- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Voynich Reconsidered
- Voynich Reconsidered
-
RE: Voynich Reconsidered
Hider > 19-06-2023, 07:59 AM
-
RE: Voynich Reconsidered
nablator > 19-06-2023, 05:27 PM
(19-06-2023, 04:30 PM)dfs346 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thoughts on what I call the "Voynich alphabet": how the Voynich producer instructed the scribes on the writing order of the glyphs.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:The rules of the “slot alphabet” are essentially as follows:
• A glyph can be followed by a glyph in the same or a higher-numbered slot.
The "slot alphabet" is a transliteration alphabet. The rules of "regular" words (51% of all word types in M. Zattera's transliteration) are described in a grammar (state machine) in figure 4. It does not allow a glyph to be followed by a glyph in the same slot, except in slots 6 and 9 (e and i repetitions). It does not allow any higher-numbered slot either.
A simple 12-slot sequence-enforcing rule will not generate good Voynichese: more constraints are needed. -
RE: Voynich Reconsidered
nablator > 19-06-2023, 10:01 PM
(16-06-2023, 04:51 PM)cvetkakocj@rogers.com Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Stična codex in sloveniand can be found on
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.>
Maybe You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If this is it, it's an audio recording, not helpful.
PDF and text links posted here:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: Voynich Reconsidered
dfs346 > 04-07-2023, 07:32 AM
I feel that the Voynich producer would have wished to give the scribes a simple set of instructions, whereby they could write the manuscript with minimal supervision. A relatively simple rule could be: first transcribe letters to glyphs (using some mapping prescribed by the producer), then re-order the glyphs in each "word" according to a "Voynich alphabet" (along the lines of Massimiliano Zattera’s "slot alphabet").
However, with Zattera's alphabet, the scribes would need to know where to place the "nomadic glyphs". For example, should a v101 glyph {8} be in slot 0, 7 or10? (In Zattera’s alphabet, all three are permitted.)
Trying to step into the Voynich producer's shoes, I could imagine that he or she might define two or more "slot alphabets": for example one for Currier's Language A, another for Language B. Then, for example, he or she might instruct the scribes of Language A to place any {8} in slot 0; and the scribes of Language B to place any {8} in slot 7. (And maybe there is a third language.)
Alternatively, the producer might have defined a "slot alphabet" for each section of the manuscript: one for the plant section, one for the "baths" section, and so on.
To test this hypothesis, we could invite Mr Zattera to re-run his program on separate subdivisions of the manuscript, suitably defined. -
RE: Voynich Reconsidered
dfs346 > 04-07-2023, 08:32 AM
As a low-tech alternative to re-running Mr Zattera’s program: we could, for example, formulate three versions of his "slot alphabet", as follows:
* version 1: {8} in slot 0 only
* version 2: {8} in slot 7 only
* version 3: {8} in slot 10 only.
Additional versions could be based on permutations of the "slots" for the other "nomadic glyphs".
We could then list the ten or twenty most frequent "words" in Languages A and B respectively, and for each "word", ask ourselves: to which version of the "slot alphabet" does the "word" best conform? Thereby we might identify a possible "alphabet" for Language A and another for Language B.
As an example: we could focus on "words" containing the v101 glyph {8}. The "word" {8am} is frequent in both Languages A and B; it only conforms to the "slot alphabet" if {8} is in slot 0 or 7. We can find other "words" in which {8} has to be in slot 7 or 10; for example, "words" such as {1c89} and {2c89}. We can find "words" in which {8} can only be in one slot; for example, "words" containing {a8} or {i8} would place the {8} in slot 10. Maybe such "words" are only found in Language A or B, but not both.
We could do a similar exercise on each section or theme of the manuscript: the plant pages, the "bath" pages, and so on. Maybe each section has its own "slot alphabet". -
RE: Voynich Reconsidered
nablator > 04-07-2023, 05:40 PM
(04-07-2023, 08:32 AM)dfs346 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As an example: we could focus on "words" containing the v101 glyph {8}. The "word" {8am} is frequent in both Languages A and B; it only conforms to the "slot alphabet" if {8} is in slot 0 or 7. We can find other "words" in which {8} has to be in slot 7 or 10; for example, "words" such as {1c89} and {2c89}. We can find "words" in which {8} can only be in one slot; for example, "words" containing {a8} or {i8} would place the {8} in slot 10. Maybe such "words" are only found in Language A or B, but not both.
No clear relation to section/language it seems.