Hannig's analysis
As a starting point, Hannig assumes that a o y e and i are vowels.
He then compares VMS "vowel" patterns to a number of languages, giving three languages as examples (English, German, French).
Based on vowel patterns and the shortness of the VMS tokens, he concludes that the language cannot be Indo-European, Basque, Turkish or Finno-Ugric, that it is a Semitic language consisting mainly of three consonants.
Based on this, together with European-style drawings, he writes that there are only three possible options: "Arabic, Hebrew or Aramaic".
Thus he deduces that Hebrew is the only probable language.
As a starting point, Hannig assumes that a o y e and i are vowels.
He then compares VMS "vowel" patterns to a number of languages, giving three languages as examples (English, German, French).
Based on vowel patterns and the shortness of the VMS tokens, he concludes that the language cannot be Indo-European, Basque, Turkish or Finno-Ugric, that it is a Semitic language consisting mainly of three consonants.
Based on this, together with European-style drawings, he writes that there are only three possible options: "Arabic, Hebrew or Aramaic".
Quote:Wegen des (durchgängigen) Fehlens des arabischen Artikels el/al ist als wahrscheinliche Lösung nur Hebräisch als Sprache des Voynich anzunehmen, da Aramäisch in Europa nur im Zusam- menhang mit dem Hebräischen genutzt wurde.
Thus he deduces that Hebrew is the only probable language.