Language A vs B crib?

[-JKP-]

...
If you buy the hypothesis that they are ciphers for the same plaintext word, then the glyph "8" is likely a null in Language A. ...

That's one possible explanation.

Another possibility is that 8ain is a functional unit and they got tired of writing out the whole thing and realized ain would suffice, in which case the 8 glyph in other words might not be a null.

But then would you not expect the B words to be generally shorter than the A words, if the scribe was tired?!

No, not necessarily. They are two different things. Noticing that something will suffice, will do the job just as well, is not the same as shortening it because the scribe was tired. I probably shouldn't have combined "suffice" and "tired" in the same post but I guess I did so because both are possible explanations.

When you first set up a writing system (whether it's a cipher system or a phonetic system), you may think you have done it effectively or that you have covered all the contingencies, but in actual use situations are likely to come up that may not have been covered. Similarly, situations might come up where you realize you overdid it and can get as much bang out of a smaller buck.

I'm not asserting that's the reason it was shortened, I am simply noting that there are other possibilities than the one you mentioned.


I'm not at all surprised there are anomalies (uncommon sequences and letters) in the VMS, and a general shift in the "code" (vord frequencies) in other parts of the document. Not only does the content appear to change in different parts of the document (which would affect vord relationships and frequency), but to get a unique writing system perfect the first time is highly unlikely.