pfeaster > 02-04-2024, 12:03 AM
Quote: xxxvii36 xxx21 ii5 xxiii8 xxviii10 xxx20 xxx22 xvii29 xxx28 xiii16 xxix12 xxx22 xii3 xxx28 ii13 xxix5 viii25 xxix20 xxx28 xxiii40
RobGea > 02-04-2024, 12:52 AM
Quote:Mr. Friedman disclosed to me his belief that the basis of the script
was a very primitive form of synthetic universal language such as was developed
in the form of a philosophical classification of ideas by Bishop Wilkins in 1667 and Dalgarno a little later.
It was clear that the productions of these two men were much too systematic,
and anything of the kind would have been almost instantly recognisable.
My analysis seemed to me to reveal a cumbersome mixture of different kinds of substitution.
...I tried in 1957 to trace back the idea of universal character, but I had little time to devote to this research.[1]
ReneZ > 02-04-2024, 12:56 AM
Antonio García Jiménez > 02-04-2024, 07:35 AM
Aga Tentakulus > 02-04-2024, 08:15 AM
ReneZ > 02-04-2024, 10:27 AM
(02-04-2024, 07:35 AM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.All this naturally with the prior hypothesis that we are dealing with a language, whether natural or encrypted, which is not proven in any way.
Aga Tentakulus > 02-04-2024, 10:47 AM
(02-04-2024, 12:56 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is:
Is it possible to do a word-by-word substitution of the Voynich MS and come up with a meaningful text?
I see more reasons why the answer should be "no" rather than "yes".
Mark Knowles > 02-04-2024, 10:50 AM
(02-04-2024, 12:56 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Is it possible to do a word-by-word substitution of the Voynich MS and come up with a meaningful text?
I see more reasons why the answer should be "no" rather than "yes".
If it is "no", then we cannot create a dictionary of Voynichese to some known language.
A constructed language is most easily conceived in the form of a dictionary.
If it is "no", then also all types of ciphers are excluded, even the more complicated diplomatic ones.
Essentially all past proposed meaningful solutions assume that some form of dictionary should exist.
Hermes777 > 02-04-2024, 11:02 AM
ReneZ > 02-04-2024, 12:32 PM
(02-04-2024, 10:47 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(02-04-2024, 12:56 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is:
Is it possible to do a word-by-word substitution of the Voynich MS and come up with a meaningful text?
I see more reasons why the answer should be "no" rather than "yes".
Good question.
If I want to define words, then I need the context. But I need words for the context.
Where and how do I break the vicious circle?