(11-08-2020, 08:11 AM)ReneZ wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
...
The perceived problem with Eva-s vs. Eva-sh is not a real problem, especially when one looks at trigrams.
It is exactly the same as in English, where the s in 'she' is a different s than the one in 'son'.
However, English also has words like 'mishap', where the s is like in 'son'. This problem does not happen in Voynichese.
The s in "she" is pronounced differently from the "s" in "son", and there are numerous examples like this in English because it is a Germanic language with a huge infusion of Romance vocabulary (French). Around here, it's often called a "mongrel" language. There are numerous pronunciations for combinations like "ough" (tough, trough, though, through, and plough).
But how is that exactly the same as English? The shapes are the same in English and the sounds are different. In the VMS the shapes are different (quite a bit different) and whether it is pronounceable is not yet demonstrated.
But assuming Voynichese can be pronounced (which I doubt, at least in an untransformed form), the VMS text is not clustering near English. There are some languages where pronunciation is more closely tied to actual spelling. EVA-s and EVA-S might represent very different things. I don't know whether Caucasian spellings diverge significantly from pronunciation but whether it matters might depend on the language group.
But more importantly, there's no evidence that EVA-S and EVA-s are related in sound or function. EVA-s is an individual character. EVA-S is a combination of EVA-c and the curved-macron-shape that is written above it, which is somewhat presumptuous since that macron-shape is sometimes attached to EVA-h rather than EVA-c. One might be "a", the other might be "cer" (this is just an example). EVA-s and EVA-S do not behave the same in the VMS.