07-10-2019, 06:37 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-10-2019, 06:38 AM by Stephen Carlson.
Edit Reason: font size
)
(06-10-2019, 10:50 PM)Searcher wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
...
Ok. I agree. But the knowledge of this itself doesn't help. Did anyone try to find some common thing between those labels for different objects? Or common homograph? How many people examined and tried to make identifications of a particular word or word combination? As for the multiple encriptions, I'm just not sure how they can be recognized in the text.
...
At a minimum, this homonymy is evidence suggesting that the "labels" are not referential to the object it is next to. (Proposals of attributes or metadata for their function reflect this.) Yet, (deictic) referentiality is the basic function of a label, especially in what looks like an encyclopedia, so we have a mismatch between form and function but these "labels." One upshot that it is probably impossible to solve the VM through the "labels" since we are not justified in assuming that they actually do what labels do. Another upshot is that they--and the rest of the "language"--may well be asemic.
(07-10-2019, 03:52 AM)-JKP- wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
After putting in such an incredible effort to find patterns/relationships, the only noteworthy patterns that I saw were that the cho Vords showed up more often in the plant sections and the oh words more often in the star-related sections. The other commonalities did not yield the kind of linguistic patterns one would expect.
Sounds like disappointing results for such a lot of work. But thanks for the work.