Optigraphic respelling.   A second respelling is what we might call optigraphic, a spelling based on a misreading of the name due to its appearance when written down on the page. Figure 7 shows how this can come about with an abbreviated name, which process also introduces its own degree of uncertainty. In this case the misreading has resulted in the interpretation of a form of Joseph as either Joshua or James, or even Josiah, three completely different names of the language.

There are also at least two different levels of analysis that can describe some of the more obscure variations of this drastic kind of respelling. Figure 8 illustrates one of these.

To calculate the distances between members of different groups, the possibility of confusion between them must be taken into account. The confusions illustrated in figure 7 arise from the equivalence of their optigraphic representations. Of the many parameters that play into the effects of an abbreviation function, the two most important seem to be: 1) the relative frequency of occurrence of the full spelling (f), and 2) the length (l) so that the savings that is thereby achieved can be accounted for. We have discovered two different kinds of abbreviation: 1) conflation with two or three characters retained (Ac), as when Jas. abbreviates James, and 2) truncation (At), as when Josh. abbreviates Joshua. These two functions handle the parameters of relative frequency and length differently.

To see how important relative frequency can be consider the case when the interpretation of the written image is unique, i.e. the spelling does not occur multiple times. Suppose, for example, that Leffebvre, \LMB2MA5\ (in a style in which an upper case F is written by the use of two lower case F's) is interpreted as Leslebore, \LMBAMA5\. This latter spelling has no other occurrences, only the one instance has ever been seen. The score assigned to this reading must take into account the drastic difference between the relative frequencies and particularly that the one spelling is unique. The principle is that a unique spelling ought to be reinterpreted as a reading variant of its nearest more common spelling.