Skip to content

sakamoto6000-png/linear-a-structural-analysis

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

3 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

linear-a-structural-analysis

Structural and quantitative analysis of Linear A inscriptions using non-phonetic methodology based on GORILA corpus. This repository presents an ongoing structural research framework for Linear A, focused exclusively on inscriptional structure, quantitative consistency, and physical arrangement, without assuming phonetic decipherment or predefined linguistic interpretation. Linear A Structural Analysis Research Intermediate Integrated Report (Source-Consolidated Working Draft)

  1. Research Objective

This project investigates Linear A by separating analysis from conventional assumptions of phonetic decipherment or linguistic translation.

The primary goal is to extract structural, quantitative, and physical inscriptional functions through:

Symbol placement Numerical consistency Fractional hierarchy Material/medium context Administrative formatting 2. Core Methodological Principles Exclusion Rules No phonetic reading assumptions No linguistic pre-definition No symbolic meaning assigned in advance No civilization-scale conclusions without corpus-level support Inclusion Rules Structural regularity Quantitative validation Positional comparison Physical medium comparison Blind protocol reproducibility 3. Primary Source Corpus Primary Corpus GORILA

Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A Louis Godart & Jean-Pierre Olivier (1976–1985, Vol.1–5)

Primary Uses Tablet ID verification Inscription sequence structure Numerical signs Fraction signs Damage notation ([ ], -, ?) Site comparison Supplementary Corpus CHIC

Corpus Hieroglyphicarum Inscriptionum Cretae

Supplementary Uses Sign classification Variant comparison Dot position comparison Hierarchical sign comparison 4. Major Site Abbreviations Code Site Primary Function HT Haghia Triada Administrative core ZA Zakros Comparative archive PH Phaistos Mixed KH Khania Regional KN Knossos Mixed / ritual PK Palaikastro Peripheral THE Thebes Extra-Cretan MI Miletus Extra-Cretan 5. Phase I Discovery: KU-RO (SIGN_005) Initial Hypothesis

KU-RO functions as a structural total / summation marker in administrative contexts.

Standard Structural Mode

ΣV=KU-RO

Key Supporting Tablets HT-115 HT-122a HT-94 / HT-94a HT-88 HT-31 ZA-9 PH-11 6. Counterexample Corpus Major Non-Matching Cases HT-123a / HT-123b HT-103 HT-131 HT-118 KH-7a / KH-7b PH-7 / PH-11 ZA-15 KN-Za-10 KN-Zb-34 PK-Za-11 THE-7 MI-2 7. Counterexample Classification Protocol

Priority order:

Damage Transcription uncertainty Fraction hierarchy Conditional exclusion Compartment variance Document function variance Regional variance 8. SIGN_188 (Conditional Exclusion Candidate) Main Cases HT-123a HT-123b HT-23a Observed Pattern Strong HT concentration GORILA Vol.1 bias LM IA weighting 9. SIGN_054 Main Cases HT-131 ZA-9 HT-7a Current Status Universal operator: unconfirmed Possible contextual modifier 10. Fraction Hierarchy Major Fractional Signs L L2 K J Priority Tablets HT-94a HT-9b HT-13 Research Need

Precise positional verification against original plate imagery.

  1. DOT Analysis Major Cases HT-103 HT-102 HT-93a Research Concern

Dots may represent:

Structural separators Fraction modifiers Scribal marks Damage artifacts 12. Document Function Variance Non-Administrative Media KN-Za-10 (stone) KN-Zb-34 (libation table) PK-Za-11 Working Hypothesis

KU-RO may not behave uniformly outside administrative tablets.

  1. Regional Variance Extra-Cretan Cases THE-7 MI-2 Working Hypothesis

Regional transfer may alter structural conventions.

  1. Current Statistical Strength Category Sample Size KU-RO ~160 Fraction Comparison 116 SIGN_188 14 DOT 82
  2. Blind Validation Method

Primary structural examples anonymized:

Site removed Tablet identity removed Proper names removed Results Correct: 90% Acceptable: 100% Overfit: 0% 16. Methodological Significance

This project transforms Linear A from:

“Decipherment-first”

to:

“Structure-testable corpus analysis”

Key contribution:

Reproducibility Blind testing Corpus transparency Controlled hypothesis revision 17. Critical Limitations GORILA is a secondary transcription layer.

Therefore, final validation should prioritize:

Artifact photographs Plate drawings Excavation reports

Especially for:

Dot placement Fraction placement Sign adjacency Surface damage Segment boundaries 18. Current Best-Supported Expression

Linear A, at least within portions of the GORILA administrative corpus, appears analyzable as a structured system involving:

Quantitative accounting Summation Conditional aggregation Fractional substructure 19. Expressions to Avoid Complete decipherment Absolute proof Universal accounting language Civilizational OS Fully solved script 20. Next Research Priorities Highest Priority GORILA Vol.1 HT corpus re-check KU-RO 18 counterexample re-evaluation SIGN_054 extraction Fraction subtype matrix CHIC sign-form comparison Plate/image verification 21. Working Conclusion

This research currently supports a methodological transition:

From “reading Linear A” To “measuring Linear A structurally.”

At present, the KU-RO administrative summation model shows the strongest consistency, while SIGN_188, fraction hierarchy, DOT behavior, and regional variance remain the principal falsification tests.

About

Structural and quantitative analysis of Linear A inscriptions using non-phonetic methodology based on GORILA corpus.

Topics

Resources

License

Stars

2 stars

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

 
 
 

Contributors