+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview (/thread-2066.html)
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - MarcoP - 07-09-2017
(07-09-2017, 08:49 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2017, 08:10 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- What is your evaluation of the progress made during the last three years?
- How do you think further research should proceed?
I presume you mean "progress made on his own theory" here, rather than "progress made by you on his blog"? ;-)
Seriously, I have contributed very little on the text analysis side, and linguistic analysis is where I would be interested in Stephen's opinion. In particular, these ideas have been mentioned and sometimes extensively discussed on his blog:
- Derek Vogt's extension of Stephen's phonetic system;
- Darren Worley's proposal of "structured data sets" (i.e. limited and well organized sets of labels, like those on the T-O diagrams or some of the smaller circular diagrams) as the most approachable parts of the text;
- Emma May Smith's research.
I guess Stephen could have opinions on each of these subjects, since they all make for interesting comparisons with the contents of his 2014 paper.
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - -JKP- - 07-09-2017
(07-09-2017, 07:33 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2017, 08:49 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2017, 08:10 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- What is your evaluation of the progress made during the last three years?
- How do you think further research should proceed?
I presume you mean "progress made on his own theory" here, rather than "progress made by you on his blog"? ;-)
Seriously, I have contributed very little on the text analysis side, and linguistic analysis is where I would be interested in Stephen's opinion. In particular, these ideas have been mentioned and sometimes extensively discussed on his blog:
- Derek Vogt's extension of Stephen's phonetic system;
- Darren Worley's proposal of "structured data sets" (i.e. limited and well organized sets of labels, like those on the T-O diagrams or some of the smaller circular diagrams) as the most approachable parts of the text;
- Emma May Smith's research.
I guess Stephen could have opinions on each of these subjects, since they all make for interesting comparisons with the contents of his 2014 paper.
I would be more interested in hearing directly from these people than hearing someone else's interpretation of their work.
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - Koen G - 07-09-2017
I think I'll just ask a general question about what he thinks about the way other researchers have picked up his work (this would be mostly about Derek then) and allow him to respond as he sees fit.
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - Davidsch - 08-09-2017
questions to Mr bax:
1. what "word-order" do you think is valid for the text and why (background You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
2. did you discover word-stems in the text and do they reference to specific languages and why
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - Koen G - 13-09-2017
Today is the last day for submitting questions!
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - -JKP- - 13-09-2017
(13-09-2017, 09:21 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Today is the last day for submitting questions!
In which time zone? (I'm far distant from most of you.)
There's a question I really want to ask but I can't do it now (it's 3:00 am and I haven't had any sleep). When is the cutoff in Greenwich Meantime?
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - Koen G - 13-09-2017
If you submit your question at your earliest convenience during your "today", we should still be able to include it
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - -JKP- - 13-09-2017
My questions:
In your video, you interpret the Voynich Manuscript text essentially as a one-to-one substitution code and in your analysis you identify more than one of the VMS glyphs as variations of closely related sounds, which results in too few remaining glyphs to represent anything close to a normal alphabet (or set of sounds).
1. What is your reasoning for interpreting the text as a one-to-one substitution code and how do you explain the problem of missing glyphs/sounds when interpreted this way.
2. How do you resolve the problem of certain glyphs always being in specific positions in Voynichese words, when natural languages, such as those you referenced in your video (and probably also those that might be extinct), do not typically have these patterns or severe restrictions.
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - Koen G - 14-09-2017
Thanks, JKP. These questions get straight to the point and I like the way you phrase them.
RE: Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview - Stephen.Bax - 15-09-2017
(27-08-2017, 02:15 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think what you are doing is GREAT, great work, very interesting and a good direction and I think your choice of the first person to interview was a good one.
But I'm going to be completely blunt here...
Since his views on the manuscript are controversial and unproven, I would rather see Stephen Bax in a debate with someone with a good reputation who holds different views from his than to see a question-answer format interview with SB.
I think it would be of greater benefit to the community and to Voynich research in general if the format chosen acknowledges whether the person's contributions are substantive (a curator or someone close to the history of the manuscript itself is a good choice because he or she has hands-on knowledge of the physical properties that most of us can never have) or speculative (in which case a debate or panel format with two to four people is far more likely to yield useful insights than giving a platform to an individual).
Unfortunately, the mere act of interviewing someone whose ideas are unproven, and sometimes strongly contested, seems to give that person a certain amount of "credibility by association" and you have to ask yourself whether that's the best way to use the time and resources of the Voynich community, and whether it will bring out information that furthers Voynich research. When it comes to unproven theories I think a panel format of people with a variety of views is more likely to be beneficial.
UM, I am going to be completely blunt back agan. Do you know any theory or idea about the Voynich which is NOT controversial or unproven? Even the carbon dating is contested! From day one I have also made it clear that my discussions are provisional and partial.
I am happy to discuss them with anyone at all, on any panel. But if you exclude from that panel anyone who has an idea which is 'controversial' or 'unproven', you will be sitting for a long time looking at a row of empty chairs.
Stephen Bax