+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: News (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-25.html)
+--- Thread: [Article] Jacek Syguła & Agnieszka Kałużna - paper at academia.edu (/thread-1949.html)
Jacek Syguła & Agnieszka Kałużna - paper at academia.edu - Diane - 15-06-2017
Jacek and Agnieszka have kindly been keeping me in touch with their study of the written text, even though aware that I'm not in a position to offer any useful comment on 'cracking' the language.
You can find the paper at academia.edu by searching 'Jacek Sygula' there.
I'll be honest and say that I'm not certain the paper isn't a hoax.
Would anyone better able to say something useful about the content care to comment?
RE: Jacek Syguła & Agnieszka Kałużna - paper at academia.edu - -JKP- - 16-06-2017
(15-06-2017, 09:16 PM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Jacek and Agnieszka have kindly been keeping me in touch with their study of the written text, even though aware that I'm not in a position to offer any useful comment on 'cracking' the language.
You can find the paper at academia.edu by searching 'Jacek Sygula' there.
I'll be honest and say that I'm not certain the paper isn't a hoax.
Would anyone better able to say something useful about the content care to comment?
It doesn't look like a hoax, it looks sincere, but...
Text
They've followed the same general steps as a number of people in expanding the Latin-looking abbreviations into a variety of Latin prefixes and suffixes and assigning values to the rest. I'm sure this has been tried by many many people because these particular glylphs not only follow Latin shapes but also, to some extent, Latin positional conventions. It's natural that it would be the first thing most of those familiar with Latin would try. I've tried it, Searcher has tried it, possibly hundreds have tried it.
The authors don't do it consistently, they choose whichever expansion seems to work (which is also necessary when expanding Latin abbreviations), but Latin words are known whereas VMS words are not, which means that this method of expansion is like anagramming... it involves a certain amount of subjective interpretation of what the VMS characters mean.
They've translated Aries as meaning bull and equated Aries as meaning Taurus, but Aries is a ram, not a bull, and the grammar is questionable.
They assert that our familiar friend "daiin" is French for "nom" (name).
Plants
They've translated some words into plant names that don't match the plant on the page.
They assert that "cioamom" means cinnamon on a page with a plant that doesn't even remotely resemble cinnamon and when the same glyph pattern occurs again four words later as conciamom or comciamom, they don't give an explanation for it.
If it doesn't work in Latin, they change it to a language in which it does kind of work (except that the grammar is somewhat fractured), not only word by word, but sometimes in the middle of a word (e.g., claiming the first part of the word is French and the ending is Latin).
I'm not asserting that plant names on plant pages must match the plant but if they don't, some explanation for the discrepancy should be given and I didn't see one. Also, if the same glyphs show up with other letters pre- or appended in such a way that the translation of the original word is called into question, why no explanation?
The short paper (which has only a handful of translations) ends with this:
" In conclusion, we can state that the transcription of the alphabet used in the VM into the Latin one by means of the method that we adopted enabled us to obtain astonishingly accurate results which allow for the accurate reading of the manuscript."
I didn't see astonishingly accurate results. I see what we so frequently see–a handful of words wrested out of the text by cherry picking the language of interpretation and secondarily, by accepting bad grammar and logical inconsistencies between the translated words and similar untranslated words.
I think Searcher did a much better job of trying to translate the glyphs into Latin and I think even Searcher will acknowledge that the results were still too grammatically odd and repetitious for the VMS to be something as straightforward as lightly encrypted Latin.
RE: Jacek Syguła & Agnieszka Kałużna - paper at academia.edu - Koen G - 16-06-2017
You're a very patient man, JKP. I gave up at "I am Aries"
RE: Jacek Syguła & Agnieszka Kałużna - paper at academia.edu - R. Sale - 16-06-2017
JKP says, " I see what we so frequently see–a handful of words wrested out of the text by cherry picking the language of interpretation and secondarily, by accepting bad grammar and logical inconsistencies between the translated words and similar untranslated words."
This seems to be *so typical* of proposed VMs translations, that I generally don't follow these 'linguistic' presentations. It always seems that some sort of method has been applied to the VMs text with a low level of pot-shot success barely achieved through gymnastic manipulation and multiple exceptions. If the house of cards can withstand the collective scrutiny, and none ever has, I will learn of it eventually.
What's wrong here is 'method' - the choice of method, and the discovery of method. After some efforts the investigator finds a method that translates a few scattered words. That is - an externally imposed, carefully tailored, system of interpretation can make sense of a few short text segments. That's a level of success in the same ballpark with the monkeys and typewriters.
The origins of the proposed methodology are significant. Is there an alternative to repeated application of various externally developed methods of interpretation? It would have to be something internal that develops 'organically'. Something with more than just a superficial presence.