Not my thesis at all! What I am saying is that when a character is separated into its constituents it will very often suggest an entirely different way of thinking about the concept at hand. Necessity plays no part. This is a creative process.
Sounds like my recent fun with anagrams. To suggest that an anagram has any real meaning or relationship, besides the trivial, to the original word/phrase is ridiculous but it is rather fun in any case to see what we can come up with. Certainly does permit use of 'the creative process' but to what end besides entertainment?
PS Since I've not read the book fell free to completely ignore this post.