RenegadeHealer > 08-08-2020, 09:36 AM
(08-08-2020, 04:28 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For example, in English, you could say, "Keep you tomorrow health best," and everyone would understand it, but no one says it that way. They would normally say, "Take care," or "Be well," "Gesundheit," or "Watch out for your health," or a few other common phrases. No one would say, "Keep you tomorrow health best."
Pepper > 08-08-2020, 03:07 PM
(08-08-2020, 12:45 AM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi Pepper,
When I do not translate directly (1/1), what I wrote to you seems to be my personal comments. The reason I translate directly is because you can see that the sentence is linked to the drawing on the page and the words have meanings. The direct translation is: "The roots are cute." and/or "The roots are fat."
But none of these words in Turkish alone mean root. But when both of these two words (AYAK SAPI) combine, it becomes an adjective that refers to the roots of the plant. Therefore, translation of a Turkish text into other languages is also a matter of expertise.
I don't need to comment on your other comment because I already shared my opinion on these issues.
Thanks for your comment,
Ahmet Ardıç > 08-08-2020, 03:18 PM
(08-08-2020, 04:28 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Translations have to be evaluated in two ways.
- First you look at the translation and ask yourself, "Does this make sense?"
- Second you have to ask yourself, "Would they normally write it this way?"
For example, in English, you could say, "Keep you tomorrow health best," and everyone would understand it, but no one says it that way. They would normally say, "Take care," or "Be well," "Gesundheit," or "Watch out for your health," or a few other common phrases. No one would say, "Keep you tomorrow health best."
So... there is text that is understandable in a rough way. And there is text that is normal and conventional.
Some of the solutions proposed so far (in a variety of languages) have bits and pieces that seem understandable, but they are not normal phrases for the Middle Ages.
If it is understandable, but seems a bit odd AND the translation method has a lot of degrees of freedom, then you have to ask yourself if the degrees of freedom are resulting in a subjective "solution". Normally degrees of freedom make it easier to write something that is traditional and normal and yet, in the case of many VMS "solutions", this is not what happens. Even with all this freedom, translations are still grammatically odd or the grammar is nonexistent.
Ahmet Ardıç > 08-08-2020, 03:27 PM
(07-08-2020, 09:25 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-08-2020, 03:02 PM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-08-2020, 02:33 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.That is exactly the point. It is the same with Gerard Cheshire's theory and so many other translation theories. The degrees of freedom in interpretation of a given portion of text means that one can inevitably find a translation which very loosely fits the context of the drawings albeit often without any grammar. I think it was referred to this kind of approach to the translation generating a "word salad" of text which the author can interpret as he/she sees fit.
Indeed. From what I understand so far, the Ardics have the following degrees of freedom:
1. The author used multiple dialects, so a word can be translated into any of half a dozen forms
2. As shown in the YouTube video, one glyph can have 7+ sounds assigned to it
3. The author used "poetic" language that is "rhythmically matching" along with some kind of very clever word play
4. The author encoded information in an acrostic down the first line of every page
5. The author also used some Latin / Greek / other words
Seems to me if you take a five-glyph vord you could easily find 50+ interpretations from which you can choose to construct your sentence.
For example, Ahmet, you claim that the first word on the eighth line of f4r is "baby pomegranate." Why does the author write about baby pomegranates on f1v, f2r, f3r, and so many others? I believe your answer will be that the vord means baby pomegranate on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and something else on those other pages. Probably a different meaning on each page. This isn't an isolated case; the text is full of repetition. I don't find your explanations of homophones, roots/suffixes, and the author's incredible linguistic prowess to be satisfactory - even when we take them all together.
I also find it very difficult to believe that this author wrote, in an invented script, a 200-page manuscript that
a) includes acrostic codes
b) is poetic and rhythmically matching
c) makes grammatical sense, both in the acrostic code and in the filler text
d) does all this in two distinct 'languages', Currier A and B
I'm a published fiction author, and I write and edit nonfiction as a profession, in one of the world's most flexible languages - English. And I know I couldn't do what the Ardics claim this mysterious author has done. Not a chance. I could perhaps do a page with a lot of hard work, but 200? No.
Hi,
Let talk about on the specific example.
If you see our work as a kind of interpretation, what is your opinion about our translation work on f-65r in VMS?
There is only 3 words in page f-65r and for sure it is a sentences.
Which part of our reading can be call as interpretation in this sentence read work?
There is 3 words in this page, one of them only has 1 sound drop and 1 sound change (OIYAK became AYAK) in time. (OI became A only > Phonetically, it is still the closest to each other, and no linguist can read this word differently than our reading. In the past 600 years, it has experienced a very small sound change and there are many similar phonetic change examples in Old Turkish.)
And other 2 words never change in phonetic value in last 600 years and we already share that dictionary links for those words.
The sentence was written as OIYAK SAK APAK, which is today as AYAK SAK APAK.
AYAK (foot, leg, stand, hoof) You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
and
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
and
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
SAK [see this section in the page: (II) is. (sa:k) bit. b. esk. Sap.] (stalk, handle, stem, shank, grip, shaft) You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
APAK [See: Tombul, gürbüz, sevimli in the link-page] > (plump, robust, cute ) > You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
600 years old: OIYAK SAK APAK
Written today as: AYAK SAK APAK
which with direct (1/1) translation:
Foot stalk plump, robush, cute
Wich translation in normal way is:
The foot stalk is plump, robush, cute
Our interpretation is only that; "the author calls "foot stalk" for "root of the plant".
What part of this translation would be considered as interpretation?
"The author calls "foot stalk" for "root of the plant" part is our interpretation only.
In that case, just accept the dictionary's equivalent of 1/1 words and forget about our interpretation.
Which is "Foot stalk plump, robush, cute" with zero interpretation. Which reading is only based on the dictionaries.
By the way, please note that, linguists are already 100% agreed with our statement for this sentence and nobody read it in different way yet.
To call this type of reading as an anagram or an interpretation, one must be completely away from linguistics.
This reading is one of the clearest readings made in VMS and there is many more.
The words are not changed in last 600 years and those are still shown in dictionaries today.
I don't know what can be said to those who call "interpretation" to this type of reading.
With all due respect, this type of reading is purely scientific and the evidence is there. Evidence cannot be challenged. Linguistics have read thousands of ancient texts in same way with using same methods since from very long time. If our reading will be interpreted as interpretation. More than a million articles written in academies will need to be officially announced as garbage.
1. The author used only one dialects in this sentence, so a word can not be translated into any of half a dozen forms for sure.
2. After our YouTube video, the paired phonetic matches have been simplified a little more. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
And sound matches for syllabic characters will be simpler in reading progress for sure.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
This is a case for our study method and is explained in our study papers.
3. But there is a much more important detail. Between 1951 and 1956 scholars claimed to have read the Hittite scripts/texts. They also published their articles. In these readings, 1 word of the Hittites was paired with 5 different sound values. And it was scientifically accepted. The same situation exists in Egyptian hieroglyph readings. The same was done with transcriptional translations of many ancient texts (which were officially announced as 'reading have done'). In this case, you criticize us for doing what scientists do. So you have to declare that Hittite readings, Egyptian readings, and others are also garbage. Because they all pared one sing with more than one phonetic value.
4. The multiple sound equivalents you mentioned are mostly valid for syllabic signs, and we will simplify them just like simple alphabet characters in the next period and we will have read more than 1000 words and 300 sentences in the near future for sure (in one or two years may be unless we have any problems like health issues). The biggest problem is that I'm not doing this VMS studies as a job. And this is not my only hobby too. We have to do this job in our free time. Otherwise we would have been read much more full pages.
You said that; "Why does the author write about baby pomegranates on f1v, f2r, f3r, and so many others?"
The answer could be one of this in general in other cases;
1- We know that The author is grafting (combining or fixing two different plant together/bud/instilled/) the plants and attempting to combine some species. (we know that from our readings)
2- You cannot evaluate these words in this way. Because many words in Turkish have more than one meaning. Therefore, everything will be revealed when sentence solutions are completed. Today we are at a very early stage. We need more free time to work on VMS or we need to find other Turkish VMS readers to speed up the reading process on the MS. We are already working on these issues.
3- Why should the author not use the word 'baby pomegranate' on more than one page? But if a time machine is built, you won't have to go and ask because these will be explained with more sentence analysis. So, no need to have time machine any more to visit VMS author to ask this.
4- For example, in f-2r this word is written with the 2 other words as ÇNOR, ÇULU, ŞAMU. I explained the word ÇNOR. I'm not writing here again. The two words next to it are ÇULU and ŞAMU. The sound of -U at the end of these two are suffixes.
“-Ü/-U” and “-İ/-I”: these are an Object Pointer Suffixes (Turkish Direct Object Suffix (accusative) such as “the” in English). (Clauson, Guise)
So, it means you can see these words in root form in dictionaries.
ÇUL (gunny, sack, bag, poke): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞAM (candle, wax): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ÇNOR ÇULU ŞAMU =
The Baby pomegranate gunny candle
or
The Baby pomegranate bag wax
So these three words together are an adjective. An analogy is made using this adjective. She/He mentioned a certain part of the plant drawn on this page has been identified with using this adjective in this text.
... etc ...
I don't know what kind of article you have written on which topic before. However, these works are not interpreted with feelings and/or personal opinions. No solution can be found if the solution will not met with mathematics, and linguistic-knowledge.
You also said that; "Seems to me if you take a five-glyph word you could easily find 50+ interpretations from which you can choose to construct your sentence."
If it's that easy, use the same method yourself and read as many words and overlapping sentences in English as we did in VMS. Let's see is it true what you said or do you have difficulty for evaluating some details in linguistic?
You don't find my explanations of homophones, roots/suffixes, and the author's incredible linguistic prowess to be satisfactory etc. just because you don't know Turkish. If the VMS was in Japanese or Chinese or any other language, I could be where you are today.
For anyone to say I have read any ancient text, they must meet the following criteria:
1- An alphabet transcription mapping that is useful for reading a large number of words needs to be done. (All the transcriptions made, including EVA, were wrong, so it didn't work. We did ATA transcription and read hundreds of words.)
2- Phonetic and syntactic overlaps should be seen in the syntax of words and sentences should give meaningful results.
3- The linguistic structures of the languages compared must be overlapping. For example, word suffixes of the past language should be seen in the other old texts, etc.
4- With the given transcription, other texts written in the same language and same alphabet should be read in same way and everyone should be able to make these readings using the same alphabet transcription.
5- When paragraphs and pages are read, meaningful texts that maintain the integrity of meaning and that are clearly understood to be the continuation of a certain subject should be able to be translated.
6- The root meanings or the whole of the words read should be shown in dictionaries or the meaning content should be proven with linguistic methods. If this cannot be done, the predictions that can be made should not break the sentence integrity. If any word is interpreted as a guess, this should be noted in translations. All translated words should be shown in dictionaries and word-suffixes should be explained.
7- There must be overlapping with historical and time-related realities.
We think that our work meet all these 7 criteria with our work and this will be understood in time. However, despite this, VMS reading is not complete. We are talking about an ongoing work at the moment. We are making new progress every week, and all of these are in a positive way.
Thanks,
Ahmet Ardıç
Ahmet Ardıç > 08-08-2020, 04:06 PM
(07-08-2020, 09:50 PM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In Turkish, do the phrases "the baby pomegranate gunny candle" and "the foot stalk is plump, robust, cute" make sense as something one would naturally write and which a reader would easily understand? Because in direct translation they look like word salad.
For me to say the manuscript has been solved, my basic criteria would be:
1) Other experts in the language (the medieval version) can use the method to translate a page independently and come up with roughly the same translation, allowing for reasonable variation because the manuscript is old and language is fluid. I.e. the results are repeatable.
2) The text makes grammatical sense without the translator having to explain that it makes sense if you kind of squint at it and give the author leeway for being poetic or being constricted by an acrostic.
Until you publish your full method and translation it isn't possible to say whether these criteria have been met. I would very much like them to be, because I want to read this damn manuscript (in modern English) before I die.
I will say that when you publish your findings, people much more knowledgeable and clever than me are going to ask you much more informed and clever questions. I would suggest you don't accuse them of being emotional, racist, Euro-centric, or try to twist their words to say they must agree with you. Science, as you say, should be about the facts and the evidence.
(08-08-2020, 04:28 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Translations have to be evaluated in two ways.
- First you look at the translation and ask yourself, "Does this make sense?"
- Second you have to ask yourself, "Would they normally write it this way?"
For example, in English, you could say, "Keep you tomorrow health best," and everyone would understand it, but no one says it that way. They would normally say, "Take care," or "Be well," "Gesundheit," or "Watch out for your health," or a few other common phrases. No one would say, "Keep you tomorrow health best."
So... there is text that is understandable in a rough way. And there is text that is normal and conventional.
Some of the solutions proposed so far (in a variety of languages) have bits and pieces that seem understandable, but they are not normal phrases for the Middle Ages.
If it is understandable, but seems a bit odd AND the translation method has a lot of degrees of freedom, then you have to ask yourself if the degrees of freedom are resulting in a subjective "solution". Normally degrees of freedom make it easier to write something that is traditional and normal and yet, in the case of many VMS "solutions", this is not what happens. Even with all this freedom, translations are still grammatically odd or the grammar is nonexistent.
Alin_J > 08-08-2020, 05:09 PM
(07-08-2020, 12:00 AM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(04-08-2020, 12:05 AM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi Ahmet, nice to see you here and thanks for answering questions. What is your translation of the vord daiin?
Hi Pepper,
You asked an explanation about a short word with using a short sentence. However, the answer is not short. Because this word is used in many different meanings as both a word suffix and an independent word. For this reason, this word is used very often in VMS and this is a very normal situation.
We can write this word in Latin abc in the form SAĞN / ŞAĞN / SEĞN, SAM / ŞAM / SEM / ŞEM, ŞAIIN / SAIIN / ŞEĞN / ŞEİİN according to ATA alphabet transcription.
I am not saying that the author was referring to all of these words by writing with this single word. There's absolutely nothing like that. Only this word has a Turkish equivalent of all different transcription combinations and some of their meanings are also common. Because the word root is the same. So, that as the word is read in context, the human brain (for a native speaker) automatically derives all variations, and selects the appropriate one for the context. An example of the brain automatically selecting the appropriate concept to the context in English would be the presentation of the word “fly.” Depending on the context in which it is being read, the brain will draw a distinction between “fly” the verb and “fly” the noun. A similar situation exists in Turkish, albeit with more options. If this is confusing, you can read the explanation below and see that all of them in Turkish.
I hope you will understand my English in first read.
The spelling of this word as SAIIN and as like SAĞN are so close to each other with in phonetic-value that they cannot be perceived as different words. The root of this word is the SA- ('SAĞ-' in some dialects), and it has the suffix '-ĞN'.
The suffix “-ĞN” (“-AĞN”/“-ĞIN”/ “-GİN”) is the phonetic equivalent of “-AĞIN / -EĞİN” due to the Turkish vowel harmony rule, for when the last letter of a root is a consonant, a vowel may be placed as a conjunction between the root and the suffix. These suffixes indicate prospect attainability, potentially achieving something, to be able to potentially attain/reach something, and expecting forthcoming form of something (-able). Sir Gerard Clauson in his book "Studies in Turkic and Mongolic Linguistics" (page 154) explained the suffixes “ĞIN”, and “GİN” as: ["-ğın/-gin function uncertain; e.g. kev- "to masticate" > kevgin "indigestible"; rare and unproductive and probably very old."]. In addition, Sir Gerard Clauson explained in his book "An etymological dictionary of pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish" (Clauson) that: ["-ğ the commonest Deverbal Suffix; forms a wide range of Deverbal Nouns and Noun/Adjectives, Nomen actiones, etc".]
You can see this word in some Turkish dictionaries (with certain meanings) in the form SAĞIN. But you can often see this word in dictionaries with the word-suffix '-mek / -mak'. So you can see this word in the dictionaries as like SAĞINMAK and SAĞMAK too.
The suffixes “-mek/-mak”: these are suffixes of Turkish infinitive. They turn the root word into a verb as well as also a concrete noun.(Clauson, Eyuboğlu, Guise)
SAĞINMAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
SAĞMAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(See Turkish equivalents in the dictionary in google word translator.)
In addition, the various meaning of the word SAĞIN itself is shown in some dictionaries.
SAĞIN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You could say that essentially, the letter A and E correspond to ATA Transcription with a single typeface. So we can read this word as SEĞİN.
However, the word SEĞİN is a Turkish word too.
SEĞİN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If you read the word in SEM format, it also has Turkish meanings.
SEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we talk about reading this word as SAM, we can say the following. This word is both a word-suffix and a word that has its own meaning.
The word SAM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The suffixe -SAM: The suffix “-SAM” indicates actions taken in first person. This suffix is directly described as “I/me” and is related to the suffixes “-SAM”, “-SIM”, “-SİM” or “-SEM” which all describe action’s owner to be “I, me, myself” (first person) (Guise).
In Turkish, some word-suffixes can be written separated from the main word/root since ancient times.
Likewise, the pronunciation of word SEM also has Turkish meanings. For example, we know that this word is used in the meaning of 'medicine' in Old Turkish. But the word SEM also has other meanings too.
SEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The pronunciation of this word as ŞAM and as like ŞEM has some meanings in Turkish.
ŞAM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we talk about the spelling of the word ŞAĞIN;
Today, this word is written and read in the Anatolian dialects in the form of UŞAĞIN. In other words, the word has a U sound on the front side. We know that some dialects in Azerbaijan are still used in the form of ŞAĞIN in the same meaning.
In this spelling, the root word is the word UŞAK. But when it was take the word suffix -ĞIN, the K sound was lost in pronunciation and the word became as USAĞIN.
UŞAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we read the word as ŞEĞN, this lives in our language in the form of ŞEYİN. The root of this word is ŞEY. It usually appears in the root form in dictionaries.
ŞEY: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞEYİN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
As you can see, we have shown all the different readings of this word read in VMS according to ATA transcription. Moreover, we shared all related Turkish dictionary pages.
You may have noticed that this word is repeated in almost every page, with multiple numbers in VMS. Moreover, just like in modern Turkish, this word appears in VMS as both an independent word and as a word suffix. So, in this point, the overlap between Turkish and VMS is very clear. All I can tell you is that the word is not used in the same meaning, or in the same function with all of these repetitions in VMS.
So that's why there are many repetitions.
In the runic alphabet inscriptions from the Old Turkish Period, cases where two or more sounds were met with a single alphabet sign were recorded. So this is not just for VMS-specific too.
However, this type of alphabet has helped the author to encode confidential information. We talked about how this coding is done in our second youtube video in English. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
May be it is very difficult to understand this situation for a person who thinks English (or any other PIE rooted language) in his/her brain, but an example, even if a word has 10 readings and 100 different meanings, someone who knows Turkish will understand the meaning of the word when they read a sentence. In addition, Turkish speaking person will always understand whether it was used as a word-suffixe or as a separate word too.
So, This is suffix and word. Different readings of the word mostly from same root and a native speaker brain automatically selecting the appropriate concept or meaning form the meaning content.
The author could write this word in a more separable form by using with simple alphabet characters only, if she/he were wanted to that.
If the author were wanted to that, she/he was not match some single sign in the alphabet with 2 sounds. So this type of writing is not very normal. However, the aim of the author was to create a coded MS which should have been not easy to read. The author was coding and developed a complex alphabet to make this MS difficult to read.
In other words, this alphabet is the situation specific alphabet to created only for VMS, which has been created with consisting of both the syllabic alphabet, the simple alphabet and the tamga-scripts and the numbers. For this reason, now we are reading a simple word in very different ways.
The interesting thing is that even when we take the meanings of different words, the meaning integrity of the sentences is often not broken in meaning. I think this is a situation that created by the intelligence of the author, but it cannot be a coincidence. It is probably not possible to simulate this situation in a language other than Turkish.
Best regards,
Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta
Pepper > 08-08-2020, 06:49 PM
(08-08-2020, 04:06 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif]In brief, "The Baby pomegranate bag wax" (is not phrase or is not sentence too, but it is an adjective.[/font]
Thanks.
Ahmet Ardıç > 09-08-2020, 10:39 PM
(08-08-2020, 05:09 PM)Alin_J Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-08-2020, 12:00 AM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(04-08-2020, 12:05 AM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi Ahmet, nice to see you here and thanks for answering questions. What is your translation of the vord daiin?
Hi Pepper,
You asked an explanation about a short word with using a short sentence. However, the answer is not short. Because this word is used in many different meanings as both a word suffix and an independent word. For this reason, this word is used very often in VMS and this is a very normal situation.
We can write this word in Latin abc in the form SAĞN / ŞAĞN / SEĞN, SAM / ŞAM / SEM / ŞEM, ŞAIIN / SAIIN / ŞEĞN / ŞEİİN according to ATA alphabet transcription.
I am not saying that the author was referring to all of these words by writing with this single word. There's absolutely nothing like that. Only this word has a Turkish equivalent of all different transcription combinations and some of their meanings are also common. Because the word root is the same. So, that as the word is read in context, the human brain (for a native speaker) automatically derives all variations, and selects the appropriate one for the context. An example of the brain automatically selecting the appropriate concept to the context in English would be the presentation of the word “fly.” Depending on the context in which it is being read, the brain will draw a distinction between “fly” the verb and “fly” the noun. A similar situation exists in Turkish, albeit with more options. If this is confusing, you can read the explanation below and see that all of them in Turkish.
I hope you will understand my English in first read.
The spelling of this word as SAIIN and as like SAĞN are so close to each other with in phonetic-value that they cannot be perceived as different words. The root of this word is the SA- ('SAĞ-' in some dialects), and it has the suffix '-ĞN'.
The suffix “-ĞN” (“-AĞN”/“-ĞIN”/ “-GİN”) is the phonetic equivalent of “-AĞIN / -EĞİN” due to the Turkish vowel harmony rule, for when the last letter of a root is a consonant, a vowel may be placed as a conjunction between the root and the suffix. These suffixes indicate prospect attainability, potentially achieving something, to be able to potentially attain/reach something, and expecting forthcoming form of something (-able). Sir Gerard Clauson in his book "Studies in Turkic and Mongolic Linguistics" (page 154) explained the suffixes “ĞIN”, and “GİN” as: ["-ğın/-gin function uncertain; e.g. kev- "to masticate" > kevgin "indigestible"; rare and unproductive and probably very old."]. In addition, Sir Gerard Clauson explained in his book "An etymological dictionary of pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish" (Clauson) that: ["-ğ the commonest Deverbal Suffix; forms a wide range of Deverbal Nouns and Noun/Adjectives, Nomen actiones, etc".]
You can see this word in some Turkish dictionaries (with certain meanings) in the form SAĞIN. But you can often see this word in dictionaries with the word-suffix '-mek / -mak'. So you can see this word in the dictionaries as like SAĞINMAK and SAĞMAK too.
The suffixes “-mek/-mak”: these are suffixes of Turkish infinitive. They turn the root word into a verb as well as also a concrete noun.(Clauson, Eyuboğlu, Guise)
SAĞINMAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
SAĞMAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(See Turkish equivalents in the dictionary in google word translator.)
In addition, the various meaning of the word SAĞIN itself is shown in some dictionaries.
SAĞIN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You could say that essentially, the letter A and E correspond to ATA Transcription with a single typeface. So we can read this word as SEĞİN.
However, the word SEĞİN is a Turkish word too.
SEĞİN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If you read the word in SEM format, it also has Turkish meanings.
SEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we talk about reading this word as SAM, we can say the following. This word is both a word-suffix and a word that has its own meaning.
The word SAM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The suffixe -SAM: The suffix “-SAM” indicates actions taken in first person. This suffix is directly described as “I/me” and is related to the suffixes “-SAM”, “-SIM”, “-SİM” or “-SEM” which all describe action’s owner to be “I, me, myself” (first person) (Guise).
In Turkish, some word-suffixes can be written separated from the main word/root since ancient times.
Likewise, the pronunciation of word SEM also has Turkish meanings. For example, we know that this word is used in the meaning of 'medicine' in Old Turkish. But the word SEM also has other meanings too.
SEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The pronunciation of this word as ŞAM and as like ŞEM has some meanings in Turkish.
ŞAM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞEM: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we talk about the spelling of the word ŞAĞIN;
Today, this word is written and read in the Anatolian dialects in the form of UŞAĞIN. In other words, the word has a U sound on the front side. We know that some dialects in Azerbaijan are still used in the form of ŞAĞIN in the same meaning.
In this spelling, the root word is the word UŞAK. But when it was take the word suffix -ĞIN, the K sound was lost in pronunciation and the word became as USAĞIN.
UŞAK: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we read the word as ŞEĞN, this lives in our language in the form of ŞEYİN. The root of this word is ŞEY. It usually appears in the root form in dictionaries.
ŞEY: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
ŞEYİN: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
As you can see, we have shown all the different readings of this word read in VMS according to ATA transcription. Moreover, we shared all related Turkish dictionary pages.
You may have noticed that this word is repeated in almost every page, with multiple numbers in VMS. Moreover, just like in modern Turkish, this word appears in VMS as both an independent word and as a word suffix. So, in this point, the overlap between Turkish and VMS is very clear. All I can tell you is that the word is not used in the same meaning, or in the same function with all of these repetitions in VMS.
So that's why there are many repetitions.
In the runic alphabet inscriptions from the Old Turkish Period, cases where two or more sounds were met with a single alphabet sign were recorded. So this is not just for VMS-specific too.
However, this type of alphabet has helped the author to encode confidential information. We talked about how this coding is done in our second youtube video in English. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
May be it is very difficult to understand this situation for a person who thinks English (or any other PIE rooted language) in his/her brain, but an example, even if a word has 10 readings and 100 different meanings, someone who knows Turkish will understand the meaning of the word when they read a sentence. In addition, Turkish speaking person will always understand whether it was used as a word-suffixe or as a separate word too.
So, This is suffix and word. Different readings of the word mostly from same root and a native speaker brain automatically selecting the appropriate concept or meaning form the meaning content.
The author could write this word in a more separable form by using with simple alphabet characters only, if she/he were wanted to that.
If the author were wanted to that, she/he was not match some single sign in the alphabet with 2 sounds. So this type of writing is not very normal. However, the aim of the author was to create a coded MS which should have been not easy to read. The author was coding and developed a complex alphabet to make this MS difficult to read.
In other words, this alphabet is the situation specific alphabet to created only for VMS, which has been created with consisting of both the syllabic alphabet, the simple alphabet and the tamga-scripts and the numbers. For this reason, now we are reading a simple word in very different ways.
The interesting thing is that even when we take the meanings of different words, the meaning integrity of the sentences is often not broken in meaning. I think this is a situation that created by the intelligence of the author, but it cannot be a coincidence. It is probably not possible to simulate this situation in a language other than Turkish.
Best regards,
Ahmet Ardıç
ATA Team Alberta
Hello Ahmet,
I believe that in your answer you are attempting to provide us with ample explanations to why this particular separate glyph sequence is found very frequently in the VMS (in fact it is the most frequent qlyph sequence), if I'm not being too much mistaken? However, you didn't really answer the question asked. In your links that you have provided no actual translations of the words can be found since everything is written in Turkish, so you have to have knowledge of Turkish to understand the web-pages. Therefore I would here like to re-formulate the original question:
What would be your translation of the - or one of the - most commonly found example(s) of this word/word-suffix in Turkish/Old Turkish languages, into English?
I am not relying on Google translate, I would like an answer from someone who speaks Turkish. Thank you.
Ahmet Ardıç > 09-08-2020, 11:41 PM
(08-08-2020, 03:07 PM)Pepper Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(08-08-2020, 12:45 AM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi Pepper,
When I do not translate directly (1/1), what I wrote to you seems to be my personal comments. The reason I translate directly is because you can see that the sentence is linked to the drawing on the page and the words have meanings. The direct translation is: "The roots are cute." and/or "The roots are fat."
But none of these words in Turkish alone mean root. But when both of these two words (AYAK SAPI) combine, it becomes an adjective that refers to the roots of the plant. Therefore, translation of a Turkish text into other languages is also a matter of expertise.
I don't need to comment on your other comment because I already shared my opinion on these issues.
Thanks for your comment,
Ah, I haven't been clear. I don't object to you converting your direct translations into a form that makes sense in English ("the foot stalk is plump, robust, cute" > "the roots are cute"). I'm grateful for those Turkish > modern English translations because it helps me understand.
What I'm asking is if somebody writing in 15th century Turkish would write "the foot stalk is plump, robust, cute" in that way? JKP explained this better than me - "keep you tomorrow best health" could be a direct translation from VMS to English but it would be dubious because nobody would construct a sentence that way.
Also, what does cute mean in this context? It makes me smile because it seems so anachronistic for a medieval mansucript, but that could be my ignorance talking!
-JKP- > 10-08-2020, 12:55 AM
(08-08-2020, 03:18 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.