15-04-2026, 10:00 PM
@ rickforto No Problem 
On the one hand, that is a valid objection, but at the same time you are overlooking some of the distinctive features of the theories presented here.
Adjusting the frequency is not actually what I do. There is no question that anyone can adjust a frequency distribution retrospectively – you are right about that. What I do is something different: I create a model based on Bavarian MHD morphology and grammar and ask what code structure necessarily follows from it. The answer exhibits VMS-like properties, without my referring to the specific features of the VMS in the construction itself.
A concrete example: "qo". A pure frequency analysis would not suggest that prepositions and articles are being absorbed here. Nor would a frequency analysis be able to identify the o as an article. Quite apart from the fact that the y absorbs not only "ge" but also a range of other prefixes.
These are not coincidences that could occur in any language. The absorption of articles into a prefix, the inseparability of prepositions and articles into a single morpheme, the greater typological diversity of prefix-initial tokens – these properties arise inevitably from German morphology. Try this with Latin. Try it with Arabic. The structure does not emerge. It arises only from German.”
The question of why "y" is one of the most frequent suffixes can only be explained by absorption – a frequency analysis would, in principle, merely have established that there is no equivalent. If one were to attempt this with "y" in Latin, it would fail, as has indeed happened often enough.
It is therefore by no means as simple as you describe it.
What I have not presented here in these posts are the many other analyses I carried out in order to arrive at these results in the first place.
The frequency analysis is merely the part that confirms this and which I use, or have used, to compare the frequency of letters/glyphs.
However, I have since moved away from this approach, as it simply does not work with the Kerns. I am currently turning the tables and have answered the question of how to encrypt a text using a German MHD text, an absorption cipher and 24 glyphs in such a way that a cipher is created, and I am checking the similarities with VMS texts. The results are surprisingly consistent, which is due to the morphological structure of MHD itself - not to any adjustment on my part. As soon as I've finished, I'll publish it here too.
On the one hand, that is a valid objection, but at the same time you are overlooking some of the distinctive features of the theories presented here.
Adjusting the frequency is not actually what I do. There is no question that anyone can adjust a frequency distribution retrospectively – you are right about that. What I do is something different: I create a model based on Bavarian MHD morphology and grammar and ask what code structure necessarily follows from it. The answer exhibits VMS-like properties, without my referring to the specific features of the VMS in the construction itself.
A concrete example: "qo". A pure frequency analysis would not suggest that prepositions and articles are being absorbed here. Nor would a frequency analysis be able to identify the o as an article. Quite apart from the fact that the y absorbs not only "ge" but also a range of other prefixes.
These are not coincidences that could occur in any language. The absorption of articles into a prefix, the inseparability of prepositions and articles into a single morpheme, the greater typological diversity of prefix-initial tokens – these properties arise inevitably from German morphology. Try this with Latin. Try it with Arabic. The structure does not emerge. It arises only from German.”
The question of why "y" is one of the most frequent suffixes can only be explained by absorption – a frequency analysis would, in principle, merely have established that there is no equivalent. If one were to attempt this with "y" in Latin, it would fail, as has indeed happened often enough.
It is therefore by no means as simple as you describe it.
What I have not presented here in these posts are the many other analyses I carried out in order to arrive at these results in the first place.
The frequency analysis is merely the part that confirms this and which I use, or have used, to compare the frequency of letters/glyphs.
However, I have since moved away from this approach, as it simply does not work with the Kerns. I am currently turning the tables and have answered the question of how to encrypt a text using a German MHD text, an absorption cipher and 24 glyphs in such a way that a cipher is created, and I am checking the similarities with VMS texts. The results are surprisingly consistent, which is due to the morphological structure of MHD itself - not to any adjustment on my part. As soon as I've finished, I'll publish it here too.