[Blog Post] MSI at last!

[pfeaster]

1) In the Voynichese sequence revealed on 1r, Marci interprets EVA [an] and [in] as single characters instead of bigrams. I'd love to hear from the data-gatherers among you how this interpretation might impact analytics!

Comparing the c/d and d/e glyphs, I wonder whether they may simply be [r] and [n] rather than [r] and [an], something like this:

   

There's a lot of variation in how the "base" stroke of [r] and [n] was written in Voynichese, and although this curvature wouldn't exactly be typical, it doesn't strike me as falling wholly outside the range of plausible forms either (especially if we're dealing with someone who's just guessing about what the glyphs "should" look like, just as we are ourselves).  Meanwhile I'm having trouble identifying anything here with the [a] part of [an].

The f/g glyph looks more convincingly like [in], although it's hard to rule out the rare [u].  If it is [in], which seems more likely than [u], it's interesting that the [n] is drawn with a very short backwards curve this time, while the other [n] associated with c/d is drawn with a relatively long one.