- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Ruby's Greek Thread
- Ruby's Greek Thread
-
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
ololololo > 17-08-2026, 09:55 AM
For a couple of seconds, forget about EVA and show where the connection and similarity between these words lie:
-
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
Ruby Novacna > 17-08-2026, 12:39 PM
I quote my post
"In my opinion keerodal can be read as muro8ai and can correspond to the Byzantine Greek word μυρωδίαι, plural of μυρωδία (μυρωδιά, μερωδία), coming from ancient Greek μυρώδης"
"It’s true that the ending doesn’t have a perfect match" -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
ololololo > 17-08-2026, 09:17 PM
And why can we read it this way?
For example, I don’t see any similarity between k and μ. -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
eggyk > 17-08-2026, 11:19 PM
(17-08-2026, 09:17 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And why can we read it this way?
For example, I don’t see any similarity between k and μ.
I believe that the similarity is between EVA k and latin "m". Then μ is the greek letter that corresponds to latin m. -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
Ruby Novacna > 18-08-2026, 12:03 AM
(17-08-2026, 09:17 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And why can we read it this way?
For example, I don’t see any similarity between k and μ.
Take a look at this book, for example.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Moreover, I saw in this table the letter μ very similar to ee EVA in the word oeepoaly (oeefoaly, in reality). -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
ololololo > 18-08-2026, 07:07 AM
Interesting table! The theta there is quite similar to EVA y.
But mu is a letter with a lower descender. EVA k — with an upper one.
(17-08-2026, 11:19 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It’s the same as saying that the Latin letter A and the Cyrillic letter A are the same.(17-08-2026, 09:17 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And why can we read it this way?
For example, I don’t see any similarity between k and μ.
I believe that the similarity is between EVA k and latin "m". Then μ is the greek letter that corresponds to latin m. -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
Oscroft > 18-08-2026, 10:35 AM
(18-08-2026, 07:07 AM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(17-08-2026, 11:19 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It’s the same as saying that the Latin letter A and the Cyrillic letter A are the same.(17-08-2026, 09:17 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And why can we read it this way?
For example, I don’t see any similarity between k and μ.
I believe that the similarity is between EVA k and latin "m". Then μ is the greek letter that corresponds to latin m.
And, as I've been saying, it highlights the folly of trying to match EVA (which has no phonetic meaning) with other languages' phonetics. But it seems Google Translate is making that impossible for our theorist to understand. -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
Oscroft > 18-08-2026, 01:04 PM
(17-08-2026, 11:19 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I believe that the similarity is between EVA k and latin "m". Then μ is the greek letter that corresponds to latin m.
And the problem with that is that the Voynichese letter that corresponds with EVA "k" (which might or might not correspond with the Latin "m") does not itself correspond with the Latin "m" (unless by pure chance, as nobody knows the actual Latin equivalent of any Voynichese letter - some of them were named in EVA as they had apparent similar written forms to Latin letters, but that's completely arbitrary and absolutely does not imply a Voynichese-to-Latin equivalence).
The "k" (or "m") is the result of a single substitution cipher, and therefore carries none of the phonetic properties of the plaintext letter. It's possible that I'm the one misunderstanding something here, but it seems painfully simple to me - though absolutely impossible to get our would-be Voynich detective to understand. -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
Ruby Novacna > 18-08-2026, 05:38 PM
(18-08-2026, 01:04 PM)Oscroft Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The "k" (or "m") is the result of a single substitution cipher, and therefore carries none of the phonetic properties of the plaintext letter. It's possible that I'm the one misunderstanding something here, but it seems painfully simple to me - though absolutely impossible to get our would-be Voynich detective to understand.
At least with you, I'm learning English, thank you. -
RE: Ruby's Greek Thread
eggyk > 18-08-2026, 10:53 PM
(18-08-2026, 01:04 PM)Oscroft Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And the problem with that is that the Voynichese letter that corresponds with EVA "k" (which might or might not correspond with the Latin "m") does not itself correspond with the Latin "m" (unless by pure chance, as nobody knows the actual Latin equivalent of any Voynichese letter - some of them were named in EVA as they had apparent similar written forms to Latin letters, but that's completely arbitrary and absolutely does not imply a Voynichese-to-Latin equivalence).
I don't understand what this means. The post was talking about 3 texts, and the question was to explain the similarity between them.
(17-08-2026, 09:17 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And why can we read it this way?
For example, I don’t see any similarity between k and μ.
The assertion is that EVA "k" looks like latin "m" somehow. Then, seperately, that a latin "m" corresponds to the same sound as greek μ. Therefore, whether EVA "k" looks like μ or not is irrelevant to the point.
I wasn't saying that's a fact, I was saying that is the assertion.