+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Marginalia (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-45.html)
+--- Thread: 116v (/thread-437.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 03-01-2020
If you say "for me to take" it's about someone giving something to someone else for them to take (to use).
RE: 116v - Anton - 03-01-2020
But it's not "for me to take", it's "take me" - kinda the "take me" in "Alice in Wonderland".
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 03-01-2020
Of course, it depends how the letters are interpreted. If one reads it as "so nim gaf mich" then it's "so [to] take gave me". If it's "so nim gäs mi[l]ch" then it's a different interpretation.
By the way, Walsen/Palsen can also be interpreted as names. So if it were interpreted as Palsen or Walsen Presbyteren would be like saying, Walsen, the Presbyter with "-en" as the article. Those names did exist in the middle ages.
I'm really leaning toward it being palsen pbren. You can see the descenders if you look closely, but they are faded or washed out (like the descender in "so") and flat-bottomed "v" wasn't written like that (I collected a lot of flat-bottomed vees in order to try to figure out if it was "v"—if it is, it's very nonstandard).
By the way, Walsen/Palsen can also be interpreted as names. So if it were interpreted as Palsen or Walsen Presbyteren would be like saying, Walsen, the Presbyter with "-en" as the article. Those names did exist in the middle ages.
I'm really leaning toward it being palsen pbren. You can see the descenders if you look closely, but they are faded or washed out (like the descender in "so") and flat-bottomed "v" wasn't written like that (I collected a lot of flat-bottomed vees in order to try to figure out if it was "v"—if it is, it's very nonstandard).
RE: 116v - Anton - 03-01-2020
Yes, I agree, the descenders hint themselves, which makes it more enigmatic. About the "f", no, I firmly believe it to be an "s", if you look at good zoom, you'll see that the supposed crossbar is in fact the ascender of the "m".
"probieren" suggested by Helmut is a more appropriate reading, in my opinion
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 03-01-2020
I'm not looking at the serif on the "m" as the crossbar. I'm looking at that scrape in the medium that goes up and to the left and has chopped pieces out of at least 3 letters:
I don't know if it is f or s. I just think it's possible it might be f.
RE: 116v - Anton - 03-01-2020
Ah, I see. But I don't consider that as anything missing, IMO that's just the effect of the quill producing two separate thin lines (instead of one bold) in its going down. The point where it began is looking as if it's something missing.
***
"palden" as "balden" (remember the p/b interchangeability much discussed earlier in the thread) together with abbreviated "probieren" looks more promising in the context
but probably we are going in circles, I have the deja-vu of all this having been discussed already in the former pages of this monstrous thread
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 03-01-2020
Yes, "p" was very frequently substituted for "b".
(03-01-2020, 01:25 AM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Ah, I see. But I don't consider that as anything missing, IMO that's just the effect of the quill producing two separate thin lines (instead of one bold) in its going down...
And across. The crossbar on the + and the top stem of the long-ess have chunks out of ithem also. Whether it's a pen skip or a scrape, part of the line is missing.
Under the long-ess something is missing as well. It looks like 90% of something got scraped off. Letters? A drawing? Whatever it was, there's only a small hook-shape left at the top and two tiny tails on the right-hand side.
RE: 116v - Aga Tentakulus - 03-01-2020
I just write it again without much comment.
The "g" is actually a "tz"
"so nim zas mich o" Where the "z" stands for "tz."
"so nim tzas mich o" spelled correctly.
"so nimtz as mich o" In good German.
"so nimmt's (es oder das) mich auch"
If someone speaks Bavarian or Austrian dialect, he will hear that out.
This is how I see it.
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 03-01-2020
There are apparently a LOT of people who read that shape as "o". I don't understand why.
- It'd not drawn like a normal "o".
- It doesn't look like any of the other "o" letters on the folio (or in the VMS main text).
- It is not lined up with the other text. It is below the baseline.
- It is not round like the other "o" letters on the folio.
- It is not the same size as the other letters. It's bigger and has a point on the lower left that the "o" letters don't have.
- It has dots associated with it (five of them, possibly six, two on the left and four on the right).
- To me it looks like a drawing, not like a letter.
So those of you who think it is an "o". Why do you think it is "o"?
RE: 116v - Aga Tentakulus - 03-01-2020
The context is basically correct even without the "o". Try to follow the train of thought.
Let us assume that above is a disease.
If I do something wrong, "it takes me".
Since the one above already has it, "so it takes me too".
The same goes for curses, in the end I have to say 3 Pater Noster + 3 Ave Maria because I have cursed.
If I do not do that " so it takes me (too)".
Important what it is about are the words "valden, obren".
If he just does it wrong, "so it takes me ( too )".
No matter how I twist and turn it, the context is right.
I don't think the points are intentional. Why should they be?