11-09-2016, 12:35 PM
Many thanks Marco,
this is indeed a very helpful result.
If 172 labels are not found back in the text, then 332 are. Of these, 70% are found back as a single word separated by spaces, and this is indeed a very high percentage, suggesting that the spaces as we see them in the main text are intentional.
This isn't water-tight proof of course, but very strong evidence.
One has to keep in mind that the list of labels in the MS do not follow Zipf's law at all. While the label words aren't exactly unique, they are "almost unique". Among the labels, there are only few repetitions.
The label words *could* be repetitions of words in the main text, after the text was written with arbitrary space insertion, but then one should not expect such a flat word frequency distribution in the labels.
this is indeed a very helpful result.
If 172 labels are not found back in the text, then 332 are. Of these, 70% are found back as a single word separated by spaces, and this is indeed a very high percentage, suggesting that the spaces as we see them in the main text are intentional.
This isn't water-tight proof of course, but very strong evidence.
One has to keep in mind that the list of labels in the MS do not follow Zipf's law at all. While the label words aren't exactly unique, they are "almost unique". Among the labels, there are only few repetitions.
The label words *could* be repetitions of words in the main text, after the text was written with arbitrary space insertion, but then one should not expect such a flat word frequency distribution in the labels.
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)