Theorems on letters

[Emma May Smith]

DS Theorem one on 13.10.2017

Any translation attempt that includes the EVA letter [P] or the EVA letter [F] and 
converts it directly in any other character or group of characters of another language, is wrong.

That being posed, the first word on f1r can not start with the EVA letter [P] being translated into a Latin P.

---

DS Theorem two. 14.10.2017:     The Eva letter [P] and Eva letter [F] are a signalling letter.

Theorem One, as stated, isn't clear and seems contradicted (at least in part) by Theorem Two, though I agree with Rene that the first and second have different natures. I think the problem is that the terminology involved is unclear.

Now, any solution which sees the script as a code, cipher, or essentially meaningless isn't concerned by this theorem. Only those which posit a direct linguistic value for each of the script's characters have to answer. For these theories, each character should have a value which can be described in linguistic terms. These values will or should be mostly phonetic in nature, though maybe not exclusively.

Because of this, we can say that [f, p] cannot have values which are both phonemic and exclusive: whichever phonemes they represent must be represented by other characters also, and whatever difference they indicate must be non-phonemic. This is because of their restriction to certain parts of the text, which is seemingly unlinguistic, but also the reasonable assumption that they indicate some difference in value due to their difference in shape. However, they can have a direct phonemic value, so long as it is shared with another character. In short, they are variant characters, though for what reason is unknown, and this unknown attribute is, I guess, what you referring to by saying that it is a 'signalling letter'.

But, the position of [f, p] at the beginning of a paragraph--quite apart from their usual restriction to first lines--also poses the question whether they have any phonemic value in those positions. I think it is quite reasonable that many do not. Yet we should be aware that [t] occurs more often than it should at the start of lines which are not paragraph initial, as well as occurring commonly at the start of paragraphs. Given that [p] is most similar to [t] in shape, it might be that at least some occurrences of paragraph initial [p] are genuine due to the interaction of both 1) first line, and 2) line start position.