4 ms·

Language change that shifts populations away from their historical niche and towards global systems conflicts me. One the one hand I find it sad that whole bod

by jl6 10y ago

Language change that shifts populations away from their historical niche and towards global systems conflicts me. One the one hand I find it sad that whole bodies of literature will pass out of understanding. On the other hand this seems like it will make it slightly easier for the Kazakh people to interoperate with the rest of the world. In the end I believe the greater good comes from enabling more people to talk to each other. (I know, it's "just" a script change, not a new language, but I feel the two are sufficiently related that the point stands).

lacampbell 10y ago
I don't think the point does still stand with just a script change. Learning a new alphabet is orders of magnitude easier than learning a new language. Touch typing with an alphabet that's not printed on your physical keyboard can challenging though (I still struggle a bit with that).
turndown 10y ago
As stated in the article, the script they currently use was forced on them by the Soviets. Before then, they used Latin characters, and before that, Arabic.
- jwilk 10y ago
  > Before then, they used Latin characters ...which was also forced on them by the Soviets.
nathan_f77 10y ago
They are actually shifting back to (one of) the original alphabets. > Nazarbayev described the use of the Cyrillic script as "political," noting that the Latin alphabet had previously been used from 1929 until 1940. Prior to 1929, the Arabic script had been used. "In 1940 … a law was adopted transferring the Kazakh language from the Latin alphabet to one based on Russian script," Also: > The Kazakh language belongs to the family of Turkic languages, whereas Russian is a Slavic language. Other countries with Turkic languages, such as Turkey, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, currently use the Latin alphabet. At the end of the day, this is not really about interoperating with the rest of the world. It's about pride and national identity.
- int_19h 10y ago
  The traditional alphabet in this case is Arabic. Latin was also pushed on them from the outside, and never broadly used prior to that, so it's also "globalizing" in that sense (remember how it was introduced in Turkey, and why?).
  - pseingatl 10y ago
    Arabic is a Semitic language; Turkish and the other Turkic are not. Vowels are an afterthought to Arabic writing, that is not the case with Turkish. Yes, you can write Turkish (more properly, Osmanli) using Arabic script. For that matter you can write Spanish using Arabic script and for many years many people did. But in both of these cases, you're shoehorning a language into a script that really isn't appropriate for it.
    - alnitak 10y ago
      > Vowels are an afterthought to Arabic writing. Are you an Arabic speaker? This claim is a bit stretched. Yes, short vowels are written as diacritic symbols on consonants, which are often dropped from mass publications. However, long vowels are an essential part of the language and they are indeed present as their own letters in Arabic.
    - Koshkin 10y ago
      But the Arabic alphabet is already being succesfully used in Iran and Pakistan, to give a couple of examples, for languages that are very different from Arabic.
    - gotchange 10y ago
      > Vowels are an afterthought to Arabic writing, That's an orientalist claim. Vowels do exist in Arabic but some foreign learners of the language don't get the distinction between short and long vowels and how the letters "ا و ي" have dual role as consonants and vowels as well. > you're shoehorning a language into a script that really isn't appropriate for it. Here's a phonetic transliteration of your first sentence in Arabic "Arabic is a Semitic language; Turkish and the other Turkic are not." "أَرَبِك از أَ سِمِتِك لانجوِﭺ، تِركِش أَند أَذَر تِركِك أَر نَت" By the way, this is the Egyptian convention since the "g" sound is missing in Modern Standard Arabic.
vbezhenar 10y ago
Everyone already knows latin alphabet. It doesn't make it any easier to learn language. Nor it would make it easier for foreigner to understand anything in latinized Kazakh language, this language is completely different from English. I guess, it has some common words with Turkey language, so may be for them it would be a tiny bit easier. Honestly I'm seeing it as a pure political decision and huge waste of money, not something, that would have any real benefit. Making Russian and English as an additional official government languages — now that would be useful. Currently almost noone except highly educated people knows English and a lot of people don't know Russian or know it very poorly and it's sad. For Kazakhstan, Russia is a most important neighbor and it's very important to keep common cultural values.
- Symbiote 10y ago
  It probably is 99% political, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a waste of money. Cyrillic is/was a big part of Russia/USSR's identity from the west -- see things like "BORДT", faux Cyrillic [1], cheap exported Russian vodka, "СССР" on t-shirts, etc. If Kazakhstan wants to appear less Russian, swapping the alphabet from Cyrillic to Latin will be very effective. (I know the Latin alphabet but only a few letters of the Cyrillic one. It's far easier for me to read signs in Viet Nam than it is in Russia, even though I can probably pronounce Russian much better than Vietnamese. When I don't understand a word written in Cyrillic, it takes me 20 times longer to type it into my phone's dictionary.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faux_Cyrillic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faux_Cyrillic
- WillyOnWheels 10y ago
  > Honestly I'm seeing it as a pure political decision and huge waste of money Sounds like how the BJP is about to force all high school students in India to learn Sanskrit. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/world/asia/india-sanskrit-assam.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/world/asia/india-sanskrit...
paganel 10y ago
> Language change that shifts populations away from their historical niche and towards global systems conflicts me. It happened before. For example it happened to my language, Romanian, which used to be written in Cyrillic script until the 1860s or so. AFAIK it was the only Romance language which used Cyrillic, which I find kind of interesting. You're right, most of the Romanian literature/newspapers written before the switch are now illegible for 99% of today's population, but it also matters that not that many books had been printed in Romanian until the switch was made, our culture was mostly an oral one.

by jl6 10y ago

lacampbell 10y ago

I don't think the point does still stand with just a script change. Learning a new alphabet is orders of magnitude easier than learning a new language. Touch typing with an alphabet that's not printed on your physical keyboard can challenging though (I still struggle a bit with that).

turndown 10y ago

As stated in the article, the script they currently use was forced on them by the Soviets. Before then, they used Latin characters, and before that, Arabic.

jwilk 10y ago
> Before then, they used Latin characters ...which was also forced on them by the Soviets.

nathan_f77 10y ago

They are actually shifting back to (one of) the original alphabets. > Nazarbayev described the use of the Cyrillic script as "political," noting that the Latin alphabet had previously been used from 1929 until 1940. Prior to 1929, the Arabic script had been used. "In 1940 … a law was adopted transferring the Kazakh language from the Latin alphabet to one based on Russian script," Also: > The Kazakh language belongs to the family of Turkic languages, whereas Russian is a Slavic language. Other countries with Turkic languages, such as Turkey, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, currently use the Latin alphabet. At the end of the day, this is not really about interoperating with the rest of the world. It's about pride and national identity.

int_19h 10y ago
The traditional alphabet in this case is Arabic. Latin was also pushed on them from the outside, and never broadly used prior to that, so it's also "globalizing" in that sense (remember how it was introduced in Turkey, and why?).
- pseingatl 10y ago
  Arabic is a Semitic language; Turkish and the other Turkic are not. Vowels are an afterthought to Arabic writing, that is not the case with Turkish. Yes, you can write Turkish (more properly, Osmanli) using Arabic script. For that matter you can write Spanish using Arabic script and for many years many people did. But in both of these cases, you're shoehorning a language into a script that really isn't appropriate for it.
  - alnitak 10y ago
    > Vowels are an afterthought to Arabic writing. Are you an Arabic speaker? This claim is a bit stretched. Yes, short vowels are written as diacritic symbols on consonants, which are often dropped from mass publications. However, long vowels are an essential part of the language and they are indeed present as their own letters in Arabic.
  - Koshkin 10y ago
    But the Arabic alphabet is already being succesfully used in Iran and Pakistan, to give a couple of examples, for languages that are very different from Arabic.
  - gotchange 10y ago
    > Vowels are an afterthought to Arabic writing, That's an orientalist claim. Vowels do exist in Arabic but some foreign learners of the language don't get the distinction between short and long vowels and how the letters "ا و ي" have dual role as consonants and vowels as well. > you're shoehorning a language into a script that really isn't appropriate for it. Here's a phonetic transliteration of your first sentence in Arabic "Arabic is a Semitic language; Turkish and the other Turkic are not." "أَرَبِك از أَ سِمِتِك لانجوِﭺ، تِركِش أَند أَذَر تِركِك أَر نَت" By the way, this is the Egyptian convention since the "g" sound is missing in Modern Standard Arabic.

vbezhenar 10y ago

Everyone already knows latin alphabet. It doesn't make it any easier to learn language. Nor it would make it easier for foreigner to understand anything in latinized Kazakh language, this language is completely different from English. I guess, it has some common words with Turkey language, so may be for them it would be a tiny bit easier. Honestly I'm seeing it as a pure political decision and huge waste of money, not something, that would have any real benefit. Making Russian and English as an additional official government languages — now that would be useful. Currently almost noone except highly educated people knows English and a lot of people don't know Russian or know it very poorly and it's sad. For Kazakhstan, Russia is a most important neighbor and it's very important to keep common cultural values.

Symbiote 10y ago
It probably is 99% political, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a waste of money. Cyrillic is/was a big part of Russia/USSR's identity from the west -- see things like "BORДT", faux Cyrillic [1], cheap exported Russian vodka, "СССР" on t-shirts, etc. If Kazakhstan wants to appear less Russian, swapping the alphabet from Cyrillic to Latin will be very effective. (I know the Latin alphabet but only a few letters of the Cyrillic one. It's far easier for me to read signs in Viet Nam than it is in Russia, even though I can probably pronounce Russian much better than Vietnamese. When I don't understand a word written in Cyrillic, it takes me 20 times longer to type it into my phone's dictionary.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faux_Cyrillic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faux_Cyrillic
WillyOnWheels 10y ago
> Honestly I'm seeing it as a pure political decision and huge waste of money Sounds like how the BJP is about to force all high school students in India to learn Sanskrit. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/world/asia/india-sanskrit-assam.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/world/asia/india-sanskrit...

paganel 10y ago

> Language change that shifts populations away from their historical niche and towards global systems conflicts me. It happened before. For example it happened to my language, Romanian, which used to be written in Cyrillic script until the 1860s or so. AFAIK it was the only Romance language which used Cyrillic, which I find kind of interesting. You're right, most of the Romanian literature/newspapers written before the switch are now illegible for 99% of today's population, but it also matters that not that many books had been printed in Romanian until the switch was made, our culture was mostly an oral one.