Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

Indeed. From what I understand so far, the Ardics have the following degrees of freedom:

1. The author used multiple dialects, so a word can be translated into any of half a dozen forms
2. One glyph can have 7+ sounds assigned to it
3. The author used "poetic" language that is "rhythmically matching" along with some kind of very clever word play
4. The author encoded information in an acrostic down the first line of every page
5. The author also used some Latin / Greek / other words

Seems to me if you take a five-glyph vord you could easily find 50+ interpretations from which you can choose to construct your sentence.

I think numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 could be said to essentially apply to Gerard Cheshire's theory. (Number 4 does not apply)

Cheshire's proto-romance theory draws on many European languages and non-European languages, that may not necessarily be romance languages, so point 1 applies; this is the most important parallel. In Cheshire's theory I believe that some Glyphs can have more than one sound, point 2. "Word salad" grammar free sentences, which can be interpreted in many ways, I think this is similar to point 3. Point 5 is in Cheshire's theory akin to point 1.

And your conclusion about the degrees of freedom in interpretation of a word also implies.

One thing I don't know if Ardic like Cheshire ignores spaces or places spaces where he sees fit.

I haven't studied lots of Voynich translation theories, so I am unable to comment on which other theories have the same problems, but my impression is that many have these kind of problems, where the degrees of freedom necessarily make it possible to construct many different translations from the text of the Voynich. Of course these multiple translations make it a very slow process for the decipherer to select their preferred translation, which they think best fits the imagery.

I think that there is a detail that most of the people misjudge.
The author used of multiple dialects never give us an area for translations. It doesn't give us much room to move. On the contrary, it makes our work difficult for sure. For example, the word AY /month, moon) in some dialects can be voiced as OY in another, as OI or AIY etc. There are no big distances between them in terms of sound value. On the contrary, they have close sound values. In addition they all have the same meaning content. So this does not give us much room for movement. In fact, there are similar situations in every language. We cannot avoid them, but we must take them into account.

Thanks,