Koen G > 14-04-2019, 02:49 PM
Emma May Smith > 14-04-2019, 02:58 PM
Koen G > 14-04-2019, 03:29 PM
(14-04-2019, 02:58 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've done it. I wrote a blog post about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Emma May Smith > 14-04-2019, 04:23 PM
MarcoP > 14-04-2019, 05:20 PM
(14-04-2019, 04:23 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I suppose if we could program something to automatically split all the words (I only did about the one thousand most common) we could quickly spot the very long and unusual.
Emma May Smith > 14-04-2019, 05:56 PM
(14-04-2019, 05:20 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi Emma,
do you mean finding all the long words that cannot be "explained" as the concatenation of two shorter words?
Quote:About benches and e-sequences:
A possible experiment could be considering bench+e sequences as single glyphs, and see the effect on Sukhotin's algorithm (for instance). More than 90% of e-sequences follow a gallows, bench, or benched-gallows glyph. A difficulty would be deciding what to do with benched-gallows: gallows appear to be clearly distinct; we can experiment with assimilating benches and 'e'; but benched-gallows?
The characters following e-sequences are almost equally split among possible vowels [oay] and other glyphs, so the outcome of the experiment is not easy to predict....
MarcoP > 14-04-2019, 06:39 PM
(14-04-2019, 05:56 PM)Emma May Smith Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Quote:About benches and e-sequences:
A possible experiment could be considering bench+e sequences as single glyphs, and see the effect on Sukhotin's algorithm (for instance). More than 90% of e-sequences follow a gallows, bench, or benched-gallows glyph. A difficulty would be deciding what to do with benched-gallows: gallows appear to be clearly distinct; we can experiment with assimilating benches and 'e'; but benched-gallows?
The characters following e-sequences are almost equally split among possible vowels [oay] and other glyphs, so the outcome of the experiment is not easy to predict....
I think the easiest was to do it would be to consider the [h] as part of the [e] sequences or equal to an [e]. Then [C] and [S] and [ck, ct, cf, cp] would be counted as glyphs in their own right. Maybe also insert a null after an [e] sequence or [h] not followed by [a, y, o] and that null would be a proxy which we might hope the algorithm would discover as a vowel?
(I seem to recall that one of the vowel finding experiments did actually find [h] as a vowel!)
Emma May Smith > 14-04-2019, 09:01 PM
Quote:This experiment seems much more approachable, but also here a few examples could be useful.
How would chey, cheeey, pchey, chol, ckhedy, chckhedy be encoded?
Of course, experimenting with and without the 'null' should be fairly easy.
Koen G > 15-04-2019, 07:30 PM
-JKP- > 15-04-2019, 07:47 PM
(15-04-2019, 07:30 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm thinking there should be a way to automatically count syllables without having to do any coding (i.e. within my abilities). Basically you take a word list with each word on a line, paste it in Word or whatever, use "find and replace" to delete all "consonants" and to replace all "vowels" by 1. If you do this in the correct order, you can even implement conditional cases. Then copy-paste the resulting strings of ones back in excel (next to the original word list), make a sum of the "1"'s and that will be your number of syllables.
(probably the programming-savvy are making fun of me now, but that's how I would do it )
Does anyone have a Voynichese word list?