isaac,
let's look at the "trooth of the claim":
lxm, gyl, mlx, l$m, ly$, lylh, lwl, bll, xcyl,
nlxm, lpt, xlmwn, xlbon, xlb, $lm, $lwm, $lwh, b$l, plg,
mlmlh, qlql, mll, mwll, tltl, TlTl, qtl, mhl, $ll, $)l,
l(s, lgm, l), gll, lglg, plx, clb, dl, dlyl, clwl, xlwl,
clm, xlmy$, xwl, mzl, glwy, gwlm, l$, plpl, clcl, cl (, p(l,
including:
lb(=center!), glgl(=circle!)
and many more - all have L but hardly any sense of "up, on above", unless we
are willing to stretch (up!...) our imagination to the very limit.
npl, cll, mcwlh, dlp, gl$, $l, $l$l, xlxl, zlzl, zll, )zl,
here, oddly, it is "down, below". AND, finally,
ram, gavoha, nisa), nasi), tipes, rakab, $mym, (nn, rqy(
all are "up,on,above" par excellence but none has L.
but, as observed by george, we shall not let a couple counter examples
destroy a nice theory.
nir cohen
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.