+- 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: The Origin of [sh] (/thread-2440.html)
RE: The Origin of [sh] - Anton - 26-07-2018
(26-07-2018, 10:38 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Just my humble opinion from looking at thousands and thousands of manuscripts and collecting more than 2,000 examples of the letter "d", but I don't think anyone would ever write a "d" like this (like the footed apostrophe) in the Middle Ages (even if they were trying to hide it)... the flow and shape, the extra curl to the left and down, are just wrong.
Do you mean b? We're not talking about Latin "d" here, but about EVA "b".
RE: The Origin of [sh] - -JKP- - 27-07-2018
(26-07-2018, 11:41 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
Do you mean b? We're not talking about Latin "d" here, but about EVA "b".
Ah, I get it now (I think)—it was self-referential (within the VMS).
I don't use EVA, I use my own key-mapping and fonts, so just to be sure I understand it, are you referring to the EVA designation for the shape at the end of some of the daiin tokens?
If so, then I'll agree they may have something in common. It would be consistent with medieval conventions. In Latin scripts, the tail is an abbreviation symbol and in Latin scripts, the various apostrophes are also abbreviation symbols, and some of these symbols are used in both positions (above letters and also at the ends of words) so yes, in the VMS there may also be a relationship between the "d" shaped tail and the "d" shaped "apostrophe" glyph.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - Anton - 27-07-2018
I don't remember where exactly it occurs - it's quite rare - but definitely it occurs from time to time, I once checked for that. See here (table "basic EVA"): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - nickpelling - 28-07-2018
I've thought a lot about ch vs sh: the key problem seems to be that the plume of sh is rendered in so many ways through the Voynich Manuscript's pages that it seems likely that you can find numerous counterexamples to just about any constructive theory you can put together about how they they were supposed to be constructed.
At a slightly more fundamental level, I don't believe that anyone has yet done a microscopic study of the letters in the different section to work out in which precise order different hands assembled strokes into letters. My suspicion is that each of the hands has a fairly consistent way of writing Voynichese letters, but that this breaks down when they miscopy things (e.g. when they start copying sh as ch, and then have to fix it up etc), but it would be much better if we just knew this kind of thing in a codicologically definitive way.
The area I was pretty sure in 2006 that I caught one of the Voynich hands specifically assembling letters in different passes was on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (Curse pp.164-168), where it seemed (and indeed still seems) to me that the aii- groups were written first before the -n flourish was added as a second pass (in a different ink). But that's a separate story.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - -JKP- - 28-07-2018
(28-07-2018, 06:08 PM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've thought a lot about ch vs sh: the key problem seems to be that the plume of sh is rendered in so many ways through the Voynich Manuscript's pages that it seems likely that you can find numerous counterexamples to just about any constructive theory you can put together about how they they were supposed to be constructed.
If you are familiar with Latin conventions, you find that they do fall into the same basic shape groups. This, however, does not necessarily mean that the shape variations are meaningful in the VMS as they are in Latin. It might be that the scribes are so familiar with writing these forms that they habitually and unconsciously draw them. It's also possible that the shape variations are intended to make the manuscript "look" like Latin (to those who know scribal conventions) while still being something else.
Quote:At a slightly more fundamental level, I don't believe that anyone has yet done a microscopic study of the letters in the different section to work out in which precise order different hands assembled strokes into letters. My suspicion is that each of the hands has a fairly consistent way of writing Voynichese letters, but that this breaks down when they miscopy things (e.g. when they start copying sh as ch, and then have to fix it up etc), but it would be much better if we just knew this kind of thing in a codicologically definitive way.
I have been working on this for a long time. This is why I've done the painstaking work of creating four transcripts (each from a slightly different point of view). There are certain sections where specific shapes are seen more often than others and there are scribes that distinguish the shapes more clearly than others. It is, however, extremely time-consuming. I basically have to give up sleep to work on it.
Quote:The area I was pretty sure in 2006 that I caught one of the Voynich hands specifically assembling letters in different passes was on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (Curse pp.164-168), where it seemed (and indeed still seems) to me that the aii- groups were written first before the -n flourish was added as a second pass (in a different ink). But that's a separate story.
I think this is an important issue, that the VMS text may have been assembled in different passes, and I believe it is something that can be studied. It's not something I've worked on, however, since there aren't enough hours in the day. I'm hoping someone will. Emma's question about when the topstroke may have been added (after the bench was drawn), I assume, indicates an interest in this.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - -JKP- - 29-07-2018
(27-07-2018, 01:24 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't remember where exactly it occurs - it's quite rare - but definitely it occurs from time to time, I once checked for that. See here (table "basic EVA"): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Anton, I tried to figure out what was meant by EVA-b b.
I thought it might be the "d"-shaped tails that sometimes occur at the end of "daiin" (and it might be, for some of them), but I found more clear examples, where it looks like a tail has been added to the base of a c-shape. This is not standard in Latin script. Usually when they added a tail to "c" or "e" they did it at the top not the bottom, so I'm not sure how to interpret these (folio 7v):
And yes, this might be related to some of the foot-attached tails in EVA-sh.
The line that has the first sample also has a deees token with a tail on the top.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - Common_Man - 29-07-2018
Isn't it curious that many letters in voynich has a counterpart with a tail attached as well? EVA-R, EVA-S, EVA-I and now this. How is this charachter distributed? (As in the number, is the number comparable to other alphabets/tokens? How closely are vords using these symbols written?) I think depending on distribution, it maybe having an independant meaning/sound.. Or maybe Torsten's idea of shaps of glyphs being important and that similar ones occur together might have a substantiation, right?
RE: The Origin of [sh] - -JKP- - 29-07-2018
What's interesting about EVA-r and EVA-s is these are common Latin abbreviations and, in Latin, they can stand alone (as a single glyph). In the VMS, they can also stand alone.
They are shaped the same and often positioned the same.
In Latin, the EVA-r shape can stand for r-something abbreviation but can also stand for i-something abbreviation. Which one it is is known by context. In the VMS, IF the tail is an abbreviation, there's not enough context to know if it is i-something, r-something (or something else). In other words, it's possible that EVA-r could represent two different sound values or abbreviations, as it does in Latin, or it could simply be a shape by itself that means anything (a number? a symbol?).
But here's something that is not clear. Is EVA-r a stem with a top-tail and then the v shape with a tail a stem with a bottom-tail? What I mean is, are the bottom and top tails deliberate position shifts? If so, the dynamic of foot-tails and top-tails we see in EVA-sh might apply to other glyphs, as well.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - Emma May Smith - 29-07-2018
(29-07-2018, 11:26 AM)Common_Man Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Isn't it curious that many letters in voynich has a counterpart with a tail attached as well? EVA-R, EVA-S, EVA-I and now this. How is this charachter distributed? (As in the number, is the number comparable to other alphabets/tokens? How closely are vords using these symbols written?) I think depending on distribution, it maybe having an independant meaning/sound.. Or maybe Torsten's idea of shaps of glyphs being important and that similar ones occur together might have a substantiation, right?
You may be interested in Brian Cham's Curve-line System (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). The theory basically posits two things:
- That many glyphs have a e and i counterpart, such as s and r or b and n.
- And that the e and i fundamentally govern the structures of words.
It definitely deserves its own thread as there's so much to discuss on the matter.
RE: The Origin of [sh] - Anton - 29-07-2018
@ JKP - yes, that's exactly what's EVA-b. I think I have seen this symbol in a 15c manuscript, I'll try to post about that later.
@ Emma & Common_Man - check these threads:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.