This is impossible for a language

[Mauro]

In Spanish and Portuguese, 'antes' is a very common word that means 'before'.  But it is also a suffix like English '-ents' and '-ants', so there are many hundreds of words that end with '-antes', like 'estudiantes', 'cantantes', 'passantes', ...

In Italian 'vino' of course is a very common word, but it is also the ending of all nouns and adjectives that end in '-vo' when inflected in the diminutive: 'bravo' -> 'bravino', and also of all verbs that end in '-vare' when inflected in the subjunctive 3rd plural: 'provare' -> 'provino', 'trovare' -> 'trovino'...

In Italian I would add 'mente'. It means both 'mind' and 'he/she lies' and is also an extremely common adverbial suffix, similar to English '-ly'. Abitualmente (usually), attualmente (currently), banalmente (trivially), casualmente (randomly), dannosamente (harmfully), estremamente (extremely)... thousands of words I guess, surely (sicuramente) many hundreds (*).

(*) I then asked Google (translated and shortened): many thousands attested in the dictionaries, but it's impossible to give an exact number because the suffix is extremely productive and new words in -mente are continually evolving.

And I guess this holds for most languages.

[eggyk]

Things like "-ly" or "-dly" would get huge coverage too in english. "-lijk" in dutch as well. e?

But the challenge is to find a suffix that may occur in hundreds of words in the same book, and is by itself a word that is more common than all of them.

All the best, --stolfi

Something like "den" or "en" in dutch, perhaps. 

Any noun that ends with "d" will become "den" when pluralised. They both work standalone too:

"en" is extremely common word of course, meaning "and"
"den" is an old version of "de" (at least i think?) which is the definite article "the", but also means pine tree

Both would likely be more common than the suffix version if used that way.

[pfeaster]

Even after finding a language with one or more sets of words that behave in the way described here, the real challenge might lie in finding one in which virtually every word -- and not just some of them -- belongs to a group that behaves in the same way.

[oeesordy]

Things like "-ly" or "-dly" would get huge coverage too in english. "-lijk" in dutch as well. e?

But the challenge is to find a suffix that may occur in hundreds of words in the same book, and is by itself a word that is more common than all of them.

All the best, --stolfi

I agree with this.

[oshfdk]

But the challenge is to find a suffix that may occur in hundreds of words in the same book, and is by itself a word that is more common than all of them.

All the best, --stolfi

I agree with this.

What's wrong with "in" in English. It's a very frequent word by itself and there are hundred of English words that end with "-in", but I think all of them are not as frequent as "in". bin, tin, sin, spin, grin, chain, begin...

[JoJo_Jost]

As I said, the German word ‘ein’ – it isn’t restricted to certain types of words... it’s just everywhere. I reckon in several thousand words. And in Bavarian, what a coincidence, it’s written as ‘ain’...

[Stefan Wirtz_2]

... all here who used samples of existing natural languages to object the headline "impossible for a natural language",
indirectly gave proof that VMS is not deeply and cleverly `enciphered´ at all:
if the most common endings or word parts of languages re-appear constantly as `daiin´, that assumed encryption was quite worthless...

[oeesordy]

Adding to the challenge I see it has not been met as just in theory.  What if it were the highest frequency word and 165 of them in the book with the same amount of tokens as daiin for the word in the book as the suffix?

[oeesordy]

Suppose I'm wrong, then would it be word substitution not following letter for letter of a language; or does the Voynich lean more towards an invented language, because I think if it were a cipher it would have already been solved?  Can these questions really be answered, I hope this example might have gave us rush not disappointment.  It seems the voynich has so many blind alley's when you look for light the more pain to your eye's.

And if you think it is word substitution would the prefixes and suffixes follow any logic from the given language it supposed to follow like Latin or is it just "Lingual"?  However maybe the attempt at making a language makes it really not behave entirely like a language.

[Stefan Wirtz_2]

Suppose I'm wrong, then would it be word substitution not following letter for letter of a language; or does the Voynich lean more towards an invented language, because I think if it were a cipher it would have already been solved?  Can these questions really be answered, I hope this example might have gave us rush not disappointment.  It seems the voynich has so many blind alley's when you look for light the more pain to your eye's.

And if you think it is word substitution would the prefixes and suffixes follow any logic from the given language it supposed to follow like Latin or is it just "Lingual"?  However maybe the attempt at making a language makes it really not behave entirely like a language.

I would go so far to say that the VMS characters are an invented alphabet — this is easy.
„Alphabet“ may as well be some simple-type enciphering, but I think you are right: that one would have been cracked at latest within the last 10-20 years.

There is no trace of Latin = it is not Latin or any related language. The list of „solutions“ shows all the failed attempts.
I severely doubt there was ever any systematic comparison even with only all (geographically) european languages; the dogma of VMS „being an italian herbal“ or „coming from somewhere around the Alps“ weighed too heavy on those who are still curious…