Moreover, the allographs detected by Pozdniakov are given different readings by Fedorova, so that, for example, otherwise parallel texts repeatedly substitute the purported verb glyph 6 ma‘u "take" for the purported noun glyph 64 tonga "a kind of yam". (Pozdniakov has demonstrated that these are graphic variants of the same glyph.) As it was, Fedorova's catalog consisted of 130 glyphs; Pozdniakov's additional allography would have made her interpretation even more repetitive. Such extreme repetition is a problem with all attempts to read rongorongo as a logographic script.[38]
Many recent scholars[39] are of the opinion that, while many researchers have made modest incremental contributions to the understanding of rongorongo, notably Kudrjavtsev et al., Butinov and Knorozov, and Thomas Barthel, the attempts at actual decipherment, such as those of Fedorova here or Fischer below, "are not accompanied by the least justification".[note 17] All fail the key test of decipherment: a meaningful application to novel texts and patterns.
seiko mens watches
tombinishop


