Addendum:
Sh appears 99% of the time at the beginning or in the middle of a word, so the character that signals the “qo” beginning of the next word is practically never the last character—which means your argument about the last sound doesn't hold up.
And here's the table for reference:
"qo" at start of the following word, by frequency of the preceding word. Words containing sh, ch or k exclusively (glyphs atomic, no other of the three in the same word). Transitions counted within the same line only; n = occurrences that have a following word in the line. EVA z3b, whole manuscript.
So it's not about word dependencies; the dependency is everywhere...
Unfortunately, that just proves that you won't accept any claim that contradicts the theory of Chinese origin.
Sh appears 99% of the time at the beginning or in the middle of a word, so the character that signals the “qo” beginning of the next word is practically never the last character—which means your argument about the last sound doesn't hold up.
And here's the table for reference:
"qo" at start of the following word, by frequency of the preceding word. Words containing sh, ch or k exclusively (glyphs atomic, no other of the three in the same word). Transitions counted within the same line only; n = occurrences that have a following word in the line. EVA z3b, whole manuscript.
So it's not about word dependencies; the dependency is everywhere...
(20-09-2026, 08:24 AM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Unfortunately that only proves that you will accept any claim, without checking, if it contradicts the Chinese origin theory.
Unfortunately, that just proves that you won't accept any claim that contradicts the theory of Chinese origin.