• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Theories & Solutions
  • Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes
• Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

• Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

  Muhammadzubair#1 > 2 hours ago

  After three rounds of independent peer review and full public replication setup, here is Version 5 of my Andalusian Arabic proposal for the Voynich Manuscript (Beinecke MS 408).
  Key features (all honest and falsifiable):
  • 21% firm single-meaning lexical coverage (28 word types + k = kull family of 73 types → 7,720 of 36,473 tokens). The old 87% polyvalent claim was retracted in Version 2.
  • Blind test on 20 unseen folios: 29.9% overall coherence, rising to 30.2% in herbal/pharmaceutical sections (vs 3–5% chance baseline). Three zero-match folios are reported honestly.
  • Forward-only decoding of three prescription sentences, including f6r.12 (“garlic with borax — many doses”) validated against two independent medieval sources (Ibn al-Baytar Ch.7 and Abu l-Ala Zuhr Fragment 2) that were not consulted during decoding.
  • Complete morphological grammar skeleton (o- = wa-, qo- = qad, -dy = dhi, etc.) aligned with Andalusian Arabic (Corriente 1997).
  Full PDF attached (or available on request).
  Public replication dataset (EVA corpus, character table, all CSVs, blind-test raw data, etc.):
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  Explicit invitation to Arabic linguists:
  Apply the character table to any 10 folios of your choice and check the output against Corriente (1997) or Lane’s Lexicon. Report the valid Arabic root match rate.
  Results >10% support the hypothesis. Results at 3–5% (chance baseline) would falsify it. This is an open, reproducible test.
  Figure 1 in the paper shows the f6r.12 garlic-borax sentence with actual folio image and mechanical transliteration.
  Looking forward to serious feedback and independent testing — especially from those who read Arabic or medieval pharmacology.

• RE: Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

  eggyk > 1 hour ago

  Hello, 
  
  You state very frequently that your hypothesis is falsifiable if our replication results are around 3-5%, the same as "baseline chance". Considering this seems to be a crucial detail, how was that "Baseline chance" calculated? 
  
  Also, your "grammar skeleton" includes the building blocks of many common words (like "qok-" words), it's surely unsurprising that you get those matches? If "qok" words are valid words, are you not effectively just measuring the % of words that you have decided are correct? 
  
  And for the decoded sentence, you have a figure stating "f6r line 12" , with an EVA transcription of "shol cthom chor cthy". Except, you highlighted this line: 
  
     
  
  "daiin qodaiin cho s chol okaiin s", which is neither the 12th line, nor the transcription that you used.

• RE: Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

  tavie > 58 minutes ago

  It is more fleshed out than most of the other AI papers but I'm still getting red flags reading through it.  In what ways exactly did you use an AI Large Language Model chatbot, e.g. Claude, Gemini, ChatGPT?

• RE: Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

  Muhammadzubair#1 > 30 minutes ago

  Thank you for these detailed questions — they’re exactly the kind of scrutiny I hoped for. 
  
  1. Baseline chance (3–5%): This figure comes from prior statistical work (e.g., Reddy & Knight, 2011) showing that random strings under simple substitution yield valid Arabic roots at about 3–5%. I used that as the comparison baseline for blind tests. I can provide the calculation references if helpful. 
  
  2. Grammar skeleton and “qok-” words: You’re right that the skeleton defines recurring prefixes/suffixes. The key point is that these were derived statistically from Voynich text frequencies before consulting any medical sources. The “qok-” family was then tested against independent Arabic dosage formulas. So the matches aren’t just circular — they’re checked against external linguistic and medical patterns. 
  
  3. Sentence line mismatch: Good catch. The EVA transcription used in the decoding is correct (“shol cthom chor cthy”), but the figure caption mistakenly highlighted the wrong line in the folio image. That was a formatting error in Version 5 of the paper, not a change in the decoded sentence itself. I’ll correct that in the next revision. 
  
  I appreciate you pointing these out — replication and critique are the only way this hypothesis can be tested properly.

• RE: Andalusian Arabic in the Voynich Manuscript (21% firm coverage, blind tes

  pjburkshire > 7 minutes ago

  Muhammadzubair#1,
  
  I have not downloaded your PDF file.  You have not given me any reason to download your PDF file.  The part that I am interested in is the middle Stars&Nymphs section.  Can you give one or two sentences that explain what you see as the meaning of the Stars&Nymphs section?  If you see what I see then maybe I will be interested in the rest of what you have to say.  If you don't see what I see then I'm not wasting my time.
• Next Oldest Next Newest