estutweh@aussie.zone to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world · 8 months agoDo languages that use non-Latin alphabets (Asian, Cyrillic, Greek, Hebrew) have upper and lower case letters? What about serif or sans-serif? How do they show emphasis?message-squaremessage-square59linkfedilinkarrow-up1138arrow-down13
arrow-up1135arrow-down1message-squareDo languages that use non-Latin alphabets (Asian, Cyrillic, Greek, Hebrew) have upper and lower case letters? What about serif or sans-serif? How do they show emphasis?estutweh@aussie.zone to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world · 8 months agomessage-square59linkfedilink
minus-squareshoebum@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up2·7 months agoI agree about how languages leave out groups that can indicate a lot about the script and its people. And imposing scripts do kill that implicit. But don’t you think that’s how most new languages are created. I’m assuming there must have been so many language impositions throughout history. In fact hindi was created by Brits because hindi was not a single language till 1600s Having said that, what was the core question that you wanted to address?
minus-squareParagone@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·7 days agoA language’s script MUST be engineered to communicate ALL the required-dimensions of that language. There is no exception to that, that I can imagine. IF tonal, THEN tonality MUST be indicated… simple principle, right? in the cases of the Semitic languages, which leave-out vowels, their intent was to lock-out outsiders. NOT-communicating with others, was part of the intent. & … well, that’s their right, but it’s created problems… Not just the obious-ones: When you force a population more-completely into memorization-paradigm, you make thinking-paradigm less-default ( the 2 modes compete for brain-resources: culturally, pick 1, & let the other be secondary ) So, the Semitic languages with the left-out defaults pushed memorization more heavily, & … that affects/alters/shapes history! ALL language-choices have consequences… ( I’d actually want the ideal-culture to have at-least 5 different languages, simultaneously, by default: Engineering / English or German social-relativism / Japanese Indigenous-perspective/understanding, / probably Maya? scripture, origins / Sanskrit ( language-of-origins, not language-of-effects/symptoms, multiple people fluent in it have agreed ) programming / Haskell ( get people to think correctly! ) emotion / Arabic math something like that… Just switch languages/modes, to communicate within that-language’s domain. _ /\ _
I agree about how languages leave out groups that can indicate a lot about the script and its people.
And imposing scripts do kill that implicit.
But don’t you think that’s how most new languages are created. I’m assuming there must have been so many language impositions throughout history.
In fact hindi was created by Brits because hindi was not a single language till 1600s
Having said that, what was the core question that you wanted to address?
A language’s script MUST be engineered to communicate ALL the required-dimensions of that language.
There is no exception to that, that I can imagine.
IF tonal, THEN tonality MUST be indicated…
simple principle, right?
in the cases of the Semitic languages, which leave-out vowels, their intent was to lock-out outsiders.
NOT-communicating with others, was part of the intent.
& … well, that’s their right, but it’s created problems…
Not just the obious-ones:
When you force a population more-completely into memorization-paradigm, you make thinking-paradigm less-default
( the 2 modes compete for brain-resources: culturally, pick 1, & let the other be secondary )
So, the Semitic languages with the left-out defaults pushed memorization more heavily,
& … that affects/alters/shapes history!
ALL language-choices have consequences…
( I’d actually want the ideal-culture to have at-least 5 different languages, simultaneously, by default:
something like that…
Just switch languages/modes, to communicate within that-language’s domain.
_ /\ _