[split] Word length autocorrelation

[ReneZ]

In real languages, the correlation is usually slightly positive: long words tend to follow long words, short after short. But in the Voynich, it’s negative (about –0.07). That means the text tends to alternate — long words are followed by short words, and short by long.
It gives the text a zig-zag rhythm.

If that is a 'normalised' correlation, i.e. not a covariance, then the value -0.07 means 'no correlation'.
So, it depends on how it was calculated.

When I scrambled the text within lines as a test, the alternation got even stronger, which proves the manuscript isn’t random, but it’s still unlike natural language.

This is not expected, and suggests that both cases effectively show 'no correlation'.