-JKP- > 05-04-2018, 07:06 PM
Koen G > 05-04-2018, 07:30 PM
Quote:While this is true in the vast majority of cases, there are some exceptions, the majority of which are romanised from Arabic, Chinese, Hebrew, Inuktitut, or other languages which do not use the English alphabet
davidjackson > 05-04-2018, 07:39 PM
Quote:Take "qu" in English. It's usually a bigraph but you also get "q" without u in loans. There's a wiki about it You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..Which I said earlier.
Koen G > 05-04-2018, 07:41 PM
(05-04-2018, 07:39 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You think they knew about loan words then?
davidjackson > 05-04-2018, 07:45 PM
Quote:By they should all comply with the language rules, (here I extrapolate from known natural languages ) unless they are loan words - in which case, how is the encoding system working if it is bending a bigraph?
English works well in this case, it has no problem in accommodating q+vowel but only in the case of loan words. A peculiarity of which I know of no studies.
But how would an encoding system capable of producing voynichese cope with these loan words
-JKP- > 05-04-2018, 08:08 PM
(05-04-2018, 07:39 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
Of course, let's not get hung up on a direct correspondence : q ain't necessarily q.
Quote:But if q+o Appears in say, 90% of cases it's an indication that something is going on. If Voynich ese glyphs are letters, then we have a bigraph. If they aren't, we still have a syllable.
Quote:Hey, this dates from the 15th century You think they knew about loan words then?
davidjackson > 05-04-2018, 08:17 PM
Quote:They used loan-words more than we do. They were constantly inserting Greek, Latin, and Hebrew into their text.But there was no philosophical difference between their vernacular and the loan word. That is they wouldn't have known to change the encryption method to make loam words appear the same as regular words.
Quote:I totally agree that something is going on, but I think there's a difference between qo + token and q + token that usually starts with "o" and I'm leaning toward it being the latterEntirely possible, which is why we need the statistics. Cmon people!
MarcoP > 05-04-2018, 08:29 PM
(05-04-2018, 08:17 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Entirely possible, which is why we need the statistics. Cmon people!
davidjackson > 05-04-2018, 08:51 PM
Emma May Smith > 05-04-2018, 09:41 PM
(05-04-2018, 07:06 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There might be some skepticism about this, but I don't think qo is a bigraph.
I'm not 100% positive, but I've spent a great deal of time looking at this word structure and I suspect what is happening is that q is commonly prepended to tokens beginning with "o" and thus it resembles a bigraph, but the "q" does not require "o" to follow. There are times when "q" goes in front of other things.