A key to understand the VMS

[Torsten]

First it was "no natural language has a word network".  Now it's "no natural language with polysyllabic words has a word network".  Looks like you're losing ground, but despite this you seem to have no interest in considering further evidence.  Anyway, I've already talked about how a polysyllabic language could have the word network property, but despite the fact that you even quoted some of this below you did not actually address it in any way.  Instead you're just mechanically repeating the same points over and over again.

Maybe you should read your first posts in this thread again. Your point was that different "grammatical forms" are typical for languages in general and that no network of similar words exists. Now your point is that theoretical a language with a network of similar words like that of the VMS can exist. Obviously I was able to convince you that a network of similar words exists for the VMS.

Indeed my first statement was not specific enough. Therefore I have made a more detailed statement. I didn't see any problem if there is some progress in a discussion and both sides  learned something new.

The problem is that we didn't know if the VMS contains language or not.

Again, you did not actually address my point here at all.

I address your point. It is simply not my task to disproof your language hypothesis or Nick Pellings historical cipher hypothesis or Gordon Ruggs Cardan Grille hypothesis or Thomas E. O'Neils Gematria hypothesis etc. It is always possible that someone comes with a new hypotheses along. Therefore it is enough to ask you which language the VMS text represents or Nick Pelling which historical cipher he thinks the VMS text stands for. In the case of Gordon Rugg it is enough to point out that Rugg didn't give any reason why he is trying his Cardan Grille approach and that he can't explain why someone should use highly structured tables to generate a pseudo text. In the case of O'Neils Gematria it is enough to point out that he reads the same words differently all the time.
Therefore I find it more productive to discuss what the characteristic features of the VMS are and what this features say about the text of the VMS. My point simply is that before comparing the VMS with language we should look if the characteristic features of the VMS are compatible with the language hypothesis.

What characteristic features for the VMS exists beside the network of similar words?

One feature is the weak word order. In a text using human language grammatical relations should exist between words, and these relations should result in words used together multiple times. Therefore, the lack of repetitive phrases is surprising for the VMS. Moreover since the weak word order exists beside the network of similar words the existence of both features together is a challenge anyway.

There are many things that could be said about the VMS word order, but do you really believe that there are no natural languages with "weak word order"?

The problem is that beside the repetition of similar words there is no word order. "An additional observation is that in 24 out of 35 cases these repeated sequences use at least two words which are either spelled the same or very similarly." [see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.].

The shape of letter determines in some way how the letter is used within a word or within a line or within a paragraph. ...

What's more likely is that how the words are structured has influenced the design of the script.

No. For instance 'e' is common after 'k' and 't' but not after 'p' and 'f'. Words like 'peShol' and 'feeedy' are unusually rare whereas words like 'keeedy' and 'teeedy' are common for the VMS.

A second example is  that a gallow glyph following 'l' is most likely a glyph 'k' or 'f' but not a 't' or 'p'. An example for a word using 'lk' is 'olkchedy' and an example for a word using 'lp' is 'olpchedy'.

With other words the shape of a glyph has some influence to the selection of the next glyph.

With other words we search for a system with many interesting features at the same time. It is using the same or similar words but not the same or similar word sequences. Additionally this system is changing over time. Did this features really describe language?

Yes, the properties of the VMS text are like those of an unencrypted natural language text, and cannot be explained in any other way that is known and can be demonstrated.

Now, how many of these properties that you have mentioned can be found in sample texts generated by your auto-copying code?  My guess is: none.

It is not necessary to guess here. I have published an App to simulate the auto-copying hypothesis. See for instance my post from 08-02-2017, 07:23 PM in the thread. In fact all of the properties I know can be explained with the auto-copying hypothesis. 
The auto-copying method is not an invention of me. In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. I try to reverse engineer the way the text of the VMS was written. Maybe I have overseen something important in doing so but at least the auto-copying hypothesis is covering some of the properties of the VMS.