New missing piece: Córdoba?

[todihk]

The more interesting question is whether the general, multi-layered and combinatorial method described by Fernando shows functional similarities to structures that are already known in the Voynich Manuscript or are currently being investigated.

Córdoba indeed seems to be an important figure for the (pre)history of formal logic.  

But I don't see how it could relate to the VMS.  While there have been many proposed and statistically confirmed models for the structure of words, AFAIK there have been no significant findings about the "grammar" -- how words can be put together and parsed into sentences (which would yield the relations, analogies, affirmations etc. that Córdoba's work is all about). 

Moreover, even if one does not accept the SPS≈SBJ claim, one should be aware that even parag-formatted text may have a non-grammatical formulaic structure, like a mere list of diseases, or a table-like list of attributes (like "flavor:bitter-sweet, bitter aftertaste; potency: mostly high; form: powder, flakes, grains; humors: phlegmatic, choleric; planet: Trappist-1e; pokémon character: pikachu of course; sources: Dioscorides, Ea-Nasir; harvest time: jony to octembre"  Except of course in random order, with randomly omitted fields, random substitutions by synonyms ... and random errors.  And no punctuation, of course. 

All the best, --stolfi

Thanks for taking the time to read through my rather long post.

I think your point about word structure vs. actual grammar is fair. At the moment I cannot show any factual evidence that Voynich really encodes relations, propositions or operators in the way that would make the Córdoba comparison much stronger.

I did try to look at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. in that direction for myself. There are some interesting hints, especially a possible forward/reverse organisation in the rings of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and between the marginal columns on f66r. But the tests are not strong enough to present this as evidence for an operator or information relationship. Also, because I had only limited possibilities and used AI for those analyses, I do not think they are suitable to present here as research results.

So for me Córdoba is not a “solution” to Voynich.
What I found interesting is simply that he gives us a real historical example showing that this kind of general, layered and combinatorial method was possible in the fifteenth century.

So my point is much more:
not “Voynich = Córdoba”, but rather “this kind of idea fits the historical period”.

Your example of a formulaic list is also a good warning. And thanks for the "Pikachu" 
A text could be very regular without having normal sentence grammar at all.
Thanks again for the reply. It helps me keep the comparison within reasonable limits.