21-09-2022, 01:56 PM
So you suggest, Antonio, that the sets of coodinates (vords) are arranged to give the appearance of a running text (and labels) in order to convey the impression of a “wise text” in one of the suitably wise languages? At that level, the appearance is deceptive?
What enables it to be done, though, is the spread of vords, some shorter and some longer.
So, if the vords are formulae (of coordinates?) why do some have three glyphs and some seven and most about five? And moreover, this according to a distribution not unlike natural languages?
If all vords were, say, five glyphs long, it wouldn’t give the desired impression of a text. Groups of vords would be like tables with columns. Instead, our author wants to give the impression of a (normal) running text, and can do this because vords are of various lengths (in linguistically felicitous proportions, as it happens.)
If vords are formulae – or at least (highly) formulaic sets – of astronomical data, you’d expect them to be the same number of glyphs, a set form. Formulae have form. Instead, these formulae vary in length.
But perhaps this is deceptive, and part of the deception to create the impression of text? The glyph set might be designed to allow for abbreviation or expansion of a standard set (vord). So vords are, say, all five glyphs long, but modified, so that some are longer and some shorter, by expansion or abbreviation? Perhaps all vords can be shortened or expanded into a standard formula?
As it is, it seems vords consist of three compartments (containers) – the standard formula is tripartite (even where compartments are empty.)
Do we have an astronomical reason why formulae (of coordinates) would be structured into three parts? (Past, present, future? Solar, lunar, fixed stars?)
Maybe the plaintext is just lists or tables of such formulae, all the same length, in three-part vords? This is then disguised by amending the vords so they are of various lengths so they can be arranged to give the (false but alluring) impression of a running text?
In any case, the vords are meaningful units (of astronomical coordinates) but the presentation as a written text (of “words”) is deceptive. As you have it, the motive for this was to add prestige and an aura of wisdom to the work.
So, finally, the manuscript is a highly illustrated set of tables disguised as a text.
What enables it to be done, though, is the spread of vords, some shorter and some longer.
So, if the vords are formulae (of coordinates?) why do some have three glyphs and some seven and most about five? And moreover, this according to a distribution not unlike natural languages?
If all vords were, say, five glyphs long, it wouldn’t give the desired impression of a text. Groups of vords would be like tables with columns. Instead, our author wants to give the impression of a (normal) running text, and can do this because vords are of various lengths (in linguistically felicitous proportions, as it happens.)
If vords are formulae – or at least (highly) formulaic sets – of astronomical data, you’d expect them to be the same number of glyphs, a set form. Formulae have form. Instead, these formulae vary in length.
But perhaps this is deceptive, and part of the deception to create the impression of text? The glyph set might be designed to allow for abbreviation or expansion of a standard set (vord). So vords are, say, all five glyphs long, but modified, so that some are longer and some shorter, by expansion or abbreviation? Perhaps all vords can be shortened or expanded into a standard formula?
As it is, it seems vords consist of three compartments (containers) – the standard formula is tripartite (even where compartments are empty.)
Do we have an astronomical reason why formulae (of coordinates) would be structured into three parts? (Past, present, future? Solar, lunar, fixed stars?)
Maybe the plaintext is just lists or tables of such formulae, all the same length, in three-part vords? This is then disguised by amending the vords so they are of various lengths so they can be arranged to give the (false but alluring) impression of a running text?
In any case, the vords are meaningful units (of astronomical coordinates) but the presentation as a written text (of “words”) is deceptive. As you have it, the motive for this was to add prestige and an aura of wisdom to the work.
So, finally, the manuscript is a highly illustrated set of tables disguised as a text.