The Challenge of Analyzing a Dynamic Text

[JoJo_Jost]

I can't give you the Ortloff, it is a private transcription. But the Breslau Pharmacopoeia: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. should give similar values.

But be aware that the beginning of the Transkription is a modern German introductory text. The actual text begins with: 

Di wisen di hivore waren vnde di nu
sint der alden nachuolgere, di iehent algemeine, daz
di werlt si von vier dingen, der an ir nicht vber
Wirt noch gebrichet, der nimmer me noch nimmer
wirt min.

Transkription:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

[Torsten]

I have updated the draft of my paper 

The Challenge of Analyzing a Dynamic Text: Why the Voynich Manuscript Resists Conventional Interpretation


  The_Challenge_of_Analyzing_a_Dynamic_Text.pdf (Size: 190.1 KB / Downloads: 10)

The revised version makes four changes. First, the frequency-connectivity correlation — the paper's strongest diagnostic — now leads Section 3 rather than appearing second, with an explicit contrast to natural language behavior. Second, EVA-m is developed as a concrete case study in Section 2: the often-cited 62% line-final statistic masks bifolio-level variation where entire bifolios have zero instances while neighbors have dozens. Third, the refutation of alternatives is tightened by stating their shared prediction (discrete boundaries) once rather than addressing each sequentially. Fourth, the conclusion now includes the Timm and Schinner (2024) observation that "from the viewpoint of complexity theory, most likely the minimal representation of the VMS is the manuscript itself" — acknowledging the algorithm's limitations while reframing them as inherent to the object. The motivation paragraph has moved from the conclusion to Section 6 (Implications).

[Jorge_Stolfi]

it should be possible to construct a text of some length that has word with minimum edit distance 2 apart.

A trivial solution is to ddduuppliiccaattee eevveerryy lleetteerr of every word.  Then to change any valid word to any other valid word you need to replace at least two letters.

A more sophistcated trick is to append to each word a letter that serves as a "check digit".  Consider the letters A-Z as digits in base 26.  Take the words of any language with that alphabet.  Add all the letters of each word modulo 26, and append the corresponding letter to the word.  Define the result as the new lexicon of the language.  Then replacing any letter of the word by a different letter changes the sum modulo 26, hence the "check letter" at the end will not match; you would have to change at least two letters, or a letter and the "check letter", to get another valid word.

With a couple of "check letters" and suitable formulas you can catch also transpositions of letters.

All the best, --stolfi