The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against

[Jorge_Stolfi]

You talk about the Red Rooster more often than about these.

For two reasons. First because ROOS and parag f105v.32 are extreme outliers in terms of size, so there is no question of which entry each of them should they be matched to.  If SPS=SBJ, then  f105v.32 is the only possible transcription of ROOS, and conversely ROOS is the only possible "decipherment" of f105v.32.

Second, because ROOS is the only recipe that has eight sub-entries with the 主 keyword.  A few other recipes have three 主s, several have two, and the rest has one or none.  Thus the matching of f105v.32 to ROOS, with the 主 crib (still the best one I have) requires matching the sizes of nine gaps, rather than just four or less.

If I show an example of middling size with only three 主, like BLAR, you could reasonably say that, with 50+ parags of about the right size, many with more than three daiin-like strings, it would be very likely that one of them produced a decent match to the four gaps, just by chance.  (Even more so if you only consider the two internal gaps, as in @eggyk cokbook example above.) 

Refuting this expected counterclaim of yours would require detailed probability calculations -- that you would probably reject too, since they must start from a guessed model of "random" paragraph.

All the best, --stolfi

EDIT: strike out incorrect claim about @eggyk's experiment.