Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

Not many Turkish words with "m" ?

My private Turkish interpreter just told me there are just as many as with other letters.

Hello,

A substantial amount of the words used in the Voynich Manuscript are in current use by many modern Azerbaijani-Turkish and Anatolian-Turkish dialects, and many of the words have not changed at all, for the phonetic pronunciations and contextual definitions have remained intact. 

Furthermore, the text that appeared in VM is following many Turkish phonetic and morphological structures. Although, there are too many such concepts to list here a few examples we can provide include facts such as, both VM and Turkish structure does not have any words that end with “/b/, /c/, /d/, /g/”. 

Likewise, they also do not have any words that start with “/f/, /h/, /j/, /l/, /m/, /n/, /p/, /r/, /v/, /z/, /ş/”. 

There are some exception to this rule. There might be word being taken from other languages such as Arabic, Persian, etc. Additionally, we must account for the fact that certain first letters may be dropped , as well as letters can be changed to replace others as dialects expanded and evolved. For example, the word “bar” became “var”; “/b/” can also become “/m/”, “/s/| becomes “ş” etc.. 

Another example that has no exceptions is the use of the letter “/ğ/”, as there are no word that start with it. All of this is reflected in the VM.

In addition, there are many duplicate and multiple word repeats in Turkish. That kind of the repetition was written to make the plural of a word in Old Turkish. For example, 'flower'  (çiçek) is a singular word. The word 'flowers' (çiçekler) means a large number of (more than one) 'flowers' in today's Turkish, taking the suffix '-ler' make it plural. In Old Turkish period, They used to write that word twice (such as 'çiçek çiçek' / or example, like "flower flower") for making that word plural.

In Turkish, triple, quadruple, and quintile repetitions of the same word (for different purpose and/or functions) are also seen.
You can find the details and articles you are looking for on the page below.

Best regards,

Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Note about Multifunctional Isolated Affixation in Agglutinative Syntax:
The author of the manuscript was very specific and precise in the choice of words. A crucial aspect of the manuscript being written in a Turkic/Turkish language is that the language is agglutinative. The word structure has to contain a root, but the root may be also comprised of other roots and different combinations of suffixes, prefixes and other roots which will cause each variation to produce a new word. Furthermore, certain roots can also be used as suffixes, often changing the meaning completely. The vast understanding of the language is proven by the fact that the author is able to take a suffix and isolate it in a sentence, causing the words before and after the suffix to each have a different meaning as they approach that suffix. However, each combination of the roots, suffixes, and prefixes in the words around (either before or after, and sometimes both) the isolated suffix also have multiple combinations both within and with the isolated suffix again, thus causing even more implications and new words. The genius behind this is that the author produces and uses all of the potential meaning combinations in context and makes each one applicable to the situation. Therefore, the author is able to take two words and have a suffix in between and create dozens of meanings, yet make each one applicable to what he/she is trying to convey, thus demonstrating that the author had total control of the language being used. This enigmatic use of syntax oddly resonates with the reader without the reader fully understanding what the author did, yet renders the reader able to derive the same conclusion and understanding regardless. This example can be found in the 3rd line of the paragraph that was analyzed in Folio 33v-Sunflower-Herbal , yet is also present all throughout the manuscript as well as in different sections of analyzed folio.

Thanks,