3 ms·
I don't think the Latin alphabet is particularly well-suited to English either. We pay for C, but it never does anything K or S don't already do. Yet, we cannot
by fusiongyro 8y ago
I don't think the Latin alphabet is particularly well-suited to English either. We pay for C, but it never does anything K or S don't already do. Yet, we cannot be bothered to buy letters for 'sh' and 'th', digraphs which cover two sounds apiece and are extremely common.
- ajuc 8y agoDISCLAIMER - rant below. The problem isn't Latin, the problem is how you use it. Nobody forced you to sometimes use C when you mean K. There are many languages where these letters don't overlap. Nobody forced you to use both PH and F for the same sound. Why even use PH? It's not like anybody cares if that particular word was stolen from Greek or not. And if some people do - they can check it on wikipedia. Make it all use f and be done with it. The whole too/two/to situation is ridiculous. Ridiculous spelling is also ridiculous. Why put "o" before only one of these "u"? Either put it before both or none... Also - beautiful. Really? Eau? And why sometimes there's one "l" and sometimes there are two? Full, but plentiful. WTF? If you bothered to refactor the language every century - English would be perfectly reasonable now. Instead the whole world is stuck with learning centuries of design debt to communicate.
- geertj 8y agoObligatory link to The Chaos https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~clamen/misc/humour/TheChaos.html https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~clamen/misc/humour/TheChaos.html
- branko_d 8y agoIt strikes me that Windows is full of idiosyncrasies and historical artifacts (largely to keep it compatible with existing applications), yet is very successful and widely used - like English! I guess keeping compatibility over long periods of time can have a lot of value, for OSes and languages alike...