·    No glyphs given in K&H, K&L, BMM9, TOK.

·    History of pronunciation:

o JM (2002): nojol.

o Stuart-GfRaL.p2.l+2 (2002): nohol.

o Skidmore-ULoENR (2007): no pronunciation given.

o BMM9, K&H, K&L (all post-2018): nohol.

So the -h- form is taken to have superseded the -j- form.

·    no seems to be always present but la or lo at the end is optional. For these reasons, Stuart-GfRaL views the first as an initial phonetic complement, and the second as actually spelling the final – (with underspelling when absent). This changes what was originally NOHOL to just NOH, with the -l not being inherently present in the logogram. MHD doesn’t recognize a separate logogram NOHOL = “south”, but instead sees it as no-NOH or no-NOJ-la, perhaps with the main sign being NO(H)J = “great, big”, used here as a rebus to write nohol = “south”.

·    PAL TC A15 is from the 819-day cycle expression.

·    Stuart-GfRaL.p2.para2.l+4: The root of the term is noh, which has the related meanings of “large, great,” “principal”, or “right-side”.

·    Stuart-GfRaL.p2.para2.l+7: The flanking “u” shapes [Sim: “horseshoes”] on the “south” glyph probably constitute a separate sign [we shall see that they never appear with the supposed NOH logogram outside the context of the directional term], and they are known in other settings to be parts of the syllables xo, no, and sometimes jo. In the south glyph, I wonder if it might be an abbreviated form of no, producing a full spelling no-NOH-la or no-NOH-lo, for nohol.