-JKP- > 27-06-2020, 06:59 PM
(27-06-2020, 06:03 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think it would not be, since, as I said, they appear to be kinda "core" bigrams....
Searcher > 27-06-2020, 07:28 PM
(27-06-2020, 06:03 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There are (ref. VQP) 8558 vords starting with "o", i.e. "o*" wildcard (neglecting standalone "o")Ok. I understand your division.
Of those:
2417 are ot*
2474 are ok*
360 are op*
240 are od*
89 are of*
(these are pre-gallows and pre-d), the subtotal is 5580 or 65%. I'd say these are all operators.
Next, there are:
1069 ol*
244 or*
538 ol (just two-character vord)
366 or (just two-character vord)
the subtotal is 2217, or 26%
I guess that ol* and or* are composites here, - in other words, "o" is not an operator here.
What remains are 661 occurrences, such as 173 oc*, 132 oe* etc.
So my first guess would be that every vord-starting o beyond that in basic bigrams ol and or is a relational operator.
Searcher > 27-06-2020, 08:04 PM
Searcher > 27-06-2020, 08:09 PM
-JKP- > 27-06-2020, 08:22 PM
(27-06-2020, 08:04 PM)Searcher Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Anton > 27-06-2020, 08:51 PM
(27-06-2020, 07:28 PM)Searcher Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thus, we get the conjunction that appears before the words that begin only with the same five letters. Why?
Searcher > 27-06-2020, 08:57 PM
(27-06-2020, 08:51 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why a relational operator appears before vords beginning only with five letters (in fact, not just five, but not very many indeed, and more than half is just two - t and k) is a question leading to consideration that a relational operator can precede only a subset of vords (like, perhaps, only nouns?) and then it is reduced to the question why this subset of vords mostly begins with only two letter. And thinking over this question would not bring the thinker to the idea of simple substitution, that's for sure.Then I invite you to experiments!
But, as I said above, at the moment this is just an interesting avenue which is yet unexplored. It needs deeper research and thorough critique.
Anton > 27-06-2020, 09:45 PM
Searcher > 27-06-2020, 10:14 PM
(27-06-2020, 09:45 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Unfortunately, I have very little time to do anything Voynich-related systematically.Oh, yes! Me, too. I couldn't get to the forum and to my blog a long time, but I hope to post something here or there soon.
Searcher > 02-07-2020, 01:32 PM
Quote: For the simplest example, one may substitute not single letters but, say, bigrams. Take the word "date", if "da" maps to "po" and "te" maps to "lo", then "date" maps to "polo", and there's no 1:1 mapping between single characters (instead, it exists for bigrams). The decipherer would in vain consider the two "o" characters to be the same.