Can we go further?

[Jorge_Stolfi]

I am reaching a rather frustrating point where I ask myself whether we might actually be at the end of the road regarding the analysis of the manuscript’s text.

I understand the frustration.  I have been there too.

But yes, I think the riddle will be solved, and I suspect that it will be rather suddenly and unexpectedly (like solutions of crypto and language puzzles often are).  

But I can tell you a few ways reduce your chances of making any progress:

• Focus on character and digraph statistics, instead of words.
  
• Assume that certain properties of European languages hold for all natural languages.
  
• Assume that statistics are properties of a language, and not of a text.
  
• Assume that there are practically no errors.
  
• Assume that word spaces in the transcription are mostly correct.
  
• Try to analyze all sections and all text types (labels, parags, etc.) at the same time.
  
• Assume that the text of a parag is homogeneous, like a parag of a novel.
  
• Focus on the variation of statistics along a line (as opposed to parag).
  
• Focus on the statistics and possible equivalences of the puff gallows.
  
• Keep all EVA characters distinct instead of mapping them to similarity classes and '?'. 
  
• Assume that the script is a sophisticated cipher.
  

And I can give you a tip: look for the use of daiin (word or suffix) as a function of position within a parag (not line) of the Herbal sections.  But beware that it may show up as dair or laiin or possibly other "ink-similar" words.  (I haven't done that myself, and I don't know whether it will lead to something.  Apologies in advance if it turns out to be a waste of time.)

All the best, --stolfi