A key to understand the VMS

[Sam G]

Unfortunately, the level of context dependency for the VMS is on a higher level than expected for a linguistic system. Therefore, context dependency alone is not enough to allow the conclusion that the patterns found must be the result of a genuine linguistic structure [see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.].

I don't see any basis for this claim.

In fact co-occurence is normal for a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. [see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]. Therefore this property only demonstrates that the VMS is also using a self referencing system. Also the autocopying hypotheses results in a self referencing system: "The connection between consecutive lines and between similar glyph groups exists because the text is a copy of itself. The statistical features of the text can be explained by the hypothesis that the author of the VMS was using the described self-referencing system to generate the text. This text generation mechanism also explains the observation that for common glyph groups almost all spelling variations occur. The use of different spelling variations is no coincidence, because the scribe was generating the text by varying glyph groups already written." [You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]

Have you produced any text that has this property?  I don't see why auto-copying should produce it.

Basically, all of your arguments boil down to identifying some property of the VMS text and then:

1) Asserting, without any evidence, that it cannot be a property of a natural language text

2) Asserting, without any evidence, that auto-copying would produce that property