- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Is there any character like that?
- Is there any character like that?
-
RE: Is there any character like that?
nablator > 22-04-2025, 01:36 PM
(22-04-2025, 01:08 PM)ErinaBee Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What is the list of all twins, and what is the difference I should look out for?
Some people have been fixating on some tiny differences that they believe are meaningful. Nobody agrees on anything at this level of detail. Your guess is as good as anyone else's.
There is no way to identify variants unambiguously because their shapes are in a continuum, like spaces. Nobody can make an accurate unambiguous transliteration. -
RE: Is there any character like that?
ErinaBee > 22-04-2025, 01:41 PM
(22-04-2025, 12:44 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The only way I see an argument like this work, is if it can be demonstrated that the variants are used in different context. That would be a very convincing argument, and an exciting find. Without that, I'm afraid it's just looking at sloppy writing under a microscope.
Yeah, I think it's just sloppy writing. I tried to write something in MS Paint without using the text tool, and tried to make it as sloppy as possible. Many o's started to look like e's, and some o's had a gap on the top. One of the h's was a bit too pointy to be a regular, "not sloppy" h, and one of the u's looked like a v. -
RE: Is there any character like that?
ErinaBee > 22-04-2025, 01:47 PM
I tried to do the same but this time with mimicking the voynich writing. I made the same round vs. pointy variation by accident. This calls the twin letter theory into question -
RE: Is there any character like that?
oshfdk > 22-04-2025, 02:18 PM
(22-04-2025, 01:47 PM)ErinaBee Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I tried to do the same but this time with mimicking the voynich writing. I made the same round vs. pointy variation by accident. This calls the twin letter theory into question
I'm not sure I understand your argument. It is possible to write sloppily and it is possible to write carefully. Without knowing the underlying principle of Voynichese, we can't tell if it's sloppy or just elaborate. -
RE: Is there any character like that?
Koen G > 22-04-2025, 02:29 PM
Everything points to sloppy. The continuum nablator points out. Our inability to match different forms to different contexts. Practice in other informal medieval mss... -
RE: Is there any character like that?
oshfdk > 22-04-2025, 02:52 PM
(22-04-2025, 02:29 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Everything points to sloppy. The continuum nablator points out. Our inability to match different forms to different contexts. Practice in other informal medieval mss...
All of these do point to sloppy. But not the fact that it's possible to produce sloppy Voynichese, as ErinaBee did. Overall the scribe of the Voynich MS seems to be very proficient with the quill. It's possible the scribe chose to be somewhat careless with the writing, but I think not for the lack of skill. -
RE: Is there any character like that?
Aga Tentakulus > 22-04-2025, 03:32 PM
Writing a text with the mouse is the wrong prerequisite. No matter how hard I try with the mouse, it always looks like shit.
You should do it by hand directly on paper. -
RE: Is there any character like that?
Aga Tentakulus > 22-04-2025, 04:07 PM
No-one can tell me that these differences are the result of mistakes or sloppy writing. For me it's too frequent and too regular.
And if I see that as an option, then I have to consider it for the others as well.
That's how I see it.
Why does the 4 have so many corrections if it's not necessary? -
RE: Is there any character like that?
oshfdk > 22-04-2025, 04:28 PM
(22-04-2025, 04:07 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No-one can tell me that these differences are the result of mistakes or sloppy writing. For me it's too frequent and too regular.
And if I see that as an option, then I have to consider it for the others as well.
That's how I see it.
Why does the 4 have so many corrections if it's not necessary?
The bottom left one (in qokaiin), could be different because there was little space vertically to fit a proper k. Speaking about context, the weirdest looking k is in ykchdy and it's the only one preceded by a y, the rest of them are preceded by o's. -
RE: Is there any character like that?
ReneZ > 22-04-2025, 06:24 PM
(22-04-2025, 11:04 AM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For me the more important sign is not how small the variation is, but how unambiguously it splits letterforms into distinct groups.
I like this formulation.
Now I know that @nablator has spent a very considerable time transliterating the text and looking at exactly these variations. His comment about a "continuum" is spot on, in my opinion.
A short summary:
It is not possible to unambiguously split between (non-exhaustive list):
o and a
r and s
Ch and Ih
m and g
In fact, in all cases, it would be possible to define a form in between each pair, but that only makes matters worse: instead of one fuzzy boundary we end up with two (for each pair).
Back to the point: these pairs are already considered to be different characters, but they are part of some continuum. This is even worse than the situation that each of these individual characters has a continuum of variations.