18-04-2021, 10:05 PM
Explanatory note for those reading and catching up with this thread:
For what I now consider the relatively more serious (or rather less unserious) analysis of the Middle English hypothesis, please begin with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at the top of page 3 of this thread. My posts prior to this message followed the mistaken approach of prematurely attempting to "interpret" individual lines of text using excessive degrees of freedom in the interpretation, following the mistaken method of what the more experienced analysts of the Voynich ms text on this forum (Rene, Marco, Koen, Anton, JKP, Emma, and many others) often describe as the "four-step process" or "word salad" method of "reading", "interpreting", and "translating" the Voynich ms text. I have tried this process before, with completely different languages, and it has not worked. If I or anyone else is to make any progress with this Middle English hypothesis, we (read: I) must adopt better and more rigorous methods of investigation and analysis of the ms text. I'm sure I have still made mistakes even after the message I refer to as the proper starting point for the relatively more serious (or rather less unserious) consideration of the Middle English hypothesis in this thread. But I hope that those mistakes are less fatal and more fixable than the type of methodological errors committed prior to that point. I welcome the feedback and contributions of all who are interested in analyzing this hypothesis. The feedback of those with critical and skeptical perspectives is especially welcome. Thank you for your patience with my many mistakes and methodological errors. I appreciate it very much.
Geoffrey
For what I now consider the relatively more serious (or rather less unserious) analysis of the Middle English hypothesis, please begin with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at the top of page 3 of this thread. My posts prior to this message followed the mistaken approach of prematurely attempting to "interpret" individual lines of text using excessive degrees of freedom in the interpretation, following the mistaken method of what the more experienced analysts of the Voynich ms text on this forum (Rene, Marco, Koen, Anton, JKP, Emma, and many others) often describe as the "four-step process" or "word salad" method of "reading", "interpreting", and "translating" the Voynich ms text. I have tried this process before, with completely different languages, and it has not worked. If I or anyone else is to make any progress with this Middle English hypothesis, we (read: I) must adopt better and more rigorous methods of investigation and analysis of the ms text. I'm sure I have still made mistakes even after the message I refer to as the proper starting point for the relatively more serious (or rather less unserious) consideration of the Middle English hypothesis in this thread. But I hope that those mistakes are less fatal and more fixable than the type of methodological errors committed prior to that point. I welcome the feedback and contributions of all who are interested in analyzing this hypothesis. The feedback of those with critical and skeptical perspectives is especially welcome. Thank you for your patience with my many mistakes and methodological errors. I appreciate it very much.
Geoffrey