31-12-2025, 12:34 AM
(This post was last modified: 31-12-2025, 12:39 AM by Bluetoes101.)
It probably also doesn't help that transcriptions are not entirely accurate, especially in regards to a, o, y but also others.
The MSI scans clearly shows several mistakes on the first paragraph of the MS, so I'm not sure how literally stats can be taken from transcriptions for this sort of in-depth analysis.
Examples using - ZL v. 3b.
"ase"
When I was working on my curve-line(ish) stuff, I ran into a lot of issues with errors and re-transcribed pages then tallied up how much the changes benefitted me overall. The scored was generally around 0 (as I would find a fair few examples that worked against me too), but its worth baring in mind that stats derived from a transcription for very specific examples may not always be entirely accurate. Maybe subjective, but personally I find this to be "ytaiin" considering surrounding "a"s. You can see the inward curving right side stroke, maybe it is "o", yet it is "ataiin" for stats.
This is just to say that if you wish to understand how ch differs from ih, I found you have to sit and look at the page rather than what stats based on transliterations say. Does the scribe have "flicky" i's that might be mistook for c for example, if there's enough evidence of this in surrounding text there is a decent argument the transliteration is incorrect.
Another example of this may be found in the first paragraph also.
Top one is ii, the other is ic (sh with modification added - "ydaraishy"). Why?
Another from the first paragraph - "soiin"...
You have to go look at the text for stuff like ih rather than ch, the transliterations and stats derived from them are not accurate.
The MSI scans clearly shows several mistakes on the first paragraph of the MS, so I'm not sure how literally stats can be taken from transcriptions for this sort of in-depth analysis.
Examples using - ZL v. 3b.
"ase"
When I was working on my curve-line(ish) stuff, I ran into a lot of issues with errors and re-transcribed pages then tallied up how much the changes benefitted me overall. The scored was generally around 0 (as I would find a fair few examples that worked against me too), but its worth baring in mind that stats derived from a transcription for very specific examples may not always be entirely accurate. Maybe subjective, but personally I find this to be "ytaiin" considering surrounding "a"s. You can see the inward curving right side stroke, maybe it is "o", yet it is "ataiin" for stats.
This is just to say that if you wish to understand how ch differs from ih, I found you have to sit and look at the page rather than what stats based on transliterations say. Does the scribe have "flicky" i's that might be mistook for c for example, if there's enough evidence of this in surrounding text there is a decent argument the transliteration is incorrect.
Another example of this may be found in the first paragraph also.
Top one is ii, the other is ic (sh with modification added - "ydaraishy"). Why?
Another from the first paragraph - "soiin"...
You have to go look at the text for stuff like ih rather than ch, the transliterations and stats derived from them are not accurate.