26-05-2026, 09:08 AM
(26-05-2026, 08:50 AM)Torsten wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The calculation of 200 possible edit-distance-1 modifications treats each EVA character as an independent substitutable unit. But the scribe doesn't work in EVA
I also was not using Eva in my example, by treating 'ch' as a single unit.
Interestingly, it does not even make a great difference.
from ch to sh in Eva is a single change, as is the equivalent S to Z in Currier.
Similarly, from ch to cth is a single change, as is the equivalent S to X in Currier.
One could argue that the same is true if one looks at the writing, which is of course the correct thing to do.
My main point was that there are a great majority of possible changes that are (apparently) forbidden.
This existence of a very large set of relatively strict rules strongly suggests, that there is still something else going on. It is not just a matter of creating meaningless words based on small changes to previous words.
The rules are non-trivial too. A relatively simple (potential) change from e to a is allowed in some contexts but not in others.
One can introduce a f intruding in a ch, before a ch , but not before one or two e 's.
Etc, etc.