Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Preprint
Data sources: ZENODO
addClaim

Toward a Common Alphabet: Language Convergence, Script Reform, and the Latin Substrate

Authors: Toli, Ilia;

Toward a Common Alphabet: Language Convergence, Script Reform, and the Latin Substrate

Abstract

Languages are converging. The Latin alphabet is becoming the world's common script, English is the default pidgin, and the direction is clear. This essay looks at how different civilizations—Turkish, Greek, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Hebrew, French—have navigated or resisted this convergence, and what it cost them. It identifies three strategies: absorb loanwords as-is (zero cost), Latinize with local extensions (moderate cost), or resist and pay a compounding tax. Along the way, it argues that linguistic purity has no advantages, that Hebrew was constructed rather than revived, that emoji are the world's spontaneous re-adoption of Chinese-style logographic writing, and that the difference between script and music notation explains why script can be changed without losing anything. The author proposes ideas; he does not implement them.

Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback