Scribes are human and make mistakes, thank G-d! If the distance between the words is more than the distance between the letters of one of those words, then it's Kasher.
The 4 legged shin is a tradition: to make with the 3
legged shin on the other side 7 legs altogether. The source is hinted
by Rashi on the Gemara (Menahot) See also a book called Baruch Sheamar
with a commentary called MINHAT SOLET. The origin of the Shinin is the
folding of the box into
4 cells: the cells look like a shin with 4 legs and also the cracks
between the cells look like a shin with 3 legs. Later, the shinin were
reproduced on the smooth sides of the box.
Generally, a mezuzah is needed only when you have a lintel and a post on the right and they are concurrent. You don't make a bracha anyway if there is no door.
The unusual tagin are used only by Kabbalists -
and some ignorant scribes too.
Sha'atnez Getz is only a mnemonic.
1. In Aramaic, some scholars claim there is
Katan, not even in KOL - or rather KAL. It is true
that the Babylonian vowels (above the letters) don't support this
claim, but you might have added this. Dr Eliyahu Netan'el (Heb Univ)
wrote in an Israeli weekly SHABBAT BESHABBATO that you may say KAL or
KOL. YN Epstein wrote in
DIKDUK ARAMIT BABLIT that the Aramaic vowels are ROFEF, but didn't dare say how to pronounce anything.
Many Sephardim say KAL, though KOL is winning.
2. SHORASHAV - I've forgotten exactly what you wrote, but it should be classified like KODASHIM - ie also not entirely agreed on, because of the traditional Sephardi pronunciation SHARASHAV, KADASHIM.
3. EVHONECHA - I believe firmly that
be read EVHANECHA: there is a GE'AYA in all the old manuscripts.
grammatically, it should be, because its origin is in EVHAN,
which there is no doubt. It's a pity that the popular RINAT YISRAEL
used the words of MINHAT SHAY, based on a minority reading.
YISRAEL also writes KAL ATZMOTAY in NISHMAT, because the Sephardim have
a tradition that if there is no MAKAF then the word must be accented
and therefore it's a KG. However, it's not the only case where a MAKAF
has been omitted: you mentioned KOL AHEI ROSH I think, and the word ET
is also found similarly: ET GEON YAACOV springs to mind. The lack of
MAKAF has been discussed by various people. YORDI-VOR is another case
where RINAT Y. has a KG.,
because there is a METEG. But the METEG shouldn't be a deciding factor
always: you must be familiar with other cases: I mention MOHORAT
on my website. YORDI-VOR is actually interesting, 'cos the KETIV is
which means 'those people who go down to the pit' ie the wicked, as
in TEHILLIM. I pointed this out to Rabbi Breuer and he agreed that this
may be why some authorities have a KG, because they didn't see that
and were misled by the KETIV having an extra YOD and thought that the
is (in contrast) a different sound, ie KG.
OCHLA VEOCHLA is a book of lists of pairs of
words, written by a Masoretic scholar, and one of them is OCHLA and
VEOCHLA, and if he had pronounced ACHLA (BESHILO) it wouldn't have been
MORDOCHAY is the preferred pronunc. by Rabbi
Mordochai Breuer in a
chapter at the end of his Tanach (Mosad Harav Kook) See other ideas there, like LUKEHA-ZOT.