[Text] word starting [q] must have a valid counterpart word starting [o]

[-JKP-]

...
Emma suggests :

words beginning with [q] have two particular relationships. The first is that a word starting [q] must have a valid counterpart word starting [o], and it is not enough for the plain word without either [q] or [o] to exist. Conversely, even if the [o] form exists, that does not mean that the [q] form will.

...

I'll have to vote "no" but I'll wait a couple of days to be sure I understand the question correctly.

Some examples of q- tokens with no o counterparts:

f29r:2:5:1     qokShe but no counterpart okShe.
f51r:1:9:7     qoetam but no counterpart oetam.
f76r:1:8:2     qotedShedy but no counterpart otedShedy. (In the ms. it is definitely written as one token.)
f76r:1:9:4     qeTheed but no counterpart oeTheed.
f80r:1:1:3     qopolkain but no counterpart opolkain. (Note: this may be a rare curve-glyph rather than an "o" but even if it is, there's no counterpart.)
f102r1:2:4:6  qokeodol but no counterpart okeodol.


There are many plain words that occur without q- or o- counterparts, so I'm not sure I correctly understand this part of the statement.

Quick examples from a single folio:

f66b:1:1:6     plain word dorShepy exists without odorShepy counterpart.
f66v:2:1:9     plain word Sheopam exists without oSheopam counterpart.
f66v:3:4:10    plain word chkchody exists without ochkchody counterpart.