nevertheless, already culturally translated. `When information crosses borders via translation', says Scha¨ ffner, `the effects may be varied: it may be that the local culture uses this information to re-identify itself, to delimit itself from other cultures and thus to evaluate itself higher (or lower); or common and different aspects may become obvious, thus achieving mutual understanding in the sense of a growing awareness of differences' (Scha¨ ffner, 1999, pp. 97Á98).
The one-time system prevents the cryptanalyst from ever bringing two or more such equations together. The utter absence of any pattern whatsoever within its key precludes him from finding two occurrences of a given key character by reconstructing a pattern. And the tape's exhaustless novelty makes it impossible for him to locate these occurrences in any key repetitions. The cryptanalyst is thus denied any chance of getting additional information to delimit one of the unknowns; he is left with all 32 possibilities for the key character, and consequently all 32 for the plaintext. True it is that in the cryptanalytic case of an equation in two unknowns, some solutions are more probable than others. Thus, there is a 12 per cent chance that the plaintext unknown is e, an 8 per cent chance that it is t, and so on down the frequency table. But this does not answer the cryptanalyst's question, for it does not specify which of these
annaabi.ee 
