(14-10-2017, 01:42 PM)Davidsch wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Quote:RENE.......Such a solution is definitely wrong, in case the letters Eva(p) and Eva(f) are the only ones that encode certain plain
text letters. It would not necessarily be wrong if (for example) the plaintext "n" would be encoded by Eva(l) or Eva(p).
I disagree and [...]
It is not clear to me what you are exactly disagreeing with.
To Helmut, and the question of transcription errors, one has to distinguish between two types of errors here:
1) Errors in the actual transcription (typically inconsistencies and inaccuracies)
2) Errors in interpreting the transcription.
With respect to the question whether
p could mean something related to the letter P:
Errors of type (1) are those when
p shapes arrie mis-transcribed as something else, or other letters as p.
Errors of type (2) are related to:
- judging that P represents a character in an alphabet or an abbreviation, while maybe it isn't
- judging that
p stands alone, while it could instead perhaps be part of a construct
The point that
p almost exclusively occurs on top lines of paragraphs is a valid statistical conclusion. Errors in this statement would be errors of type (1) and these are quite small.
Treating paragraph-initial p as a plain old letter (or abbreviation) is as wrong as treating the rubricated pilcrows in medieval manuscripts as characters that are part of the text. This is an error of type (2).