[split] Does Voynichese evolve from A to B?

[npcompl33t]

small topic-specific vocabulary, developed haphazardly, and no stable grammar -
Nothing like Rohncese.

I'm not sure if you read the grammar paper, but it seems to describe Rohncese exactly like this, shifting and unstable grammar, with certain portions appearing very half-hazard. Pidgin may still be a bit of an oversimplification, but the language looks exactly like what you would expect from a solo-medieval designer. Creating coherent grammar is extremely complicated, and the creator seems to have made certain things up as they went along, with shifting rules being one of the main difficulties in resolving ambiguity and creating consistent translations. 

If the VMS were to lack any type of observed similar evolution, in my opinion, it would actually be substantial evidence against it containing meaning. 

It is extremely unlikely that over the course of writing such a long document in a novel writing script such changes and developments would not occur. Such changes were occurring rapidly across different writing systems in known languages at this time. The idea of the VMS representing a perfect unchanging script is not only at odds with the traditional Currier A/B split, or the chronological gradient, its assuming a fantasy level amount of skill on the part of the creator to develop a completely perfect writing system.

[Bluetoes101]

Not sure if it is relevant to the "evolves" argument or not but recently the person(s) looking at "The Subtlety of Witches" noted the text gets shorter as the book goes on, as in the copied text is not fully copied. We know this is not an evolution of the script as its a simple substitution cipher (of nouns in a dictionary), they just seemingly did not want to write as much after a while. 

The person(s) looking at it ask if this might be because they were rushing to finish, but no one is going to have an answer today. I don't think any new VMS glyphs get added, guessing its the same (more or less) for RC. 

Sometimes its not that deep, people get bored ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[RadioFM]

x to me seems reeks like an on-the-fly addition to the glyphset ca. the A→B transition though I could be wrong

[npcompl33t]

x to me seems reeks like an on-the-fly addition to the glyphset ca. the A→B transition though I could be wrong

I 100% agree on x. If my chronology is right and f57/f58 are roughly in the center, then x does appear to be a new invention in either rosettes or f57. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.y. A huge pop in f57, another in Herbal b, appears to slowly die out in stars. 0 bio appearances. 0 apperances in any A section

   

Its when they made it up, it was popular, but that popularity almost immediately started to fade until they abandoned it.

There are other symbols of both f57 and f66 that never get repeated again.

[Bluetoes101]

dk happens 6 times in 100+ pages, then happens twice on f57v, then happens 25 times after. Seems like a trend that takes off or an evolution, only 2 of the examples happen on the first 3 pages. 

Personally I think this stuff is reading tea-leaves. x would be interesting if not for v. The more interesting views are on groups of letters, but even then "evolution" is loosey-goosey stuff, is edy spam a sign of a more evolved or devolved writing system? 

 Anyway I shall leave the RC post alone now     

[Jorge_Stolfi]

It is extremely unlikely that over the course of writing such a long document in a novel writing script such changes and developments would not occur. ... The idea of the VMS representing a perfect unchanging script ... its assuming a fantasy level amount of skill on the part of the creator

The RC probably was written directly Brain to Paper, and its Author apparently started writing the book with little or no previous practice in the system.  

But the VMS surely must have existed in at least one draft version possibly two, before being copied to vellum.  Then this expected evolution process -- smoothing out the rough spots of the script -- would have taken place while the draft was being prepared.  

In the final draft given to the scribe, the script would have been already stabilized and uniformized.  At least for each whole section. 

On the other hand, we do see clear gradual evolution in the figures, especially the the Zodiac nymphs.  Which makes sense, because it was the first time that the Scribe had to draw such subjects. And he obviously did not make a preliminary series of sketches for the whole section, on separate sheets or paper or in pencil on the vellum itself -- as a professional drafter would.

the traditional Currier A/B split

The nature of the statistical differences between Herbal A and Herbal B s still unclear, and so is their cause.  A "spelling reform" that the Author made between drafting the two parts of the Herbal is a strong possibility.  But the differences can also be simply due to those two parts being transcribed/translated from two independent books with different styles or emphasis. 

In any case, we cannot say which came first, A or B; and it may well be that Herbal-A  was produced between two B sections.  We just don't know.

the chronological gradient

As you know, I strongly dispute this claim of "chronological gradient".  Sure, just as  between sections, there are statistical differences between pages or bifolios of the same section.  But we cannot derive the original order of writing from them.  Especially for Herbal, Astro/Cosmo, and Starred Parags, where we expect each page or parag to be an independent text.

I 100% agree on x. If my chronology is right and f57/f58 are roughly in the cente

Or maybe x is a symbol for a concept that is relevant only in some sections but not others.  Like ☊ or £ or ♂ or ☠ ...

All the best, --stolfi

[Bluetoes101]

I 100% agree on x. If my chronology is right and f57/f58 are roughly in the cente

Or maybe x is a symbol for a concept that is relevant only in some sections but not others.  Like ☊ or £ or ♂ or ☠ ...

All the best, --stolfi

I think this is probably right. Unless a convincing case for it replacing multiple glyphs is presented. 
Also we should probably be banished to the shadow realm so we don't keep polluting the Rohonc'ers space.

Koen smite us with your smitin stick!

[npcompl33t]

I 100% agree on x. If my chronology is right and f57/f58 are roughly in the cente

Or maybe x is a symbol for a concept that is relevant only in some sections but not others.  Like ☊ or £ or ♂ or ☠ ...

All the best, --stolfi

So why is it in Herbal B and not Herbal A?

[npcompl33t]

But the VMS surely must have existed in at least one draft version possibly two, before being copied to vellum.  Then this expected evolution process -- smoothing out the rough spots of the script -- would have taken place while the draft was being prepared.  

In the final draft given to the scribe, the script would have been already stabilized and uniformized.  At least for each whole section. 

So you're agree that a gradient capturing the evolution could exist in between sections then? Something like the 'spelling reform' you describe?

[Jorge_Stolfi]

So you're agree that a gradient capturing the evolution could exist in between sections then? Something like the 'spelling reform' you describe?

IF the A/B difference is indeed a spelling reform, sure, it is probably the case that all A sections were drafted before the B sections, or vice-versa.

But my preferred guess (guess only, no evidence) is that Herbal-A and Herbal-B are transcriptions of two distinct herbals, and the differences are due to slight dialect changes, different tense, different emphasis, etc.

My lalamo says that the German spoken in the Frankfurt area differs from standard German in ways that resemble the A/B differences: "swallows word endings (e.g., haben becomes hawn), and changes the "ch" sound to a soft "sch" sound (making ich sound like isch)".  It also tells me that Norwegian and Danish are almost the same language, but Norwegian pronunciation is "clear, uses distinct pitch accents (tones), and consonants are pronounced crisply" whereas in Danish "soft consonants like d, g, and b often turn into semi-vowels or disappear entirely", and there is a phonemic glottal catch that is absent in Norwegian.

A style change that could produce significant digraph frequency shifts would be from conditional ("if someone ate this berry, he would see pink elephants") to descriptive ("eating this berry makes one see pink elephants") or imperative ("eat this berry and you will see pink elephants") or telegraphic ("eat berry, see pink elephants"), etc.

An emphasis change could be: Herbal A is mostly about tonics for preventing baldness and bad breath, Herbal-B is highly concerned with remedies for heartburn and ingrown toenails.

As you may know, I became convinced that daiin in the Starred Parags section is most often a keyword meaning roughly "mainly for" that precedes a list of diseases, while chedy is most often a certain invisible fluid that carries the nutrition value of food from the stomach and spleen to the lower torso and performs several other important physiological functions around the body.  If that is the case, obviously the frequency of use of those words (and hence of the digraphs they contain, like the infamous ed) is expected to be different in other sections.

And I also am fairly convinced that the endings -ir and -iir were actually -iin and -iiin, and that many k (but not t) were actually d, which were written by the Author in sloppy semi-cursive handwriting on his draft, and thus misread by the Scribe.  (Possibly those errors also affected many other -r endings, so that many dar may have been originally dain; but my word model allows dar while it excludes dair, so I am still quite uncertain about these.) If that is the case, the frequency of such replacements in other sections may be higher or lower, depending on how sloppy was the Author's handwriting on the respective drafts.

All the best, --stolfi