3 ms·
I favour the hoax hypothesis... except that the letters and syllable distribution bear a strong similarity to natural languages. A XVth century forger could not
by GnarfGnarf 5y ago
I favour the hoax hypothesis... except that the letters and syllable distribution bear a strong similarity to natural languages. A XVth century forger could not possibly have known about this.
Recently a Turkish scholar has found indications that it is old Turkish.
https://www.openculture.com/2019/02/has-the-voynich-manuscript-finally-been-decoded.html https://www.openculture.com/2019/02/has-the-voynich-manuscri...
- goodcanadian 5y agoRecently a Turkish scholar has found indications that it is old Turkish. They certainly make the claim, but I haven't found any evidence that their approach is being given much credence.
- GnarfGnarf 5y agoHere is a brief video of Amet Ardic, who believes the manuscript contains “shapes meaning prefixes and suffixes in distinctive letters, resembling the Turkish language used in his home country.” https://youtu.be/p6keMgLmFEk https://youtu.be/p6keMgLmFEk
- CRConrad 5y ago> except that the letters and syllable distribution bear a strong similarity to natural languages. A XVth century forger could not possibly have known about this. A XVth century schizophrenic would have had at least one natural language, and could therefore have, consciously or less so, made up another one. EDIT: If successful it may perhaps still be deciphered; if the descent into illness had gone too far it may not actually make any sense to be decoded out of it -- but still look like a "real" language.