Interesting result for f3r with an ngram Genetic Algorithm

[julian]

The two attached histograms are based on the length of word occurrences (not word "types" as in Rene's graph discussed above).

Latin has a spike for words 2 characters long. These correspond to a number of hugely frequent particles like prepositions (in, ex, ab, de...), conjunctions  (et, ac...), pronouns (id, tu, me...). 
Latin also has a long tail of long words, which of course get less frequent with the growing of length. In the vulgate, 9% of the words are 10 or more characters long.

Voynichese has a simpler distribution, with a single peak corresponding to length 5 (corresponding to the central, but secondary, peak for Latin). Long words are rarer: less than 1% are 10 or more characters long.

The mapping from Voynichese to Latin should stretch the histogram in two opposite directions, possibly by making short words shorter and long words longer.

Thanks, Marco.

Based on comparisons of Voynich word frequencies in Herbal A and Herbal B, the following pops out:

• EVA-d is a null. Or optional. 
  

This substitution places EVA-aiin at the top of the Herbal word frequency list for language A and B.


It looks like the Language A scribe always wrote EVA-daiin whereas the Language B scribe sometimes wrote EVA-daiin and sometimes EVA-aiin. I haven't looked to see if s/he switched to EVA-aiin in the later Language B folios - that would be a nice finding if so.

If you replace EVA-d with a null, and recompute the word statistics, you find that EVA-aiin occurs about one and half times as often as the next most common word, in both Language A and B, which I think lends credence to the postulate that EVA-d is a null   

Going further, replacing EVA-d with a null in the whole manuscript, and looking at the resulting top frequency words leads to another pop out:

• EVA-chol (Language A) is the same word as EVA-chey (Language B)
  
• EVA-chor (Language A) is the same word as EVA-shey (Language B)
  

Food for thought