Voynich theories and Voynich solutions

[MarcoP]

Marco and Koen, I want to thank you both for taking the time to discuss my remark about the Combinatorial Method. Obviously there are limitations on its use, at least for the individual researcher. Though I hope that the general idea, of using and questioning the artefact in order to evolve an explanation, is acceptable. Outside information might prove very useful, but we must have an absolute certainty about its appropriateness before using it.

Theories which use outside information will eventually prove worthless if the wrong information is brought in—that's the long and short of it. Theories which are built up by comparing and contrasting different parts of the manuscript will always have some worth, however little.

This is true of imagery and text. For example, I know that Koen has done research comparing the nymphs to one another, and the findings will always be valid. Yet comparing the nymphs to those in other manuscripts is always fraught because we can never be sure (or, at least, it takes huge proof) that the illustrator ever saw such and such a drawing.

Hi Emma, I have only read a few web pages about Pallottino's method after you mentioned it. I understand his main "adversaries" were etymologists freely matching Etruscan words with similar words in other languages. This fits well with what you write about the intrinsic reliability of an analysis which is not based on external parallels. 

I wish I knew more of the history of Etruscan research. For instance, how did they come to understand the difference between singular and plural words? Your current Voynichese research is possibly starting to give results in the identification of root forms (and there is a lot of work that can be done in this area). But I can't imagine how one can move from this structural analysis to the assignment of meanings (I do understand this is premature now). I guess that labels will play an important role in this, both because (as you wrote on your blog) labels can be expected to be in a "normal form" uninfluenced by other text and because they can benefit from some kind of (however obscure) visual hint to their meaning.

Maybe it would be a good idea to have a thread about Pallottino and Etruscan linguistic research (and its similarities and differences with Voynich research). Reading suggestions would also be welcome