- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
What is the current status of the transcription?
- What is the current status of the transcription?
-
What is the current status of the transcription?
JoJo_Jost > 11 hours ago
I’m having trouble with the Bavarian cipher—I’m finding interesting and coherent words that, in terms of how frequently they appear, also match other Middle High German recipe books; actually, a lot of it fits together. But there seem to be certain letter combinations that sometimes work and sometimes don’t.
And that’s when I noticed this example: 9v, line 5.
I’m concerned with the “cc” and “ee.” If I’m seeing this correctly, I could read the first “cc” as a “tc,” while I could read the second “cc” as a “cz,” and the “ee” as a “ce”... or maybe none of that is correct, but if it is, that would be discouraging—because we have the “a/o” problem, problems with the “Gallows”... R problems... and that would completely turn all the statistical and other analyses upside down.
And so I’m asking myself:
What is the most current transcription, or the most accurate one?
Does it even make sense to ask that?
Is Eva a dead end that thousands of people have walked into, when Stolfi is already doubting it (if I’ve understood correctly)?
I’m a bit at a loss right now...
-------------
In this context, I should also mention this writing exercise: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. 0.6.5.jsp?folder_id=0&dvs=1774358703990~945&pid=19073483&locale=pl&usePid1=true&usePid2=true -
RE: What is the current status of the transcription?
RadioFM > 5 hours ago
The transliteration itself is not the main problem IMO. It's the choices you make when parsing and processing the text. Do you group glyphs together? Do you count every single glyph or discard some? Whether you transpose glyphs, split and shuffle words around, skip words, all those choices have greater impact on your end results. -
RE: What is the current status of the transcription?
oeesordy > 3 hours ago
substitution is dead -
RE: What is the current status of the transcription?
JoJo_Jost > 2 hours ago
(5 hours ago)RadioFM Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The transliteration itself is not the main problem IMO. It's the choices you make when parsing and processing the text. Do you group glyphs together? Do you count every single glyph or discard some? Whether you transpose glyphs, split and shuffle words around, skip words, all those choices have greater impact on your end results.
I completely disagree with that. It is an extremely important question whether “cc” is read as one letter, two letters, two identical letters, or two different letters. It becomes even more important when ‘cc’ can be identified not only as “ch,” but also as “ch,” “ct,” or “cz”—that is, three letter clusters with different meanings. Are different glyphs the same or not? That changes everything, including the statistics.
Unless one assumes it’s a hoax, but as we know, there is statistical evidence for and against that... so we can’t assume that yet.
@ oeesordy Yes, but not other ciphers, such as an absorption cipher. I have at least been able to prove that it could be such a cipher. But for that, I would need clear transcriptions. That is why I am asking for the latest ones... -
RE: What is the current status of the transcription?
oeesordy > 2 hours ago
@JoJo_Jost
This link discusses the grammar and a study where vords before and after a vord. After some runs the guys discussed and agreed that Latin was a 280 and English 300 a random text was 20, the Voynich was 100. Post #74 in this link.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: What is the current status of the transcription?
JoJo_Jost > 1 hour ago
(2 hours ago)oeesordy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@JoJo_Jost
This link discusses the grammar and a study where vords before and after a vord. After some runs the guys discussed and agreed that Latin was a 280 and English 300 a random text was 20, the Voynich was 100. Post #74 in this link.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
and?
-
RE: What is the current status of the transcription?
ReneZ > 1 hour ago
@JoJo_Jost, to answer your question
the transliterations are definitely full of errors.
These errors are also of several different types. Going from the bottom up.
1) There are bound to be plenty of errors in the actual handwritten text on the pages of the MS. In this, I fully agree with Stolfi. We have no way of quantifying this now. If a solution is ever found, we will know then.
2) The transliterations include an interpretation of what are the same characters and which are different. Since different transcribers used different assumprions, the various files are different in that respect. The STA versions of the transliteration files tend to include all differences that have been noted. (Though not the RF file which eliminates a few of the v101-based differences).
3) Finally, people have 'read' the MS differently, so there are transliteration mistakes as well.
The impact of errors 2 and 3 can be avoided by using the original images of the MS, but of course this only allows you to do manual work, no statistics.
It can also be partly quantified by doing statistics or experiments with different transliteration files in parallel.
An error of type 2 that will not be easy to catch is, for example, if in reality f and p are one and the same. Since these characters are relatively rare, this will not be a major problem, but worse cases could easily be imagined, and may well exist.
Finally a word of caution. If a theory is not working, it may be tempting to blame the transliterations. One should always be realistic in which types of errors one is likely to accept, and which should not be acceptable.