From "decryption" to "translation"

[Anton]

Hi Marco,

In any case, exact reduplication of words does not disappear even if one considers a nomenclator.

Yes, that's a good point, I've been thinking of that. One possible case that I can bring forward when repetitive sequences could occur (in a "nomenclator solution") is when one is in need of composite numerals, such as e.g. 333. In the absence of such large numerical in a nomenclator,  one has two options to represent that. The first one is to say "three hundred and thirty three", the other one is say "three three three". The latter option would produce a repetitive sequence. Not that I can point the exact sequence in the VMS where I believe this be the case, but this is simply for the sake of argument. Other potential cases may probably be imagined as well.

I would not stricly advocate a "purely nomenclator" solution; with 8114 (as per voynich.nu) different vords comprising the vocabulary of Voynichese, it's quite an open question whether it would have been both efficient and possible to base that entirely on a nomenclator. That's quite a number; for example, Shakespeare's vocabulary embraces (as I just googled out) roughly 12000 words.

What I'm bringing forward is, in the first place, this "word-based" paradigm, I wonder if an unknown text can be efficiently approached from this viewpoint, given a) the extensive imagery, b) the statistical tools that are at hand for modern researchers and c) our rough understanding of the contexts in which the vords such as labels do occur. E.g. if labels occur near stars, then they would designate either star names or some associations with stars - like e.g. stones governed by stars etc. This paradigm is solution-invariant (with the meaningless text hypothesis set aside, of course).