·     No glyphs given in K&H.

·     Do not confuse this with the visually and phonetically similar JEL.

o Some sources do not distinguish JAL from JEL.

o For those which do, JAL consists of two strands actually “interwoven” whereas JEL consists of only two bars “crossing”.

·     Do not confuse this with the homonym JAL/JALAL = “reed”.

·     This logogram has a number of independent, unrelated meanings: “weave”, “manifest/appear”:

o EB.p82.pdfp87.#3 gives only “reed”.

o K&H.p91.#2 gives only “manifest”, and lists JALAL as meaning “reed” (no glyphs for either JAL or JALAL).

o K&L.p37.#2 gives “weave” but says it’s used as a rebus to write “appear”, and lists JALAL as meaning “reed” with a separate, distinctly different (unrelated, more representational) glyph.

o BMM9.p90.#13 gives only “manifest” (with an example glyph). It lists JALAL as meaning “reed” (but without example glyphs).

o 25EMC.pdfp37.#1 gives both “manifest/appear” and “weave”, and lists JALAL as meaning “reed” with a separate, distinctly different (unrelated, more representational) glyph.

·     In addition to the more literal meaning JAL = “to weave”, there is also the meaning “to manifest/appear”. As with the distinction BAAK/“bone” vs. BAAK/“captive”, it’s difficult to say whether these two “different” meanings might be two shades of the same basic etymon (from an emic point of view) or if, instead, they are just two independent etymons which happen to be homonyms (and for which the logogram for one was used as a rebus for writing the other).