[split] Verbose cipher?

[MarcoP]

Hi Yulia, as I wrote You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., I think that labels are a serious problem for the "plain verbose cipher" idea. If it is a verbose cipher, it is likely homophonic and labels suggest that there is more going on (e.g. heavy systematic abbreviation): such a complex system could explain why the manuscript hasn't been decoded yet. 

I agree with this ideas, verbose cipher, homophonic and maybe some abbrevations. 
In my opinion "words" are small groups of letters.

This is indeed the scenario described in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. For instance, the single plain-text word "sigh" is encoded by two Voynichese words 'sain' and 'asy' corresponding to the "small groups of letters" 'si' and 'gh'.
I don't know much about the history of cryptography, but I believe that such a cipher is much more advanced than the actual early XV century ciphers we know.

The iterations of "words" (some of them with slitght variations) throughout the text suggests a style of writting to hide the words. A sample, to say quattor: QTOR   ATOR   ATTOR.

In the scenario described above, this seems to me to be an over-kill, i.e. further complexity is added without explaining  any additional property of Voynichese:

• The fact that Voynichese words are short is already explained by the assumption that each cipher-word corresponds to something smaller than a plain-text word. There is no need for an additional abbreviation system (which  is instead necessary for a verbose cipher where each cipher-word codes a plain-text word).
  
• The "slight variations" could be  explained by the homophonic options in the verbose cipher: e.g. A could be ciphered as both "ain" or "aiin", B as both 'ok' or 'qok' etc. Features of Voynichese like its low character conditional entropy, almost normal TTR, rigid word structure are not compatible with the arbitrary dropping of characters in your example. Everything  is possible, but your example does not seem to me to be consistent with the available evidence.