18-11-2021, 07:27 PM
In the shower the other morning (where I do my best thinking) I wondered whether evidence that the grammar changes in concordance with scribal hands gives weight to the theory that the text is meaningless.
In other words, if there are different scribes, and each scribe has a slightly different grammar, are they all using their own interpretation of the same generating mechanism to create slightly different nonsense texts?
If they were working off the same encoding mechanism, then you wouldn't see these differences, as the text would always be encoded in the same fashion.
Of course, we could explain this away by suggesting that each scribe had their own style of writing, and it's just the way they put together the underlying plaintext that causes the differences.
In other words, if there are different scribes, and each scribe has a slightly different grammar, are they all using their own interpretation of the same generating mechanism to create slightly different nonsense texts?
If they were working off the same encoding mechanism, then you wouldn't see these differences, as the text would always be encoded in the same fashion.
Of course, we could explain this away by suggesting that each scribe had their own style of writing, and it's just the way they put together the underlying plaintext that causes the differences.