10-03-2020, 08:51 AM
All conclusions based on detailed statistics or general (visual) inspections are based on a set of assumptions.
Unfortunately, these assumptions are rarely stated, and often not even fully realised.
The tacit assumption in almost all analyses is that one Voynich character represents one plain text character or one sound.
The tentative conclusion that Voynichese is incompatible with human language is based on this assumption.
Statistical tools are an excellent way to test the assumptions, but this is rarely done.
As far as I am concerned, Voynichese is not incompatible with human language in general. This has not been demonstrated by any test.
Also under the assumption that one symbols is one PT character or sound, Voynichese has not been demonstrated to be incompatible with human language.
It behaves rather similarly to oriental languages that exhibit a clear syllable structure.
Now, to be clear, I am not saying that this is what Voynichese is. I am just saying that it is not incompatible with that.
Unfortunately, these assumptions are rarely stated, and often not even fully realised.
The tacit assumption in almost all analyses is that one Voynich character represents one plain text character or one sound.
The tentative conclusion that Voynichese is incompatible with human language is based on this assumption.
Statistical tools are an excellent way to test the assumptions, but this is rarely done.
As far as I am concerned, Voynichese is not incompatible with human language in general. This has not been demonstrated by any test.
Also under the assumption that one symbols is one PT character or sound, Voynichese has not been demonstrated to be incompatible with human language.
It behaves rather similarly to oriental languages that exhibit a clear syllable structure.
Now, to be clear, I am not saying that this is what Voynichese is. I am just saying that it is not incompatible with that.