·     L&D.p23.pdfp23 explains that the -ib suffix derives nouns with instrumental meaning from verbs: uk’ = “to drink” è uk’ib = “drinking vessel”. [Sim: we’ = “to eat” è we’ib = “utensil used for eating” = “plate”.]

·     It can be written either with the logogram UK’ or purely with syllabograms; in the possessed form, that’s yu-k’i-bi.

·     MHD statistics (2024-02-28) – the pure syllabogram spelling is much more common than the logogram spelling:

o Logogram:

§ Abstract UK’ – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” (to get only the confident readings and not those arrived at from context) and “blcodes contains PXB” (abstract variant of UK’): 12 hits.

§ Representational/head UK’ – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” (to get only the confident readings and not those arrived at from context) and “blcodes contains PM4” (head variant of UK’): 2 hits.

This shows that there are 12 + 2 = 14 instances where yuk’ib is written with the logogram UK’ (of which, only two have the bi explicitly written – the other 12 have yu-UK’, with the bi just implied from context:

§ This can only be seen from inspecting the hits that come back from the queries.

§ The two with explicit bi are not the two with the representational/head variant (those 2 only have an implicit bi) but are instead 2 of the 14 written with the abstract UK’ variant.

o Syllabogram:

§ Quincunx variant of bi – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” (to get only the confident readings and not those arrived at from context) and “blcodes contains ZBF” (sole variant of yu) and “blcodes contains BX2” (sole variant of k’i) and “blcodes contains XQ6” (quincunx variant of bi): 493 hits.

§ Footprint variant of bi – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” (to get only the confident readings and not those arrived at from context) and “blcodes contains ZBF” (sole variant of yu) and “blcodes contains BX2” (sole variant of k’i) and “blcodes contains” HL1 (footprint variant of bi): 9 hits.

§ Head variant of bi – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” (to get only the confident readings and not those arrived at from context) and “blcodes contains ZBF” (sole variant of yu) and “blcodes contains BX2” (sole variant of k’i) and “blcodes contains” AC8s (head variant of bi): 68 hits.

This shows that there are 493 + 9 + 68 = 570 instances where yuk’ib is written solely with yu-k’i-bi (using the various variants of bi).

o Cross-check:

§ The total number of confident yuk’ib readings in MHD – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” (to get only the confident readings and not those arrived at from context): 712 hits.

§ There is an apparent discrepancy between 14 (logogram) + 570 (syllabogram) = 584 confident readings vs. the 712 confident readings of yuk’ib (with no extra criteria): 712 – 584 = 128 hits.

§ These consist of the various other combinations where the yu or k’i or bi are implicit, i.e. where they are underspelled – “blmaya1 contains yuk’ib” and “blmaya1 does not contain yuk’ib?” and “blcodes does not contain ZBF PBX” and “blcodes does not contain ZBF PM4” and “blcodes does not contain ZBF BX2 XQ6” and “blcodes does not contain ZBF BX2 HL1” and “blcodes does not contain ZBF BX2 AC8s”: 131 hits. Examining these hits shows many other combinations of underspelling yuk’ib in syllabograms.

o Summary:

§ The syllabogram spelling for yuk’ib is much more common than the logogram spelling.

§ When written with the logogram, only yu-UK’ is usually written, the bi is inferred from context.

§ When written with syllabograms, all three syllabograms yu-k’i-bi are usually written (though there is some underspellilng here too).