Floating gallows

[pfeaster]

pfeaster, as an aside, what are your thoughts on the idea that [tch] and [kch] might be equivalent to [cTh] and [cKh], respectively? I was much taken by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about the possibility that [f] and [p] might be nothing more than top-line-of-paragraph variations of [ke] and [te]. 

Based just on a comparison of word frequencies, I'd think [t] and [k] are more likely to be equivalent to each other than [kch] is to [cKh] and [tch] to [cTh].  Consider:

• [chcKhy] 123 and [chcThy] 70, versus [chkchy] 5 and [chtchy] 3
  
• [qocKhy] 18 and [qocThy] 8, versus [qokchy] 60 and [qotchy] 60
  

Beyond that, my gut feeling is that [kch] is probably as distinct from [cKh] as [ko] is from [ok] -- but I don't have a strong opinion and am weighing in only because you asked. 

The idea that [p] could represent [te] is an attractive way of trying to account for the rarity of [pe].  But if [p] = [te], then wouldn't [tee] = [pe], and if so, shouldn't [pe] still occur fairly frequently?  I suppose one of Aga Tentakulus's [p] variants could represent [te], and another [tee], but that feels like clutching at straws.