It is easy to display the imprint of the two templates or paradigms – cycles - that are the basis of the high-level text.
We can identify some elements – glyphs, bigrams – that definitely belong to one paradigm or the other.
Our paradigmatic words, again, are QOKEEDY and CHOLDAIIN.
We will avoid ambiguity, and any other cycles, by concentrating only upon the glyphs and forms of these two paradigmatic words.
Qokeedy Paradigm
We see the imprint of the QOKEEDY template, for a start, in the glyph [q]. This is a defining feature of the paradigm, and so too is the prefix [qo-].
Next, the gallows [k] indicates QOKEEDY.
So too does the glyph [e] and the glyph [y], neither of them found in CHOLDAIIN.
[d] is found in both words, but [dy] is an imprint of QOKEEDY.
The Choldaiin Paradigm
As for the CHOLDAIIN paradigm, or template, it provides the words [chol] and [daiin].
The glyph [a] belongs to CHOLDAIIN, as do the glyphs [i] and [n].
So too the glyph [ch] and the word initial bigram [cho].
By extension [c] and [h] belong here too.
The glyph [l] is from CHOLDAIIN and the combination [ld].
We leave aside all those glyphs that are not part of these two paradigms, or are variants of elements of these two paradigms. We leave aside [s] and [r] for now, [m] and any others.
We leave aside [sh] even though it is clearly a variant of an element of CHOLDAIIN.
And we leave aside gallows glyphs other than [k]. Only [k] is certainly the imprint of QOKEEDY.
The glyphs that are shared by the two paradigms, [o] and [d], are left ambiguous where they are not already assigned.
* * *
We can then colour the text – a chromated text – by simply rendering the elements of the two paradigms in two different colours, leaving the residual text black.
Here is the first line of the manuscript:
fachys.ykal.ar.ataiin.shol.shory.cthres.y.kor.sholdy
In the first word, we can see, the elements [a] and [ch] are from CHOLDAIIN. The [y] glyph is from QOKEEDY, and neither the gallows [f] or the final [s] are from these paradigms: they reveal other underlying cycles.
The first line is largely made of elements from CHOLDAIIN – including the intact suffix [-aiin] – with the glyph [y] – which is found free-standing – being the main contribution from QOKEEDY.
Nevertheless, other than the stand-alone [y] no word in the first line is exclusively assembled from elements from only one paradigm. Every word is a mongrel.
In the second line, however, the final word [dan] is entirely made from elements of CHOLDAIIN. (We mark such words in bold.) It is a contraction of [daiin]:
sory.ckhar.or.y.kair.chtaiin.shar.are.cthar.cthar.dan
Then in the fourth line we find the full form [daiin], the first occasion in the text:
ooiin.oteey.oteos.roloty.cth*ar.daiin.otaiin.or.okan
The appearance of fully QOKEEDY words does not begin till line 25 and 26:
[oky] and more fully [keey] are contractions of the QOKEEDY paradigm.
* * *
Chromating the text in this way – which is also a stratification – is a useful tool for analysis.
Essentially, what is does is make Text A and Text B visible.
CHOLDAIIN is the template for Currier A.
QOKEEDY is the template for Currier B.
On Text A pages we find the CHOLDAIIN paradigm dominates, and we find many words fully consisting of elements from CHOLDAIIN. Pure CHOLDAIIN words.
On Text B pages we find the QOKEEDY paradigm dominating with many pure QOKEEDY words.
Two examples:
These lines from f21 are strongly Text A with very few intrusions from QOKEEDY:
In contrast, three lines from f112 – Text B - where the imprint of the QOKEEDY template is very strong:
* * *
PURE CHOLDAIIN
Some core words:
chol
daiin
dain
alaiin
alain
dal
aiin
ain
chodaiin
chaiin
chain
ldaiin
dalaiin
cho
ol
laldan
daldaiin
choiin
dail
PURE QOKEEDY
Some core words:
qoky
dy
qo
okey
qokeey
keey
okedy
ykeedy
ky
okeey
qoky
qody
kedy
qokey
qokedy
keedy
qekeey
ykedy
The CHOLDAIIN text is inherently more fragmented than the QOKEEDY text and is more evenly distributed.
The QOKEEDY text is more concentrated.
[chol] is found nearly 300 times in Text A, but also about 100 times in Text B.
[daiin] is found over 500 times in Text A and about 300 times in Text B.
[choiin] is not found in Text B at all.
[choldaiin] is only found once in the text, in Text A, while [chodaiin] is twice as common in A than B.
Overall, the CHOLDAIIN paradigm dominates in Text A (and the QOKEEDY paradigm is absent.)
But [okedy] is found over 100 times in Text B, zero in Text A.
Similarly, [kedy] is not found in Text A at all.
The paradigm itself, [qokeedy] is found over 300 times in Text B, but not once in Text A.
The QOKEEDY paradigm dominates in Text B, (but not because the CHOLDAIIN paradigm is absent).
* * *
These are what we might call the pure cases, but the bulk of the text consists of words that have elements of both CHOLDAIIN and QOKEEDY.
And both are disrupted by other cycles, such as the [s] and [r] and other variations not accounted for in this model which, again, deals strictly with the dual paradigm at the top level of the text.
Among the mixed words, the first class to consider are those that show a clear prefix/suffix structure, a CHOLDAIIN prefix plus a QOKEEDY suffix, or vice versa.
Examples:
[chedy] = [ch] + [edy]
[qokaiin] = [qok] + [aiin]
These too are easy to identify in a chromated text and will be explored in later studies.
R.B.
No comments:
Post a Comment