reading [y] as a null character

[geoffreycaveney]

The problem with the idea of [y] as a general-purpose abbreviation symbol, standing for a wider variety of abbreviations, is that one could then make it represent almost any grammatical or derivational suffix one pleases, in any language. In this case the script would give us almost no information about the actual grammar of the language--the rest of each vord would presumably represent the roots or stems of the words, but as soon as each word reaches the grammatical suffix, we would find the identical [y]! Imagine trying to interpret the grammatical relations and meaning of the following line:

"Army viryque cany Trojy quy primy ab ory"

Good luck with deciphering and interpreting such language expressed in an unknown script. 

I think we have a better chance of deciphering and interpreting the ms text if [y] is a null character, than we do if [y] represents an abbreviation for any suffix whatsoever.