05-03-2025, 07:29 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-03-2025, 11:53 PM by Bluetoes101.)
I have been taking time away from analysis and code to collect the thoughts of others.
Two of these ideas were;
Lisa's hypothesis that EVA: "f" and "p" may be abbreviated "te" and "ke"
Rene's hypothesis that EVA: "cXh" may be "oXe" (X for gallows)
Using Lisa's reasoning that "pe" and "fe" are mostly not found but "te" and "ke" are common is the same reasoning I would apply to state that maybe
benched gallows are "aXe". Maybe it is where all the "ap, af, at, ak" went to.
"a" in the case of "p,f,k,t,d" seems to have been replaced with "e" in non-benched versions but isn't found in other line-curve glyphs r,l,n,j,m.
Using the same logic, the missing "e"'s preceding r,l,n,j,m may be answered with "sh" in that the different loops represent one of r,l,n,j,m.
In my mind, although I know nothing of linguistics, being stuck with doing "ake" for every "ak" and "ere" for every "er" doesn't make much sense.
There I would lend from another of Rene's thoughts that the bench character is likely a single character not two.
So maybe "cXh" is ap,af,ak,at (or ake, ate, ak, at using Lisa's idea) and "sh" is er,el,en,ej,em. Maybe "m" could be "re" and "ere" when part of "sh", but that's just a passing thought.
Going further down the rabbit hole, maybe "ch" is a combination of "a" and "e" - "æ".
Two of these ideas were;
Lisa's hypothesis that EVA: "f" and "p" may be abbreviated "te" and "ke"
Rene's hypothesis that EVA: "cXh" may be "oXe" (X for gallows)
Using Lisa's reasoning that "pe" and "fe" are mostly not found but "te" and "ke" are common is the same reasoning I would apply to state that maybe
benched gallows are "aXe". Maybe it is where all the "ap, af, at, ak" went to.
"a" in the case of "p,f,k,t,d" seems to have been replaced with "e" in non-benched versions but isn't found in other line-curve glyphs r,l,n,j,m.
Using the same logic, the missing "e"'s preceding r,l,n,j,m may be answered with "sh" in that the different loops represent one of r,l,n,j,m.
In my mind, although I know nothing of linguistics, being stuck with doing "ake" for every "ak" and "ere" for every "er" doesn't make much sense.
There I would lend from another of Rene's thoughts that the bench character is likely a single character not two.
So maybe "cXh" is ap,af,ak,at (or ake, ate, ak, at using Lisa's idea) and "sh" is er,el,en,ej,em. Maybe "m" could be "re" and "ere" when part of "sh", but that's just a passing thought.
Going further down the rabbit hole, maybe "ch" is a combination of "a" and "e" - "æ".