14-01-2018, 07:50 PM
I don't claim to be strong at Latin, but I have been reading medieval Latin texts for a few years and this doesn't look like anything that I've seen from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, England, Czech, etc.
I would really like to hear Helmut Winkler's opinion on your translations.
In your translation, the words, their combination, the distribution... are all highly unusual. The common words found in almost every sentence in almost every medieval Latin text are completely missing. The joining words are missing. There are a lot of uncharacteristically long words joined together. The grammar is stilted and feels contrived.
I am also having trouble seeing the logic for some of the translations. It's as though you have intentionally created meaning. As I mentioned, why would you assume that bidirectional flow is referring to two colors of paint when it could just as easily (perhaps more easily) be translated as two branches of flowing liquid, as in a stream, for example? This strikes me as a very subjective choice.
I would really like to hear Helmut Winkler's opinion on your translations.
In your translation, the words, their combination, the distribution... are all highly unusual. The common words found in almost every sentence in almost every medieval Latin text are completely missing. The joining words are missing. There are a lot of uncharacteristically long words joined together. The grammar is stilted and feels contrived.
I am also having trouble seeing the logic for some of the translations. It's as though you have intentionally created meaning. As I mentioned, why would you assume that bidirectional flow is referring to two colors of paint when it could just as easily (perhaps more easily) be translated as two branches of flowing liquid, as in a stream, for example? This strikes me as a very subjective choice.


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