11-07-2024, 12:44 AM
[quote="tavie" pid='60473' dateline='1720639845']
I will also answer your questions...
[spoiler]
[quote="Ahmet Ardıç" pid='60470' dateline='1720629723']
Dear Tavie,
Now I answer your comments in green pen:
1- How should the occurrence of quadruple and fifth-times word repetitions, unique to Turkish, in VM texts be interpreted on a scientific level? Based on this info, What could this event mean in terms of mathematical possibilities, and to what extent could there be overlap between which languages? You need to demonstrate that the way it happens in Voynichese is the way it happens in Turkish. Going through all the parts where this occurs and providing sentences that wouldn't have been unusual for Turkish syntax would be a start. Is there such a language as Voynichese? In my article published (at a symposium with an international scientific committee of linguists) on how to read page 33v, I made alphabet transcription mapping for a full page. Then I showed which words this pairing corresponded to in today's language (so much so that some of the words had never changed their phonetic structure). Then I found the words in Turkish dictionaries and gave references to them. Then, I showed that the sentence structure of Turkish and the sentence structures we presented in these readings overlap. Additionally, in the same article, I showed with a statistical approach that structural situations specific to Turkish are also present in VM texts. Now I ask you, which different method do you think is applied in linguistics? Stop making the same meaningless repetitions like nonsense and a broken record and have your linguists interpret what I wrote in my article. Because I understand from the question you asked in response to my question that you are unaware of what approaches comparative linguistics uses to read similar texts.
2- Only in VM texts and Turkish; How should the situation of "words never begin or end with certain sounds/letters" be interpreted on a scientific level? Based on this info, What could this event mean in terms of mathematical possibilities, and to what extent could there be overlap between which languages? It's not uncommon for languages to have certain phonemes that rarely/never occur at the start or end of words. Voynichese's behaviour seems extremely excessive. You need to demonstrate a correlation between the precise behaviour and what is seen in Turkish, and that this is a better correlation than other languages. A good start would also be explaining what is behind line patterns. Correlation is a statistical measure that describes the extent to which two variables are related. It quantifies the degree to which changes in one variable predict changes in another. The correlation coefficient, typically denoted as "r", ranges from -1 to 1. A value of 1 indicates a perfect positive correlation, -1 indicates a perfect negative correlation, and 0 indicates no correlation. In this example, the correlation value r is exactly +1. What other correlation are you talking about?
See this; The text appearing in the Voynich manuscript (VM) follows many Turkish phonetic and morphological structures. For example, there are no words ending in /b/, /c/, /d/, /g in both the VM texts and the Turkish structure. Likewise, there are no words starting with /h/, /j/, /m/, /n/, /v/, /ğ/ in either of them. What could we write if we were to express the situation in which exactly the same sounds are not in the same part of the words in both languages in the form of correlation?
There is a perfect correlation between the phonetic structures of the VM text and the Turkish language in that:
1. No words end with the sounds /b/, /c/, /d/, /g/.
2. No words start with the sounds /h/, /j/, /m/, /n/, /v/, /ğ/.
Isn't it? If you cannot understand by statistics, mathematics or logic that a correlation has been presented here and that this is a perfect correspondence, go find a teacher and he will explain to you what correlation is and what it is not. Because the person who would say there is no correlation here either does not know the definition of these concepts or has low intelligence. If you are a smart man, I suggest you not to ask such ridiculous questions that will make you look funny again.
3- Have words written with 5, 6, or 10 vowels or consonants side-by-side words been recorded in the history of Indo-European and Semitic languages? Not sure why this is relevant when we haven't been able to identify which glyphs are vowels and which are consonants.
Your question here;
"Why is this relevant when we haven't been able to identify which glyphs are vowels and which are consonants?"
This is important in terms of comparative linguistics to understand whether there are overlaps in the phonetic structure of the compared words. For example, if there is no word recorded in the history of the Indo-European language in which five or ten vowels or consonants are written side by side, then you choose one of the following;
A- You minimize or eliminate the possibility that the VM texts are Indo-European.
B- You bring to the fore the possibility that multiple text signs coming together actually represent a single sound. As a matter of fact, for example, letters appearing in the form CC make the sound G, and letters II together make the sound Ğ.
Can you understand this?
4- How many different text images/letters are there in VM texts? You've already had this answer from others. We don't know.
I wrote that there are between 340 and 360 text images. Moreover, I am the first to write this. Now explain from whom I got this answer. Because now there is an accusation here and you are implying that I stole someone else's answer. In this case, I expect you to prove what you said immediately. If you can't prove it, apologize, and if you can't do both, don't read my comments again because I don't want to deal with people who are not serious, inconsistent, and liars.
5- Is it possible that the VM texts could not be read due to incorrect transcription texts made so far?
Inability to know if we are parsing the glyphs correctly has long been suggested as an obstacle to reading the text. It has already been said in this thread that EVA was not created as an accurate representation of whatever Voynichese's plaintext characters are. It had no pretensions of doing so - it simply makes it easier to talk about the text. It is likely there are more individual characters than EVA sets out, but we don't know how much more.
That is not the only reason we have not been able to read the manuscript, though. A bigger problem is that most who engage it with it almost immediately believe they have solved it, and that's the end of the road for them. That's a lot of potential manpower gone.
At least you seem to be starting to understand that you won't get any results with EVA. This is a kind of progress.
6- I claim that there are 340 to 360 different writing signs/letters in VM texts. When there were so many written signs (even if there were more than 100 in total), it should have been understood that some of the signs in the texts had to be syllabic characters. Do you have a response to this opinion? It wouldn't at all surprise me if some - or indeed many - glyphs are actually syllabic. There may also be homophones. But while I think that - if it is not meaningless - there may turn out to be many more characters than EVA has, it would take a lot of persuading for me to accept there are over 300.
Did you say anything, or after writing so much, I don't quite understand what you said, but it doesn't matter. Let's assume this was due to my lack of English.
7- 112 drawn word matches between VM and Turkish, 1000 word matches (in terms of meaning and phonetics, and moreover, the spelling of 21% of them will remain unchanged in 600 years), more than a hundred sentences have been read means that there is a strong mathematical connection between VM and Turkish language. Does it provide information as a possibility, or is it all a coincidence or does it match the words we made up with our imagination? (If so, how do you explain the fact that we can find these words in the dictionary pages and show them to you and linguists?) I feel probability has been misused on this thread. And plenty of other solvers find words in the dictionary or Google translate. I haven't seen any good reason to see your solution as any better than the hundred + other solutions. I haven't seen these hundred sentences you have translated. I apply the same conclusion that I apply to pretty much all other solutions, which is that if your system worked, we would have seen multiple clear, coherent page translations without the need to resort to arguments that more help is needed, other dialects/languages are involved, etc.
That doesn't, of course, mean it isn't Turkish.
You said that; "plenty of other solvers find words in the dictionary or Google translate." What are you talking about? I didn't ask a question about others, so you are telling me about others.
I find every word I read in the dictionary and show it. I explain many words by separating them with their roots and suffixes. Doesn't linguistics follow the same path?
When there is a single word that I cannot find or explain in the dictionary, even if I have read all the remaining words of the sentence in which that word is used and found them in dictionaries, I do not come forward with a single article or claim to read about them.
Forget 100 sentences and 1000 words. I understand that you do not have sufficient knowledge to evaluate linguistic comparison methods in terms of my article. If you could understand that even one of the 112 drawing word matches whose phonetic value remained unchanged in 600 years was detected, you would understand what this information means at the linguistic level.
I will also answer your questions...
[spoiler]
[quote="Ahmet Ardıç" pid='60470' dateline='1720629723']
Dear Tavie,
Now I answer your comments in green pen:
1- How should the occurrence of quadruple and fifth-times word repetitions, unique to Turkish, in VM texts be interpreted on a scientific level? Based on this info, What could this event mean in terms of mathematical possibilities, and to what extent could there be overlap between which languages? You need to demonstrate that the way it happens in Voynichese is the way it happens in Turkish. Going through all the parts where this occurs and providing sentences that wouldn't have been unusual for Turkish syntax would be a start. Is there such a language as Voynichese? In my article published (at a symposium with an international scientific committee of linguists) on how to read page 33v, I made alphabet transcription mapping for a full page. Then I showed which words this pairing corresponded to in today's language (so much so that some of the words had never changed their phonetic structure). Then I found the words in Turkish dictionaries and gave references to them. Then, I showed that the sentence structure of Turkish and the sentence structures we presented in these readings overlap. Additionally, in the same article, I showed with a statistical approach that structural situations specific to Turkish are also present in VM texts. Now I ask you, which different method do you think is applied in linguistics? Stop making the same meaningless repetitions like nonsense and a broken record and have your linguists interpret what I wrote in my article. Because I understand from the question you asked in response to my question that you are unaware of what approaches comparative linguistics uses to read similar texts.
2- Only in VM texts and Turkish; How should the situation of "words never begin or end with certain sounds/letters" be interpreted on a scientific level? Based on this info, What could this event mean in terms of mathematical possibilities, and to what extent could there be overlap between which languages? It's not uncommon for languages to have certain phonemes that rarely/never occur at the start or end of words. Voynichese's behaviour seems extremely excessive. You need to demonstrate a correlation between the precise behaviour and what is seen in Turkish, and that this is a better correlation than other languages. A good start would also be explaining what is behind line patterns. Correlation is a statistical measure that describes the extent to which two variables are related. It quantifies the degree to which changes in one variable predict changes in another. The correlation coefficient, typically denoted as "r", ranges from -1 to 1. A value of 1 indicates a perfect positive correlation, -1 indicates a perfect negative correlation, and 0 indicates no correlation. In this example, the correlation value r is exactly +1. What other correlation are you talking about?
See this; The text appearing in the Voynich manuscript (VM) follows many Turkish phonetic and morphological structures. For example, there are no words ending in /b/, /c/, /d/, /g in both the VM texts and the Turkish structure. Likewise, there are no words starting with /h/, /j/, /m/, /n/, /v/, /ğ/ in either of them. What could we write if we were to express the situation in which exactly the same sounds are not in the same part of the words in both languages in the form of correlation?
There is a perfect correlation between the phonetic structures of the VM text and the Turkish language in that:
1. No words end with the sounds /b/, /c/, /d/, /g/.
2. No words start with the sounds /h/, /j/, /m/, /n/, /v/, /ğ/.
Isn't it? If you cannot understand by statistics, mathematics or logic that a correlation has been presented here and that this is a perfect correspondence, go find a teacher and he will explain to you what correlation is and what it is not. Because the person who would say there is no correlation here either does not know the definition of these concepts or has low intelligence. If you are a smart man, I suggest you not to ask such ridiculous questions that will make you look funny again.
3- Have words written with 5, 6, or 10 vowels or consonants side-by-side words been recorded in the history of Indo-European and Semitic languages? Not sure why this is relevant when we haven't been able to identify which glyphs are vowels and which are consonants.
Your question here;
"Why is this relevant when we haven't been able to identify which glyphs are vowels and which are consonants?"
This is important in terms of comparative linguistics to understand whether there are overlaps in the phonetic structure of the compared words. For example, if there is no word recorded in the history of the Indo-European language in which five or ten vowels or consonants are written side by side, then you choose one of the following;
A- You minimize or eliminate the possibility that the VM texts are Indo-European.
B- You bring to the fore the possibility that multiple text signs coming together actually represent a single sound. As a matter of fact, for example, letters appearing in the form CC make the sound G, and letters II together make the sound Ğ.
Can you understand this?
4- How many different text images/letters are there in VM texts? You've already had this answer from others. We don't know.
I wrote that there are between 340 and 360 text images. Moreover, I am the first to write this. Now explain from whom I got this answer. Because now there is an accusation here and you are implying that I stole someone else's answer. In this case, I expect you to prove what you said immediately. If you can't prove it, apologize, and if you can't do both, don't read my comments again because I don't want to deal with people who are not serious, inconsistent, and liars.
5- Is it possible that the VM texts could not be read due to incorrect transcription texts made so far?
Inability to know if we are parsing the glyphs correctly has long been suggested as an obstacle to reading the text. It has already been said in this thread that EVA was not created as an accurate representation of whatever Voynichese's plaintext characters are. It had no pretensions of doing so - it simply makes it easier to talk about the text. It is likely there are more individual characters than EVA sets out, but we don't know how much more.
That is not the only reason we have not been able to read the manuscript, though. A bigger problem is that most who engage it with it almost immediately believe they have solved it, and that's the end of the road for them. That's a lot of potential manpower gone.
At least you seem to be starting to understand that you won't get any results with EVA. This is a kind of progress.
6- I claim that there are 340 to 360 different writing signs/letters in VM texts. When there were so many written signs (even if there were more than 100 in total), it should have been understood that some of the signs in the texts had to be syllabic characters. Do you have a response to this opinion? It wouldn't at all surprise me if some - or indeed many - glyphs are actually syllabic. There may also be homophones. But while I think that - if it is not meaningless - there may turn out to be many more characters than EVA has, it would take a lot of persuading for me to accept there are over 300.
Did you say anything, or after writing so much, I don't quite understand what you said, but it doesn't matter. Let's assume this was due to my lack of English.
7- 112 drawn word matches between VM and Turkish, 1000 word matches (in terms of meaning and phonetics, and moreover, the spelling of 21% of them will remain unchanged in 600 years), more than a hundred sentences have been read means that there is a strong mathematical connection between VM and Turkish language. Does it provide information as a possibility, or is it all a coincidence or does it match the words we made up with our imagination? (If so, how do you explain the fact that we can find these words in the dictionary pages and show them to you and linguists?) I feel probability has been misused on this thread. And plenty of other solvers find words in the dictionary or Google translate. I haven't seen any good reason to see your solution as any better than the hundred + other solutions. I haven't seen these hundred sentences you have translated. I apply the same conclusion that I apply to pretty much all other solutions, which is that if your system worked, we would have seen multiple clear, coherent page translations without the need to resort to arguments that more help is needed, other dialects/languages are involved, etc.
That doesn't, of course, mean it isn't Turkish.
You said that; "plenty of other solvers find words in the dictionary or Google translate." What are you talking about? I didn't ask a question about others, so you are telling me about others.
I find every word I read in the dictionary and show it. I explain many words by separating them with their roots and suffixes. Doesn't linguistics follow the same path?
When there is a single word that I cannot find or explain in the dictionary, even if I have read all the remaining words of the sentence in which that word is used and found them in dictionaries, I do not come forward with a single article or claim to read about them.
Forget 100 sentences and 1000 words. I understand that you do not have sufficient knowledge to evaluate linguistic comparison methods in terms of my article. If you could understand that even one of the 112 drawing word matches whose phonetic value remained unchanged in 600 years was detected, you would understand what this information means at the linguistic level.