·     Do not confuse this with the homonym ak’ = “turkey“. [This is only relevant for the people who subscribe to reading logogram AK’ = “dance” – I prefer AK’OT, which is then not a homonym of AK’ = “turkey”.]

·     There is considerable uncertainty as to whether the -ot is part of this logogram; i.e., is it AK’OT or just AK’? Almost all sources give only AK’:

o Reading it as only AK’ makes it difficult to explain where the -o- in the noun ak’ot = “(a/the) dance” comes from, as we hardly ever (never?) see a k’o written.

o Reading it as AK’OT solves this, because the -o- is present in the logogram. The reading of ak’taj = “he danced” is then also easily explained: AK’OT + aj (verbal suffix) è ak’otaj è ak’taj by the rule in Classic Maya that when there are three syllables in a row arising out of compounding or derivation, the middle syllable can be suppressed.

o However, if this were the case, then we should be able to find instances of ak’taj where only the ja is written after the AK’OT. Strangely, we never find this. Instead, there is always a ta written as well. This suggests that there is no -t in the logogram itself, which is probably why a number of sources give the verb as just ak’.