The Voynich Ninja

2 ReneZ
I think authors of the MS spoke that language (some crazy form of Latin) and they didn't need to translate anything form regular Latin.
Then process of encoding therefore is pretty straightforward, for example (different sample from f14r):
falescōruī consulō, mensifōrus(?) illus, compōtōrūra illī

All sounds are clear here, only c in first word is pronounced as [ts], I think.
Removing all unnecessary vowels, leaving obligatory ones (endings) we have:
flscruī consulō, mnsfrs ls comptrur lī

Encoded with glyphs (first and third s are encoded with y rather than f because they are near tall letter; escape o before t):
pdychoiiin yfodain @tyshy dy ypchor daiin


2 Searcher

Yes, there are problems with verbs, I'm not sure of the precise meanings of their forms. Here are my guesses, for sample miniātōrus (which is noun by default):
tchy, miniātōrus - draw
tchey, miniātorātus - drawn pass
tcheol, tches, miniātorātum - have drawn, perf
tchor, miniātōrūra - drawing


Now detailed review of your sample:
Patr.āt.iōn.ell.urum - pl. diminuitive of completion (used as adjective here)
parabol.ī - comical images
cupītōr.ūr.a - wanting (does that word exist?)
copi.um - abundantly, adv
apic.ōr.um - to fill with points (from apex, point or top, using tricky conjecture about 3rd Latin decl.)
com.ān.us - set of leaves (in Russian would be листва, cannot find proper word in English)

Another sample (I have forgotten to include to pdf, f66r, end of paragraph three):
kcheody chxar daly fchdar cheor aly sy shor shckheody dal shedy qokor al shes
My guess: Editōriculus charazāre lānus. Secōrellārius creātūra hāmus acus, aperiūra periodōriculus illam partellus, caudūra eam partam
Pencil scratches vellum. [With] cutter creating sharp hook, opening sentence for that part, ending this part.

Pencils didn't exist in the middle ages. They had ink, stylus, charcoal (flaky, fat, and brittle), and silverpoint.

There were many new and better drawing tools in the late 15th century, but in the early 15th century, drawing tools were quite limited.

(20-10-2017, 08:35 PM)farmerjohn Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.2 ReneZ
I think authors of the MS spoke that language (some crazy form of Latin) and they didn't need to translate anything form regular Latin.
Then process of encoding therefore is pretty straightforward, for example (different sample from f14r):
falescōruī consulō, mensifōrus(?) illus, compōtōrūra illī

All sounds are clear here, only c in first word is pronounced as [ts], I think.
Removing all unnecessary vowels, leaving obligatory ones (endings) we have:
flscruī consulō, mnsfrs ls comptrur lī

Encoded with glyphs (first and third s are encoded with y rather than f because they are near tall letter; escape o before t):
pdychoiiin yfodain @tyshy dy ypchor daiin

farmerjohn,

my question to you is one I would also ask to all other proposed solutions.
The problem is that your method cannot have been used to 'encode' real Latin, or at least so it seems.

To encode the phrase: "falescōruī consulō, mensifōrus illus, compōtōrūra illī"
is not very interesting to me, because it means nothing.

It did not exist before you just wrote it down.

To convert the Voynich MS to meaningless text is very easy, and there are an infinite number of
ways of doing it.

2 JKP
Yes, I was inprecise in my translations. "Writing instrument" is better.

2 ReneZ

Strange passage about existence.

I didn't get your question about translation perhaps.
If you ask if one can encode real Latin (for unknown reason), the answer is positive (there is small issue with letter x at the end of word which seems to be solved by VMS means).
If you ask if we will get something VMS-alike. The answer is more "no" than "yes". At least because of verb endings. For example -t is common for Latin. It corresponds to EVA-e or EVA-k, which are rare Voynechese endings.

Small question to everybody.
What do you think of images of 83r. Where they all drawn by the same hand?

I don't see any inconsistency - so yes, my opinion is that they are all drawn by the same hand.

Another update on vowelless Latin theory. A big amount of work was done, progress was made, but as it often happens it resulted in very small number of changes and even in reduction of the code (which is nice; programmers will understand me). The visible portion of an iceberg is that the number of translated and presented phrases is increased, but that's really not the main goal at the moment.

Anyway have a good reading and Happy Old New Year in advance

I'm sorry, farmerjohn, I looked at the first page of translations and there are hardly any Latin words on that page, only words that look a bit like Latin. Even if one ignores the spelling and tries to ignore the lack of grammar, it's still not Latin.

Maybe someone who is strong in Latin can wrestle some meaning out of it by taking some liberties with the spelling and construction, but I can't.

(11-01-2018, 11:42 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm sorry, farmerjohn, I looked at the first page of translations and there are hardly any Latin words on that page, only words that look a bit like Latin. Even if one ignores the spelling and tries to ignore the lack of grammar, it's still not Latin.

Maybe someone who is strong in Latin can wrestle some meaning out of it by taking some liberties with the spelling and construction, but I can't.

Every word is correct Latin word (=acceptable by Whitaker's Words) with precision to declension, conjugation, etc. This is checked mechanically.

As for wrestling, I honestly tried to map Voynichese to clean polished Latin, but no, as stated hundreds of times it's impossible, at least verb endings do not allow that. It's simply wrong.

So willy-nilly some other approach should be considered. Latin words with restricted number of forms is an excellent compromise (at least English speakers don't suffer from small number of forms). Yes, yet another invented language that can magically explain everything causes nothing but vomiting, it's difficult to work with, it's difficult to prove, it's difficult to present, it's difficult to understand, it looks almost like alien theory. But in the end the main trait of theory is its correctness.

(12-01-2018, 10:12 AM)farmerjohn Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Every word is correct Latin word (=acceptable by Whitaker's Words) with precision to declension, conjugation, etc. This is checked mechanically.

...

Many of the words in Whitaker's Words were not used in the Middle Ages or were extremely rare. Nor can most of these words be found in the tens of thousands of Latin books from late-15th, 16th, 17th centuries that have been digitized and are available online.

You took these words:

A. Patratum aperium jocionum apertum partus tabelli, caudicariura aeque exec orularum bimanorus

 to complete |  explain/uncover/open  |   to jest  |  open/revealed  |   produce/beget |  purtrid fluid,  ||  ship-hand/bargeman  |  equally/ to the same degree  |  execorularum??  |  bimanorus?? 

And translated them into this:

B. Finished with playful beginning open part of the drawing, trunk divided equally, painted in two colors
 

Even if all the words in Whitaker's Words were used in the Middle Ages, which isn't the case, I can't figure out how how you got from A to B. Some of them don't match their meanings and others are questionable. For example, it's a bit of a leap to interpret "bimanorus" as painted in two colors. Yes, bi is two and mano is to flow, but it could just as easily be a river flowing in two directions or something else.


It's also not entirely clear how you got from this:

   Patrationellurum paraboli cupitorura copium (?) comanus

To this:

   Want to (?) leaves of  finished drawings



It's not just the individual words that are strange and unusual, the way they are combined is not at all typical of any Latin I have seen.