23-01-2025, 12:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 23-01-2025, 12:37 AM by Bluetoes101.)
A tiny amount of progress
"e" acting as ">" rather than "c" has a huge positive impact on Currier B scores and a negligible impact on Currier A scores.
It could be that "o" is a pretty universal "switch"
od (2295)
or (2785)
ol (5581)
ok (6097)
ot (3866)
op (578)
of (158)
"a" is fairly specialised
ad (47)
ar (3192)
al (3032)
ak (37)
at (13)
ap (6)
af (3)
and "e" picks up the bits "a" seems to not like very much, while avoiding pairings "a" likes
ed (5004)
er (32)
el (12)
ek (491)
et (214)
ep (80)
ef (48)
"d" is still problematic. I wouldn't be the first person by a long way to suggest "d" could share a function with "y", but until every possible avenue has been exhausted I don't want to label it "X" (essentially "Null"). I actually don't think "y" is "Null" either, I have some ideas but for the stage I'm at with making this right now the ideas are too complicated. One that I have is that "y" is a word start and end form of "a".
Tiltman (1967) - From You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
y occurs quite frequently as the initial symbol of a line followed immediately by a combination of symbols which seem to be happy without it in any part of a line away from the beginning. Otherwise it occurs chiefly before spaces very frequently preceded immediately by d. Hence my belief that these two have some separative or conjunctive function. (I have to admit, however, that y also seems sometimes to take the place of o before k or t (though rarely, if ever, after q); this is particularly noticeable in some of the captions to illustrations in the astronomical section of the manuscript - these most commonly begin ok (of) or ot (op) and it is here that we occasionally see yk (yf) or yt (yp).
The basic idea I have is why have another "o", would "a" not make more sense as we do not see "a" starting or ending words (outside of ain/aiin), but is abundant mid-word. also "y" looks like "a" with a tail. Its not a great reason but.. it does. If I wanted to write "ok" that's ok (sorry) but ak is not. If I need to start "a" maybe I have to use "y" because some rigid system I'm using requires it. Maybe the same rule says I must do this at the end too. Just an idea for meddling with stuff at a much higher level once a base ruleset seems, ok (sorry)
"e" acting as ">" rather than "c" has a huge positive impact on Currier B scores and a negligible impact on Currier A scores.
It could be that "o" is a pretty universal "switch"
od (2295)
or (2785)
ol (5581)
ok (6097)
ot (3866)
op (578)
of (158)
"a" is fairly specialised
ad (47)
ar (3192)
al (3032)
ak (37)
at (13)
ap (6)
af (3)
and "e" picks up the bits "a" seems to not like very much, while avoiding pairings "a" likes
ed (5004)
er (32)
el (12)
ek (491)
et (214)
ep (80)
ef (48)
"d" is still problematic. I wouldn't be the first person by a long way to suggest "d" could share a function with "y", but until every possible avenue has been exhausted I don't want to label it "X" (essentially "Null"). I actually don't think "y" is "Null" either, I have some ideas but for the stage I'm at with making this right now the ideas are too complicated. One that I have is that "y" is a word start and end form of "a".
Tiltman (1967) - From You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
y occurs quite frequently as the initial symbol of a line followed immediately by a combination of symbols which seem to be happy without it in any part of a line away from the beginning. Otherwise it occurs chiefly before spaces very frequently preceded immediately by d. Hence my belief that these two have some separative or conjunctive function. (I have to admit, however, that y also seems sometimes to take the place of o before k or t (though rarely, if ever, after q); this is particularly noticeable in some of the captions to illustrations in the astronomical section of the manuscript - these most commonly begin ok (of) or ot (op) and it is here that we occasionally see yk (yf) or yt (yp).
The basic idea I have is why have another "o", would "a" not make more sense as we do not see "a" starting or ending words (outside of ain/aiin), but is abundant mid-word. also "y" looks like "a" with a tail. Its not a great reason but.. it does. If I wanted to write "ok" that's ok (sorry) but ak is not. If I need to start "a" maybe I have to use "y" because some rigid system I'm using requires it. Maybe the same rule says I must do this at the end too. Just an idea for meddling with stuff at a much higher level once a base ruleset seems, ok (sorry)