11-05-2020, 11:27 AM
This paper adds to what we know about the manuscript and opens new avenues of research. I am looking forward to its developments with the ongoing linguistic study at Yale.
In particular, I am curious to see the outcomes of a comparative analysis of the "Herbal A" and Recipes (or Pharma / Small-Plants) sections, both written by Scribe 1. This could allow us to understand how much of the difference between dialects is due to different scribes and how much to different contents.
Similarly, since "Herbal B" was written by three different scribes (2, 3, 5) a careful comparison between the dialects in single pages could be very informative. If I understand correctly, the contribution of Scribe 3 to properly herbal pages is limited to f65v, but for Scribes 2 and 5 there could be enough herbal text for an analysis.
Also, I am grateful to Lisa for joining the forum. Hopefully this will help making academic research more known between amateurs and improve the level of our contributions.
In particular, I am curious to see the outcomes of a comparative analysis of the "Herbal A" and Recipes (or Pharma / Small-Plants) sections, both written by Scribe 1. This could allow us to understand how much of the difference between dialects is due to different scribes and how much to different contents.
Similarly, since "Herbal B" was written by three different scribes (2, 3, 5) a careful comparison between the dialects in single pages could be very informative. If I understand correctly, the contribution of Scribe 3 to properly herbal pages is limited to f65v, but for Scribes 2 and 5 there could be enough herbal text for an analysis.
Also, I am grateful to Lisa for joining the forum. Hopefully this will help making academic research more known between amateurs and improve the level of our contributions.