• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Analysis of the text
  • Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs
• Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

• Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  JoJo_Jost > Yesterday, 08:19 AM

  My intention is to use this thread to create, with your help, as complete an overview as possible of the ligatures and brevigraphs used in VM. I'll just get started and hope that such a thread doesn't already exist. (I searched and scrolled until I got tired...)
  
  Definition
  Ligatures:
  Individual characters created by joining two or more letters, often to improve legibility or speed up writing.
  
  Brevigraphs:
  Special shorthand characters that abbreviate common words or endings in medieval Latin, such as a ‘9’-shaped character for ‘-us’ or a stroke above the line for missing letters.
  
  My sources, unless otherwise stated
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  The Basics:
     
  First, here are the classics of Brevigraphs, as I will refer to this list again and again throughout this article.
  Of particular interest for VM is the ‘9’ as a very productive prefix and suffix for con, com, cum, cun, us, os, is s. – normally superscripted, which of course does not prevent us from interpreting the eva ‘y’ as just that.
  This brings us to the similarities in VM.
  
  This bloody "aiin"
     
  
  Here, the ending looks like the end of aiin, but it is a ‘u’ with a curved abbreviation stroke (titulus) indicating that letters are missing before the u (in this case, a t). This leads to the conclusion that the word aiin could also be ‘aiu’ with one or more letters simply missing.
  (Actu is the ablative singular form of ‘actus’ and means ‘through the act’, ‘in the action’ or ‘through the deed’.)
  
     
  
  Here we have the classic Aiin ending, which means ‘mum’, although in rapid writing the ‘m’ counterstroke does not necessarily have to be written.
  
  (Note: I assume that neither ‘o’ nor ‘a’ are stable in the Voynich text (!) and use them freely)
  
  Aiin = -amum and -omum are not Latin suffixes in the strict sense. The actual suffix is -um. Endings such as balsamum, amomum, cinnamomum, cardamomum, opobalsamum are loan words from Greek (-amon/-ōmon → in Latin -amum/-omum), especially for spices, resins and plant names.
  Frequency: Rare in general Latin; relatively common in medical-botanical texts because many drug names are formed in this way.
  
  So is aiin merely a suffix for plants, among other things?
  
  Otherwise: Based on the above, the following variants remain:
  
  aiXu (X = variable for one or more letters)
  Aium
  aXium
  aiXum
  
  With X = st = aiXu: If one reads ‘ai’ as “ae” and the final ‘u’ as a true -u (or -um), one gets aestu (ablative of aestus = heat).
  With ai = ae and X = qu, one can think of aequu(m) → aequum. Aequum = meaning flat terrain, flat surface
  ‘aXium’ =  alium (accusative of alius ‘the other’)
  and, particularly appropriate in botany, allium/Allium (garlic/leek genus).
  And apium (celery).
  With X = ‘tr’ you get atrium = plenty of room for speculation ?.
  
  And -arium is a productive suffix, especially in a botanical context (e.g. herbarium, rosarium).
  
  Here, one might perhaps recognise several productive endings of plant names too – I am confused by the number of i's in ain, aiin aiiin.
  
  My assessment: difficult... Aiin and its variants occur too frequently, but I don't want to attempt a translation in this thread, just to show what is factually and hypothetically possible ?.
  
  I also stick with ‘duo’, which is what you read when you mirror the word ?.
  
  
  The ch and sh ligature
  
  I already explained this in another thread, but I'll repeat it here (sorry about that) so that this thread is complete:
  
     
  
  We may have three different spellings of ‘sh’ here. I say ‘may’ because these (extremely) small superscript letters could also all be a 9 or an S, as that is the most common form – I would say in well over 90 per cent of cases. But like Stolfi, I am now also convinced that large parts of the script were painted over at a later date.
  
  I also believe that the text was copied from an older, more illegible text – so that a multitude of problems could have greatly altered the original text and made it nearly "indecipherable". So....
  
  First version:
  
  The sign which looks like a mirrored c stands for ‘us, os, is, s’ (see above) so the letters can be inserted here. But also a 9 with a straight tail pointing downwards. But mostly at the end of a word. 
  
  However, it can also indicate that this is inserted into the word via consonants. 
  
  Second version
  The small 9 above the ligature stands for ‘er’.
     
  The book is written in German, and it says: A symbol very similar to ‘us’ is sometimes found above certain consonants with the meaning ‘he’, but not at the end of the word, as in
  
  In the last, third version, the symbol stands for ‘cir’.
     
  
  And then this character can also belong to the first c and represent an S – together with c / t. Sc or St usualy meant sanct (which doesn't make much sense, given how often it occurs here):
  
  And of course "sit / sunt / esse"
     
  
  And here we come to the most interesting version: esse
  
  Of course, the ‘ch’ can also be an ee/ss, standing for “esse” and ‘sunt’, as well as sit.
  
     
  
  And so we have an ee with a stroke above it.... And who wouldn't be reminded of our ‘ch’?
  
  This gives us one of the most productive translations for ch.
  
  
  This would explain the multitude of these words very well. I would say we have cleared that up.
  
  and here different Versions of sh:
  
     
  All right, that's it for now. I have more interesting Ligatures and Brevigraphs to share, and I hope I haven't presented anything here that was already completely obvious to everyone.

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  JoJo_Jost > Yesterday, 02:36 PM

  And do we have the solution for the t-Gallow here?
  
  Probably yes....
     
  The problem is that the letters as ec should not normally protrude above the others in size, as the t Gallow does. But if we already recognise Eva ‘y’ as Brevigraph 9, we shouldn't be too precise.
  
  Of course, ecaetera would not match the frequency of occurrence, so it is rather unlikely that it is eceatera. 
  
  But there is an even simpler solution. Let's take a look at this ligatur
     
  Perfect, how much does this Glyph Re resemble the t? 
  
  But it gets even better:
  
     
  
  we delete the small "o" (that is for the word Renuntiand"o") at the top right, then we tilt the small hook from the upper arc of the R to the centre left and still have Re
  Too twisted?
  
  Then look here: 
     
  
  So is "t" = imperativ (recipere) recipe  = take 
  
  And where does this ligature like to appear? Take! often appears at the beginning of a sentence. Perfect match.
  
  So could this be the imperative ‘Take’?
  
  Then we would already have two very important words for recipes : esse / sunt / sit and take!
  
  Okay, there is still a long and convoluted road ahead... before a translation is possible, but we are getting closer...

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  JoJo_Jost > 11 hours ago

  The cursed d
  
  1. d = d (what a surprise)
  
  2. d is a Brevigraph for de / di and (depending on the language) also for der, dis, dum, and other d-syllables. After a q, it has the meaning “quod.”
  
  Nos. 14 and 29 in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  2. When mirrored, it is a b (I will come back to mirroring much later).
  
  3. But a 8 can also be a qui:
     
  Okay, the titulus—but it could have faded, so let's allow it if it fits
  
  The Latin word qui is a relative pronoun and means “the,” “which,” or “who.” It is used to introduce a relative clause that refers to a previously mentioned noun.
  
  4. dch [occurs 336 times, dsh 154 times / Herbal: 164 times, dsh 60 times.]
       
  
  Let's assume that the ch has not just one meaning, but several, for example depending on the context, after a d, as ec, then it could fit. A wild theory i know.
  
  often used in recipes as a process step; “decoction” its a normal Word in middleage recipes...
  
  now we have a word for cooking too

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  Jorge_Stolfi > 11 hours ago

  (Yesterday, 08:19 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Brevigraphs: Special shorthand characters that abbreviate common words or endings in medieval Latin, such as a ‘9’-shaped character for ‘-us’ or a stroke above the line for missing letters.

  
  The similarities between some Voynichese glyphs and Medieval Latin brevigraphs are intriguing, even maddening, and may still be worth exploring.
  
  However, one problem is that the total number of  (definitely) distinct Voynichese glyphs is barely enough for an alphabet.  If any of them are interpreted as brevigraphs (and there are dozens of these for Latin), the glyphs that remain would make an awfully small alphabet.
  
  It could be that EVA and other transcription alphabets are conflating glyphs that are actually distinct Voynichese letters.  But I have yet to see any convincing alternative proposals.  
  
  I spent a lot of time recently re-encoding all p/f gallows in the VMS transcription so as to distinguish the "hooked arm" and "straight arm" variants.  I haven't analyzed the results yet.  But I am afraid that (as others surely found already) that the distinction is not significant.  It seems that the Scribe added a hook whenever he felt like it and there was space for it.
  
  You propose that the first Sh with extra-long ligature is different from ordinary Sh.  But how many of those long-Sh are there? Can they be distinguished from short-Sh, or are all Sh in a continuum between those two extremes?
  
  By the way, I am not impressed by the similarity between iin and the "mum" brevigraph.  It seems that the LR horizontal line at the end of the plume is an essential feature of the latter, and usually there is not a hint of the same in the former.
  
  All the best, --stolfi

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  nablator > 11 hours ago

  (Yesterday, 02:36 PM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.we are getting closer...

  
  Jumping to conclusions and ignoring previous research, in order to solve the Voynich in less than two weeks, is definitely the best method.
  
  
  
  Any source mss. for this?
  
  It must be very rare as it is not in the Cappelli book. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.=

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  JoJo_Jost > 10 hours ago

  (11 hours ago)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The similarities between some Voynichese glyphs and Medieval Latin brevigraphs are intriguing, even maddening, and may still be worth exploring.
  
  However, one problem is that the total number of  (definitely) distinct Voynichese glyphs is barely enough for an alphabet.  If any of them are interpreted as brevigraphs (and there are dozens of these for Latin), the glyphs that remain would make an awfully small alphabet.

  
  In my opinion, these tend to inflate the information content massively. And nothing is replaced, but added. There's no question that a "d" can be a "d", but it can also be a di, a "b" etc. One letter suddenly becomes many letters, which tend to expand the alphabet.
  
  Combined with other letters, they form syllables and whole words.
  
  

  (11 hours ago)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I spent a lot of time recently re-encoding all p/f gallows in the VMS transcription so as to distinguish the "hooked arm" and "straight arm" variants.  I haven't analyzed the results yet.  But I am afraid that (as others surely found already) that the distinction is not significant.  It seems that the Scribe added a hook whenever he felt like it and there was space for it.

      You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  (I accidentally pressed send.)
  
  You know this place, why would the writer write this Gallow four times in a row, twice without a bow and twice with a bow? In my opinion, it doesn't make sense if they aren't different glyphs.

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  JoJo_Jost > 10 hours ago

  (11 hours ago)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Jumping to conclusions and ignoring previous research, in order to solve the Voynich in less than two weeks, is definitely the best method.
  Any source mss. for this? 
  
  It must be very rare as it is not in the Cappelli book. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.=

  In two weeks? in one day!!   (I've been working on it for a while now.)
  
  sure it is Cappelli S. 422
  
  Which previous research am I ignoring? That's a serious question.
  
  but we are getting closer...sry, that was a joke...

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  Ruby Novacna > 9 hours ago

  (10 hours ago)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
  sure it is Cappelli ...

  
  So, there's no need to republish his entire work. 
  What we're all waiting for is the application of this method to the text of the VM. 
  Several researchers, I think, have already tried; now it's your turn. 
  Good luck starting with a few words, sentences, paragraphs!

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  oshfdk > 9 hours ago

  (10 hours ago)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Which previous research am I ignoring? That's a serious question.

  
  There have been attempts to interpret Voynichese as Latin abbreviations or to investigate any potential link between the scribal abbreviations and Voynichese. For example,
  
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

• RE: Fun with Ligatures and Brevigraphs

  JoJo_Jost > 8 hours ago

  (9 hours ago)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There have been attempts to interpret Voynichese as Latin abbreviations or to investigate any potential link between the scribal abbreviations and Voynichese. For example,
  
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  
  JK Petersen: i ve not read all of him, but quite a bit. It is very interesting, but I disagree on some points. The first link does not contain things like this here. 
  
  

  (9 hours ago)Ruby Novacna Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So, there's no need to republish his entire work. 
  What we're all waiting for is the application of this method to the text of the VM. 
  Several researchers, I think, have already tried; now it's your turn. 
  Good luck starting with a few words, sentences, paragraphs!

  
  Why so negative? It's obvious that not everyone has read the entire book, and very few will do so—there are only 14,000 ligatures. I now know many of them.
  
  I didn't write that I have a solution. I'm just interested in the extent to which a text with brevigraphs and ligatures can be made legible. And I thought others might also be interested in seeing how ligatures can be applied to Voynich and perhaps contribute their own ideas. If that's not the case, I won't bother with it any further (I don't mean that defiantly, just because it's work). I don't care, I was just interested in an exchange. The title is not “Solution with ...” but “Fun with ...”. (no, not Flags!)
• Next Oldest Next Newest