Re: Oh no, someone else has been at the Voynich manuscript ... but wait ...

And it only took him 2 weeks to figure all this out!  And he doesn't offer
the transcription or translation of a long passage or even a full
sentence.  See
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Farstechnica.com%2Fscience%2F2019%2F05%2Fno-someone-hasnt-cracked-the-code-of-the-mysterious-voynich-manuscript%2F&data=02%7C01%7CCLASSICS-L%40lsv.uky.edu%7C823dbf00a62a449d931408d6d9b2700d%7C2b30530b69b64457b818481cb53d42ae%7C0%7C1%7C636935757737907710&sdata=gCSHIsgallQF%2Fj63SqoamALLxjRjYn6ejduSvGPe%2Byk%3D&reserved=0
where
you will find --No, someone hasn’t cracked the code of the mysterious
Voynich manuscriptMedieval scholar: "Sorry, folks, 'proto-Romance language'
is not a thing."

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 9:32 PM Ralph Hancock <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Yet another interpretation of the notorious Voynich manuscript:
>
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tandfonline.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1080%2F02639904.2019.1599566&amp;data=02%7C01%7CCLASSICS-L%40lsv.uky.edu%7C823dbf00a62a449d931408d6d9b2700d%7C2b30530b69b64457b818481cb53d42ae%7C0%7C0%7C636935757737907710&amp;sdata=MVngtPxVzXQIlmneA0HPIftWhUGT%2BLQEf8zDiq4zAkk%3D&amp;reserved=0
>
> This is strangely convincing. I had always thought that the manuscript was
> a huge and laborious hoax. But I will have to have another look at the
> article in the cold light of day and see if I was carried away by a
> persuasive interpretation.
>
> RH
>