11-07-2024, 03:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2024, 03:28 PM by Ahmet Ardıç.)
[quote="ReneZ" pid='60483' dateline='1720696500']
1. It is an unproven assumption that any symbol in the Voynich MS represents any sound in any language.
Just as the proof of such assumptions is made with comparative linguistics methods, we found and demonstrated this evidence using exactly the same methods.
There are clear overlaps shown in the form of statistical correlations.
The fact that phonetic and word formation structures that are only seen in Turkish (which are unique to Turkish and have no similar records in other languages) are also seen in VM texts is a complete and perfect overlap. In the history of VM readings, there is no better, clearer (and harder to criticize) evidence than this. These are very strong evidence. In addition, the fact that we read words that have not changed their phonetic value in 600 years and show them in dictionaries is also another evidence. Moreover, if some of these words match the drawings, this can be called as additional clearest evidence possible. Defining and classifying the languages compared in the field of linguistics can only be possible with this and similar evidence.
Moreover, being able to show many sentences and sentence structures and some full pages in dictionaries by showing Turkish sentence structure overlaps and each word in those sentences is also evidence.
It is said that Egyptian Hieroglyphs and Hittite inscriptions were read by linguists! But, even they do not have as clear overlaps and evidence as we present.
Here, we have carried out our study by presenting the clearest findings and evidence that can be presented in history for various inscriptions that have not been read before throughout historical periods and that do not deviate from methods other than linguistics.
If you are still looking for evidence by ignoring such clear findings and so much evidence, this indicates that you lack knowledge of linguistics or have limited ideas about linguistic comparison methods. In this case, I can advise you to refresh your knowledge and be open to learning new things.
The idea that we do not present evidence is nothing but empty, inconsistent claims. If what we present is not evidence, you should say that Egyptian hieroglyphs and Hittite inscriptions are also without evidence and cannot be read. Because science cannot accept one of two examples that reach a conclusion using the same methods and reject the other. If he does this, science will cease to be science anyway. Therefore, here, you should not think about an incomprehensible lack of evidence, but rather the reasons why you cannot see the evidence, which I think may be due to your limited knowledge of linguistics.
2. Evidence against this is highly incomplete, but has been increasing gradually over the last decades.
If you don't mind, if you list the evidence that has been increasing in the last decade and the studies that have been presented, I will try to get information.
Additionally, If you don't mind, could you list the evidence that has not been presented by us, the trials that have not been conducted by myself, or the methods that have not been used in our VM-Turkish study, which you describe? What does the term "highly incomplete" mean at the linguistic level? So what will your "highly incomplete" list explain and list without moving away from the understanding and methods of linguistics?
3. This puts in perspective any attempts to mapping any symbol to a specific sound in a lost language
How can you prove that we are talking about a lost language here and that the VM language is "a lost language"? There is no need to describe such unreadable texts as "lost languages".
There were unreadable texts in history. They could not be read because the alphabet was not transcribed correctly and, most importantly, the presence of syllable sounds was not reflected in the transcription recommendations. Our ATA alphabet transcription made a proposal that would allow reading 340 or 360 different writing signs. Moreover, we made the transcription containing the largest number of Latin letter images ever made for the letters VM and showed how syllable signs are made by combining Latin letters.
Does "symbol-mapping" get any better than this?
An incorrect alphabet transcription and less focus on languages other than European languages were the reasons why this work was not completed for a hundred years.
1. It is an unproven assumption that any symbol in the Voynich MS represents any sound in any language.
Just as the proof of such assumptions is made with comparative linguistics methods, we found and demonstrated this evidence using exactly the same methods.
There are clear overlaps shown in the form of statistical correlations.
The fact that phonetic and word formation structures that are only seen in Turkish (which are unique to Turkish and have no similar records in other languages) are also seen in VM texts is a complete and perfect overlap. In the history of VM readings, there is no better, clearer (and harder to criticize) evidence than this. These are very strong evidence. In addition, the fact that we read words that have not changed their phonetic value in 600 years and show them in dictionaries is also another evidence. Moreover, if some of these words match the drawings, this can be called as additional clearest evidence possible. Defining and classifying the languages compared in the field of linguistics can only be possible with this and similar evidence.
Moreover, being able to show many sentences and sentence structures and some full pages in dictionaries by showing Turkish sentence structure overlaps and each word in those sentences is also evidence.
It is said that Egyptian Hieroglyphs and Hittite inscriptions were read by linguists! But, even they do not have as clear overlaps and evidence as we present.
Here, we have carried out our study by presenting the clearest findings and evidence that can be presented in history for various inscriptions that have not been read before throughout historical periods and that do not deviate from methods other than linguistics.
If you are still looking for evidence by ignoring such clear findings and so much evidence, this indicates that you lack knowledge of linguistics or have limited ideas about linguistic comparison methods. In this case, I can advise you to refresh your knowledge and be open to learning new things.
The idea that we do not present evidence is nothing but empty, inconsistent claims. If what we present is not evidence, you should say that Egyptian hieroglyphs and Hittite inscriptions are also without evidence and cannot be read. Because science cannot accept one of two examples that reach a conclusion using the same methods and reject the other. If he does this, science will cease to be science anyway. Therefore, here, you should not think about an incomprehensible lack of evidence, but rather the reasons why you cannot see the evidence, which I think may be due to your limited knowledge of linguistics.
2. Evidence against this is highly incomplete, but has been increasing gradually over the last decades.
If you don't mind, if you list the evidence that has been increasing in the last decade and the studies that have been presented, I will try to get information.
Additionally, If you don't mind, could you list the evidence that has not been presented by us, the trials that have not been conducted by myself, or the methods that have not been used in our VM-Turkish study, which you describe? What does the term "highly incomplete" mean at the linguistic level? So what will your "highly incomplete" list explain and list without moving away from the understanding and methods of linguistics?
3. This puts in perspective any attempts to mapping any symbol to a specific sound in a lost language
How can you prove that we are talking about a lost language here and that the VM language is "a lost language"? There is no need to describe such unreadable texts as "lost languages".
There were unreadable texts in history. They could not be read because the alphabet was not transcribed correctly and, most importantly, the presence of syllable sounds was not reflected in the transcription recommendations. Our ATA alphabet transcription made a proposal that would allow reading 340 or 360 different writing signs. Moreover, we made the transcription containing the largest number of Latin letter images ever made for the letters VM and showed how syllable signs are made by combining Latin letters.
Does "symbol-mapping" get any better than this?
An incorrect alphabet transcription and less focus on languages other than European languages were the reasons why this work was not completed for a hundred years.