Bigram = phoneme theory (language agnostic)

[Emma May Smith]

I've long suspected that words ending [in, iin, iiin] could be reflecting some aspect of prosody. I don't have the proof and looking for it hasn't turned up anything solid. It would go some way to explaining certain aspects of its distribution and the interrelationships of the words containing [i].

On the topic of bigrams:

• The "gappiness" of the bigram table of all possible combinations speaks to a confounding factor inherent in the glyphs, such as sound values, which govern their combination.
  
• Words can be constructed incrementally, one glyph at a time: [chedy] > [kchedy] > [okchedy] > [qokchedy].
  
• There are a handful of sequences of single glyphs which suggest that the writer conceived of them as being discrete.
  
• For any given bigram its place and relationship in a word is often governed by one glyph or the other, and not a combination of the two. For example: all bigrams of the form [ch*] will have a similar leftward relationship regardless of the second glyph. There are exceptions, but the rule is true enough to suggest that we're dealing with two glyphs with different identities rather than a whole with its own identity.