+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Tasks (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-28.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich tasks (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-32.html)
+---- Forum: Positions we can agree upon (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-53.html)
+---- Thread: [Palaeography] There is evidence of corrections within the text (/thread-1593.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - Anton - 05-03-2017
(05-03-2017, 06:23 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(05-03-2017, 06:00 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There was an example of scraping provided by Wladimir, I'll try to find it out.
EDIT: Actually, here it is: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
That looks more like the writing from the other side shining through...
That's why Wladimir provides fragments of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. side by side, to show that that's not the case.
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - ReneZ - 06-03-2017
I think that these figures show the opposite, but it's clearer without the coloured lines.
The shine-through is present on both sides, and the relative positions of several looped gallows on both sides match.
It seems to be a limited area on this folio. This area could have had some liquid (oil?) spilled on it, but it also has stretch marks from the parchment preparation, so could be a local thin spot.
There are much more extensive examples of this on other folios, e.g. almost all the text of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is visible through f116v.
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - Wladimir D - 06-03-2017
I admit my mistake.
Transparent mirror image (f44v) is rotated by 5 degrees,to match the anchor. The discrepancy between 5 degrees occurred due to inaccuracy placed horizontally of the manuscript in the scanner.
However on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (Figure 3You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ) is nevertheless done scraping.
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - Anton - 06-03-2017
Wow, it appears that for 80r and 57r those were my own examples, I already completely forgot about them.
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - Davidsch - 14-03-2017
I can not answer this poll question fully. So I vote No.
There are different kinds of "mistakes" in the VMS. First there are the wrong compositions of vords.
You can see these by analysis of the word compositions.
Most of the time these were corrected, by simply placing the correct letter over the wrong letter.
The amount of such mistakes is in the range of 25-50 in the entire VMS. Most of the time it makes reading the correct letter almost impossible.
However, sometimes this is not possible, because there are more letters wrong. Most of the time the scribist did not correct them, and simply rewrote the word after it correctly. Such mistakes can be counted on two hands.
Also there are wrong spacings, or better: spacings that are too narrow and spacings that are to wide. This is inevitable for a handwritten text.
That is not a correction. I agree, and i also see no possibility to correct these.
Evidence.
If you talk about evidence of the corrections, which is the subject of this poll, you need to define not only the correction type, but also what you accept as evidence. It is my experience in the VMS that no matter what you present, it is not regarded as evidence.
In the best scenario, your findings are being discussed but that seems the highest achievable. For something to become evidence it must be accepted by the majority of (professional?) researchers. Until accepted, the better description would be "indications that corrections took place".
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - MarcoP - 15-03-2017
(14-03-2017, 11:39 AM)Davidsch Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I can not answer this poll question fully. So I vote No.
There are different kinds of "mistakes" in the VMS. First there are the wrong compositions of vords.
You can see these by analysis of the word compositions.
Most of the time these were corrected, by simply placing the correct letter over the wrong letter.
....
For something to become evidence it must be accepted by the majority of (professional?) researchers. Until accepted, the better description would be "indications that corrections took place".
Hi David,
you write that in the VMS there are corrections of several "mistakes". I think that your opinion is founded on something that you personally consider as evidence. Am I wrong?
The whole point of discussing "positions we can agree upon" is finding an agreement of what we can consider as evidence, so I think it's correct to refer to "evidence" in the proposed statements. Of course, the statement cannot be changed after it's accepted (the reference to "evidence" cannot be added in a second time, as you seem to suggest).
It would be helpful if you could make your personal position clear, so that we can try to re-express the statement in a form that is acceptable to you.
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - Koen G - 15-03-2017
Agreed. Our aim should be to debate the statements hoping to reach a form which agrees with all currently available evidence.
Please try to provide a way in which the statement can be improved.
RE: There is evidence of corrections within the text - Davidsch - 15-03-2017
Thank you for your interest Marco.
After analysis of several items (word compositions, letters in words, word-order, letter-word-order, n-gram order, edit distances etc.etc.)
it became clear to me that when I merge all these statistical outcomes, there can be seen patterns. And there are clear patterns on which I based several words and letters in words as "anomaly". For example, if there are on a count of 1000 identical records, only 2 that deviate, those are visually examined. A simple example would be if the expected characters would be da and it's written do. Somewhere I published several items here; no reactions. The interest on ninja is mainly in the herbals and in the drawings and that's ok, but many things discussed here have been examined and published in books by professionals in length, so only very rarely it does add value for me.
If ninja wants to publish a position on which "we" can agree on, I must make the point that I do not agree on the words "evidence of the corrections".
If you want to make a statement as ninja group on evidence, you first have to decide what you call evidence and how you accept or deny such.
In my opinion, there is no procedure or foundation for acceptance of evidence here, so, you can not make such a statement as a group that holds: "we feel that there is evidence of the corrections" if you do have not made clear what the evidence is.