(13-02-2023, 10:28 PM)Searcher wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The text is full of long sequences of ch, sh, o, r, d, etc. They are not so notable in the text, but it doesn't mean that their strings less significant.I should check ch/sh sequences. ch/sh are similar to k/t in probability of getting an existing word by replacing one with the other, especially for common words, which gives them a random-like quality. I don't understand what you mean by o, r, d.
The Latin examples of alliteration that you give are remarkable because they are rare. There is nothing in literature like what we see in the VMS anyway. Too many literary devices kill the literary devices hypothesis. I know some authors don't have limits: there is a French 300-page book written entirely without the letter "e", and there are two VMS pages, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , written entirely without EVA-e, coincidentally.
About alliteration, k/t function as consonants too, because they are inserted next to apparent vowels, making the text look less strange. Why would they then make the text so babble-like? It defeats the purpose of making it believable. I don't believe even hoaxers (in Torsten Timm's self-citation theory) would mindlessly copy nearby chunks of text so much that they have several in close vicinity, without realizing how poor the lexical diversity has become, and then consistently made it stay even lower in an entire section: quire 13. I found a Latin book that has a very low type-token ratio. The manuscript is even worse than the printed version. So anything is possible. But is it likely? No.