Switch System

[dashstofsk]

If we work under plaintext assumption

That is not really my way of thinking about the manuscript. A plaintext assumption seems implausible to me. I am inclined to believe that a lot of the writing in the manuscript depends on the disposition of the author. For instance, qokeeey.  As I see it when the author writes this word he could well instead have written qokeey  or  qokey.  Similarly  daiin,dain,dan.  Similarly  otchey,okchey,oteeey,okeeey,oteey,okeey.  Similarly  cheols,cheol,chol,Sheol,Shol.

The author seems also to have his favourites. He tends to like to finish his words with a flourish and so  l,y,r,n  are frequently placed at the end of a word, and not so often mid-word. Likes to start a new page with a bang so  p  often comes first. Likes the easy-to-repeat strokes  i  and  e.  Also strange things seem to happen at the ends of lines ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). It is human nature to want to be a bit sporting.

So, I suppose what I really want to do is to warn people against believing that any one word has a fixed meaning, and that the same word has the same meaning wherever it appears in the manuscript. I can see that those people who are hoping that the manuscript can be rendered into some meaningful narrative might not like this. Nevertheless I am still happy to read the evidence for the alternative scenarios. Possibly I might be proved wrong.