Implications of the continuity of Currier "languages"

[ChenZheChina]

...

Choice 4: either A and B language words are different encodings of the same source text word, or, they are different source text words.
This is one of my favourite questions about this topic. I don't know the answer (of course).
This is also highly correlated with Choice 2.

Choice 5: the text is the product of a single person or of 2 (or more) persons
The main difference here is that for a single person, such a large variation would probably imply a longer creation time.

...

Here are some of my opinions.

For Choice 5, I asked how could you be sure that there were 2 or more persons, but the point is not the number of persons, but where they started. For me, it is totally possible that the book had more than one author, and they worked on the book one after one from Language A to Language B, so that the writing style changed as authors relayed.

Thus, for Choice 4, I prefer the second option, where different source text words were used to generate the Voynich language continuum. It is natural that a language could evolve by generations, and therefore new generations speak different text words than old generations speak.

The main reason I think it might take several generations is the introduce of EVA-x in Language B pages. According to Voynichese.com, EVA-x is absent in Language A pages, and is exclusive to Language B pages. This might imply that a new phoneme appeared in the new generation, and thus one new letter is required (example: G is introduced into Latin You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), or an old phoneme no longer exists, and thus removed (Kana WI and WE were removed in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).