, any substitution can be “confirmed.” Just as a side note: According to previous statistical studies, purely spoken glossolalia can never maintain a structurally rigid system like the one we see in VMS—especially not over 200 pages.
Even if it’s not supposed to make sense, still: Frequency-rank matching between VMS and Latin is known to have failed: The VMS frequency distribution is structurally different from Latin (too few rare letters, too many frequent glyph clusters). This has been tested many times.
But, as I said, I’m not sure if I understood you correctly.
I think they used "Oct", as I see a four in there as well. It's not in the Latin Language although they I believe they used a Latin frequency table to help construct vocal words in a dictionary that don't make sense. There is the possibility of a few Latin words in the Voynich I imagine. Well it's constructed so maybe they were trying to capture words that were spoken in "tongues" by people who could do it in a dictionary. This is a problem but since the language is different ("too few rare letters, too many frequent glyph clusters") the often used o could be an artefact of "speaking in tongues"
Why don't you explain the four glyphs in a row JoJo?
According to my transcription of Eva, “4 eeees” appears 8 times.
Unfortunately, I can't tell you what the four “e”s mean; no one has deciphered the manuscript yet. In German, there's the word “Hawaiianer”—someone from Hawaii. That's four vowels in a row, after all.
“ee” could encode diphthongs, such as “ei,” “eu,” “iu,” etc.
And who says the spaces are correct? There could be two words separated by encoded diphthongs at exactly this spot.
Additionally, there could be some unknown cipher where the “e” represents either a letter or a syllable depending on its position, and in very rare cases, four “e”s appear, although “ee” is already a bigram. So technically, it’s only two times.
There are many possibilities like that....
This is still the same theory as in your thread You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., right?
(11-04-2026, 10:41 AM)tavie Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is still the same theory as in your thread You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., right?
No that was a mechanical shift theory based on numbers in the vords for anagrams to Latin. This theory is a Glossolalia with it based on latin letter system but not the language, the letters merely mirror the glyphs in a one to one. That's why you get a pronunciation like.
qoqokeey -->"kwat-too-or" e "kwat-too-or" e L uu te
daiin Octessr
I wrote it out like this so you get the feel of the word spoken in tongues. In Latin the i's are You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as e's. I realize the people who want this solved don't want to see a theory like this, because the words don't convey much meaning yet they do. The voynich can act out in repetition like tongues and some words would start out similar like in tongues. To capture the sound of tongues I believe they used the Latin alphabet in the early 15th century and wrote a Glossolalia script but used a dictionary of tongue words that almost sound like a language to put the script to like an Angelic language. The MS=408 is an Angelic language of Tongues.
Glossolalia is some option for Voynich Manuscript but I'm not sure about your proposal.
If I understand it correctly you based your soloution on ideal match of frequencies. So if most common Latin letter is "i" and most common Voynichese letter is "o" then Voynichese "o" should be read as "i". And the same goes for all letters.
But then you assume some exceptions like "octessr".
The problem is - why in some gibberish letters would have exactly the same letter frequencies as in Latin?
And let's be honest, with your transcription these words are really "ugly" to pronounce. I believe glossolalias are supposed to sound "cool" and not make you break your tongue.
When it comes to glossolalia I like more Ianus van Altrideicktus solution more:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
SISATER.ICTUS.CATALIS.VANISATER.ITUS.IFINITUS.SATUR.ATER.ALIS.CONTUS.ECESUM
r
I found You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. occurrences of "You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view." means You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. in folio 79v with the cross. The qor in a straight substitution would be "dio" however the pronunciation is different. I use 4 for q, so
qorchedy would be "kwat-too-or" e o a Oct novem
I'm not optimistic about this at all, but just for sake of methodology: I'd advise you treat Currier A and B as separate "conlangs" at the very least, you could go further and split the corpus according to RZ languages even. If you're still hopeful about matching a conlang like this, you'll also have to tackle the grammatical differences between Voynichese dialects and natural languages, taking into account the distribution of f p in the text, start and end of line strings (and LAAFU itself), horizontal and vertical reduplication, etc...
Try not to brush mismatches off, keep track of them as a sanity check to get a feeling of the quality of your results as a whole. Matching 'dio' in the right sections doesn't mean anything if it pops up in nonsensical contexts, or if the resulting grammar doesn't make sense even if the word-for-word mapping is undone. The grammar need not match exactly the patterns of Latin, but if it's a conlang you can expect some internal consistency.
If you are interested in my theory, I have a website where you can input "eva" and output "Glossolalia". Here is a You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.. I'm not sure of the statistics if the entropy would rank higher toward a language or not compared to voynich than the substituted Glossolalia.
Here is my website:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
You can put in multiple words. Try daiin first.
Here is the first paragraph of folio 1r the way they spoke 600 years ago for MS-408. The word "mic" below would sound like meech in You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view..
fachys ykal ar ataiin Shol Shory cThres ykos Sholdy
sory cKhar or y kaer chtaiin Shar are cThar cThar dan
syaiir Sheky or ykaiin Shod cThoary cThes daraiin sy
doiin oteey oteos roloty cTh*ar daiin otaiin or okan
dair y chear cThaiin cPhar cFhaiin ydaraiShy
VEANOVEMB NOVEMLEC EO EPESSR MIC MIONOVEM POUB NOVEMLIB MICOCTONOVEM
BIONOVEM LEO IO NOVEM LEUO APESSR MEO EOU PEO PEO OCTOER
BNOVEMESSO MULNOVEM IO NOVEMLESSR MIOCTO PIEONOVEM PUB OCTOEOESSR BNOVEM
OCTOISSR IPUUNOVEM IPUIB OICIPNOVEM P?EO OCTOESSR IPESSR IO ILER OCTOESO
OCTOESO NOVEM PESSR GEO VESSR NOVEMOCTOEOESMNOVEM