I notice they have left out the transliteration step in their examples.
For example, they don't explain how they got from
otcheo dain chty ykees cheg
to
"I manage a sudden leap of the believer by fighting against appearances (symptoms) and to restrain contractions for a while. "
I tried to match up the text with the transliteration chart (I have to go, so I had to do this quickly) and I think it comes out like this...
Ovis contracto saltum contra visus contentis quoque contracts g
I'd like to know what our Latin experts think of that.
If that's not what the writer intended, then he should have included the transliteration step.
.
To me, it looks like the writer took isolated phrases and tried to fit the abbreviations to the phrases (rather than the other way around) to wrangle some sense out of it, but try applying those transliterations to any other part of the manuscript and see what you get!
(I'm less motivated to read the paper now.)
For example, they don't explain how they got from
otcheo dain chty ykees cheg
to
"I manage a sudden leap of the believer by fighting against appearances (symptoms) and to restrain contractions for a while. "
I tried to match up the text with the transliteration chart (I have to go, so I had to do this quickly) and I think it comes out like this...
Ovis contracto saltum contra visus contentis quoque contracts g
I'd like to know what our Latin experts think of that.
If that's not what the writer intended, then he should have included the transliteration step.
.
To me, it looks like the writer took isolated phrases and tried to fit the abbreviations to the phrases (rather than the other way around) to wrangle some sense out of it, but try applying those transliterations to any other part of the manuscript and see what you get!
(I'm less motivated to read the paper now.)