01-04-2020, 02:54 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2020, 02:55 PM by Mark Knowles.)
I brought this up in the context of pharma labels as it was observed and as I have also observed that there are some examples of different plants with the same labels; moreover it is the case that there are non-plants with the same labels as plants elsewhere in the manuscript. In addition the question of the uncommonality of the plant label in the accompanying text was referred to.
Suggestions were made to explain this, such as:
1) Maybe plant labels aren't really names.
2) Maybe Voynichese is a highly inflective language as suggested by Koen.
(Elsewhere the possibility of the use of abbreviations has been suggested.)
A highly inflective language would still mean that the same/related word would in general have to some degree the same spelling as would a word that was sometimes abbreviated or not in different ways. However a word such as we see with the use of homophones that can be spelled in completely different ways would be much harder to spot.
The concept of nulls and filler text to me seem to be intrinsically related.
I would suggest renaming the thread to "Mark Knowles theories' of pharma and other labels"
Suggestions were made to explain this, such as:
1) Maybe plant labels aren't really names.
2) Maybe Voynichese is a highly inflective language as suggested by Koen.
(Elsewhere the possibility of the use of abbreviations has been suggested.)
A highly inflective language would still mean that the same/related word would in general have to some degree the same spelling as would a word that was sometimes abbreviated or not in different ways. However a word such as we see with the use of homophones that can be spelled in completely different ways would be much harder to spot.
The concept of nulls and filler text to me seem to be intrinsically related.
I would suggest renaming the thread to "Mark Knowles theories' of pharma and other labels"