igajkgko > 13-11-2025, 09:33 PM
Doireannjane > 13-11-2025, 09:45 PM
(13-11-2025, 09:33 PM)igajkgko Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The feeling of Déjà vu in these threads is pretty strong..
I can certainly understand that you are convinced that you have (or are getting close to) a solution, and that you have spent a lot of time on it. But it's not necessarily particularly convincing to others, because we have seen more or less exactly the same before.
The sentences make sense, the words make sense, they even match the pictures, it cannot be a coincidence, .. This solution is _nothing_ like the others and that's an absolute certainty.
Your last post reminded me of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., which was not even a month ago. And no, that thread is not the first either.
Maybe you have somehow - although the odds are not on your side - managed to stumble upon the correct solution. Translating more sentences is unlikely to convince others. There's no shortage of "translations", with equally convinced authors.
What's needed is to show why your solution is different. And to do that you probably need to understand where the others went wrong. Because to an observer, they look the same.
oshfdk > 13-11-2025, 09:51 PM
(13-11-2025, 08:17 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So, what you're doing is not in good faith. It's rude.
(13-11-2025, 08:17 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Can you use my methodology and see what you produce?
Doireannjane > 13-11-2025, 09:51 PM
Doireannjane > 13-11-2025, 10:09 PM
(13-11-2025, 09:51 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(13-11-2025, 08:17 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So, what you're doing is not in good faith. It's rude.
I can't agree. It is straightforward, yes, and it does simplify, but it's designed to highlight a point and it does a reasonably good job. Overall I see little difference between your solution and rikforto's mockup, other than yours is much more complex and evolved.
(13-11-2025, 08:17 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Can you use my methodology and see what you produce?
No, even though I tried. One of the most common words in the MS is chol. According to the table you posted it's r??, only the first glyph has a single unique mapping, there is no way to identify which word this could be. Another very common word is chedy. It's r?d[in], again it's absolutely unclear what this should map to.
If you wish to demonstrate your methodology, here are some of the most common words in the MS: chedy, Shedy, chol, chey, cheol, Shey, chor, dar. Each one of these appears more than a hundred times in the manuscript. If the manuscript is a phonetic representation of a language, each of these should map to some very common word. It's possible that some of them have several meanings, but at least one of the meanings should be a frequent word. What are these 8 common words, could you list them?
Doireannjane > 13-11-2025, 10:17 PM
Doireannjane > 13-11-2025, 10:25 PM
Doireannjane > 13-11-2025, 10:32 PM
oshfdk > 13-11-2025, 10:44 PM
(13-11-2025, 10:09 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If you're not going to try to demonstrate repeatability, why are you on this thread?
(13-11-2025, 10:09 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.All you need is Teanglann