julian > 07-09-2016, 06:52 PM
-JKP- > 07-09-2016, 07:12 PM
(07-09-2016, 06:52 PM)julian Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
If you buy the hypothesis that they are ciphers for the same plaintext word, then the glyph "8" is likely a null in Language A. ...
ReneZ > 07-09-2016, 07:19 PM
julian > 07-09-2016, 08:08 PM
(07-09-2016, 07:12 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2016, 06:52 PM)julian Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
If you buy the hypothesis that they are ciphers for the same plaintext word, then the glyph "8" is likely a null in Language A. ...
That's one possible explanation.
Another possibility is that 8ain is a functional unit and they got tired of writing out the whole thing and realized ain would suffice, in which case the 8 glyph in other words might not be a null.
Koen G > 07-09-2016, 08:10 PM
julian > 07-09-2016, 08:14 PM
(07-09-2016, 07:19 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have a rather similar table You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (about two thirds down), with statistics for a few additional 'types' of pages.
It takes a while to digest, perhaps. It uses the Currier transcription alphabet (it was written in pre-Eva times).
I split the recipes folios (f103-116) into two parts, which I called stars-B and stars-Bio based on some statistical considerations which are explained on that page.
What I think it shows is that the relationship between daiin and aiin is probably more complicated.
(07-09-2016, 08:10 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Isn't it just a possibility that the source text for both sections was in a different language, dialect, register or just vocabulary set? Even if it wasn't a standard prose text but rather a set of data of some kind, this is still possible.
-JKP- > 07-09-2016, 08:22 PM
(07-09-2016, 08:08 PM)julian Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2016, 07:12 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2016, 06:52 PM)julian Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
If you buy the hypothesis that they are ciphers for the same plaintext word, then the glyph "8" is likely a null in Language A. ...
That's one possible explanation.
Another possibility is that 8ain is a functional unit and they got tired of writing out the whole thing and realized ain would suffice, in which case the 8 glyph in other words might not be a null.
But then would you not expect the B words to be generally shorter than the A words, if the scribe was tired?!
Anton > 07-09-2016, 09:36 PM
Quote:We then compare the distributions: a reasonable speculation is that the most common words in A are the same plaintext as the most common words in B.
julian > 07-09-2016, 09:56 PM
(07-09-2016, 09:36 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Quote:We then compare the distributions: a reasonable speculation is that the most common words in A are the same plaintext as the most common words in B.
That's not that reasonable if you compare text blocks the subject of which is different - like Herbal A with Recipe B. A pure test would be to compare herbal A with herbal B.
In a highly abbreviated "telegraph-style" text (which the VMS probably is), function words may be absent at all.
Anton > 07-09-2016, 10:13 PM
Quote:Do I have that wrong?