tavie > 07-06-2025, 11:25 AM
(07-06-2025, 09:01 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For example, it could be possible that okechedy is very rare, because it is preferably written opchedy
I am not saying that I think that that is the case. It is just a valid possibility.
ReneZ > 07-06-2025, 11:34 AM
(07-06-2025, 11:25 AM)tavie Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.wouldn't that then require a reason (e.g. subject matter) for the opchedy/okechedy word type to be so predominantly on the top row?
dashstofsk > 07-06-2025, 11:38 AM
(07-06-2025, 11:07 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.a radically new script being developed for an existing language
ReneZ > 07-06-2025, 12:24 PM
(07-06-2025, 11:34 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-06-2025, 11:25 AM)tavie Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.wouldn't that then require a reason (e.g. subject matter) for the opchedy/okechedy word type to be so predominantly on the top row?
Good point.
Every option has its problems though.
For example, why are only k or t that are not followed by e replaced by f or p ?
And why are these predominantly on the first rows?
I don't remember exactly the details of Lisa's statistics, they will play a role here.
Jorge_Stolfi > 07-06-2025, 02:14 PM
(07-06-2025, 11:38 AM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Are you still of the opinion it might be in some Chinese dialect?
dashstofsk > 09-06-2025, 08:56 AM
(07-06-2025, 02:14 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.not only the Chinese "dialects" (actually more than a dozen distinct languages) but also Tibetan, Vietnamese, Laotian, Burmese, Thai, Hmong, ...
RadioFM > 09-06-2025, 11:13 PM
Torsten > Yesterday, 09:53 PM
(06-06-2025, 10:53 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.However, in the 1970's Currier already demonstrated that p and f are not alternatives for t and k, and more recently, Lisa did some more stats from which she concluded that the following would explain a lot:
f is an alternative form for te and p is an alternative form for ke.
(There is no typo here).
Jorge_Stolfi > 10 hours ago