![]() |
|
Every terminal glyph has a tail... - Printable Version +- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja) +-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html) +--- Forum: Analysis of the text (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-41.html) +--- Thread: Every terminal glyph has a tail... (/thread-3429.html) Pages:
1
2
|
Every terminal glyph has a tail... - -JKP- - 13-12-2020 I have a mostly written blog on this, but I am falling farther and farther behind in my blogs (I don't know when I can finish it) and, despite the pandemic, work is busier than ever, so it's becoming difficult to fit in any Voynich research. This topic came up on another thread, but I think it deserves a thread of its own. I've written numerous blogs about shapes in the VMS that are similar to Latin scribal conventions. I want to point out another analogy, and that is that EVERY GLYPH that could (by convention) have a terminal tail in Latin has a tail in the VMS. Look at this example that I snapped from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. in the big-plant section. There are no exceptions. Every terminal glyph that has a tail-appropriate shape has a tail: ![]() This is pretty important because they do NOT put tails on everything in medieval scripts, but they do have a method for deciding which shapes CAN be given a terminal shape. For example, in languages that use Latin characters (French, German, Italian, English, Czech, Spanish, etc.)
If you look at the marginalia on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. you will see that some of the letters have terminal tails, like the "n" and "h" on the last line. This is pretty normal in medieval script. Some scribes also added a tail to "h" within a word (and sometimes not). It might even be argued that y is a c-shape with a tail rather than a Latin-like abbreviation symbol, but that's a separate discussion. So, the VMS text respects this basic convention of which shapes may have a tail and which ones usually don't BUT it is highly unusual and distinct in having a tail on every terminal letter that is, by convention, allowed to have a tail. This is NOT something you see in medieval manuscripts. It is, however, a very western way of doing things, even if it is idiosyncratic and specific to the order and choice of VMS glyphs. So... putting a tail on everything that might normally have a tail seems to me to be significant because the entire manuscript is crafted like this. It's not like normal narrative text. It's almost like an exercise in scribal conventions and discipline (skills that a would-be scribe would need to have to get into a guild or to secure an apprenticeship). I've often thought that the VMS was unfinished. There are a few things that look like they were left out. One of these is the illuminated initial that would normally be in the upper-left corner of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (it is missing). But maybe it's not "unfinished". Maybe this is part of the exercise. Indent the text to make room for an initial. Demonstrate that you know how to do it. RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - Koen G - 13-12-2020 This is an important topic, and certainly one that pops up a lot when thinking about glyph equivalences. First though, why do you not consider EVA-y tailed? RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - -JKP- - 13-12-2020 I think there are two arguments for it. That it is a c-shape with a tail. Or that it is a y shape (which, in Latin languages is usually at the end or beginning of words as an abbreviation symbol). It's such a complex discussion, I don't think it can be discussed on the same thread. I'm agnostic about which one it might be. There are arguments for both sides. RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - RenegadeHealer - 14-12-2020 (13-12-2020, 04:49 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've written numerous blogs about shapes in the VMS that are similar to Latin scribal conventions. First of all JKP, I wanted to credit you and your blog with opening my eyes to the fact that all Voynichese glyphs, with the possible exception of EVA=t, would have been familiar to anyone reading or writing in the Roman alphabet in XV century Europe. I'm fully sold; the VMs's writing system is anything but exotic. As is the way in this scene, I'd bet money you're not the first to come up with this idea. But I'll be damned if I could name anyone from the original Mailing List or the First Study Group who pointed it out before you. Since you've been the most passionate, articulate, and well-sourced defender of this idea during my time working with the VMs, you'll be the one I'll credit if I ever publish anything about the VMs that builds upon this idea. If true, your Voynichese-glyphs-as-repurposed-Latin-scribal-marks idea undermines theories that the VMs is a fake foreign book, designed to swindle someone rich, or impress party guests. If this were indeed the writer's intention, using almost all glyph shapes that were familiar to literate people doesn't really help that end. If the VMs is really a meaningless medieval hoax, I think it's more likely that the intended marks were the illiterate clientele of a quack doctor or other fake expert, and the book was designed to be carried and "pored over" by the charlatan. I digress. JKP Wrote:I want to point out another analogy, and that is that EVERY GLYPH that could (by convention) have a terminal tail in Latin has a tail in the VMS. Look at this example that I snapped from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. in the big-plant section. There are no exceptions. Every terminal glyph that has a tail-appropriate shape has a tail. That said, this quote of yours feels like a truism to me. Which tells me I'm probably having trouble wrapping my head around it. Here's what I think you mean; correct me if I'm wrong: The final glyph of a vord has a tail if and only if its tailless Latin-scribal-convention homolog also conventionally took a tail when it ended a word. RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - -JKP- - 15-12-2020 Yes, there were two things I wanted to emphasize.
There are some reasons why #2 is unusual...
Below is an example of c. 1451 Gothic script (Latin language) in a style very similar to the script on 116v. It has many shapes in common with the VMS such as
RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - -JKP- - 15-12-2020 If you say, for the sake of discussion that y is e + tail or e + tail, then every VMS token in this clip has a terminal tail (except the round shapes o or d, which would normally not have one in any western language): ![]() Thus, the y n r s and m comprise the overwhelming majority of terminal glyphs (g shows up occasionally but not frequently). Only five characters. In linguistic texts, most letters (c. 18 to 22 characters) can occur at the end. The tail analogy applies to specific shapes, but not their frequency. Compare this to the Latin example (which is similar in balance and form to other languages that use Latin characters). Even though terminal tails are relatively common, it averages only about 1 or 2 per line (some manuscripts might have 3 or 4 but it's rare for there to be more than this). ![]() Western languages generally only have about 10–20% of words ending in tails (this is if you combine terminal tails together with abbrev. symbols that are tails—if you count only terminal tails, the percentage is even less). Stretched letters and tails do occur in Hebrew and Arabic scripts, but the choice of what gets a tail appears to follow Latin-alphabet conventions in the VMS. RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - -JKP- - 15-12-2020 I don't want to complicate this too much by describing too many things in the same post, but the shapes m g, in languages that use Latin characters, are abbreviation symbols and they are almost always at the ends of words (rarely in the middle). The y is also an abbreviation symbol that is used mostly at the end and sometimes at the beginning (which is why I say there are arguments both for and against y being a single character or y being a ligature, i.e., a c-shape with a tail). RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - -JKP- - 15-12-2020 For those who are interested, here is a translation of the Latin text (prayer-related). I have expanded the abbreviations. It might not be perfect (I don't know what "tuaut" is meant to be) but it's pretty close: In nomina beatissime ac individue trinitatis Amen Redemptor humani generis / qui visitavit nos oriens ex alto quibusvis conmunem vivendi modum per percepta dotuerit ditens / Si vis advitam ingredi serva mandata Modum tun? maioris perfectonnis non tuaut? tum dixit / Qui vult venire post me abneget semet ipsum et tollat crucem suam et sequatur me / Quem modum vivendi tumdem sancti prens distinctione habituum et doctrinis regularum spiritu sancto inspiritante RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - Helmut Winkler - 15-12-2020 It is ' tuant' from verb tueri and prens should be patres, it is an Arenga of a charter by papal visitators for monastery Admont RE: Every terminal glyph has a tail... - Koen G - 15-12-2020 So on the fact that there are so many tails at the ends of words. Am I right in supposing that this looks like positional variation and abbreviation simultaneously? So "x with tail" is to be read ad "x + missing part"? Again EVA-y complicates things here probably, since it just stands for the abbreviated part. |