Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

the meaning of ÖD

The combination oq appears 22 times in the whole VMS, if o have several meanings then the different meanings of the combination make it even more marginal. 

You say that the symbol 4 is always followed by the symbol O. However, examining the words here with this approach is one of the many mistakes made very often.
As a result, trying to classify the words you want to examine by making tables in this way can be applied for Indo-European language words. But it is not applicable for Turkish. Here, due to the special and difficult-to-read writing style of the VM texts, it will be necessary to evaluate only and only the words in the form of phrases and sentences with the word in front of them.

But the numbers are clear, this combination represents 5.289 of 5.421. Where is the mistake in the approach? You can evaluate the words one by one, but that will not change the global numbers. The approach of big numbers to understand the relation between symbols is good for any language that uses them, I dont see any reason why turkish should be different.  

Your use of apps like "voynichese" is misleading. Because, for example, you read a single or multiple syllable character as if it were a single letter. Just like the phonetic sign you thought was P. For this reason, the table you have already made is wrong and misleading. Forget the Voynichese app and EVA tables. 

The group of P. I am not reading it in any way. The apps voynichese does not read it in any way. It just count coincidences, and it says than the group of P is preceded by q only 3 times in the whole Vms, and never is followed by q.
My table counts coincidences, there is nothing wrong in it. How do you interpretate the data is the question.

Dear Sali,

It is true that you have seen two letters side by side 5289 times as if they were a linear-pattern or a photograph. The mentioned web-app lets you count them. But there are facts that have been overlooked.


1-) This syllable, which is seen 5289 times, is not the same syllable that has the same phonetic value and has the same meaning on every line in which it is written. Sometimes the word suffix is sometimes a standalone word. The phonetic value, on the other hand, varies slightly according to the vowel harmony rule of the Turkish language and according to the alphabet transcription. For example, not making a distinction between O and Ö or A and E, etc. I have explained this part in detail before.

2-) It is possible that the syllable characters are similar to each other in terms of handwriting and that they are read incorrectly. The apps and tables you use all suggest incorrect sound equivalents, as well as suggest the same phonetic value for different signs.

3-) There are about 180 writing signs in the book, including syllable characters. About 30 letters, or sometimes less, were envisaged in each of the "Voynichese" implementation and the EVA variations, as well as in the alphabet transcriptions made before that. How will you solve a system with 180 fonts by suggesting 30 letters? Seeing the syllable characters as a normal alphabet sign already leads to a fundamental wrong start in the way of analysis.

4-) Turkish is an articulated language in terms of word formation. You can translate some single words in Turkish to English by forming sentence in English, sometimes with using 9 words or more. If you write Turkish word suffixes by separating them from the root, it can be difficult for the reader to read. Therefore, when you read the whole sentence, the phonetic value before any syllable changes the meaning of the word you read, so it is necessary to look at the whole. In other words, 5289 words may actually be loaded with 20 or 40 different words or word suffix-functions. that is, there is no situation where the same thing is repeated 5289 times.

5-) "Voynichese" app counts coincidences. But in many times it counts the coincidences by choosing different sign as a same one. Often, more than one syllable counts as like the same/particular phonetic value. So those numbers aren't correct anyway. However, they can be work for counting for side by side single adjacent letters (only for without syllable characters).

So, Voynichese counts coincidences, which is nothing wrong in it. But each of the "same looking coincidences part" could be different word and suffixs based on position in their sentence.

Thanks