Currier A/B split is not what we thought it was!

[Labyrinthinesecurity]

Still confused. You seem to suggest that ‘Che’ is more prevalent in language A.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has 10 cho to 2 che You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has 22 cho to 6 che

Which means according to your definition should be a language B instead of A

Thanks for catching what looks like a confusing presentation let me clarify: 

the cho counter sums both cho and sho. Likewise for the che counter: it sums both che and she.

f2r: 17 cho+sho, 6 che+she → r_cho = 0.739 (73.9% cho) → Language A 
f2v: 21 cho+sho, 4 che+she → r_cho = 0.840 (84.0% cho) → Language A

---

Do you know if these 2 folios are known to be problematic, from a Currier classification perspective?

I don't think so... no obvious problem. But everything is problematic with the criteria that Currier defined himself: -dy, unattached finals, etc. See here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

He didn't even mention the prevalence of the glyph bigram ed.

Thank you for the confirmation!