11-06-2024, 05:42 PM
[quote="Aga Tentakulus" pid='60037' dateline='1718107799']
Dear Aga Tentakulus,
First and foremost, I would like to thank you for trying to understand the transcription I made for a sentence on this voynich.ninja page and for being the first person to ask a question about this matter.
I certainly did not cut off the sentences from anywhere. As you know, our author does not use period marks at the end of sentences, but most often each line is a separate sentence. However, in some cases, the sentence continues on the second line. For example, the continuation of the 10th line on page 33v can be seen on the 11th line. So how do we understand where the sentences end? In Turkish, the position of the subject and predicate within the sentence indicates where the sentence ends. In most dialects of the Turkish language, the predicate is at the end of the sentence. However, this rule is broken in poetic/literary writing styles and some dialects. For instance, this is not the case in Gagauz-Turkish.
The author seems to have used literary language in a poetic rhyme form on many pages here, and she/he also uses inverted sentences so as not to disrupt the integrity of the sentence. However, all these structures are in perfect harmony with the nature of Turkish as expected.
In the image you shared, the first line immediately following the original image line (the section starting with "Türeşkoşum") is the transcription line corresponding to the original letters in the Latin alphabet. In this line and the following line, the "/" (division) sign separates different pronunciations of the word. For example, as OLAR/ÖLER. You may remember from my previous posts that there is a vowel harmony rule in Turkish. Accordingly, O, A, U, I vowels are one group, and Ö, E, Ü, İ vowels are another group. These two groups never mix within a word.
Such a mix is not common, and it can seen in some dialects, minority dialects, and words that have passed from Arabic and Persian into Turkish. Therefore, the word we are giving as an example can never be OLER or ÖLAR. For instance, the word OLER disrupts the phonetic harmony of Turkish with the vowels O and E. Therefore, this word only has two forms of writing. Sometimes, and usually in words of 2 or 3 letters with only one vowel inside the word, there can be three different readings of the word. But let me say that all of these have corresponding meanings in Turkish. Just as the word OLAR (becomes) and the word ÖLER (dies) have meanings in Turkish.
Here, the VM author has set up so many different word plays that he has chosen each word in detail and with a plan. Because, we can see that the meaning of the sentence changes with the combinations of differently read words within the sentence, but the logical integrity and meaning of the sentence's integrity do not break.
Here, our author writes the texts to a special reader whom she/he addresses as "my pasha." The person the author addresses as "my pasha" is most likely Fatih Sultan Mehmet himself. Because, in a sentence on the map page, she/he conveys the message that a woman in a fortress kissed the armpit of the kaftan worn by "the pasha," which means offering verbal respect and allegiance to the sultan. Additionally, "kaftan" is the name of a special garment that is mostly worn by the sultan.
Anyway, to not stray too far from your questions, I will return to your question. I do not bring sentences together or divide them as I wish. Even without punctuation, it is understood where the sentence starts and ends when reading, and I read by maintaining the same word order. Also, due to the different readings of words, I write how these will change the meaning of the sentence in the explanations section. If you notice, I almost find and show every word in current and old Turkish dictionaries. Linguists working in Turkology will probably claim for many years to come that the different forms of sentences due to these types of word plays by the author should be correct. But in my opinion, the author definitely did this consciously and must have wanted to show his intelligence to the sultan (since he is a special reader) in this way.
You can translate my related article into any language you want using artificial intelligence and examine it.
Remember that this alphabet was created for a special purpose. Time by time, the author used the writing advantages provided by this special alphabet and performed a narrative as powerful as two separate sentences with one sentence without breaking away from the narrative content valid for the topic he described by playing with words.
So I'm not selectively taking words, but I'm indicating all the alternative reading forms, and I'm indicating all accordingly, the different forms of sentences.
This is quite a special book in Turkish, and I suppose the author must have thought and designed each sentence for minutes, sometimes hours, and then constructed it.
So, much so that the first letter of each line in the content is also coded from top to bottom.
I can engage in discussions with experts in the Old Turkish language who review my article about the dialect of the author and which sentence will be read with which meaning by choosing which words, and these are already happening. However, we are not having a discussion about whether the VM content is Turkish or not. Every Turkologist who examines the VM content with our ATA transcription can already see that the content is Turkish.
Remember that there are still controversial translated sections among linguists in Shakespeare’s texts, which are about 400 years old. Although linguistics still debates different forms of transcription for almost every ancient inscription, they have been able to identify the language in the content. We not only defined the language in the VM content, but we believe that we made the most accurate translations possible, and we can discuss this at an academic level.
Thanks,
Dear Aga Tentakulus,
First and foremost, I would like to thank you for trying to understand the transcription I made for a sentence on this voynich.ninja page and for being the first person to ask a question about this matter.
I certainly did not cut off the sentences from anywhere. As you know, our author does not use period marks at the end of sentences, but most often each line is a separate sentence. However, in some cases, the sentence continues on the second line. For example, the continuation of the 10th line on page 33v can be seen on the 11th line. So how do we understand where the sentences end? In Turkish, the position of the subject and predicate within the sentence indicates where the sentence ends. In most dialects of the Turkish language, the predicate is at the end of the sentence. However, this rule is broken in poetic/literary writing styles and some dialects. For instance, this is not the case in Gagauz-Turkish.
The author seems to have used literary language in a poetic rhyme form on many pages here, and she/he also uses inverted sentences so as not to disrupt the integrity of the sentence. However, all these structures are in perfect harmony with the nature of Turkish as expected.
In the image you shared, the first line immediately following the original image line (the section starting with "Türeşkoşum") is the transcription line corresponding to the original letters in the Latin alphabet. In this line and the following line, the "/" (division) sign separates different pronunciations of the word. For example, as OLAR/ÖLER. You may remember from my previous posts that there is a vowel harmony rule in Turkish. Accordingly, O, A, U, I vowels are one group, and Ö, E, Ü, İ vowels are another group. These two groups never mix within a word.
Such a mix is not common, and it can seen in some dialects, minority dialects, and words that have passed from Arabic and Persian into Turkish. Therefore, the word we are giving as an example can never be OLER or ÖLAR. For instance, the word OLER disrupts the phonetic harmony of Turkish with the vowels O and E. Therefore, this word only has two forms of writing. Sometimes, and usually in words of 2 or 3 letters with only one vowel inside the word, there can be three different readings of the word. But let me say that all of these have corresponding meanings in Turkish. Just as the word OLAR (becomes) and the word ÖLER (dies) have meanings in Turkish.
Here, the VM author has set up so many different word plays that he has chosen each word in detail and with a plan. Because, we can see that the meaning of the sentence changes with the combinations of differently read words within the sentence, but the logical integrity and meaning of the sentence's integrity do not break.
Here, our author writes the texts to a special reader whom she/he addresses as "my pasha." The person the author addresses as "my pasha" is most likely Fatih Sultan Mehmet himself. Because, in a sentence on the map page, she/he conveys the message that a woman in a fortress kissed the armpit of the kaftan worn by "the pasha," which means offering verbal respect and allegiance to the sultan. Additionally, "kaftan" is the name of a special garment that is mostly worn by the sultan.
Anyway, to not stray too far from your questions, I will return to your question. I do not bring sentences together or divide them as I wish. Even without punctuation, it is understood where the sentence starts and ends when reading, and I read by maintaining the same word order. Also, due to the different readings of words, I write how these will change the meaning of the sentence in the explanations section. If you notice, I almost find and show every word in current and old Turkish dictionaries. Linguists working in Turkology will probably claim for many years to come that the different forms of sentences due to these types of word plays by the author should be correct. But in my opinion, the author definitely did this consciously and must have wanted to show his intelligence to the sultan (since he is a special reader) in this way.
You can translate my related article into any language you want using artificial intelligence and examine it.
Remember that this alphabet was created for a special purpose. Time by time, the author used the writing advantages provided by this special alphabet and performed a narrative as powerful as two separate sentences with one sentence without breaking away from the narrative content valid for the topic he described by playing with words.
So I'm not selectively taking words, but I'm indicating all the alternative reading forms, and I'm indicating all accordingly, the different forms of sentences.
This is quite a special book in Turkish, and I suppose the author must have thought and designed each sentence for minutes, sometimes hours, and then constructed it.
So, much so that the first letter of each line in the content is also coded from top to bottom.
I can engage in discussions with experts in the Old Turkish language who review my article about the dialect of the author and which sentence will be read with which meaning by choosing which words, and these are already happening. However, we are not having a discussion about whether the VM content is Turkish or not. Every Turkologist who examines the VM content with our ATA transcription can already see that the content is Turkish.
Remember that there are still controversial translated sections among linguists in Shakespeare’s texts, which are about 400 years old. Although linguistics still debates different forms of transcription for almost every ancient inscription, they have been able to identify the language in the content. We not only defined the language in the VM content, but we believe that we made the most accurate translations possible, and we can discuss this at an academic level.
Thanks,