27-09-2017, 11:20 PM
I wonder how useful it would be to have an agreed set of meta characters as part of EVA.
I have seen others use capital letters to stand for groups of characters which are similar in some ways. For example [E] can be used to stand for [e, ee, eee], ignoring exactly how many [e] characters are in a row. So [okEdy] could stand for [okedy, okeedy, okeeedy]. This is useful in talking about more general and abstract word structure.
Some proposals for meta EVA:
[B]: any bench [ch, sh]
[E]: any [e] sequence [e, ee, eee]
[G]: any non-bench gallows [k, t, f, p]
[I]: any [i] sequence [i, ii, iii]
[N]: any sequence ending [n] with any number of [i], so [n, in, iin, iiin]
[R]: any sequence ending [r] with any number of [i], so [r, ir, iir]
Thoughts? Would it be useful?
I have seen others use capital letters to stand for groups of characters which are similar in some ways. For example [E] can be used to stand for [e, ee, eee], ignoring exactly how many [e] characters are in a row. So [okEdy] could stand for [okedy, okeedy, okeeedy]. This is useful in talking about more general and abstract word structure.
Some proposals for meta EVA:
[B]: any bench [ch, sh]
[E]: any [e] sequence [e, ee, eee]
[G]: any non-bench gallows [k, t, f, p]
[I]: any [i] sequence [i, ii, iii]
[N]: any sequence ending [n] with any number of [i], so [n, in, iin, iiin]
[R]: any sequence ending [r] with any number of [i], so [r, ir, iir]
Thoughts? Would it be useful?


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)