ThomasCoon > 01-06-2017, 02:56 PM
-JKP- > 01-06-2017, 03:25 PM
ReneZ > 01-06-2017, 03:27 PM
ThomasCoon > 01-06-2017, 03:37 PM
(01-06-2017, 03:27 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Did I overlook something, or could you have done with one less "group of four"?
I think this could be done by making the first purple one the start.
Any word starting left of it could be shifted right by one group.
-JKP- Wrote:One thing to consider is the "unique" vords as compared to those that repeat at least a few times.
Unique vords don't necessarily follow the [exact] same structure.
Note that unique vords can often be broken into two vords that do follow patterns similar to the vords around them, just as removing EVA-P from the beginning of paragraphs (treating them as a special case) often yields vords that follow regular patterns.
Also, something I've noticed is that EVA-ch -sh (which you've classified in the "c" group) are more positionally flexible than many of the others and MIGHT belong in a class of their own (or differ in some other way).
Emma May Smith > 01-06-2017, 05:38 PM
Koen G > 01-06-2017, 06:49 PM
ThomasCoon > 01-06-2017, 10:45 PM
(01-06-2017, 06:49 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
So that's 4-1-2-3-1-1, right?
Doesn't that turn your proposed solution into something like binary code, where the exact glyph doesn't matter but rather whether it is expressed (1) or omitted (0)?
Emma May Smith Wrote:While you are wholly right that characters group together, I don't think that your groups are necessarily the best that can be.
For example, lk is common, rk is rare, and nk or mk are basically non-existent. Similarly, s is common at the end of words, d a bit less common but clearly normal, and all the gallows are uncommon in that position.
Instead of groups I've preferred to think like this: for every character, which is the most similar? It lets me see more about similarities and differences, and informs the bigger groups.
Koen G > 01-06-2017, 11:11 PM
ThomasCoon > 02-06-2017, 02:19 AM
(01-06-2017, 11:11 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I like any approach that tries to look for connections between glyphs and word structure and such. But I personally feel that the next step you propose is implausible.
One problem I see is that there would be ambiguities if any glyph can be dropped, to produce a 0 in the implicit binary code. Consider a word 1234. How do we know that those four glyphs belong to the same set? Might it be 123 without 4, followed by a 4 without 123? Or may 3412 have been dropped between 2 and 3?
So if I understand it correctly, a Voynich word 1234 may represent one, two or three plain text letters?