(01-09-2017, 08:24 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About your other doubts ("tibi" etc.), the riddle is an important document which has been studied by a number of scholars. I am afraid I don't have the necessary level of competence to meaningfully add to their work.
I could be completely wrong about it being "ci" rather than "ti" but it does look like "ci" to me and to follow conventions for writing "c" more than for "t". I find this detail of particular interest for the following reasons...
Looking at this from a paleographic point of view, it would be very unusual to combine the letters t and i in that particular way in a document that has "t" with a distinctive crossbar (but without more text in this scribe's hand, it might forever be an open question).
So, I gave some thought as to why someone
might write "cibi" instead of the very prevalent "tibi" (which I've never seen spelled with anything other than a "t" so far) and it occurred to me that perhaps it was pronounced "tchibi" or "chibi" in that time and place, and I
have seen "ch" written as only "c" in some manuscripts.
So why would this detail (of whether it's ci or ti) matter on a Voynich forum?
Well, first of all, the "ci" or "ti" and several other letter combinations in this fascinating historical riddle are ligatures. There are more ligatures than one usually sees in such a short chunk of text, and I strongly get the feeling that several VMS glyphs might be based on ligatures, at least in terms of their shapes.
The "ci" or "ti" ligature in the riddle uses a long "i" with a descender. Look familiar?
It's a two-part construction (a c-curve + descending line), but represents two letters. It's not exactly the same shape as EVA-y, but it is constructed similarly. In the VMS,
y is
positioned like the Latin "9" (abbreviation for con- com- -us -um), mostly at the ends, sometimes at the beginning, less often in the middle, but the way it is used in the VMS may not be related to the inspiration for the shape.
Recently I posted on another thread a pic and question about whether EVA-d might also be a ligature, a combination of EVA-l + EVA-e. The gallows characters certainly resemble ligatures (EVA-k bears strong resemblance to the ligature for "It" which was a very common abbreviation for "Item").
Latin was the first language I attempted to wrestle out of the VMS, because the VMS contains so many Latin glyphs and abbreviation conventions, but I never came up with anything that indicated that a
sizable chunk of the VMS was in Latin. Many others have tried to translate it into Latin, both after I tried (with Lockerby being the most recent) and long before (I note on the Web that there are many references to it being Latin prior to 2003). It was, after all, the
lingua franca at the time, and the VMS shapes are Latin, so it's logical to give it a try.
But what I'm leading up to is this...
When one attempts to translate the VMS into Latin, it's natural to interpret the "9" and other glyphs as they would be interpreted in medieval Latin and this is what most researchers have done (I won't include a list because pretty much everyone with a knowledge of Latin and even some who obviously don't know Latin have expanded these glyphs as if they were Latin abbreviations).
But... (this is the important part)... if one looks at the glyphs as
ligatures, rather than as
abbreviations, one gets quite different results—the expansion for ligatures is handled in a different way.
Using the Italian riddle ligature as an example...
If you expand VMS
y at the ends of words as it would be traditionally expanded as a Latin abbreviation, you most frequently get
-us or
-um.
But, if you approach it differently and expand VMS
y as it would be expanded from a ligature as in Old Italian script (which is similar to late Latin), the same shape might give you
ti or
ci or something else that differs from -us or -um.
So, assuming the underlying language were Latin (not saying it is, just that it might be, and even if it isn't, the same reasoning applies), there are potentially two completely different interpretations of the same glyphs depending on whether they are interpreted as abbreviations or as ligatures.
When you look at the letter "a" in Voynichese (which many people insist is a vowel but I'm not so certain this is true), one notices that there are many instances in which the curve is
almost separated or
is separated from the stem. Perhaps this too is a ligature rather than a letter, one that only looks like "a".