-JKP- > 19-02-2020, 05:40 PM
nablator > 19-02-2020, 05:58 PM
-JKP- > 19-02-2020, 06:30 PM
nablator > 19-02-2020, 09:32 PM
(19-02-2020, 06:30 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.How can you measure word clustering (the relationship of words to their neighbors) without taking into account the word constistuents?Words are just nodes in a network, connected to other nodes: for the calculation to be made, no information about them other than connectivity needs to be kept. To build the network it is not necessary to decide whether EVA-qo and EVA-iin are "indivisible" or not (whatever that means), only where words are, and which words look similar enough to be considered identical.
Torsten > 19-02-2020, 11:31 PM
(18-02-2020, 09:27 PM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.At least with Linear B pretty much all the experts agreed that it was a syllabary. With Voynichese, we still have not even the outline of a proof as to what constitutes a single token.
-JKP- > 20-02-2020, 12:40 AM
(19-02-2020, 09:32 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(19-02-2020, 06:30 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.How can you measure word clustering (the relationship of words to their neighbors) without taking into account the word constistuents?Words are just nodes in a network, connected to other nodes: for the calculation to be made, no information about them other than connectivity needs to be kept. To build the network it is not necessary to decide whether EVA-qo and EVA-iin are "indivisible" or not (whatever that means), only where words are, and which words look similar enough to be considered identical.
RenegadeHealer > 20-02-2020, 01:49 AM
(20-02-2020, 12:40 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Even in Hebrew, the distinction between Hey and Chet is difficult for some people to see and much more subtle than the variations among VMS glyphs.
Alin_J > 20-02-2020, 06:18 PM
(20-02-2020, 12:40 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.These are not oddballs or uncommon in medieval script. They are normal and common. Their interpretation is NOT based on shape entirely. It is heavily based on context. So how do you determine which nodes are the same for something like the VMS, which might use the same conventions? Looking similar means very little if you can't read the glyphs. Especially since we don't know if height or tail-length changes the interpretation of a glyph. There are Asian languages where a tiny little serif changes the meaning of a syllable. Even in Hebrew, the distinction between Hey and Chet is difficult for some people to see and much more subtle than the variations among VMS glyphs.
-JKP- > 20-02-2020, 06:53 PM
Alin_J Wrote:This can be true for any text where we don't know the language or anything about. However, statistics can still say a lot from starting with a basic assumption, and that can be that the meaning of a word is not context-dependent. To go from there and only consider those words which are written exactly the same way in the text could then be a reasonable starting point. If you deal with an unknown language you have to start from an assumption such as this, it is the only way to go. If it is a correct one, the results will probably reveal something. But of course, you can never be sure of anything already from the start regarding an unknown writing.
nablator > 20-02-2020, 06:57 PM
(20-02-2020, 12:40 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Especially since we don't know if height or tail-length changes the interpretation of a glyph. There are Asian languages where a tiny little serif changes the meaning of a syllable. Even in Hebrew, the distinction between Hey and Chet is difficult for some people to see and much more subtle than the variations among VMS glyphs.