(Yesterday, 08:43 AM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
Well, true or not remains to be seen, I don't know.
But it's a different thing to propose a real text from a real manuscript, thank you, much better than hypothetical reforms...
Quote:The first spelling system is found roughly in lines 1-901 and 961-1183, the second in 902-960 and 1184-1794
Good. I'll check the change in statistics.
(Yesterday, 08:43 AM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Someone who had little exposure to written Japanese, Chinese, and Korean may not even notice the difference between them.
Yes but this is totally irrelevant. Your claim that the differences between Currier A and B are like those caused by a 'modest' spelling reform is another thing. The orthographic reforms would actually need to be huge, or (more likely) impossible, because it is a hypothetical idea, not a fact, and I don't believe it is what we are seeing in the VMS. Your own proposed mapping that would bring the frequencies in the two "languages" closer doesn't describe a plausible orthographic reform, it is too pervasive and may actually better fit how many homophones used with variable probabilities behave in a cipher: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Anyway, before discussing plausible and implausible spelling reforms, it would be necessary to establish that the two Currier "languages" are languages. If they are not, because "words are not words" (Currier), orthography is irrelevant.
"Let us be well assured of the matter of fact, before we trouble ourselves with inquiring into the cause"
Fontenelle, La dent d’or « Assurons-nous bien du fait, avant que de nous inquiéter de la cause ».
(17-10-2026, 03:24 PM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Could then we conclude that the statistical differences between VMS sections, even between Herbal-A and Herbal-B, are more like those caused by a modest spelling/encoding/blabber reform than a change of natural language?
This is starting from the (wrong) premise that the only possibilities are 1) a spelling reform 2) different natural languages.
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)
