I have finished my review of the corpus transliterated with the Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics; there were some inconsistencies, but I believe that it is now correct. I included a new glyph (the question mark, [?]) for the first glyphs of what we suppose is the Ionian Sea, as likely there is a single glyph missing.

I used the reviewed corpus to divide the glyphs into classes with a Maximum-Likelihood-Criterion; I adapted the corpus in order to use “mkcls”, which is part of the Giza++ package frequently used in statistical machine translation (http://code.google.com/p/giza-pp/). The glyphs are divided in groups from 2 to 10 classes, my comments are below.

Please remember that these are **not** linguistic categories, phonological, morphological, syllabic, whatever. They are classes based, essentially, on the frequency and context where each glyph is found in the corpus; while the might mirror real categories, they are to be understood as statistical properties, not linguistic ones (not only because they were built by a statistical classifier, but also because, as I’ve been whining since the first post, the corpus we have is very limited).

Division into 2 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: , ᐣ ᐧ ᑦ ᑫ ᒣ ᓄ ᔑ ᔭ ᖗ ᖚ ᘈ ᘖ ᙉ
- Class 2: ? ᑕ ᓭ ᔪ ᕋ ᖉ ᖊ ᖽ ᘊ ᘛ ᘝ ᙐ

Division into 3 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: , ᓄ ᔑ ᖗ ᖚ ᘖ
- Class 2: ? ᑕ ᒣ ᓭ ᔪ ᕋ ᖉ ᖊ ᖽ ᘊ ᘛ ᘝ ᙐ
- Class 3: ᐣ ᐧ ᑦ ᑫ ᔭ ᘈ ᙉ

Division into 4 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: ᑕ ᒣ ᔪ ᖽ ᘊ ᘛ ᙉ
- Class 2: , ᓄ ᔑ ᖗ ᖚ ᘖ
- Class 3: ? ᓭ ᕋ ᖉ ᖊ ᘝ ᙐ
- Class 4: ᐣ ᐧ ᑦ ᑫ ᔭ ᘈ

Division into 5 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: , ᓄ ᖗ ᖚ ᘖ
- Class 2: ᐣ ᑦ
- Class 3: ? ᓭ ᔑ ᕋ ᖉ ᘝ ᙐ
- Class 4: ᐧ ᑫ ᔭ ᘈ
- Class 5: ᑕ ᒣ ᔪ ᖊ ᖽ ᘊ ᘛ ᙉ

Division into 6 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: ᐣ ᐧ ᑦ ᑫ ᔭ ᘈ ᙉ
- Class 2: ᒣ ᘊ
- Class 3: , ᓄ ᔑ ᖗ
- Class 4: ? ᔪ ᘛ ᘝ ᙐ
- Class 5: ᕋ ᖉ ᖚ ᖽ ᘖ
- Class 6: ᑕ ᓭ ᖊ

Division into 7 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: ᒣ ᘊ
- Class 2: ᑕ ᖽ ᘖ
- Class 3: , ᓄ ᖗ ᖚ
- Class 4: ᓭ ᖊ
- Class 5: ? ᔪ ᕋ ᖉ ᘛ ᘝ ᙉ ᙐ
- Class 6: ᐣ ᑦ
- Class 7: ᐧ ᑫ ᔑ ᔭ ᘈ

Division into 8 classes of glyphs

- Class 1: ᑕ ᖚ ᖽ ᘖ
- Class 2: ᓭ ᖊ ᙐ
- Class 3: ᒣ ᘊ
- Class 4: , ᓄ ᖗ
- Class 5: ᐣ ᑦ
- Class 6: ᐧ ᔑ
- Class 7: ? ᔪ ᕋ ᖉ ᘛ ᘝ
- Class 8: ᑫ ᔭ ᘈ ᙉ

My comments:

- Assuming there are no unseen glyphs, the missing glyph at the beginning of “Ionian Sea” is probably one in the group ᔪ ᕋ ᖉ ᘛ ᘝ.
- The same group ᔪ ᕋ ᖉ ᘛ ᘝ probably mirrors a true, linguistic group; if the script is alphabetic, they very likely are a group of related consonants.
- The ML classifier suggests that the diacritics are indeed a separate category of glyphs, an in particular that ᐣ and ᑦ are very similar (one is probably, as per the graphical representation, the inverse of the other). There are, however, doubts regarding the lower diacritic (the comma) and, to a lesser extent, the vertically centered dot.
- As the affix study had suggested, ᒣ andᘊ are probably very alike, which probably is also true for between ᓭ and ᖊ.