glyph [d] as a substitute for [p] and [f]

[geoffreycaveney]

A few thoughts:

• [d] is common on the first line of a paragraph, which would need to be explained.
  
• [p, f] are shorter when written away from the first line of paragraphs and [k, t] are taller when written on the first line. The scribe was capable of adjusting the glyph height.
  
• [d, l, r, s] all lack significant number of [e] following them.
  
• [p, f] take relatively good numbers of [ch, sh] following them, which [d] does not, especially away from the start of the line.
  

Emma, thank you for the concise and specific remarks. This methodical approach is most productive.

My thoughts in response:

* I propose that [d] represents a distinct letter in its own right, not merely a substitute for [p, f]. Moreover, if [d] represents /u/~/v/ and [p, f] represent other labial obstruents, [d] might occur more frequently than [p, f] even without the substitution. (For example, in Portuguese and Italian "u" + "v" together have over 5% frequency, "p" has 2.5%-3%, and "b" and "f" only about 1% each.) Thus the frequency of [d] in first lines of paragraphs would still be expected. 

* I agree that the scribe was capable of writing [p, f] away from the first line of paragraphs. For some reason, he or she usually chose not to do so. Rene has emphasized the point so many times that I always feel obliged to account for this phenomenon in any hypothesis.

* It is a good point that [d, l, r, s], like [p, f], all lack a significant number of [e] following them. The only glyphs that precede [e] in any substantial numbers are [k, t], and above all [ch, sh] and all of the ligatures with [ch]. The most natural phonological explanation for this that I can think of is that [e] is the vowel /i/ and [ch] is the corresponding palatal glide /j/. In this case the ligatures would represent the sounds often expressed in Romance languages with such combinations as "ci", "gi", "ch", "tj", "dj", and even "lh"/"ll" and "nh"/"ny"/"ñ". If [l, r, s] represent nasals and/or liquids, perhaps the scribe insisted on "palatalizing" all of them with the [sh] ligature when they occur before the front vowel [e].

* If [d] represents /u/~/v/, which would also be the labial glide /w/, and [ch] represents the palatal glide /j/, then it would be understandable that the two distinctly different glides cannot naturally be written in combination together.