The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against

[Jorge_Stolfi]

[..]
The Voynichese daiin (and sometimes slight variants like dain, kaiin and laiin, and the abbreviation dam)

There is no proof for some of them being just „slight variants“ or even an „abbreviation“ for daiin or anything else.

Regardless, the point is that all attempts to identify articles in Voynichese have failed.

But I think I do have good proof that dair, dain, kaiin and laiin can be variants of daiin. It seems you stll don't accept that evidence, but I hope it will eventually be irrefutable; I am working on that.  

And I have also an explanation for those particular variations: the glyphs k, d and l (and, separately, r and in)  would look very similar if written in a "cursive" handwriting, such as the Author may have used in the draft.

The k may look very different from d because of its size; but even in the "print letters" of the Scribe's clean copy it can be squeezed down to the same height of a d, like this
   
(f103r, line 9) and then the only real difference is whether the corner at top left is sharp or rounded.

As for dam being an abbreviation of daiin, (or, more generally, m being an abbreviation of iin) besides the evidence of the SPS=SBJ matches, there are statistical clues, like the prevalence of m at line end.

All the best, --stolfi