15-03-2019, 05:36 PM
Hello Jeffrey,
sure, I am critical, but I am equally critical of my own attempts.
I can be more specific:
On the vagueness and (especially) inconsistency, the translation table you provided is not complete, of course, but already there are a number of unclear associations:
Voynich-t can mean two different things, and so can Voynich-e.
At the same time, two different Voynich characters both map to Greek tau.
Voynich-d is particularly unclear. I think I understand that Voynich-p is not an alternative for Voynich-d, that can be used in the first lines, but Voynich-d is an alternative for Voynich-p that can be used in all lines (first and later).
Thus, Voynich-d can always mean two different things, of which one is a consonant (pi) and the other a vowel (upsilon) ?
Voynich-i also has a context-dependent meaning.
Stand-alone Voynich-a is a but when followed by Voynich-i it is ei.
Even more important I consider the second problem.
I am trying to put myself in the position of the author/scribe. What did he really write down and what did he mean?
If he meant to write:
skiais tais eipan oun
then why did he not do that, but wrote instead:
skiiois tis epan oan
The grammatical issue is something I cannot judge, so I can only refer to Koen's comment.
Finally, it is *much* more difficult to reduce entropy in any significant manner, than just removing the distinction between a few consonants. And again, the word pattern is not addressed at all.
This last point about the word pattern by itself is sufficient to reject the proposed "solution".
sure, I am critical, but I am equally critical of my own attempts.
I can be more specific:
On the vagueness and (especially) inconsistency, the translation table you provided is not complete, of course, but already there are a number of unclear associations:
Voynich-t can mean two different things, and so can Voynich-e.
At the same time, two different Voynich characters both map to Greek tau.
Voynich-d is particularly unclear. I think I understand that Voynich-p is not an alternative for Voynich-d, that can be used in the first lines, but Voynich-d is an alternative for Voynich-p that can be used in all lines (first and later).
Thus, Voynich-d can always mean two different things, of which one is a consonant (pi) and the other a vowel (upsilon) ?
Voynich-i also has a context-dependent meaning.
Stand-alone Voynich-a is a but when followed by Voynich-i it is ei.
Even more important I consider the second problem.
I am trying to put myself in the position of the author/scribe. What did he really write down and what did he mean?
If he meant to write:
skiais tais eipan oun
then why did he not do that, but wrote instead:
skiiois tis epan oan
The grammatical issue is something I cannot judge, so I can only refer to Koen's comment.
Finally, it is *much* more difficult to reduce entropy in any significant manner, than just removing the distinction between a few consonants. And again, the word pattern is not addressed at all.
This last point about the word pattern by itself is sufficient to reject the proposed "solution".