- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
- The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
-
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Koen G > Yesterday, 06:02 PM
We did not assume meaning at all. We looked at the letter shapes and only used those that could be reliably determined, regardless of expected meaning. For example, we did not use those 8-shapes, because they don't quite work for "d" or short-s, they are just too wonky and unreliable.
There is no crossbar in the long-s at the end of "gas". There is only the horizontal line running from "g" through "a". This may be a connecting stroke plus another one through "a", perhaps. And then there is the onset of "m", which leaves a dot. These combined cause the illusion that there may have been a stroke through the long vertical. What we see is quite consistent with the way this author writes long-s. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
JoeyB > Yesterday, 09:31 PM
To the extent this helps, I just happen to have been messing with the MSI tiffs for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. this week and have this assembled.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
it's too big to attach or embed so just putting it on a free image hosting site and linking to it. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > Yesterday, 09:47 PM
(Yesterday, 06:02 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We did not assume meaning at all. We looked at the letter shapes and only used those that could be reliably determined, regardless of expected meaning. For example, we did not use those 8-shapes, because they don't quite work for "d" or short-s, they are just too wonky and unreliable.
Apologies for that undue inference.
But beware that the Restorer himself must have chosen the Latin letter interpretation of several smudges on no other basis than they seemed like they could maybe perhaps make sense in Latin or his German dialect.
Quote:There is no crossbar in the long-s at the end of "gas". There is only the horizontal line running from "g" through "a". This may be a connecting stroke plus another one through "a", perhaps. And then there is the onset of "m", which leaves a dot. These combined cause the illusion that there may have been a stroke through the long vertical.
Well, there is a small crossbar:
It could be just a quill accident; but, given the overall variability of the handwriting, that could also have been a crossbar.
Note that the vellum seems to be damaged in that area:
That damage could account for the detached dot from the "m" and for the gap in the upper part of the "s"/"f". If the damage is real, the crossbar could have been longer,
Anyway, isn't that the wrong place for a long "s"? Since it is word-final, shouldn't it be a short "s"?
By the way: I don't recall how you read the two words below, but they start with "p", not with "u" or "v" as many have read them:
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
J_Voy > Yesterday, 10:48 PM
ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The nymphs and the goat on the left do not seem to fit with the author's style (especially when compared to the nymphs from balneology). You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can be either an attempt to reconstruct the text or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I don't really believe that this is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., because in the end, it feels like stretching an owl on a globe.
To adress your first point:
In my opinion... No, i feel like the nymph actually belongs to the same style, i've provided some examples, and in my opinion, these are the same style. In my opinion, the example from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. especially lines up well with the nymph from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
For your second point:
If it's not a meaningful German spell, then why do you see '+' shapes that indicate a medieval charm? And a capital 'N' that in medieval charms stands for the names of people? -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > Today, 04:13 AM
(Yesterday, 10:48 PM)J_Voy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If it's not a meaningful German spell, then why do you see '+' shapes that indicate a medieval charm? And a capital 'N' that in medieval charms stands for the names of people?
Well, it is not a meaningful German spell because it has no meaning in any German dialect, known or imagined.
I suppose that the person who tried to restore the lost text saw one or two smudges that looked like tall crosses. They could not be "t"s, which, in the script he was assuming, did not look at all like crosses (see the "multod" for example). So he must have guessed that the second line was a charm -- and "restored" it accordingly. But the words that he got just don't make sense, in any language...
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
J_Voy > 10 hours ago
Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Well, it is not a meaningful German spell because it has no meaning in any German dialect, known or imagined.
I suppose that the person who tried to restore the lost text saw one or two smudges that looked like tall crosses. They could not be "t"s, which, in the script he was assuming, did not look at all like crosses (see the "multod" for example). So he must have guessed that the second line was a charm -- and "restored" it accordingly. But the words that he got just don't make sense, in any language...
Personally, i believe there is meaning, it's just that the handwriting is so sloppy we can't read any of it besides a few words here and there, we see the capital 'N' which i pointed out along with the '+' shapes, but we also see the phrase 'ſo nim' meaning 'then take', being one of the most common phrases in medieval charms. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > 7 hours ago
(10 hours ago)J_Voy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Personally, i believe there is meaning, it's just that the handwriting is so sloppy we can't read any of it besides a few words here and there
If it was just a matter of sloppy handwriting, we should have figured out the text 70 years ago. But the handwriting is not that sloppy. It is not cursive. At worst, there are only a few possibilities for each latter. Juggling all the possibilities would not turn "michiton", "oladabas", "morix", "abia", "pbren" etc into words of any language. Those few "words" that could be "Germanish" or Latin words do not make sense together.
Quote:we see the capital 'N' which i pointed out along with the '+' shapes, but we also see the phrase 'ſo nim' meaning 'then take', being one of the most common phrases in medieval charms.
Again, the Restorer who tried to recover the lost (Voynichese) text apparently thought that the parag was a charm, and tried to "restore" the smudges accordingly.
Wherever there is now a cross, maybe there was a smudge that looked like cross, or maybe there was just a blank space and he assumed that there should have been a cross there too, because in charms typically there is a cross at every word space. Charms often have a (capital) N that is supposed to be replaced by the name of the target person, and presumably there was a smudge at the end of the line that could be a large (lowercase) n, so he restored its as such. On the last line there were smudges that he thought could have been "so nim", so that is what he wrote. And so on...
By the way, two of the crosses (after "multod" and after "cere") are closed at the northwest quadrant by a diagonal line, so that they look more like a "4". But crosses are normally drawn with a vertical down stroke and a left to right horizontal stroke. If the quill is not completely lifted off the vellum between the two traces, the result would be a diagonal line closing off the southwest or northeast quadrant, depending on which stroke is drawn first. The diagonal line at the northwest suggests that what the Restorer saw there was a "4", not just a cross. Like a partially erased q...
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Koen G > 7 hours ago
Stolfi: that little "thorn" thingy is actually expected for long-s, it comes from doubling the line.
And yes, it would be out of place in word-final position, which is why I think gasmich is best read as one word. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
ololololo > 6 hours ago
(Yesterday, 10:48 PM)J_Voy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No, i feel like the nymph actually belongs to the same style
The hat looks a little more detailed, and it has legs. The difference is that she looks a little better. Judging by the illustrations in the VMS, the artist could not have drawn such a hat, and he would hardly have drawn legs. I believe that someone has redrawn the nymph. But who knows...(Yesterday, 10:48 PM)J_Voy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If it's not a meaningful German spell, then why do you see '+' shapes that indicate a medieval charm? And a capital 'N' that in medieval charms stands for the names of people?
Is there an N there?
There could be many reasons why there are pluses there. The fact that it's a spell is undeniable, but the fact that it makes sense is incredible. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
J_Voy > 4 hours ago
Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.... Those few "words" that could be "Germanish" or Latin words do not make sense together.
So why does the last line almost seem to refer back to the first? "poxleber" (buck's liver), "gaſmich" (goat's milk), suggesting to the reader so first take the liver of a goat, then the milk of a goat? The last three words are especially clear as "ſo nim gaſmich.", translating to "then take goat's milk.", along with all the other elements of a medieval charm that suggest it is in fact, a medieval charm?
Quote:Again, the Restorer who tried to recover the lost (Voynichese) text apparently thought that the parag was a charm, and tried to "restore" the smudges accordingly.
So why wouldn't the restorer have seen the two Voynichese words that just so happen to be perfectly untouched, along with the rest of the manuscript being in Voynichese, and figure out that the text was in fact, not in Latin or German, but in this mysterious language no one could read?
Quote:By the way, two of the crosses (after "multod" and after "cere") are closed at the northwest quadrant by a diagonal line, so that they look more like a "4". But crosses are normally drawn with a vertical down stroke and a left to right horizontal stroke. If the quill is not completely lifted off the vellum between the two traces, the result would be a diagonal line closing off the southwest or northeast quadrant, depending on which stroke is drawn first. The diagonal line at the northwest suggests that what the Restorer saw there was a "4", not just a cross. Like a partially erased q...
You do know that when writing '+' shapes fast, diagonal connecting lines can happen when writing normally, right?
I can say this because whenever I have to write a '+' as part of a math equation, or something similar, typically I write it fast, and in one stroke without lifting my pen off the paper, which usually results in a diagonal lines in either the northwest, or northeast quadrants, depending on the direction I wrote the symbol in. A shape just just like a 4, or indeed, q is just a consequence of writing a '+' symbol in one stroke.