5 ms·

The Greek alphabet was derived from the Phoenician alphabet, and the fact that it replaced the local writing and spread quickly suggests that a simpler techniq

The Greek alphabet was derived from the Phoenician alphabet, and the fact that it replaced the local writing and spread quickly suggests that a simpler technique of writing can win. I think the trend you see is the most common behavior. But the evolution of written languages is not a simple process. It is often influenced by political choice. E.g. Hangul for Korean, simplification laws in Germany or France. I can think of few exceptions where the simplification of a written language was rejected. The Sumerian ideograms were simplified after their introduction circa -3300. The writing system was adapted to the Akkadian language which was the dominant spoken languages for centuries. It mixed pure ideograms with double readings and syllabic symbols (a bit like Japanese). But after 900 BC, when neo-Assyrian ruled, Akkadian was declining, as well as writing on clay. There was a clear tendency to complexify the tablets: for example adding more symbols or reviving archaic expressions. Akkadian was the language of the elites, and simplifying it would "degrade" it. Disclaimer: I have been interested in ancient writings, with a particular attention to Mesopotamia, but I'm not an expert.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
We can see a similar drift toward complexity in the written language by looking at text messaging in the modern day. The old system was that e.g. "before" was written "before". Now it might be written that way, or it might be written "b4". The second form is easier for the scribe, but requires a lot more knowledge on the part of the reader. The shorthand, which makes things difficult for the partially-educated (such as foreigners) is a result of mass literacy. If text messaging had been restricted to formal elite-to-elite communications, they would have gone on writing "before" the same way they'd been doing it all along. I suspect something similar contributed to the trend you describe in Akkadian texts; with Akkadian in decline, the only people using it would probably have been more familiar with it than average. And that familiarity would let them use it in ways that wouldn't have made sense to a merchant's wife trying to send a letter to her husband abroad.

thaumasiotes 5y ago

We can see a similar drift toward complexity in the written language by looking at text messaging in the modern day. The old system was that e.g. "before" was written "before". Now it might be written that way, or it might be written "b4". The second form is easier for the scribe, but requires a lot more knowledge on the part of the reader. The shorthand, which makes things difficult for the partially-educated (such as foreigners) is a result of mass literacy. If text messaging had been restricted to formal elite-to-elite communications, they would have gone on writing "before" the same way they'd been doing it all along. I suspect something similar contributed to the trend you describe in Akkadian texts; with Akkadian in decline, the only people using it would probably have been more familiar with it than average. And that familiarity would let them use it in ways that wouldn't have made sense to a merchant's wife trying to send a letter to her husband abroad.