3 ms·

English arguably has 14 distinct vowel sounds while the Latin script has six vowel. So it seems like a bad match. Spanish has a few more letters and more accen

English arguably has 14 distinct vowel sounds while the Latin script has six vowel. So it seems like a bad match. Spanish has a few more letters and more accents. But the correspondence between spelling and pronounciation is amazing. And you always know which syllable to stress thanks to the acute accents on the vowels. EDIT: Sibling comment mentioned Turkish. Turkish also has very regular spelling apparently (my impression and what someone has told me). And they apparently needed those extra letters in order to achieve that.

gnulinux 4y ago
Depends on how you define regular really but Turkish alphabet also doesn't map 1-to-1 with IPA sounds we can transcribe Turkish language with. Of course, this very much depends on regional accent, but overall Turkish accents are pretty consistent that they present both /c/ and /k/ sounds yet they're both transcribed as [k] since it's obvious which sound should be produced for a native speaker (depends on the vowel). Similar anomaly exists for [g] where there are palatal and velar varities. I think the concept of language fitting an alphabet is flawed. As I mentioned in my sibling comment, although GP considers digraph usage more natural than diacritics, many alphabet designers preferred the opposite. I.e. they turned English digraphs into their own diacritics. Does this make the modified alphabet more suitable for the language? I don't know if there is an objective way to answer that. If there is, let me know. Realistically, any of the worlds' languages would be usable with any of the alphabets.