Emma May Smith > 19-08-2017, 12:17 PM
Koen G > 19-08-2017, 12:25 PM
MarcoP > 19-08-2017, 01:24 PM
(19-08-2017, 12:17 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Marco and Koen, I want to thank you both for taking the time to discuss my remark about the Combinatorial Method. Obviously there are limitations on its use, at least for the individual researcher. Though I hope that the general idea, of using and questioning the artefact in order to evolve an explanation, is acceptable. Outside information might prove very useful, but we must have an absolute certainty about its appropriateness before using it.
Theories which use outside information will eventually prove worthless if the wrong information is brought in—that's the long and short of it. Theories which are built up by comparing and contrasting different parts of the manuscript will always have some worth, however little.
This is true of imagery and text. For example, I know that Koen has done research comparing the nymphs to one another, and the findings will always be valid. Yet comparing the nymphs to those in other manuscripts is always fraught because we can never be sure (or, at least, it takes huge proof) that the illustrator ever saw such and such a drawing.
Emma May Smith > 19-08-2017, 02:23 PM
ReneZ > 19-08-2017, 04:02 PM
MarcoP > 20-08-2017, 06:40 AM
(19-08-2017, 02:23 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I believe that plurals were understood by recognizing that two or more nouns were referenced by a third noun. So, think of the difference between, "Alessandro, the son of Umberto," and "Fergus and Patrick, the sons of Michael." But this could also be cross referenced against ages on gravestones, which should always be in plural, "74 years." Of course, if there is more than one way or forming plurals then it gets harder. But given the length of the manuscript we should always have lots of examples to cross reference.
(19-08-2017, 02:23 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'll answer the other part of your question later, as I certainly believe that we could (potentially) work out the grammar and meaning even were the language unknown. Though it would be an immense task.
Emma May Smith > 20-08-2017, 11:01 AM
(20-08-2017, 06:40 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Emma May Smith Wrote:I'll answer the other part of your question later, as I certainly believe that we could (potentially) work out the grammar and meaning even were the language unknown. Though it would be an immense task.
It is very likely that the Voynich ms was written at a time when some people could read it: the language doesn't seem to be as remote in time as Etruscan and it is well possible that its cognates are still spoken today. Yet your faith in the possibilities of your method is reassuring. I am looking forward to read more of how it is possible to infer the meaning of an unknown language!
Vonologia > 03-09-2017, 04:08 AM
(12-08-2017, 11:28 PM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(12-08-2017, 10:11 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As you can most likely tell, I only really listen to the research of a handful of people who a) think like me, or b) are smart enough to make interesting and challenging theories which disagree with me (hi, Nick!).
If it's only a list of one I'm on, that's actually quite a miserable state of affairs. :-(
Davidsch > 30-09-2017, 04:01 PM